Richard,
I was actually going to start a new topic on this, but this seems a very suitable thread to put this. I have yet to purchase a WI system from you. You may remember I visited you the summer before last. I have a V6 VR4 like the one your colleague was driving at the time.
Anyway, I digress !!! I ws reading a thread on the Evolution.net forums regarding different WI systems available as well as functions and failsafe mechanisms available. Given that this forum is dedicated to WI, I am kind of surprised that something like that hasn't sprung up on here. I imagine a lot of the questions have been raised and answered but it would perhaps be nice to collate and consolidate into a thread where we could all look, discuss and analyse!
I too have been looking at a multi-nozzle accumulator approach, because as stated previously it would allow for a continued supply of water in the event of pump failure giving safe injection whilst loss of flow is detected and a boost cut triggered. Multiple nozzles also mean that it is very unlikely that all nozzles would fail/clog simultaneously meaning that reduced rather than no water flow would occur.
I am trying to decide on whether direct port or an intercooler pipe located nozzle is better. Distribution by way of direct port seems better but I am concerned that a failed nozzle in a direct port system might leave a cylinder starved of charge cooling whereas a multiple nozzle 'downstream' setup would likely fair better if a single nozzle failed.
Perhaps you could elaborate some more on the 'special order' systems. I know for one I have discussed Shurflo pumps with you and the problems of tuning the diagnostic systems to work with the high pressures those pumps involve. This is another reason I feel a 120 psi accumulator located at the engine bay with an aquamist pump in the boot/trunk is a good idea.
Please Richard could you give us an idea of all the various 'failsafe' and diagnostic components available, what they do and how much they cost. Advantages and disadvantages or limitations of each. I know it is work for you, but given the different fuel management and setups that people use it might help us to come up with ideas for improving kits and or help you to put together packages better matched to particular cars and fuel management systems.
I for one would likely be willing to spend more money on a system proven to be almost impossible to fail because it would give me the confidence to push the tune further. I think you once said that if someone is too paranoid of an engine failure to tune properly with WI then WI may simply not be for them. I think that's true up to a point Richard, but there are also a lot of us who want to innovate. I myself have taken on the task of building a setup with a so called 'bullet proof' turbo that requires boost pressures of over 25 psi to even start to work properly for my application. An aggresive tune with WI would thus be far more beneficial but also potentially dangerous to me than if I was using the stock 7 psi seen on some vehicles.
Paul.
|