Here you go. The display is a nice aluminum piece that shows when the unit is injecting, a low flow warning, and tank level indicator. We haven't hooked up the float switch for the tank level because there isn't a place in the washer resevoir to install it. If I switch to a different tank solution, I will use the float. There is also an on/off switch and a test button. The tune was done through an Apexi Neo SAFC and the dyno (Jeff did it for me). I mounted it below the center stack where it is easily visible. It has a few monitoring features that are cool to watch. Other than that, it's pretty much set and forget. As a side note, I can easily disable both the WI and AFC (reverts to the stock settings) if there is a problem or I run the system dry.

 

I'd love to see what kind of power the car produces with 100% water. I used to run a water injection on my old air cooled VW - it rocked. Very different engines of course, but it gave me more power across the entire RPM band.

 

Same here!

 

Thanks. Very nice set-up and I'm slowly beginning to understand and appreciate WM Injection.

Trying to keep this as a WM injection discussion, I wanted to explore further
"the tune" (i.e. approx. cost) - clearly one maximizes the WM investment doing a tune so it would be helpful if someone chimed in to the appr. expense.

While I have gathered that there are two methodologies on spraying based on
1) BOOST (i.e. spray comes on at a set boost point)
2) INJECTORS ( i.e. spray comes on at a set injector flow rate) <- ALTA perhaps simplistic but accurate enough ? DID I GET IT .

I will assume that either benefits from a tune but is one better or worse if you are not going to do a custom tune?

 

That is right - it is a major benefit or at least I see it as such. While I could not afford a variable boost system or Altas, the key is that if you can inject the right amount of water so that you dont get any hesitation or other issue, you can run cooler for longer ---

From the on off mentality - think if you you could ramp the water injection up as the boost increases - now you are talking

 

TampaMCS - while variable seems the more refined way to do it, have you dyno'ed yr boost on/off set-up yet? You''ll be at the dragon ? gotta hook-up and discuss over beers.

 

You can, I have the Coolingmist trunk mount kit with the Veri-Cool controller.

You first set the min boost (say 9) you want the system to start spraying. Then you set the max boost number (say 12) when you want the system to spray at full flow.

You can also adjust the flow of the injector.

I like the Alta kit as well. It is a very nice kit.

Longboard

 

For the MW impaired what % of full spray does the system start at when activated a 9 lbs of boost?

 

gmcdonnell,
100% water will not make as much power once tuned for. BUt it will make power. Methanol is cheap, and you don't go through it as much as you might think.

Bahamabart,
You got it!
1. Simple, cheap effective, but will not deliver equal amounts of water to fuel. Since these just turn on full blast at the set PSI.
2. Best solution, more expensive, more accurate, and more power can be had because of its progressive nature.

TampaMCS,
Ramping water up as the boost goes up, works to keep a hesitation from happening, but would be hard to setup to deliver the correct ratio. It can be done, but just not as easy as our system.

We are out of here! LV here we come!! Got some really good data of WI on the 07! Huge charge temp drops, just need a way to tune it! For those coming to AMVIV, you will be able to see the system installed!

 

I'm just at the very beginning of my familiarity wiith water/ methanol injection. But from what I saw when I was there at the test/ tune....

Nice work, Jeff. Shooler's got a fun little rocket now, eh? Now he just needs to find the time to actually drive it. .

 

We are all back from AMVIV!
Long drive, for a lot of fun, it was worth it!
Got to meet a lot of fellow NAMers and got to see their cars.

So we did a lot of dyno work with the new R56, and found lots of good gains, one really big potential is with WI with it.

Because we couldn't do any tuning on this car, the only test is just tuning it on and seeing what happens.

Our new car is setup with sensors everywhere, so we can monitor temps, one being manifold air temp. We placed the nozzle to the PWI-1 after the MAP/Air Temp sensor in fear that it may hurt the exposed probe. So the ECU didn't see any temp change, so HP didn't change much. But the temp changed significantly. We were getting about a 50 degree drop in charge temps! The HP stayed about the same, which is good, but there is some big potential here! So in the next few weeks, you will see some more dyno runs with some tuning involved. With the high charge temps the ECU runs in stock form (because the IC sucks!), and the fact that we can turn the boost up easier, i feel there is much more power to be had with the R56.

BTW, look for the R56 report in a day or so.

 

I did a little digging about the clutch clamping force. I found something in the factory MINI service manual saying that the clamping force was 210Nm (~154 ft lbs.). So a factory clutch holding at 190ft lbs is quite a feat.

Mine was starting to slip when it was dyno-ed and showing 179ft lbs. so that guy must have some sort of magic clutch.

 

I like my magic clutch I have yet to notice any slipping, but that doesn't mean it won't happen. I am currently looking at different clutch/lsd options.

 

yeah, I never detected mine slipping at 179/lbs ft either...

 

CmdrVimes: Why are you introducing verifiable facts to the story? Are you trying to ruin it?

 

Where you running on a chassis dyno or a roller dyno? If you were running on a roller dyno you probably didn't see it because the wheels broke traction before the clutch would.

Well, I could have also pointed out that the gear ratio they are using is also probably wrong. 4th gear on an 05-06 MCS is 4.615 not 4.650. Although the difference in number between those ratios is minimal.

 

Lets say that the clutch is deisgned to hold 154ft-lbs. That doesn't mean that it will let go at 155ft-lbs. What it means is that through the life of the clutch it will hold its rating. As the clutch wears down, it holds less, so it has to hold more than the rating to start with. Also when clutch manufactures rate clutches they don't just put a breaker bar on them and test them, then generally do a slipping type engagement test, then back off some %. Like most parts on cars they are over built to some extent.

Its not magic! But i wouldn't expect it to last long!

I think you mean roller vs a bolt on hub style like a dynopack both of which are chassis dynos. The tires should never break free on the dyno with ANY mini cooper. The only cars i have seen this happen with is 700+WHP 2wd cars. If you experienced tires breaking free, then i would assume the dyno operator didn't set it up correct.

Regarding the ratios. With all dynoes you have to "teach" them the engines RPM in relationship to wheel speed. Since we used BimCom, we could look at the exact engine RPM (not RPM on the gauge) and dial in the ratio to match. So yes sometimes they don't match the actual gear ratio, but it is still very acurate. To give you an idea, the dyno measures wheel torque and calculates using the ratio entered to give you engine torque. An exampe is the dyno reads 750ft-lbs or torque and with our ratio of 4.650 this give a reading of 161.3ft-lbs. If plug in the actual ratio of 4.615, the torque number comes to 162.5ft-lbs. So the ratio doens't play a big part, unless it is way off!

I am lost?? You dyno cars alot and i would expect you to understand this.....

 

The before and after is what to look at here.

 

Before and after is only a valid method if the results are accurate. And because of accuracy issues with the majority of dynos used by NAMers it becomes quite an issue. As Rototest states: “If the equipment cannot be periodically calibrated it falls into the same "useless" category, as it cannot be proved that it is continuing to perform and provide measurement results that have an accepted level of tolerance. Repeatability is good but cannot be compared with absolute accuracy.”

It is important to note that all inertia style dynos such as DynoJet and DynoDynamics use indirect measurement that negatively affects the torque reading. (So does lighter aftermarket wheels/tires.) Concerning accuracy, the closest I have ever been able to pin any inertia style manufacturer is +/-5%; most will not guarantee that. And there is no way for an operator to know how the dyno is performing or a way to calibrate it.

Hydraulic dynos such as Rototest and Dynapack use direct measurement. This is important because they can be calibrated and certified. Rototest and Dynapack have an accuracy of +/-1%. This is why I have come to only use these dynos.

 

You can see clutch slippage on a dyno that measures torque directly.

 

dmh, I am glad you like the dynopack as much as we do, its clean, simple, quite, provides the best data for a tuner, not smoothed out like others. Which is why we used one for this test.

 

Yup.

 

OH NOES! VENDORS AGREEING!

Break out the machiatos and jazz music

Just kidding guys, good to see this happening!

 

Yeah, tell me about it...

According to John (a day or two after I left LDG, and he looked more closely), that's what happened to me.

 

I am kind of curious, was the Neo tuned before the additon of the WI? I kind of took it that, it was all added at the same time. That being said, cooler intake temps will defintely add to an smoother running car. Lord knows my car ran 10x better in the cooler months than last summer. The WI is something I should look into at least for the ~HOT~ months