methanol injection
http://www.supraforums.com/forum/sho...ht=direct+meth
yea. i just did not want this to happen to me due to uneven distribution.
yea. i just did not want this to happen to me due to uneven distribution.
. Regardless, every reputable tuner I've talked to said the only way they recommend methanol injection is if the car has a fuel system just for methanol. So, that means a proper fuel pump, fuel tank, methanol injectors for each runner, fuel rail, and dedicated methanol fuel lines.
Last edited by dejacky; Mar 16, 2008 at 06:13 PM.
Pole Position
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 211
Likes: 0
From: kansas
Of course you are allowed to post your opinions, but this is a car forum and opinions that are backed by personal opinion, and not much else, don't help out us car enthutsiasts that are looking for justifiable logic, relevance, and numbers instead of "it looks like". You are completely missing my points about manifold, relevance etc. So your saying that the buick's motor air delivery is the same as the gte? Each manifold is specific to that car in diameter, interior texture(smooth or rough), composition, flow rate, blah blah blah. So taking this into consieration, concerning meth delivery, a 2jzgte is(I'm not even going to bring up the fact that you said yourself its a single cam engine and the completely changes the head configuration) not all that similar to the buick. So therefore, if the delivery isn't the same, is the atomization of the meth......? So a motor is a big air pump, so what? No big break through there. We are talking about meth on boosted cars.... which isn't the same on an N/A 383 stroker is it, or a 20B GT42R RX7? Is detonation prevented in both engines, certainly. BUT, since we have confirmed the delivery is different, there are obvious differences in engine design, and I'm pretty sure that there aren't alot of 700+ hp buicks out there, that meth delivery distribution to each cylinder becomes increasingly important as the demand for more power increases and tolerances become smaller smaller. So if it makes sense to use equal distribtion on higher hp cars, why would you settle for less if actual price doesnt vary much and its proven very functional in practice and thoery as well? If none of this is getting through, think of it this way: If you had a set of fuel injectors in front of you, (same price) same 850cc, one of them was perfectly flow matched, balanced, etc, and the other wasn't. Which one would you take? If you say it doens't matter then 
my argument is done and no more needs to be said. But if you choose the balanced injectors, you are agreeing that fuel delivery to each cylinder is critical for achieving perfect AFR in each cylinder. If you agree with this, please tell me how meth delivery is less important.
Jon
my argument is done and no more needs to be said. But if you choose the balanced injectors, you are agreeing that fuel delivery to each cylinder is critical for achieving perfect AFR in each cylinder. If you agree with this, please tell me how meth delivery is less important.Jon
I think your argument is long winded and most of the information is irrelevant. There is alot to be said for simplicity. Why over complicate a design that works fine the way it is.
And while I never claimed any similarity in manifolds, are you telling me that with the new technology, the designers of the 2jz intake's air delivery system flows less, and has even more uneven air flow distribution to it's cylinders than 1987 technology buick intakes?
No they are not the same engines, but common sense plays a huge factory here.
If it works on an older poorly designed intake system/engine it will work even better on the newer designs. I never said it would be perfect.... But when you add the extra failure factor of additional nozzles and the extra time required to maintain/clean/tune a true direct port system, to me personally it's a waste of time and money.
The intake manifold of the Buick is nothing like the toyota.
Most differences here lie in the flow path of the atomised particles. A GE manifold is just about perfect for a single nozzle injected at the throttle body. And if you look at a Buick's manifold (fits between the V-shape of the motor and heads) you can see it would have a more even dispersal of particles if injected at the TB when compared to the GTE intake manifold.
When particles enter the GTE manifold, they see the cylinders in order as they travel farther back. If cyl1 was on its intake cycle, it would take a proportionally large gulp of the incoming particles and less would leftover for the next cylinder (cyl 5). These particles are not evenly spaced inside this cavity; yes the AIR is, but the amount of meth particles to air particles is VERY low. Meth particles are more prone to enter the cylinders they see first vs cylinders in the back.
If the air/meth mixture were perfectly distributed before entering the GTE manifold then this would be a non-issue. But its NOT that simple. The GN manifold works much better due to the nature of what cylinder runners the incoming particles see first. There are big differences between the motors; and overgeneralizing as simple airpumps is pretty careless, especially when doling out advice. Just because the Supra's manifold is newer, doesnt mean its better at every application a third party could come up with. If you think that, you're VERY VERY naive. Met a few guys with that attitude when taking Semiconductor theory ("oh I built a computer once, its all the same").
The SupraTTs manifold design is superior for a turbocharged application... but obviously not when concerning a single-nozzled methanol injection system. There IS a lot to say for simplicity; but there is also a lot to say for stupidity. If you want simple, hook up a nitrous purge kit to your intake and call it a day on the homemade dry kit.
EDIT: for sake of presenting evidence
http://www.supraforums.com/forum/sho...&postcount=205
Most differences here lie in the flow path of the atomised particles. A GE manifold is just about perfect for a single nozzle injected at the throttle body. And if you look at a Buick's manifold (fits between the V-shape of the motor and heads) you can see it would have a more even dispersal of particles if injected at the TB when compared to the GTE intake manifold.
When particles enter the GTE manifold, they see the cylinders in order as they travel farther back. If cyl1 was on its intake cycle, it would take a proportionally large gulp of the incoming particles and less would leftover for the next cylinder (cyl 5). These particles are not evenly spaced inside this cavity; yes the AIR is, but the amount of meth particles to air particles is VERY low. Meth particles are more prone to enter the cylinders they see first vs cylinders in the back.
If the air/meth mixture were perfectly distributed before entering the GTE manifold then this would be a non-issue. But its NOT that simple. The GN manifold works much better due to the nature of what cylinder runners the incoming particles see first. There are big differences between the motors; and overgeneralizing as simple airpumps is pretty careless, especially when doling out advice. Just because the Supra's manifold is newer, doesnt mean its better at every application a third party could come up with. If you think that, you're VERY VERY naive. Met a few guys with that attitude when taking Semiconductor theory ("oh I built a computer once, its all the same").
The SupraTTs manifold design is superior for a turbocharged application... but obviously not when concerning a single-nozzled methanol injection system. There IS a lot to say for simplicity; but there is also a lot to say for stupidity. If you want simple, hook up a nitrous purge kit to your intake and call it a day on the homemade dry kit.
EDIT: for sake of presenting evidence
http://www.supraforums.com/forum/sho...&postcount=205
direct port is the ONLY way I would EVER run meth injection again. I had my 43K stock motor hydrolock from a gallon of menthanol in the intercooler on startup. and then the next motor after 4-5k miles the pistons looked like they had been picked to death from an icepick. one nozzle just does not give equal enough distibution to all the cylinders. I removed my kit. I now have paid for two rebuilds and that could have bought A LOT of race gas.BTW the AEM logged no knock when running it. but the pistons tell me a different story.
only way would be:
each runner with a 3M nozzle
check valve to keep from draining while just sitting.
pressure monitor/safety switch up front where the lines split to the runners to monitor the pressure.
only way would be:
each runner with a 3M nozzle
check valve to keep from draining while just sitting.
pressure monitor/safety switch up front where the lines split to the runners to monitor the pressure.
Last edited by Bean; Mar 17, 2008 at 10:54 AM.
Pole Position
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 211
Likes: 0
From: kansas
The intake manifold of the Buick is nothing like the toyota.
Most differences here lie in the flow path of the atomised particles. A GE manifold is just about perfect for a single nozzle injected at the throttle body. And if you look at a Buick's manifold (fits between the V-shape of the motor and heads) you can see it would have a more even dispersal of particles if injected at the TB when compared to the GTE intake manifold.
When particles enter the GTE manifold, they see the cylinders in order as they travel farther back. If cyl1 was on its intake cycle, it would take a proportionally large gulp of the incoming particles and less would leftover for the next cylinder (cyl 5). These particles are not evenly spaced inside this cavity; yes the AIR is, but the amount of meth particles to air particles is VERY low. Meth particles are more prone to enter the cylinders they see first vs cylinders in the back.
If the air/meth mixture were perfectly distributed before entering the GTE manifold then this would be a non-issue. But its NOT that simple. The GN manifold works much better due to the nature of what cylinder runners the incoming particles see first. There are big differences between the motors; and overgeneralizing as simple airpumps is pretty careless, especially when doling out advice. Just because the Supra's manifold is newer, doesnt mean its better at every application a third party could come up with. If you think that, you're VERY VERY naive. Met a few guys with that attitude when taking Semiconductor theory ("oh I built a computer once, its all the same").
The SupraTTs manifold design is superior for a turbocharged application... but obviously not when concerning a single-nozzled methanol injection system. There IS a lot to say for simplicity; but there is also a lot to say for stupidity. If you want simple, hook up a nitrous purge kit to your intake and call it a day on the homemade dry kit.
EDIT: for sake of presenting evidence
http://www.supraforums.com/forum/sho...&postcount=205
Most differences here lie in the flow path of the atomised particles. A GE manifold is just about perfect for a single nozzle injected at the throttle body. And if you look at a Buick's manifold (fits between the V-shape of the motor and heads) you can see it would have a more even dispersal of particles if injected at the TB when compared to the GTE intake manifold.
When particles enter the GTE manifold, they see the cylinders in order as they travel farther back. If cyl1 was on its intake cycle, it would take a proportionally large gulp of the incoming particles and less would leftover for the next cylinder (cyl 5). These particles are not evenly spaced inside this cavity; yes the AIR is, but the amount of meth particles to air particles is VERY low. Meth particles are more prone to enter the cylinders they see first vs cylinders in the back.
If the air/meth mixture were perfectly distributed before entering the GTE manifold then this would be a non-issue. But its NOT that simple. The GN manifold works much better due to the nature of what cylinder runners the incoming particles see first. There are big differences between the motors; and overgeneralizing as simple airpumps is pretty careless, especially when doling out advice. Just because the Supra's manifold is newer, doesnt mean its better at every application a third party could come up with. If you think that, you're VERY VERY naive. Met a few guys with that attitude when taking Semiconductor theory ("oh I built a computer once, its all the same").
The SupraTTs manifold design is superior for a turbocharged application... but obviously not when concerning a single-nozzled methanol injection system. There IS a lot to say for simplicity; but there is also a lot to say for stupidity. If you want simple, hook up a nitrous purge kit to your intake and call it a day on the homemade dry kit.
EDIT: for sake of presenting evidence
http://www.supraforums.com/forum/sho...&postcount=205
You have no idea what your talking about as far as buick manifolds. They have horrible flow distrobution (esp to the aft cyls). If U had a way of providing evidance of each manifold put on a flow bench and measuring the CFM out of each runner, then we might have something to talk about. But your claims have none of this "evidance" all U internet commandos keep talking about.
The difference between U and I is that I speak from actual experiance. Put what ever system on your car you'd like. Disagree with me as much as you'd like. But it won't change the fact that I'm making 500 hp on my NA-T setup with a single nozzle system and 91 octane. Also I'm doing this without a stand alone ECM...
Something in his story doesn't add up. If Anything I had heard that its the rear most cyls that are ones starved for air/fuel in the supra manifold setup. This guy blew his front cyl?
I don't agree with his theory on direct port meth being a necessity. First off you should have some sort of knock monitor. You don't just blow a ring/piston/HG without signs of detonation. And if you let up at the early signs of it, you won't do enough damage to "blow" a cyl.
I've been running 25lbs and 25* timing for years without a problem on 91 octane. Either he's not atomizing his meth charge enough (120+psi) or he has other issues. Single nozzle setups work. Theres a 1000 + vehicles out there to prove it. The buick community has been doing it for 20+ years without issues. Many 9-10 second cars out there on pump gas.
I'm not telling you not to do the direct port if you have the time and money. It sure can't hurt anything. More power to you I think it looks awesome. But it is over kill IMHO.
A single nozzle works great if it's done correctly.
I don't agree with his theory on direct port meth being a necessity. First off you should have some sort of knock monitor. You don't just blow a ring/piston/HG without signs of detonation. And if you let up at the early signs of it, you won't do enough damage to "blow" a cyl.
I've been running 25lbs and 25* timing for years without a problem on 91 octane. Either he's not atomizing his meth charge enough (120+psi) or he has other issues. Single nozzle setups work. Theres a 1000 + vehicles out there to prove it. The buick community has been doing it for 20+ years without issues. Many 9-10 second cars out there on pump gas.
I'm not telling you not to do the direct port if you have the time and money. It sure can't hurt anything. More power to you I think it looks awesome. But it is over kill IMHO.
A single nozzle works great if it's done correctly.
Ian at FSR Motorsport creations had the same thoughts on the meth injection. I ended up going with a single nozzle. My car has been getting work done on it for some time. Mostly clutch and trans bearings & seals, New AEM wideband, and replaced a bad VPC sensor. There was a lot of other misc tweaking the car needed for some time but I was way too busy to do it all my self. Plus I reaized there were a lot of details I had overlooked on the car. Ian says the car runs good now even on high boost. I will pick it up soon. I will post dyno results when I get it back. The meth took care of the knock.
Finally
Pole Position
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 211
Likes: 0
From: kansas
Ian at FSR Motorsport creations had the same thoughts on the meth injection. I ended up going with a single nozzle. My car has been getting work done on it for some time. Mostly clutch and trans bearings & seals, New AEM wideband, and replaced a bad VPC sensor. There was a lot of other misc tweaking the car needed for some time but I was way too busy to do it all my self. Plus I reaized there were a lot of details I had overlooked on the car. Ian says the car runs good now even on high boost. I will pick it up soon. I will post dyno results when I get it back. The meth took care of the knock. Finally
FinallyCongrats!
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
LedZepig
SC - 1st Gen (1992-2000)
1
Oct 29, 2004 02:17 PM
xBlkGs430x
SC - 1st Gen (1992-2000)
7
Sep 26, 2002 01:02 AM
