VWDiesel.net The IDI, TDI, and mTDI source.
Engine Specific Info and Questions => IDI Engine => Topic started by: ORCoaster on June 25, 2011, 07:58:37 pm
-
I have searched the forum here but do not find much mention of water vapor injection. I would like to run the blowby from the rocker cover through a volume of water and then have it pumped into the top of the intake box behind the air filter. This kind of water injection was common 20 to 30 years ago and now it has been converted to the HHO idea. I do not want to go with that idea. Why tax the alternator and reduce millage that way?
Has anyone tried this method? I have the understanding that it benefits our diesels in several ways. Mileage increase (10%), Cleaner burning of the fuel we do use so less black out the back, and the vapor cleans Coke out of the pistons. No not that cola drink goof ball. The hard nasty black crap we have to chisel out of the rings.
So given a great weekend in Portland I think this will be my next mod. I will be able to test it out come Thursday on my drive back to the coast.
Any feedback? Good, bad or indifferent, I will read and respond to all.
Thanks.
-
I think I'm missing something here.
On the stock system, crankcase blowby is already thrown into the intake. What would running it through water first change other than making it more humid?
You say the idea has been converted to HHO, but that requires breaking the water down into oxygen and hydrogen
-
RadoTD,
You are correct that the stock system feeds crankcase blow by to the intake. That means the oil gets consumed in the subsequent combustion of the next strokes. Nothing new there. But now take that oil laden air and run it through some water and yes the vapor now returns to the intake. It is the little bit of moisture in the air combined with the injection of the diesel that creates a slightly different combustion flavor if you will. There is a twist on this method that I will look into once I get the basics down, and it is to use a combination of methanol and water in a 25 75 mix. That adds a different flavor to the burn of the diesel and provides a different result.
What I mean about the HHOl is that they are taking stainless steel rods and screen and applying a charge across them to get the gases in the water to come out and be blown into the intake much the same as I described with the plain water. So it is just the idea of cycling the blow by through charged water for the HHO folks.
I think simpler is better and do not see why electricity needs to be involved here. That seems counter productive at best. I kind of like the idea that the engine only needs one charged wire to keep it running. A fuse and a switch on the fuel solenoid is a good deterrent to those that would try to steal my car. If folks knew it got the kind of mileage it does they might want to be all over it.
-
Ok, that's kinda what it sounded like, so basically you're proposing to run your PCV into the tank of a water/meth injection system and spit the oily water in, rather than just one or t'other... I'm not sure how this would be that much better than running a catch can, and a water/meth injection system...
-
The thing that worries me is shutdown. Your engine will have just inhaled a bunch of moist "air" and you may be putting your cylinder walls at a greater risk of rusting.
Other than that I am skeptical but would love to see results.
-
I don't think the amount of water that gets taken into the intake air is all that much. Compare the amount of blow by volume coming out the pipe to the total amount going into any one cylinder. One half gallon (2 L) of water lasts a long time as it never gets directly delivered to the cylinder. It must go through a change of state from liquid to gas before it can move out of the storage bottle.
I really am more interested in the cleaning aspects of this method than the mileage. But a clean engine always runs more efficient than a dirty/out of tune one right?
I also am just a tinkerer at heart I guess, if I can get 50 mpg with the set up I have can I get 55 mpg with something else that will pay me back in short order. I do not have a turbo and probably won't get one either. I will just run it stock and keep it simple and take longer to get there. But I do understand the value of running a few psi boost to lean out the combustion mix and get more MPG.
-
But a clean engine always runs more efficient than a dirty/out of tune one right?
Interesting topic, and I'm sure the expansion of water, cooling of peak temps,etc will have some benefits, but where did you learn the above nugget?
I'm a little skeptical, especially on an engine in less than perfect condition...
-
I started my search months ago looking at CNG systems. Then thought Propane would be a better choice as it is more available. From there I looked at the HHO systems as that was a gas thing similar to the others but lately I thought NO, just go back to the water only thing.
See my dad was a testing engineer for the Ford Motor Co. in Dearbon, MI. Not exactly a radical but he would tune the family vacation prior to our 10 hr drive to grandma and pa's house and get 20 mpg out of a fully loaded Country Squire station wagon. 7 kids, a cartop carrier and 70 mph. So I thought he pretty much knew what he was doing. He would use a hand held spray bottle held over the open carb and rev the engine with one hand and squirt with the other. After that application of fluid the car ran real good. I think he used a mixture of water and ethanol but who knows really. He didn't share that knowledge.
So read the links below. I have hit them and they seem to be a quick summary of what I have found. Hope they spark your interest.
For those of you with turbos and trying to cool those EGT down. Take a look, you have to hook it up differently but it seems to add to the power, lowers the temps, and allows more boost and timing changes.
http://www.dave-cushman.net/misc/mannject.html Pertains to card systems
http://www.coolingmist.com/ Not validating the vendor just the technology
http://www.labontemotorsports.com/ontrack/DIS_WP.pdf
http://www.greaseolineplus.co.cc/WaterInjection.html Don't laugh to hard at the hillbilly spin on this site, the information is still there. Just has a different delivery method.
And of course the absolute reference in the world. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forced_induction
-
One half gallon (2 L) of water lasts a long time as it never gets directly delivered to the cylinder. It must go through a change of state from liquid to gas before it can move out of the storage bottle.
If real WI than 2 L is small,it`s more than 10L/100km if you use 6-10 bar,and it`s fog like you said.I use windscreen pump and consume about 1 L ,only hi rev or hill.
Mark there near you is http://www.interexmotorsport.co.uk/ (http://www.interexmotorsport.co.uk/)
-
See this is the confusing thing about the topic WI (water injection) It can mean squirting water into the air stream, water into the fuel, or water as a vapor. They all class out as WI but the big difference is that some work on diesel, some on gasers. I am really centered on the vaporization of water and having that routed to the intake air. All done without high tech metering devices, feed back mechanisms or anything else like that.
I went to Home Depot and picked up some vinyl hose, some fittings, and clamps. It cost me less than 20 buck. I drank the last of the milk in the half gallon container I had in the fridge, washed it out, drilled it up and installed it in 20 minutes. It works, it bubbles any way. Does it provide the cleaning, the cooling and the mileage. Give me a couple of weeks to tweak it and I will let you know. I should get myself a photobucket account and shoot some pictures today. I am painting the outside of my place today but might just camera the car to have them for tonight.
Everybody interested?
-
Your Dad's pre-vacation drive action of spraying water or water-alcohol into the throat of a carb, was an age-old way of knocking down the various carbon deposits around combustion chambers. It works, and as a result, you got to take those vacation cruises with the pre-knock sensor ignition timing advanced just a little, but not causing pinging... good for mileage and good for power in most of the older gassers (yes, I still have a Ford 'Squire' wagon!).
IMHO that's a totally different subject from water injection, and especially from using the small amount of water vapor that your VW diesel's crankcase pressure might push over into the intake stream to any advantage in the work of daily driving (or even vacation trip driving). Along with mtrans, I'm betting that you'll need a lot more water, and at higher pressures to gain enough aqueous "fog" (itself widely separated liquid drops, not really a true gaseous vapor, strictly speaking) to see any significant change in mileage, power, or even combustion temps.
OTOH it doesn't sound like anything that will kill your ride, so standard experimentation advice is in order... document all steps, pics of everything, chart lots of accurate data, and report back. Who knows; it will be interesting.
Cheers.
J.R.
SoCal
-
I was responding to the question of where I got the nugget of information from when talking about good ole dad. Yes, very big difference between a spray of water at slight rev than what I am trying to do.
Did a 1974 Country Squire even have an ignition sensor? Back then a guy could tweak a distributor with a wrench and a timing light. Remember that?
For whatever reason my rate of airflow out the VC tube it pretty high. Maybe a function of the vacuum pump dumping into the lower crankcase? At any rate it does bubble the water to the point of creating a cloud of mist. I can see it working its way to the intake in the cool of the morning. I was thinking of gauging the output or the bottle to see what kind of pressure is there but my guess is that it is pretty low. .25 lbs or so.
I need to fill up prior to heading south then I will be able to separate this mod from the last. Changing the fuel mix.
(http://i1087.photobucket.com/albums/j475/Orcoaster/Water%20Injection%20system/DSCN7201.jpg)
-
One other thing I just thought of, if I am imagining what you are describing accurately then you have just significantly increased the amount of crank case pressure. You may notice some oil leaks that you didn't have before.
Pictures please :)
-
Give a guy a chance with the Photobucket learn'n curve. Yikes! Although I did mention them earlier.
Trying to eat and upload at the same time was not working. Pictures taste terrible.
I wonder if I should be gauging the back pressure between the bottle and the takeoff at the VC? I didn't think the inch or so of water showing in the hose before I start it up presents much of a head pressure on the system. My dipstick isn't popping out of its holder yet and I don't have issues with leaks at this time.
Should I post the bottle picture? Photo bucket Orcoaster albums.
http://s1087.photobucket.com/albums/j475/Orcoaster/
-
Well considering the amount of blowby I have im certainly gonna be stealing this idea!
-
I have noticed that one of the benefits to this water tank is that the oil stays there and doesn't move to the intake manifold. So I don't burn it like I am supposed to. It gives me a good idea of how much oil I was burning to get down the road. That may cause me to lose some MPG but so be it for now. I want to see smooth ride here and it sure sounds different once the vapor starts moving into the return hose.
-
Burning that oil is essentially free fuel though :P
-
I don't think the amount of water that gets taken into the intake air is all that much. Compare the amount of blow by volume coming out the pipe to the total amount going into any one cylinder. One half gallon (2 L) of water lasts a long time as it never gets directly delivered to the cylinder. It must go through a change of state from liquid to gas before it can move out of the storage bottle.
I really am more interested in the cleaning aspects of this method than the mileage. But a clean engine always runs more efficient than a dirty/out of tune one right?
I also am just a tinkerer at heart I guess, if I can get 50 mpg with the set up I have can I get 55 mpg with something else that will pay me back in short order. I do not have a turbo and probably won't get one either. I will just run it stock and keep it simple and take longer to get there. But I do understand the value of running a few psi boost to lean out the combustion mix and get more MPG.
the turbo causes back pressure to tho, so whoever told you that you get MORE MPG from a turbo'd engine, was blowing smoke up your @$$..
turbo makes power, not mileage.. because it takes fuel to make boost...
-
I don't think the amount of water that gets taken into the intake air is all that much. Compare the amount of blow by volume coming out the pipe to the total amount going into any one cylinder. One half gallon (2 L) of water lasts a long time as it never gets directly delivered to the cylinder. It must go through a change of state from liquid to gas before it can move out of the storage bottle.
I really am more interested in the cleaning aspects of this method than the mileage. But a clean engine always runs more efficient than a dirty/out of tune one right?
I also am just a tinkerer at heart I guess, if I can get 50 mpg with the set up I have can I get 55 mpg with something else that will pay me back in short order. I do not have a turbo and probably won't get one either. I will just run it stock and keep it simple and take longer to get there. But I do understand the value of running a few psi boost to lean out the combustion mix and get more MPG.
the turbo causes back pressure to tho, so whoever told you that you get MORE MPG from a turbo'd engine, was blowing smoke up your @$$..
turbo makes power, not mileage.. because it takes fuel to make boost...
99% correct, IMO, unless you drive with a light foot, and use maybe 1 or 2 psi boost to merely 'clean-up' the burn, especially if you drive up a mountain mostly...
-
I don't think the amount of water that gets taken into the intake air is all that much. Compare the amount of blow by volume coming out the pipe to the total amount going into any one cylinder. One half gallon (2 L) of water lasts a long time as it never gets directly delivered to the cylinder. It must go through a change of state from liquid to gas before it can move out of the storage bottle.
I really am more interested in the cleaning aspects of this method than the mileage. But a clean engine always runs more efficient than a dirty/out of tune one right?
I also am just a tinkerer at heart I guess, if I can get 50 mpg with the set up I have can I get 55 mpg with something else that will pay me back in short order. I do not have a turbo and probably won't get one either. I will just run it stock and keep it simple and take longer to get there. But I do understand the value of running a few psi boost to lean out the combustion mix and get more MPG.
the turbo causes back pressure to tho, so whoever told you that you get MORE MPG from a turbo'd engine, was blowing smoke up your @$$..
turbo makes power, not mileage.. because it takes fuel to make boost...
99% correct, IMO, unless you drive with a light foot, and use maybe 1 or 2 psi boost to merely 'clean-up' the burn, especially if you drive up a mountain mostly...
yea, that other 1% is the amount of us that own turbo cars, and only drive them with 1 or 2 psi boost with a light foot.. the rest of us owners of turbo cars, we USE OUR TURBOS TO THEIR FULLEST.. lol.. (we have dents in the floor under the throttle pedal)
-
Boys, Boys, you really DRIVE your Toys. :D And I understand that 100%
But note my qualifiers: Mileage Per Gallon is important to some abet 1% according to those across the big pond. Q2 Running a few pounds of boost, like 1-3 maybe.
Given these conditions it is possible to tune the same equipment you have installed on your car to get more mileage out of it. But you say, WTF would I DO THAT FOR.
So noted. But I still think one can lean it out and stretch that same fuel thus the cost of a trip would be less. Not saying you have to do it, that I always do it or that it is going to be the number one consideration when driving.
Obviously not given that your floor boards have depressions under the go pedal. Enjoy, drive hard, be safe. Just don't cuss us old geezer types out to bad as you roll on by in a cloud of black smoke. We all drive the same cars, just do it differently.
-
Boys, Boys, you really DRIVE your Toys. :D And I understand that 100%
But note my qualifiers: Mileage Per Gallon is important to some abet 1% according to those across the big pond. Q2 Running a few pounds of boost, like 1-3 maybe.
Given these conditions it is possible to tune the same equipment you have installed on your car to get more mileage out of it. But you say, WTF would I DO THAT FOR.
So noted. But I still think one can lean it out and stretch that same fuel thus the cost of a trip would be less. Not saying you have to do it, that I always do it or that it is going to be the number one consideration when driving.
Obviously not given that your floor boards have depressions under the go pedal. Enjoy, drive hard, be safe. Just don't cuss us old geezer types out to bad as you roll on by in a cloud of black smoke. We all drive the same cars, just do it differently.
sure, i could turn my pump down to where it only made 1 or 2 psi boost @ wot.. but it would be no fun to drive..
the mileage is not my sole reason for driving VWs.. its just a big bonus.. i love the cold glare i get when i tell them my car gets almost 50 mpg..
and uh, im going to say it again.. N/A is where the mileage is..
turbo is an intake restriction (while off boost) and an exhaust restriction (ALL THE TIME)
never in my life have i ever heard of someone adding a turbo to an engine to get better economy out of it..
-
ok, so on paper, its do-able, but then again, so is time travel..
i have never yet, seen a TD car get better economy than a n/a car..
well, i havent seen it happen on a regular basis.. best economy ive heard of out of a TD car is 51 mpg..
ive seen n/a cars get 70+ mpg. Hagar got like 80+ mpg didnt he? he never used any sort of turbo in his smileage experiments..
-
ok, so on paper, its do-able, but then again, so is time travel..
i have never yet, seen a TD car get better economy than a n/a car..
well, i havent seen it happen on a regular basis.. best economy ive heard of out of a TD car is 51 mpg..
ive seen n/a cars get 70+ mpg. Hagar got like 80+ mpg didnt he? he never used any sort of turbo in his smileage experiments..
The thing is, you shouldn't be talking about fuel economy on the GTD site, otherwise you'll have Jake come back and haunt you... :o
As I'm across the pond, I feel safe to comment ;D
Rumour has it that the turbo doesn't purely get it's power from exhaust pressure, but also takes heat energy out of the gas, which is why it works so much better economy wise than a supercharger
-
What Andrew (Libbybapa) said is my pea brained understanding of the argument for better mileage out of a turbo enhanced VW set up. Hagar drove a turbo. Bunny Bondo was one was she not? Last i read he was doing 76 mpg but I can't finish that saga as of yet. He is one that tunes for economy eh? You betcha. Read my lips.
745 said burning the blow by oil was free fuel. I disagree, I don't walk into the local auto parts store load up on 5 qts of oil and a filter and only pay for the filter. Does anyone? So it is paid for in some sense of the word. Just not out of the pump at the station. It reduces the amount of oil you drain out of the pan at the next oil change but I kind of think keeping it at the level on the dipstick is the proper way to get mileage. So I do end up adding some along the way.
I filled up at the station tonight and filled up with 5.58 gals only had 264 miles on it but the last 50 were more city driving and not the highway ones. Still 47.3 mpg is very acceptable. I almost have to stop bragging on the age versus mileage on this baby. Someone is going to steal it on me. That would be a rude thing to do.
Gotta run down the street, a new Rabbit moved in down the street and it looks older than mine.
Keep posting.
-
What Andrew (Libbybapa) said is my pea brained understanding of the argument for better mileage out of a turbo enhanced VW set up.
I believe what Andrew was saying is that, if you drove the TD identical to the NA.. you'd get way better economy out of the TD. If the NA can accelerate at the rate of X and the TD can accelerate at the rate of Y (Y being faster) yet you accelerate at the rate of X in the TD, you can get better efficiency out of the TD. Therefore less fuel used for distance driven. Not only will it be using less fuel, it will be doing it THAT much more efficiently.
Kevin, you've never heard nor seen of anyone getting incredible mileage out of a TD for two reasons.. 1: When you got the power you use the power, and 2: I think anything over 45 is good enough, over 45 with fun added!? BONUS.
The reason you see so many NA's above 50? They can't help but do under the speed limit, and their acceleration is abysmal.. Effectively keeping those RPM's dead low.
Turbo's do add a huge restriction to the exhaust tract, but the amount of power they give back to the engine completely offsets this restriction. They take wasted energy out of the exhaust, wasted energy that came from where you ask? Le pumpe de le Diesel.
Its easy to see how a TD could +1 an n/a on mileage.
-
ok, on paper it all works out, the TD may get better mileage..
but how many of us actually use less throttle than an n/a diesel? that tiny 1% of people..
how many of us use our boost because its there? well, thats where the other 99% of us fall..
thats why most TD cars dont get better mileage..
im not saying that its not possible, im just saying that people driving the TD cars use the boost, so in turn, use ALOT more fuel than an n/a..
-
I'd actually say atleast %50 of diesel drivers drive for pleasure, the other for mileage.. Who honestly buys a diese for performance? We're different as we know diesels can perform.. Most don't though
-
I think 100% of us drive for pleasure. The 50/50 thing is between speed and mileage. Or maybe Gees and Mileage.
Going to have to either quit working on the house earlier or stay up later working on the VW. Not sure if I will get to the two stage water bubbler this weekend or not. Working off a ladder with a long crow bar today was about all my arms could handle. Ran out of energy at 6 PM and called it a night.
-
I dunno if the people commuting for thousands of miles a week like driving at all.. they probably want to veer in to oncoming traffic at least 3 times a day. ;)
-
I'm trying to bolt my turbo for gas mileage.
-
I'm trying to bolt my turbo for gas mileage.
uh......bolt it on or off?
-
not to sure what that means.
I found a better water bubbler. I needed something short but that would hold about a gallon of water. The plastic containers I have found so far have all been real thin and did not hold the plastic elbows tight. So in my digging around I found what I think will do nicely. A paint jug. It has a thick screwable top, a handle that goes behind the old radiator overflow tank holder and it was almost thick enough to get a couple of threads out of the lower part of the jug. I ended up fabricating a brass nut and an o-ring in combination with a plastic knob that allows me to have a 3/8 ths inch diameter piece of an old toilet feed tube in it. I drilled out multiple holes along the six inch length so I would get lots of little bubbles rather than few big ones.
I really have the pressure behind this system. Do all VW's have this sort of blow by or is it a function of the vacuum pump pulling air from the brake booster all the time. Maybe I don't actually have a vacuum on mine, best check that.
So this system allows me to have an elbow at the top of the lid on both the upper and lower side of the lid. I don't think I will get much splash or water slosh if I run it half full. I do get the vapor though. Have yet to drive it any with this hooked up. Too busy doing home repairs at the moment.
I will try to shoot some pictures and get them up on here in the next couple of days.
Later keep in touch.
-
My car has ***ta pcv pressure.. So much so that the intake doesn't eat it all, and I have it vented to atmosphere right now (altho some here reckon my intake ports are clogged) so it's good to hear you have considerable crankcase pressure too. Matter of fact be careful with your bubble or you might notice your dipstick leaking oil.
I was gonna steal yer idea and do this too, but it still won't go down my intake right now, and I don't wanna start buildin crankcase pressure again (cause it appears your little bubbler is gonna cause pressure; I'm kinda waiting to see what your outcome is)
Btw your brake booster is a closed thing.. So unless it's bad (and you hear it leaking) then the vacuum pump should just hold vacuum
-
I am going to check the dipstick for out gassing pressure there later today. I don't have the massive flow from blow by or whatever it is that you seem to have wdk. I can take the top off the paint can and see all the tiny bubbles at idle and racing the engine seems to keep it the same.
I think I will have my wife turn the car off when I have my head next to the booster and see if I can hear a leak. Might also just pull the hose after it is done to see if it still has a vacuum. I could gauge it I guess but that would cause my wife to laugh even more than she is now about all those things there on the dash. What do you need them for she asks.
Oh I need to set myself up with a fuely account since this is about mileage don't I?
-
Hmmm this is somehting i might rig up on mine. And it is a turbo diesel. A 1994 AAZ 1.9 TD
The big difference between mileage and turbo/no turbo debate, is the work mileage.
Straight drivin, at 100km, with a turbo to non turbo car. If the turbo is proper for the size of engine and speed rating. maybe 2 to 3 percent increase.
The big big difference, is when you work the crap outta engines. I know from the ag sector, the VGT turbo's on the 100 HP JOhn Deere's increases work efficiency by 50 percent!!!
When you drive like me, in a heavier car versus a MK2 or MK1, at 125kmph and record steady 48mpg. thats what a turbo does for you. It makes it efficienct when you work it harder.
look at an 04 TDI. that thing is 480 pounds heavier than my MK3!! and it gets better mileage. It has a nice variable geometry (vane) turbo.
The biggest problem with our set rate turbo's is they perform efficienctly at one speed. Other than that they are either too restrictive or too free-flowing.
I got a new diesel to play with. Just picked up a 92 F250 with a 7.3 non turbo IDI!!
-
If the brake booster was leaking you would hear it while the car was running.
I have an '86 idi... Cannot find a.lift kit or nothing fun for it :( its even had a turbo already installed but doesn't build boost... but that's something else.
-
...Hagar drove a turbo.
Agreed.... Look at http://www.vwdieselparts.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=59991 (http://www.vwdieselparts.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=59991), third post:
PS : my turbo Rabbits can do 100 miles per gallon Imp or better. (ECO mode)
-
Sorry not able to take any pictures today. But the siding is on the house ready for paint tomorrow. That should go quick. Man I am getting tired of going up and down the ladders. Stupid gables.
-
I like the general idea of humidifying the intake air, but I don't like the possibility of raising crankcase pressure. It looks like a better idea to try to pull a vacuum in the crankcase, and humidify the intake a different way. I have enough oil leaks as it is!
-
Do all VW's have this sort of blow by or is it a function of the vacuum pump pulling air from the brake booster all the time.
I think it has more to do with the stroke but that is just a guess.
Even perfectly running VW diesels will push a lot of air out of the oil cap if you remove it. What matters is how much oil is in it.
-
Well, I took the VW, out for a quick run to the office. Didn't notice much difference in the way it runs. But don't expect to. Seems quieter at idle and coasting but other than that not much change. I think I will be able to see the oil build up in the water chamber so that should give me a good idea of how much I was burning. If I get a lot of oil slick on the top of the water I may split the flow and have some come into the water tank and the rest dump into the intake like it used to. That way I can burn it up, get the mileage and the vapor working for me.
Still no pictures but the house is painted and all I need to do is return the scaffolding.
-
OK it's picture time. Go here and see/read the descriptions to understand the setup.
http://s1087.photobucket.com/albums/j475/Orcoaster/Water%20Injection%20system/
I tried a couple of things to find answers to posted questions. First I pulled the hose off the vacuum booster and could here it refill with air so I am sure my brake booster is good and tight. Second I pulled the hose off the other side of the vacuum diaphragm. Then I started the car. I removed the lid of the water container and there was no bubbling going on. If I put my thumb over the hose that goes to the crankcase two things happen. One no more smokey air is blowing in my face and two the water just boils in the bucket. Hook it all back up and no real change takes place. Can you see the water surface in the picture. It is just churning.
So I pulled the dipstick out to see if the back pressure from the water was enough to spit oil out the dipstick. If I park on a steep hill it does blow some out. Not sure it does it on level ground. Either way I didn't want to have this happen on the drive to Portland this Sunday so I looked at the construction of the rubber part. It is sandwiched on there with two washers. So I went to the shop and cut away a portion of a small nut and pushed the rubber stopper down along its length and slipped the nut in between the top washer and the stopper. This in effect makes the diameter of the stopper a little fatter and so now it stays real snug in the dipstick tube. I will still watch it carefully on the drive up and maybe have to fabricate some sort of cap that clamps it tight.
The vapor from the water starts pretty quick, say within 3 minutes of startup. Hoping for a cleaner engine soon. I found oil and filters on sale today but am still 2500 miles away from a change.
-
Trip to Portland tonight. Filled up in Eugene and had 366 miles on the tank and filled with 7.25 gals of fuel. 49.? MPG. Not much difference but the oil is captured in the water now. I would say a good teaspoon worth floating on top in the 225 miles. Seemed to run smoother but had to push a pretty good headwind between Eugene and Salem. Required getting out of fifth and running it up to 65-68 mph in fourth. Still seemed to get the mileage.
Any cleaning of the coke out of the engine is probably going to take awhile. It's not exactly a solvent I am using in the vapor. Just water molecules.
Questions?
-
if your engine had coke in it, it wont come back out, ever. the crap doesnt burn..
usually coke kills a diesel.. my audi TD5 has overdosed on coke.. ~200 psi compression in all 5 cyls..
-
Can you be positive of NOT pulling water on motor start and first km, untill it`s warm.
-
Can you be positive of NOT pulling water on motor start and first km, untill it`s warm.
yea, i cant see water vapor being a good thing for a cold engine.
-
Can I be sure water vapor isn't being sucked into a cold engine? Sure, I could put the whole system on a switch, solenoid, tee fitting but why do that? It isn't like it is 30 degrees outside, ever, or hardly ever here. If I still lived in the Upper Michigan area I might think about that. But really, Roids, you know what it is like on the coast. 40 to 60 all year round. How boring right?
In all honesty it takes a while to get vapor to show up in the hose. Like 3 to 4 minutes so it isn't like a fog is rolling around in the intake right after it fires off.
I thought about the end of the cycle though. After a long run, like mine to Portland. To be able to shut it off and let it vent to the outside instead of putting it to bed wet. Not good for horses, probably not good for rabbits either. I am scheming a system that would allow me to do that. My idea is use a lawn sprinkler system solenoid that dumps the blow by to the outside. I could then just engage the switch and let it go. I could use it when cold in reverse. Wait about 5 minutes and let it vent, then dump it into the intake.
-
Sure, I could put the whole system on a switch, solenoid, tee fitting but why do that?
W/o solenoid vacum from intake can and will pull same water,as I see on my car.