Moronic Tuning "Advice" WARNING! (Related to RX7Club)

[RICE RACING]

http://www.rx7club.com/showthread.php?t=946182

Quote by Lawyer

"I have never seen any real world proof of injecting pre compressor gives any benefit. There is plenty of speculation on the subject but very little proof, theory can only go so far... If you have proof post it up please.
Also using an IAT to measure after the compressor to show "gains" is flawed from the get go as im sure most of you know already.

Water should be directed to the combustion chambers so it can do what it needs to do, cool combustion. The best way to inject an A/I is port injection. Injecting before the throttle body does no distribute the water equally depending on manifold design. Water DOES NOT flow like air.



WHAT A TOTAL IDIOT !!!
WONDER WHY BDC HAS SUCH A FOLLOWING WITH TOTAL MORON'S LIKE THIS FLOG POSTING CRAP LIKE THIS!!!!

http://www.aquamist.co.uk/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=1590&page=15

Stupid bastard needs to read this ^ thread for his "proof", only 10,000+ others know about it.

I openly blame BDC and HC for brain washing (whatever brains are left) of these types of IDIOTS who frequent that forum, searching for advice! IT NEEDS TO BE SHUT DOWN or at minimum derided at every opportunity so newbies are not scammed into reading their dribble let alone thinking their "advice" is based on any type of reality.

The internet & some forums has allot to answer for :icon_tdown:

That whole section needs to have UN sanctions imposed against it and nuked out of existence !

There is no such terminology as AI! I have never ever herd of that :18: until those DUMB AND DUMBER CUNTS named HC and BDC started shitting on and on and on and on and on about it and themselves! BOTH OF WHO DONT HAVE RUNNING CARS!!!!!!!! OR ANY PROOF OF THEIR OWN!!!!!!!!! OR ANY RELEVANT ENGINEERING QUALIFICATIONS!!!!!!!!!!!!! do i need to go on??????

It' is called WATER INJECTION you dummies ^ !!!

When you get one of your cars to actually run! and hold a piece of paper someone other than your forum qualifies you as having achieved a minimum educational standard in this field then please shut your arse and go back under the rocks from which you collectively came from.

Leave the real MECHANICAL ENGINEERING to us and STOP making people even dumber than what they are for needing to be tortured reading your crap.

[TitaniumTT]

:smilielol5: And they call ME Foul mouth Pete :rofl:

[RICE RACING]

:smilielol5: And they call ME Foul mouth Pete :rofl:


yes.

I know the internet/forums are for the lowest of the low on the food chain of nobodies generally but it still shits me that these people (Brian Dumbass Cain BDC, and HC Howard Clownman) can type till their fingers bleed and basically just like HITLER lead a whole forum nation into an insanity of blind faith.......... based off what exactly???????

The rantings of a couple of deluded moronic leaders, who have achieved nothing, just words and hot non intercooled air.

Makes me sick that site and knowing that they prey on the stupid and novices, who are looking for advice wikipedia google style but in the end are finding shit and in ample amounts over there :9898:

[RICE RACING]

They talk about Water Injection like they actually have a car that runs :dunno:

Have won something with one :dunno:

Have any type of proof to back up their rantings :dunno:

Have customers who they have repeated their knowledge on with regards to this subject :dunno:

Those POOFTERS have nothing, never ever had anything, never ever will have anything.

Leave the real engineering to people like us who are pioneers of this on these cars, we all know what we are doing! we all posses qualifications to know about it, we all have many examples of it working not only on our own cars but many customers cars, and have been doing it for decades. Much longer before you got an internets and a forum to shit on and on and on and on and on ...............

[rx71king]

so running w/i pre turbo is cooling the air that's is being compressed..? as well as the combustion chamber ...

[RICE RACING]

so running w/i pre turbo is cooling the air that's is being compressed..? as well as the combustion chamber ...

Yes,

It does multiple lots of work in the whole system :302: and is one of the only injection points that ACTUALLY results in a net performance gain ironically.

Completely the opposite to that absolute internet idiot I quoted that set me off :rant:

[rx71king]

i will be running pre turbo this summer...thanks for opening my eyes on water..:biggthumpup:

[RICE RACING]

i will be running pre turbo this summer...thanks for opening my eyes on water..:biggthumpup:

No problem at all, you can see in the thread that you linked on the GAYclub forum that I have allot of experience in this and I am the one who pioneered the system that everyone else wants/tires hard to copy :tongue1:

I out of interest of real information being put forth give up allot of my own valuable parameters so others can benefit and enjoy the same as I do everyday I get into RICESP and show cunts how good rotaries can go, no excuses, no finger bleeding BDC styled or HC inspired rants on GAYclub.com....... just proper engineering and world leading results. :biggthumpup:

[RICE RACING]

This is another excellent link to post up on GAYclub! http://www.aquamist.co.uk/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=1924 There is a very high grade of contributions on that forum, some exceptional people and knowledge that obviously precedes Wikipedia and Google :leaving:

Unlike GAYclub pay to play vendors we actually are Mechanical Engineers and have been doing water injection at all levels of motor sport for years n years, but hey maybe HC and BDC know best :banghead: :rofl:

[vex]

http://www.rx7club.com/showthread.php?t=946182

Quote by Lawyer

"I have never seen any real world proof of injecting pre compressor gives any benefit. There is plenty of speculation on the subject but very little proof, theory can only go so far... If you have proof post it up please.
Also using an IAT to measure after the compressor to show "gains" is flawed from the get go as im sure most of you know already.

Water should be directed to the combustion chambers so it can do what it needs to do, cool combustion. The best way to inject an A/I is port injection. Injecting before the throttle body does no distribute the water equally depending on manifold design. Water DOES NOT flow like air.




That's news to me. I thought water flowed exactly like a fluid... I guess I should go complain to my professor that he taught me incorrectly with incompressible and compressible fluid flow...

[NoDOHC]

A couple things to mention:

Water and air are both fluids, but the water has much higher density, thus if it remains in liquid form, it will tend to puddle at any change in direction (you will see fuel do the same thing).

The advantage of injecting before the turbo is that the turbo does a lot of the mixing of the water with the charge, also enabling it to evaporate as it leaves the turbo. The goal here is to have the water evaporate, taking heat out of the charge air.

The advantage of injecting post-intercooler is that the intercooler will do much more cooling (as the temperature difference between the charge air and the surroundings is higher than if the water had already been injected). This means that less water is required to achieve the same IAT, meaning that the water vapor displaces less of the oxygen in the intake air and thus more power can be obtained at the same boost level (the volumetric flow rate will remain equal, but the flow rate of oxygen will increase).

I have not seen a study done, but I wonder if injecting pre-turbo does the compressor any harm (high-speed blade contacts water droplet, causing deformation of the blade, resulting in fatigue failure over time).

I know back in the carb days, the blow-through carbs were preferred, as the fuel would erode the compressor over time.

For what it's worth Peter, I prefer technically informative posts over name-calling. It doesn't seem to help anyone's knowledge on the topic to learn about your opinion of the people who posted the information. Let the evidence stand for itself and let people form their own opinions.

[vex]

A couple things to mention:

Water and air are both fluids, but the water has much higher density, thus if it remains in liquid form, it will tend to puddle at any change in direction (you will see fuel do the same thing).


I understand that, but that's not what 'he' said. Both air and water flow the same. They are both fluidic in nature and as such have the exact same flow properties (IE taking the path of least resistance). Surface interaction and atomization are independent of that. They both adhere to the laws of momentum and energy indicating that the particles with higher mass are going to take wider arcs than particles of less mass (from a Euler perspective). However if you take a cylinder and account for the Re (or the Froude number if you're doing size enlargement and concerned with speed) you get the exact same flow independent of what fluid the cylinder is placed in:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b4/Vortex-street-animation.gif/220px-Vortex-street-animation.gif

I have not seen a study done, but I wonder if injecting pre-turbo does the compressor any harm (high-speed blade contacts water droplet, causing deformation of the blade, resulting in fatigue failure over time).

I know back in the carb days, the blow-through carbs were preferred, as the fuel would erode the compressor over time.
It could cause cavitation based on the impeller design and temperature of the water. I think it unlikely, but if the atomization is poor enough it could cause other issues as well cavitation being the most likely.

[NoDOHC]

It could cause cavitation based on the impeller design and temperature of the water. I think it unlikely, but if the atomization is poor enough it could cause other issues as well cavitation being the most likely.


I know that you know this, but to clarify the terms for those that may be confused, cavitation occurs in a liquid pump when either a dissolved gas is brought out of solution or the liquid evaporates. Both conditions occur under high vacuum on the impeller inlet. Liquid droplets in a normally gaseous fluid can't really be called cavitation.

I was more speaking of mechanical damage by fatigue loading.

[vex]

I know that you know this, but to clarify the terms for those that may be confused, cavitation occurs in a liquid pump when either a dissolved gas is brought out of solution or the liquid evaporates. Both conditions occur under high vacuum on the impeller inlet. Liquid droplets in a normally gaseous fluid can't really be called cavitation.

I was more speaking of mechanical damage by fatigue loading.
:seeya:
I was thinking that the sudden pressure drop across the surface of the impeller would cause the droplets to become gaseous and then collapse once exposed to additional pressure--but then again, does an impeller actually impart a pressure differential across the blades? The more I think about it the less likely it seems that they would. The only way I can think of this occurring is if it were deposited in a vacuum, induced into a gaseous state while maintaining surface integrity/tension of the droplet, only to collapse when exposed to the positive pressure in the housing of the turbo.

As for the fatigue loading I don't see that causing much of an issue either unless the injection point is unbalanced causing additional mass to only enter one specific location on the impeller.

[PercentSevenC]

I'm very interested in trying a purely mechanical pre-turbo water injection setup. From what I've read, compressor damage is just from erosion at the blade tips when the water isn't adequately atomized (and doesn't seem to be a particularly big issue). Nozzle selection is key here.

Now, what I want to know is how big a problem condensation is if you also run a conventional intercooler in addition to pre-turbo WI.

[RICE RACING]

I'm very interested in trying a purely mechanical pre-turbo water injection setup. From what I've read, compressor damage is just from erosion at the blade tips when the water isn't adequately atomized (and doesn't seem to be a particularly big issue). Nozzle selection is key here.

Now, what I want to know is how big a problem condensation is if you also run a conventional intercooler in addition to pre-turbo WI.

No its not a problem at all in regards to charge coolers.

Pre turbo injection is the only way for MAXIMUM performance, proved it over and over many years, and unlike GAYclub contributors have records and many customers to prove it.. oh and a car that runs too LOL unlike BDC and his friends :Chevy_anim:

[RICE RACING]

This thread is more about debunking GAYclub and its spammers who hold more penis than any relevant qualifications....

There are hundreds of posts there that are truely disturbing and infuriating for the total mistruths and basic rantings of internet guru's nothing more nothing less.

[diabolical1]

This thread is more about debunking GAYclub and its spammers who hold more penis than any relevant qualifications....

i'm sorry guys, this is just too damn funny not to quote.

carry on now ...

[My5ABaby]

For what it's worth Peter, I prefer technically informative posts over name-calling. It doesn't seem to help anyone's knowledge on the topic to learn about your opinion of the people who posted the information. Let the evidence stand for itself and let people form their own opinions.
+1

Why degrade our forum with name calling and ranting? Just give us the info, prove they're wrong, and people will draw their own conclusions which is far more powerful in helping people realize the RX7Club tends to be full of crap than ranting and name calling.

[RotaryXperiment]

im running pure water too, but not as much as alot of pople are.
im running a m2 pre turbo and m10 post.

[RICE RACING]

You want to learn about water injection (internets) you look here > http://www.aquamist.co.uk/vbulletin/index.php

You want to learn how to be a nobody with hockey puck engine mounts or how to start a thread on testing turbo's when you cant even afford basic testing equipment then you read RX7Club Pay to Play trash commentary site.

[TitaniumTT]

Hockey puck motor mounts are too expensive for bdc, the level of his engineering genius led him to believe that 2x4 lumber cut into squares, and probably not even square at that, with a bolt running through them would make an adequate motor mount..... and this is the guy people are PAYING to work on their cars? I'm sorry, but anyone who will defend lumber as a good substitute for a motor mount needs to not own tools..... dollars to donuts says his two favorite tools are visegrips and a claw hammer.

[2gslse]

Hockey puck motor mounts are too expensive for bdc, the level of his engineering genius led him to believe that 2x4 lumber cut into squares, and probably not even square at that, with a bolt running through them would make an adequate motor mount.....


at least he used a bolt and not a nail bent over in the block of wood.

[RICE RACING]

I really do miss reading Dumb and Dumber's posts ........... where is he? been so quiet lately, maybe started harvesting his own meth? :lol:

[TitaniumTT]

Hockey puck motor mounts are too expensive for bdc, the level of his engineering genius led him to believe that 2x4 lumber cut into squares, and probably not even square at that, with a bolt running through them would make an adequate motor mount.....


at least he used a bolt and not a nail bent over in the block of wood.

Ya know, I was assuming that he bolted it down, we all know that assumption is the mother of all f*ck ups, and to spell assume... well, it makes an ass out of U-M-E. It very well could've been a nail :rofl:

[PercentSevenC]

Hey, don't bash hockey puck motor mounts. They may be ghetto, but they work great. :D

[speedjunkie]

^I was thinking about using some for my mounts LOL.

[Mazdabater]

Fuck me, you shouldn't be owning a 7 if your too poor to buy engine mounts.

[rx71king]

i like my banzai mounts..http://www.banzai-racing.com/cgi-banzai-racing/sb/productsearch.cgi?storeid=*162dce257f4100890751a14 e90&search_field=motor+mounts&Go=Go:D

[PercentSevenC]

Fuck me, you shouldn't be owning a 7 if your too poor to buy engine mounts.
Haters gonna hate. :D

Actually, I've used both and I like hockey pucks better than the Mazda competition mounts. The hockey pucks are a bit stiffer and are theoretically less likely to break (though I've never actually heard of a Mazda competition mount breaking). The Banzai mounts look great, but I just haven't felt the need to spend the money when hockey pucks are working so well in both my FB and my REPU.

[Evil Aviator]

WHAT A TOTAL IDIOT !!!
WONDER WHY BDC HAS SUCH A FOLLOWING WITH TOTAL MORON'S LIKE THIS FLOG POSTING CRAP LIKE THIS!!!!
Well, his screen name is Lawyer and not Engineer. Anyway, I especially like how he says that "water DOES NOT flow like air".

I openly blame BDC and HC for brain washing (whatever brains are left) of these types of IDIOTS who frequent that forum, searching for advice! IT NEEDS TO BE SHUT DOWN or at minimum derided at every opportunity so newbies are not scammed into reading their dribble let alone thinking their "advice" is based on any type of reality.
I think they both mean well. As for the idiots who frequent that forum, they are mostly the Generation-Y folks who aren't going to listen to an engineer anyway. They want "proof", whatever that means. I don't even bother posting in the "AI" section because I know that it would be a waste of time. I figure that they will get what is coming to them.

There is no such terminology as AI! I have never ever herd of that :18: until those DUMB AND DUMBER CUNTS named HC and BDC started shitting on and on and on and on and on about it and themselves!
AI is Artificial Intelligence, which I suppose could control the injection. Had they any engineering background they would know that "AI" has been called ADI at least since the 1930's. I mentioned this when they were talking about making a sub-forum, but nobody listened to me, as usual. Now I am waiting for a "Turbo-Compounding" sub-forum from the laymen who think that means feeding one turbo into another.

[vex]

Now I am waiting for a "Turbo-Compounding" sub-forum from the laymen who think that means feeding one turbo into another.

I was about to put a foot in my mouth... but why on earth would they switch the two words? Do they not realize that a compound turbo set up is different than a turbo compound setup?

[Judge Ito]

this is generally a good site. If Peter and other members keep making threads like this and disrespecting people in general. this site will also go to hell. Peter I understand we all have our opinions, and so do you. but who gives a fuck about what brian or howard are saying or doing. if people listen and follow that is their choice. and if they will to do so, who the fuck are you or any of us to say any different? to the moderators, don't let this site go to shit with threads like this one peter has started. where is the moderating at?

[RETed]

There's a thread in The Lounge which might better explain the situation...

Now, there's an ADMIN in this thread present, so I will default action to the higher up's at this point.

I've said it before, although I don't condone RICE RACING's words, I do understand his frustation.
This is starting to look like the BDC thread in The Lounge...

And, Mr. Ito, as an option, you're welcome to use the Ignore (member) function (located in the User CP drop down menu at the top of this page) available to every member of this forum to prevent seeing RICE RACING's posts.


-Ted

[TitaniumTT]

Thank you Ted.

There are 2 threads on this ENTIRE site like this.

Personally, I would prefer it if Peter would debunk what hc and bdc are doing by posting his own findings. It's evident that his car can be construed as rolling proof.

We're not going to start censoring people's opinions, we will censor the words and we've been in contact with Peter about his language.

As I said, I would rather this be kept technical, and if the name calling and such continues, the thread will be continued to be cleaned up, and if repeated offenses take place, then we will take more drastic measures such as thread lockings or more than likely deletions and bans.

However, every time in the past that I had debunked or proven those two either wrong or incompetent, my posts were deleted. This does nothing to help the community by censoring my technical knowledge and experience and all it does is offer a biased one sided view. I know of a few people that have gone the bdc route and ended up with cracked plates, sheared apex seals, dropped corner seals whatever. I would rather that not happen on my watch so I will let the other side of the coin speak, as long as it can be done in a mature way. We are on the border in some of the posts though.

Like I said (hint hint) I would rather the posts be more technical in nature explaining why they shouldn't be mimiced rather than, "f*ck those bloody c*nts, they don't know what the f*ck they're talking about." I agree with Ito, that really does noone any good.

[Judge Ito]

There's a thread in The Lounge which might better explain the situation...

Now, there's an ADMIN in this thread present, so I will default action to the higher up's at this point.

I've said it before, although I don't condone RICE RACING's words, I do understand his frustation.
This is starting to look like the BDC thread in The Lounge...

And, Mr. Ito, as an option, you're welcome to use the Ignore (member) function (located in the User CP drop down menu at the top of this page) available to every member of this forum to prevent seeing RICE RACING's posts.


-Tedted, it's not about ignoring peter/rice, it's about not letting this good site go to shits.

[Judge Ito]

Thank you Ted.

There are 2 threads on this ENTIRE site like this.

Personally, I would prefer it if Peter would debunk what hc and bdc are doing by posting his own findings. It's evident that his car can be construed as rolling proof.

We're not going to start censoring people's opinions, we will censor the words and we've been in contact with Peter about his language.

As I said, I would rather this be kept technical, and if the name calling and such continues, the thread will be continued to be cleaned up, and if repeated offenses take place, then we will take more drastic measures such as thread lockings or more than likely deletions and bans.

However, every time in the past that I had debunked or proven those two either wrong or incompetent, my posts were deleted. This does nothing to help the community by censoring my technical knowledge and experience and all it does is offer a biased one sided view. I know of a few people that have gone the bdc route and ended up with cracked plates, sheared apex seals, dropped corner seals whatever. I would rather that not happen on my watch so I will let the other side of the coin speak, as long as it can be done in a mature way. We are on the border in some of the posts though.

Like I said (hint hint) I would rather the posts be more technical in nature explaining why they shouldn't be mimiced rather than, "f*ck those bloody c*nts, they don't know what the f*ck they're talking about." I agree with Ito, that really does noone any good.yes.. that is all im asking for. keep it technical and clean. this way, we could all learn and not turn this great site up side down. i have tons of valuable information. but i refuse to post it. y? cause i want to see how this site will take it's course. i'm sure many other members feel the same way. by no means i'm not saying peter is a donkey. we just don't need the bullshit from his mouth.

[Evil Aviator]

I was about to put a foot in my mouth... but why on earth would they switch the two words? Do they not realize that a compound turbo set up is different than a turbo compound setup?
See, this is exactly what RICE RACING is complaining about. The idiots have now confused you by using incorrect, made-up terminology. I would like to point out that the latest iteration of this ignorance made its way from this forum to rx7club.com, so it does work both ways.

When one compressor feeds into another it is called "staging". The setup is usually described in numbers of stages. For example, one compressor feeding into another is called "2-stage", 7 inline compressors are called "7-stage", and so on. Therefore, if you had an engine with one compressor feeding into another, you would describe your setup as a "2-stage turbocharged engine" and you would describe the method as "2-stage turbocharging", or more generically as "staged turbocharging" or simply "staging".

Garrett on staging:
http://www.turbobygarrett.com/turbobygarrett/tech_center/diesel_tech.html

Borg Warner's regulated 2-stage turbo system:
http://www.turbos.bwauto.com/products/r2s.aspx
http://www.turbos.bwauto.com/tools/download.aspx?t=document&r=106&d=107

Garrett TPE331 engine shows the design differences between the high and low compressor stages (painted blue in the cut-away picture). The resulting compression ratio was 8:1.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garrett_AiResearch_TPE-331

There's a thread in The Lounge which might better explain the situation...
Where is The Lounge? I haven't seen it in about a year now, so I figured it was deleted. :Wconfused:

[vex]

See, this is exactly what RICE RACING is complaining about. The idiots have now confused you by using incorrect, made-up terminology.

When one compressor feeds into another it is called "staging". The setup is usually described in numbers of stages. For example, one compressor feeding into another is called "2-stage", 7 inline compressors are called "7-stage", and so on. Therefore, if you had an engine with one compressor feeding into another, you would describe your setup as a "2-stage turbocharged engine" and you would describe the method as "2-stage turbocharging", or more generically as "staged turbocharging" or simply "staging".

Garrett on staging:
http://www.turbobygarrett.com/turbobygarrett/tech_center/diesel_tech.html

Borg Warner's regulated 2-stage turbo system:
http://www.turbos.bwauto.com/products/r2s.aspx
http://www.turbos.bwauto.com/tools/download.aspx?t=document&r=106&d=107

Garrett TPE331 engine shows the design differences between the high and low compressor stages (painted blue in the cut-away picture). The resulting compression ratio was 8:1.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garrett_AiResearch_TPE-331


Where is The Lounge? I haven't seen it in about a year now, so I figured it was deleted. :Wconfused:
To be fair however, even academia refers to the above as compound turbocharging of a system (at least in Marine Engineering--but then again, I take what that professor says with a heavy dose of salt for just about everything that comes out of his mouth).

Scroll all the way to the bottom of the main forum.

[Judge Ito]

See, this is exactly what RICE RACING is complaining about. The idiots have now confused you by using incorrect, made-up terminology.

When one compressor feeds into another it is called "staging". The setup is usually described in numbers of stages. For example, one compressor feeding into another is called "2-stage", 7 inline compressors are called "7-stage", and so on. Therefore, if you had an engine with one compressor feeding into another, you would describe your setup as a "2-stage turbocharged engine" and you would describe the method as "2-stage turbocharging", or more generically as "staged turbocharging" or simply "staging".

Garrett on staging:
http://www.turbobygarrett.com/turbobygarrett/tech_center/diesel_tech.html

Borg Warner's regulated 2-stage turbo system:
http://www.turbos.bwauto.com/products/r2s.aspx
http://www.turbos.bwauto.com/tools/download.aspx?t=document&r=106&d=107

Garrett TPE331 engine shows the design differences between the high and low compressor stages (painted blue in the cut-away picture). The resulting compression ratio was 8:1.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garrett_AiResearch_TPE-331


Where is The Lounge? I haven't seen it in about a year now, so I figured it was deleted. :Wconfused:I have a book called auto math. talks about tractor pulling.. tractor was making over 245lbs of boost. 3 turbo's. 1 turbo feeding boost into the second turbo and the second turbo feeding into the 3rd turbo.. 3rd turbo feeding the 245lbs of boost to the diesel engine. they also show a picture of the engine granading into pieces.... insane to say the least..

[Evil Aviator]

To be fair however, even academia refers to the above as compound turbocharging of a system (at least in Marine Engineering--but then again, I take what that professor says with a heavy dose of salt for just about everything that comes out of his mouth).
It has been called staging for over 100 years now, lol. Maybe your marine professor just liked using redneck terms? I had one who would use redneck terms as a joke.

Scroll all the way to the bottom of the main forum.
Live Chat and Video? After that I am just seeing forum stats and random album pictures.

I have a book called auto math. talks about tractor pulling.. tractor was making over 245lbs of boost. 3 turbo's. 1 turbo feeding boost into the second turbo and the second turbo feeding into the 3rd turbo.. 3rd turbo feeding the 245lbs of boost to the diesel engine. they also show a picture of the engine granading into pieces.... insane to say the least..
Yes, it's insane, especially considering that Buchi was running 71psig back in 1909.

[TitaniumTT]

You need 20 posts to see the lounge. If you'd like, I can alter your post count to see it.

I'm glad Ito and everyone else is on the same page about this. We have edited the title, and change a bunch of the posts to keep it civilized and PG-13. It's the whole censorship thing. I don't like censoring people's opinions, but if it gets out of hand with the language and the insults, then we will.'

As I said, I would REALLY like to see some heavily technical posts debunking those on the other site especially because when it comes to this subject, there are plenty of people much smarter and experienced than I am.

[rx71king]

yes.. that is all im asking for. keep it technical and clean. this way, we could all learn and not turn this great site up side down. i have tons of valuable information. but i refuse to post it. y? cause i want to see how this site will take it's course. i'm sure many other members feel the same way. by no means i'm not saying peter is a donkey. we just don't need the bullshit from his mouth.

between all of us we can make this site a greater place to visit....i need to learn new info so i can go to the next level...:rofl:..let's keep it clean.

[Judge Ito]

between all of us we can make this site a greater place to visit....i need to learn new info so i can go to the next level...:rofl:..let's keep it clean.

like asking me the timing specs on my nephews turbo II?:beatdeadhorse5:

[Evil Aviator]

You need 20 posts to see the lounge. If you'd like, I can alter your post count to see it.
Dang, you guys changed the forum settings since I first joined this board, lol. Sorry, but I didn't see any such guidance in the FAQ or other area of this forum. I will just post a few more times to get my 20. ;)

As I said, I would REALLY like to see some heavily technical posts debunking those on the other site especially because when it comes to this subject, there are plenty of people much smarter and experienced than I am.
That would require taking on the entire sub-forum, and quite frankly it's not worth spending countless hours on it just to be called a "hater" and probably getting banned in the process. Besides, sooner or later those guys will get a clue, and I look forward to that point in time in which BDC can proudly say that he has successfully reinvented the wheel. I actually like BDC, but I can't help but be amused by his method of education.

[rx71king]

:icon_no2:.....this will not end well........please stop

[Evil Aviator]

:icon_no2:.....this will not end well........please stop
Gonna be hard for me to get 20 posts if the threads all get deleted as I type, lol.

[RICE RACING]

EVERYONE Lead by example, go contribute to the "Turbo Tuning" thread I started. :001_005:

[Judge Ito]

^ You are the master of bullshit ito, I have already seen the sort of rubbish you type, this is another example of YOU! turning things to shit, and no one else. Fell free to get fucked of this forum any time as you are not welcome with your attitude :seeya:

I'll be sure to look you up when I am there soon and see how much of hero you are in person big man !

Peter, peter eater.. Peter let me tell you something. If you only knew who your talking with. but thats not here nor there. You have been kicked out of every forum. and to be honest, there is no need for it. you do have valuable information and you do contribute. but you go about it in the wrong way. I refuse to attack you personally, cause i could care less about who you are personally. this is simple, just keep it clean. no need for your childish crap. and if you want to visit me. simple Advanced Rotary Performance. 181 Grand St Paterson NJ.. 973-653-4084 pussy. it goes to show how limited your brain size is. this is about trying to maintain a site from falling apart like every other site.. peter seriously. your a good guy, just grow up a little. your in your 40's already.. cheerss.

[RICE RACING]

http://www.rotarycarclub.com/rotary_forum/showthread.php?t=13626

Here is another good thread not full of bullshit like this one has turned into after a certain person started posting in it :smash:

[rx71king]

Gonna be hard for me to get 20 posts if the threads all get deleted as I type, lol.

i was talking about rice and ito....

[RICE RACING]

Peter, peter dick eater.. Peter let me tell you something. If you only knew who the fuck your talking with. but thats not here nor there. You have been kicked out of every forum. and to be honest, there is no need for it. you do have valuable information and you do contribute. but you go about it in the wrong way. I refuse to attack you personally, cause i could care less about who the fuck you are personally. this is simple, just keep it clean. no need for your childish shit. and if you want to visit me. simple Advanced Rotary Performance. 181 Grand St Paterson NJ.. 973-653-4084 pussy. it goes to show how limited your brain size is. this is about trying to maintain a site from falling apart like every other site.. peter seriously. your a good guy, just grow up a little. your in your 40's already.. cheerss.

LOL, you have issues :icon_tdown: you say, think one thing,and type three different things all in the same paragraph!, stop hiding behind your key board :o13:

[Judge Ito]

LOL, you have issues :icon_tdown: you say, think one thing,a nd type three different things, stop hiding behind your key board :o13:

no issues, just letting you know your way out of line on the personal side, but letting you know your a contributing member that i consider valuable if you stop all your childish crap. If you carry yourself in a proper manner, believe you me, we will all come out of it better.

[Judge Ito]

i was talking about rice and ito....peter is a good guy. only reason i run my autronic 500R is because he highly recommended it to me many years ago. we ok here.

[RICE RACING]

no issues, just letting you know your way out of line on the personal side, but letting you know your a contributing member that i consider valuable if you stop all your childish crap. If you carry yourself in a proper manner, believe you me, we will all come out of it better.

YOU apply the same advice to yourself, ignore the parts you DONT like on this thread and talk about the things YOU can contribute to make it better, rather than abusing people then telling them to grow up :nopity:

I look forward to your positive contributions in this forum and its various good threads we have all started :bigear:

[Evil Aviator]

i was talking about rice and ito....
I know, but if this entire thread gets deleted then I'm gonna lose the posts.

Boy, I sure am glad that this forum is more civilized than the "evil" forum, lol.

[RICE RACING]

Like talking about the 6lt per minute of water injection used in the triple stage turbo book you have in front of you :) and debunking the moronic tuning advice I was eluding too in the first place :icon_tup:

I am going to work now :)

[Judge Ito]

YOU apply the same advice to yourself, ignore the parts you DONT like on this thread and talk about the things YOU can contribute to make it better, rather than abusing people then telling them to grow up :nopity:

I look forward to your positive contributions in this forum and its various good threads we have all started :bigear:

won't ignore it. I think we all come in here to de-stress.. and to try and share. but once you fly off the handle it's a no go.. remember ultimately is not about you me or anyone else. it's about Felix Wankel..

[Judge Ito]

Like talking about the 6lt per minute of water injection used in the triple stage turbo book you have in front of you :) and debunking the moronic tuning advice I was eluding too in the first place :icon_tup:

I am going to work now :)buy it..

[vex]

Wow... I think this thread is going to need to be trimmed... or moved... This isn't the place for such bickering. That's what the Lounge is for.

[TitaniumTT]

I know, but if this entire thread gets deleted then I'm gonna lose the posts.

Boy, I sure am glad that this forum is more civilized than the "evil" forum, lol.

Gonna be hard for me to get 20 posts if the threads all get deleted as I type, lol.

I try not to delete threads as there is almost always something valuable in it. I just trim out the BS and namecalling.

Hypocrites though..........

[Evil Aviator]

EVERYONE Lead by example, go contribute to the "Turbo Tuning" thread I started. :001_005:
Check. I gave you noobs a link on Pete Law so you can learn something from the master. Hehehe.

buy it..
I have it, and it's pretty darn basic.

Wow... I think this thread is going to need to be trimmed... or moved... This isn't the place for such bickering. That's what the Lounge is for.
:(

[Judge Ito]

Check. I gave you noobs a link on Pete Law so you can learn something from the master. Hehehe.


I have it, and it's pretty darn basic.


:(yes it is. i bought it many years ago. before i ever tuned a rotary on turbo. and when they talked about the turbo charged tractor pulling I see now how ahead of the times they were.

[Evil Aviator]

yes it is. i bought it many years ago. before i ever tuned a rotary on turbo. and when they talked about the turbo charged tractor pulling I see now how ahead of the times they were.
I happen to be rearranging my attic right now (posting on the internet to avoid working, lol), and I just flipped through that book and I don't see the tractor pull section. Is it hidden in one of the other sections, or were you thinking about the old Hugh MacInnes book, "Turbochargers"?

[Judge Ito]

I happen to be rearranging my attic right now (posting on the internet to avoid working, lol), and I just flipped through that book and I don't see the tractor pull section. Is it hidden in one of the other sections, or were you thinking about the old Hugh MacInnes book, "Turbochargers"?your correct. it's been a while, but it is the "turbochargers" book. I thought I was going crazy for a minute..

[Judge Ito]

this was many years ago..

[Judge Ito]

book.

[Evil Aviator]

this was many years ago..
Yes, it was written in the mid-80s. It just shows you how the guys nowadays are just reinventing the wheel. I just wish they wouldn't reinvent the terminology. :(

[rx71king]

like asking me the timing specs on my nephews turbo II?:beatdeadhorse5:

i won't ask you any more questions...

[speedjunkie]

Fuck me, you shouldn't be owning a 7 if your too poor to buy engine mounts.

Who said anything about being poor? While I'm certainly not the most wealthy person on this forum I'm sure, I just dropped several thousand dollars on an engine rebuild and other projects I'm taking care of at the same time, so I assure you I have no problem dropping a couple hundred or so on engine mounts if they are needed. And I'm usually very picky about my car, but not in this case since I don't see much difference between hockey pucks and delrin or polyurethane bushings most places are selling for over $100 or $200. The real reason I was going to try hockey pucks is because I need shorter mounts and I figured two hockey pucks on each side would be shorter than the Noltecs I was using...I was incorrect, it's almost the same height exactly, so I've given up on that plan. And to expand on the first reason is...

Haters gonna hate. :D

Actually, I've used both and I like hockey pucks better than the Mazda competition mounts. The hockey pucks are a bit stiffer and are theoretically less likely to break (though I've never actually heard of a Mazda competition mount breaking). The Banzai mounts look great, but I just haven't felt the need to spend the money when hockey pucks are working so well in both my FB and my REPU.

...^this...

[Judge Ito]

i won't ask you any more questions...it's no big deal.. here to share..i will try running leading on a wasted spark mode with the msd 6al later on to make a comparison..

[Barry Bordes]

Yes, it was written in the mid-80s. It just shows you how the guys nowadays are just reinventing the wheel. I just wish they wouldn't reinvent the terminology. :(

This is what the book looked like in 1976 when I did my first turbo Alfa.

With knowledge the ego builds.
Wouldn't it be great if we could learn wisdom also... thereby keeping our ego in check.

Barry

[RotaryXperiment]

have u seen anyone else try a wasted spark system on leading as well ITO? i know someone tried it but no real hard data on if it helps or not. the rx7 still drives the same but not sure if it would help under boost and/or with high pressure in chambers.

[RETed]

This is just a reminder that this is still a TECH section.

You're welcome to talk about commies / liberals / cookies in The Lounge to your hearts content.

The recent replies that have nothing to do with tech have been deleted.


-Ted

[dr.occa]

I must have wondered into the wrong room. I heard something about hockey pucks...I like the two I picked up for a buck fiddy each.

I'm not so sure I'd jump in the same boat regarding the comment about air and water having the same exact flow characteristics especially when water's own natural surface tension is a quantitative variable to factor in. Shouldn't surface tension be factored in since it's most likely a contributing factor to water pump cavitation issues? Speaking from a post (even pre) combustion side, even the weight of spent gas is an important variable to consider when flow testing.

Anyway, I guess that might be considered splitting hairs on my part. Am I wrong in this?

[vex]

I must have wondered into the wrong room. I heard something about hockey pucks...I like the two I picked up for a buck fiddy each.

I'm not so sure I'd jump in the same boat regarding the comment about air and water having the same exact flow characteristics especially when water's own natural surface tension is a quantitative variable to factor in. Shouldn't surface tension be factored in since it's most likely a contributing factor to water pump cavitation issues? Speaking from a post (even pre) combustion side, even the weight of spent gas is an important variable to consider when flow testing.Again, surface tension is not what he stated. Surface tension is nothing more than two different mediums interacting with each other. You get the same effect when different densities are present; for instance salt and fresh water or nitrogen and helium. Note that the surface tension between the two mediums becomes negligible as their densities approach unity. This is simple incompressible flow.

Water obeys the same fundamental laws as air does (energy, mass, and momentum). Hence why both mediums have circulation, currents, laminar and turbulent flows, etc, etc, etc. They both flow exactly the same. As I stated earlier you can prove this by solving for the Reynolds Number (which is a dimensionless number that accounts for the various medium's density) and applying it to both water and air. The results will be exactly the same. In fact, this is how engineers do various testing.

Anyway, I guess that might be considered splitting hairs on my part. Am I wrong in this?
It depends where you're looking at it from. From a flow stand point; both air and water flow exactly the same. From a atomization mixture stand point you are correct in that water and air will not necessarily travel the same path from an Eulerian perspective; however that does not negate the fact that they still flow exactly the same. They still are adhering to the fundamental laws which dictate flow path and direction.
:beatdeadhorse5:

[dr.occa]

The results will be exactly the same. In fact, this is how engineers do various testing...

So will liquid also emulate the same exact areas of turbulence as air in flow testing?

I'm asking not because I'm doubtful of the previously mentioned method of water injection. I'm primarily putting forth these questions for more clarification when considering the accuracy of flow testing results. I don't want to settle because it's what's been accepted for ions. It would be better to scrutinize and challenge the findings and let them stand on their own merits rather than what's spouted/parroted off by a lineage of engineers in an informal daisy chain if you know what I mean. The world is much too dynamic to take it for granted that it's ALWAYS going to do what's expected every time.

[Mazdabater]

Again, surface tension is not what he stated. Surface tension is nothing more than two different mediums interacting with each other. You get the same effect when different densities are present; for instance salt and fresh water or nitrogen and helium. Note that the surface tension between the two mediums becomes negligible as their densities approach unity. This is simple incompressible flow.

Water obeys the same fundamental laws as air does (energy, mass, and momentum). Hence why both mediums have circulation, currents, laminar and turbulent flows, etc, etc, etc. They both flow exactly the same. As I stated earlier you can prove this by solving for the Reynolds Number (which is a dimensionless number that accounts for the various medium's density) and applying it to both water and air. The results will be exactly the same. In fact, this is how engineers do various testing.

It depends where you're looking at it from. From a flow stand point; both air and water flow exactly the same. From a atomization mixture stand point you are correct in that water and air will not necessarily travel the same path from an Eulerian perspective; however that does not negate the fact that they still flow exactly the same. They still are adhering to the fundamental laws which dictate flow path and direction.
:beatdeadhorse5:


You must have missed reading those parts.

[dr.occa]

You must have missed reading those parts.

Not at all. It's called dotting your "I's" and crossing your "T's".

"Knowledge" can be bad for the ego apparently: by puffing it up and giving those who have gained any information from others a false sense of self-importance.

"Stupid" questions should be asked along with the "Not-So-Stupid" questions. That way you can better distinguish between them. Especially so in a public forum so that others can witness the difference and avoid repeating them.

Off to find wisdom somewhere else. I'm sure there are more people out in the internets that are wrong that ya'll need to take care of or something...

[Herblenny]

The world is much too dynamic to take it for granted that it's ALWAYS going to do what's expected every time.

I agree with you. I'm in Molecular Bio/Genetics and things that worked 10 years ago now doesn't work. Physics, chemistry, etc... in theory a lot stands in place, but some just doesn't work in the real world.

[vex]

So will liquid also emulate the same exact areas of turbulence as air in flow testing?Yes. They flow exactly the same, one just needs to match the Reynolds number. All calculations concerning flow of a medium use Reynolds number as the basis of calculation. This accounts for the density alterations between the two mediums.

I'm asking not because I'm doubtful of the previously mentioned method of water injection. I'm primarily putting forth these questions for more clarification when considering the accuracy of flow testing results. I don't want to settle because it's what's been accepted for ions.Ions have nothing to do with anything you're talking about unless you're considering hypersonic velocities (I believe you meant eons). It would be better to scrutinize and challenge the findings and let them stand on their own merits rather than what's spouted/parroted off by a lineage of engineers in an informal daisy chain if you know what I mean. The world is much too dynamic to take it for granted that it's ALWAYS going to do what's expected every time.

Unfortunately this is pretty standard flow knowledge. It's been done this way for ages because this is the correct way to do it. The mathematics behind it model natural occurrence very accurately. Laminar, and boundary flow are very well explored and mathematically modeled with no issues. These laws hold true regardless of what Newtonian fluid is being considered. There are of course exceptions to this but they are non-Newtonian in nature. These include things like Liquid Helium and other super fluids.

Back to the proposed comment "Water does not flow like air" is absolutely false. Point in fact the original exploration of air flow was done with water and the results extrapolated out to air, which was then tested and confirmed. Now-a-days with the proper instruments and technical ability we can test air independent of water, however, what we learn from air only reinforces what we already have known. That is, if you solve for a particular flow using the Reynolds number you can match any medium you want to the same exact flow. This means I can not only match water and air, but I could also match oil, nitrogen, helium, oxygen, etc, etc, etc.

Here's something to consider: Air (mostly composed of nitrogen, and so nitrogen is used), has a molecular weight of 14.0067 g/mol, and water has a molecular weight of (1.00794 g/mol)*2+ 15.9994 g/mol (or 18.01528 g/mol), flow exactly the same. However if we take the hypothesis of "water does not flow like air" we by extension must emphatically state that the components of water do not flow like air. This means hydrogen and oxygen do not follow the same laws as nitrogen. This is obviously false, as both hydrogen and oxygen flow exactly the same as nitrogen when one matches the Reynolds number. Since water is a Newtonian fluid as well one can do the same. Another thought experiment; what if water was turned gaseous? Would the flow be any different? No. The medium is water, but just in its gaseous state. One need only match the Reynolds number and the flows will be exact.

Now for turbulent flows:

Turbulent flows are a bit harder to model as they are equivalent to white noise in radio. They therefore remain random when looked at molecular level Eulerian perspective. This means statistical analysis is done on the medium using various fluid properties (and other boundary conditions) to determine the numerical basis of the turbulent region of concern. What I'm basically saying is that all Newtonian fluids that experience a turbulent region of flow will behave exactly the same. This means that when the Re is matched, the flow (regardless of density) remains the same. Turbulent Boundary regions, Turbulent flows, Laminar Flows, they flow the same. This is how fluids work.

The exceptions to this rule however do exist. They include super fluids, or fluids that have almost no viscosity. These fluids are never used inside of commercial engines and play no part in the discussion at hand, but they do bear mentioning. They do not behave the same as regular Newtonian fluids. For more information concerning these fluids I suggest reading the wiki-article concerning them.

[vex]

I agree with you. I'm in Molecular Bio/Genetics and things that worked 10 years ago now doesn't work. Physics, chemistry, etc... in theory a lot stands in place, but some just doesn't work in the real world.

From my knowledge on the subject thus far; the only big change is when Caloric theory was killed off by thermodynamics.

All flow experiments and research have only reinforced what was first discovered all those years ago by people by the name of:

Bernoulli
Mach
Reynolds
Froude

Just to name a few. Unless something drastic were to happen tomorrow such as the laws of Thermo Dynamics were found to be wrong, the flow laws and mathematics will remain intact.

[RETed]

Okay, I cleaned up the recent drama and hopefully left the flow of the thread intact.

Now back to our regularly scheduled programming...


-Ted

[Slides]

I know the above is a bit old now, but making arguments about the flow characteristics of air and water in entirely separate environments with matched Re numbers flowing as single fluids is entirely besides the point taken from the other forum regards water/charge distribution between cylinders/chambers rotors/whatever. I am a degreed mech eng, i get that, but it is entirely irrelevant to the original point someone was trying to make regards our fluid injection application.

By chance I found a very flawed post by lawyer in hte ai section of rx7club and replied before reading this thread, suffice to say I don't agree with him on all but the fact that mass distribution of an injected fluid (in the context of water injection in air/fuel SI turbo engines), be it water, meth, petrol, pepsi or whatever between airstreams into different runners/ports/whatever is effected by flow paths/profiles/shapes.

In an automotive, pre-plenum, over-saturated, be that equilibrium condition or quasi due to fluid particle surface area evaporation limitation giving remaining non gaseous particles fluid injection application, it is expected that high density suspended particles will not follow your streamlines of the main gas/fluid flow in which they are suspended, that is how centrifuges work. It is entirely reasonable, if used in an application where gas accelerations vary between flow paths to assume that, if the fluid injection is being relied upon for knock suppression an imbalance in fluid distribution between chambers/pistons/whatever could cause problems for the running of the engine system if air flow (and thus combustion conditions/required heat dissipation/knock limit between pistons/rotors/chambers) would otherwise be equal. In the case of most mazda 2 rotor throttle/plenum setups it doesn't really bother us due to their geometry (perhaps the short radius intake hat holley type throttles might experience this problem however), but in the case of piston engine intake manifolds, it could.

[Kontakt]

Thanks Slides. Reading through this thread that was the #1 point on my mind the whole way through.

Water in water may flow the same as air in air, but water in air does NOT flow the same as air in air.

Correct me if I am wrong, but if it is primarily the temperature reduction of the intake charge that is sought, and evaporation is attained in large part, then we are talking about water vapor vs air. Those two have much closer densities and flow together much better than water droplets in air. Rain falls, clouds float. :)

If that isn't the goal of it all, then why not just run a high pressure steam system for your injection. No pump necessary, just a boiler. (joking)

[dr.occa]

I had forgotten about this thread so sorry for yet bumping it.

For me vex clarified quite a few questions I had and actually I focused on what exactly it was I was getting side tracked by - the speed of flowing liquids/gases, etc...I believe for me I lost track of the purpose of flowbench testing: which (correct me if I'm wrong) is discovering points of restriction, poor port activity and where they can and need to be improved for a desired performance target. Water, which is easier to contain, control as well as observe than air/gas will display the necessary characteristics of flow.

I realized I'm not looking to alter what it is that'll be flowing through the engine because all I'm looking for is flow PATH. Water will show me that path because it will take same route(s) as air.

It's an "ah ha!" moment for me. Thanks vex.

Oh, and you're right, I did mean eon/aeon. I just now saw that I goofed that up.