DIY_EFI Digest Tuesday, 23 July 1996 Volume 01 : Number 206 In this issue: Re: water injection questions Re: smd components Re: smd components Re[4]: G-Tech Hp Meter Update Re: smd components Re: water injection questions Re: G-Tech Hp Meter Update Re: water injection questions Re: water injection questions Re[2]: water injection questions Re: Re: water injection questions Re: water injection questions Re: smd components Re: water injection questions re: smd Re: water injection questions Re: water injection questions Re: water injection questions Re: water injection questions Re: water injection questions smd Re: water injection questions See the end of the digest for information on subscribing to the DIY_EFI or DIY_EFI-Digest mailing lists. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Donald Whisnant Date: Mon, 22 Jul 1996 09:38:10 -0400 Subject: Re: water injection questions > From: Robert Yorke > Date: Sun, 21 Jul 1996 20:38:47 -0700 (PDT) > Subject: Re: water injection questions > > > > A lot of people mix Methanol (50/50) with the water. Water alone will act > to slow the combustion process; equivalent to raising the Octane rating (All > Octane rating is, is a gauge of how fast a particular gasoline fuel burns in > a combustion chamber). The ignition timing can then be CAREFULLY advanced > to take advantage of this. With Methanol, you have a more pronounced effect > (The equivalent Octane rating for Methanol is 105). > > I have a question about octanes (and this may show my ignorance regarding octane ratings, but) -- I've always been told and under the impression that the octane ratings on gasoline (not sure how it compares with Methanol) were not ratings as to how slow the fuel burned, but a rating of its resistance to pre-mature burn -- i.e. ignition from combustion chamber heat while being compressed... But here, you are saying the octane determines the rate it burns ... If that were the case, wouldn't increasing the octane w/ignition advance give exactly the same results as lowering the octane w/ignition retard? -- I guess the point is to have a repeatible mixture that is consistant (i.e. not having pre-mature ignition on some cycles and delayed ignition on others)... Donald Whisnant dewhisna@xxx.com ------------------------------ From: wmcgonegal@xxx.ca Date: Mon, 22 Jul 96 09:47:29 EST Subject: Re: smd components I have read about a type of solder designed for removing SMDs. You apply it to the terminals of the device and it combines with the solder that was originally holding the device in place. The new combination of solder forms a very weak alloy. The devices can then be popped off when gently pried with a screwdriver. With the device removed you clean up the solder then mount the new device with regular solder. I forget the name of the company that makes this removal solder, but I can look it up if there is any interest. Will McGonegal Mobile Sources Emissions Division Environment Canada wmcgonegal@xxx.ca ------------------------------ From: "Josh Karnes" Date: Mon, 22 Jul 1996 09:02:56 +0000 Subject: Re: smd components > Someone asked about manually soldering smd components. > It should be no problem, if you have very fine tip on your > soldering iron. > > If you wish to remove a faulty chip, just try to cut the pins first > and then clean up the pads. Exactamundo. Using a very very small wire cutter will work, or a dremel tool works better. Sometimes the wire cutter will pull the pads too much, and lift them off the board. > If you need to remove a chip without > destroying it, use a thin isolated wire - put the wire under the > chip, and then warm up one pin at a time simultaneously pulling the > wire gently under the pin. This will work almost every time on SOIC, > but PLCC package is another story. PLCC requires, almost definitely, the use of hot air. Solder-wick is the way to go with SOIC parts, IMHO, then use the wire like above. The solder-wick will pull off most of the solder. > > To mount a component, put little solder on each pad, Actually, you are better off only putting solder on one pad, then soldering that one to hold the part while you solder the rest of the part. Remember to heat the joint between the pad and the pin, not just the pin, then apply solder to the joint, not the iron. If the joint is not hot enough to melt the solder, then you will get a cold-joint. It is pretty safe to re-heat all your SMT joints after the component is mounted. > It is very easy to remove smd resistors etc by using two soldering > irons, or by shortly warming both pads many times. Careful because often times the parts are glued to the board as well as being soldered. Dunno if this applies to car electronics, but certainly home electronics and computers. Also, solder-wick is the way to go, no matter what type of part. The less solder on the part when you prepare to remove it, the better. BTW, destroying the part is always better than destroying the board: parts are generally replaceable. This does not go for programmed parts however. On any sirface mount part, it is much easier to crack, cut, or break the part to isolate the pins, then remove the remains one pin at a time, than it is to remove the part in tact. Attempts to save the part almost always result in destroying the board unless you have the right tools, or you are extremely skilled. Remember that the amount of heat required to extract a part are also likely to damage it. They are not designed to be extracted, or soldered more than once. Be sure to write down all the details of the part number, etc., before you remove the part, because it may not be in good enough shape to read when you get it off. Happy soldering :) _____________________________________________________________________________ Josh Karnes joshk@xxx.com Renaissance Man http://www.tanisys.com/~joshk/home.htm Tanisys Technology http://www.tanisys.com Austin, Texas '78 BMW 530i | '72 Datsun 240Z | IZCC #308 _____________________________________________________________________________ *** opinions expressed herein are MINE, ALL MINE!! *** ------------------------------ From: jfaubion@xxx.mil (jfaubion) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 96 09:54:04 cdt Subject: Re[4]: G-Tech Hp Meter Update >I am under the impression that the constants are empirically-derived. I >have seen these equations many times, but I have not seen a suitable >explanation of their origin. That's what I was afraid of. I too have seen the equations many times but the constants sometimes seem to change slightly. Hence the reason I asked. Thanks! John jfaubion@xxx.mil ------------------------------ From: "DAVE ZUG" Date: Mon, 22 Jul 1996 11:15:20 +0000 Subject: Re: smd components > From: Krister Wikstrom > To: "'DIY_EFI'" > Subject: smd components > Date: Mon, 22 Jul 1996 10:06:50 +0200 > Reply-to: diy_efi@xxx.edu > Someone asked about manually soldering smd components. > It should be no problem, if you have very fine tip on your > soldering iron. > I have succesfully (well, I have destroyed some pads...) mounted/removed > many components, even a 386sx processor with very fine "legs". > > If you wish to remove a faulty chip, just try to cut the pins first and then > clean up the pads. If you need to remove a chip without destroying it, use a > thin isolated wire - put the wire under the chip, and then warm up one pin > at a time simultaneously pulling the wire gently under the pin. This will > work almost every time on SOIC, but PLCC package is another story. > > To mount a component, put little solder on each pad, then put the chip on top > and warn each pin at a time to solder. This might require flux to make it > easier, as the solder will behave much nicer with flux. > > It is very easy to remove smd resistors etc by using two soldering irons, or by > shortly warming both pads many times. > > I'm working in a computer factory, and our board repair uses special tools > to remove smd component, but all are manually mounted. This includes special > chips with 200 pins. > > Oh, and magnifying glass will make it easier... > > > Krister Wikstrom > kwi@xxx.fi thanks alot, that takes the fear factor out of it knowing it CAN be done. \> ------------------------------ From: David Schmidt Date: Mon, 22 Jul 1996 08:13:27 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: water injection questions Do you have any information on how the water is supplied to the engine? (Fogger nozzle or spray bar?) How decent is the pump with this system? Thanks. Dave At 08:38 PM 7/21/96 -0700, you wrote: >Water Injection Systems are still available from Spearco Performance >Products, Inc., 14664 Titus Street, Panorama City, CA 91402. Their Phone >number is: > > (818)901-7851 > FAX: (818)785-4362 > >The part number for their complete system is P.N 980 Turbo Water Injection >System; Price listed is $146.00 (This may have changed by now) > ------------------------------ From: ptimmerm@xxx.GOV Date: Mon, 22 Jul 1996 08:49:16 -0700 Subject: Re: G-Tech Hp Meter Update >I assume that this unit will yield the horsepower at the road wheels >and not flywheel horsepower. >Can you enter in your coefficient of drag and frontal area into >the unit for wind resistance? If they have some buried constant for >these, then all bets are off on what you will get. You are correct that it is horsepower delivered at the wheels minus rolling and aero losses. There is no correction figure available for frontal area and coeficient of drag or friction. Because of all these things I think is is a OK as a qualitative tool, but lacks as an absolute quantitative tool. You can still see instantaneous HP versus speed or RPM. However, that means keeping one eye on the meter, which is not ideal. It still may be the best thing available today, and easier to use than a stopwatch. I suspect the braking and cornering functions are less problematic. paul timmerman ------------------------------ From: dave.williams@xxx.us (Dave Williams) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 1996 09:23:00 +0000 Subject: Re: water injection questions - -> A lot of people mix Methanol (50/50) with the water. Water alone - -> will act to slow the combustion process; equivalent to raising the - -> Octane rating (All Octane rating is, is a gauge of how fast a - -> particular gasoline fuel burns in a combustion chamber). Octane rating has *nothing* to do with how fast the fuel burns. An octane rating is a measure of an engine's resistance to detonation, as empirically measured in a standard engine under standard conditions, compared to a standard fuel, which is called octane. Flame front speed is very similar for all gasolines regardless of octane rating. Water does not slow the combustion process. Its primary function is to reduce the intake charge and combustion chamber temperatures, which help the engine avoid detonation. ====dave.williams@xxx.us========================DoD#978======= can you help me...help me get out of this place?...slow sedation... ain't my style, ain't my pace...giving me a number...NINE, SEVEN, EIGHT ==5.0 RX7 -> Tyrannosaurus RX! == SAE '82 == Denizens of Doom M/C '92== ------------------------------ From: doug@xxx.com Date: Mon, 22 Jul 1996 14:16:12 -0400 Subject: Re: water injection questions >I was reading my friend's Car Craft from 1980 and noticed an article >involving water injection to reduce detonation. My question is: What >happened to this wonderful idea? I saw an ad toward the back of the >magazine in which Edelbrock that was selling their Vari-Injection >system. However, such a system is not in their catalog anymore, nor can >I find any mention of water injection in my current magazines. > I just received a water injection system I'm planning to put on my supercharged Miata. The mfr is Spearco, and the design is very simple and straightforward. Instructions warn against positioning the reservoir above the nozzle, to prevent water from being siphoned into the engine when the engine is off. As to corrosion and long term effects, I don't expect these to be a problem, as the injector only kicks in at a predetermined boost level, say 4.5 psi., so it's not a continuous thing. Doug Gubbins Apogee Systems, L&H Technologies Charlotte NC "There's always another bug..." ------------------------------ From: jfaubion@xxx.mil (jfaubion) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 96 13:49:53 cdt Subject: Re[2]: water injection questions >Others may certainly have their theories about the demise of water >injection, but my favorite story concerning same is one my father has >told off and on for 40 years. When we lived in Houston, in the early >`50s, we had a neighbor who had a new Buick, and worked at Ellington AFB; >his thinking went thus: if water injection is useful for jet engines, >why wouldn't it be useful for automobile engines? Roughly the same >principles, right? He rigged up a separate tank and pump for water >injection into the manifold of this new Buick. And raved about the >performance improvements. Until his wife took the car out, left the >switch on (he'd wired it to battery, not ignition), and the engine filled >up with water overnight. Came out the next morning, turned it over, and >bent most every rod in the engine. > >It could be things like that which have queered people on water >injection, although I'll be the first to admit, while laughing at >stories such as the above, there's some sense to the principle, Actually it was economics. The profit based on the number of systems sold did not justify the cost to sell and support them. Of course these systems might have sold better if semi-fictional horror stories weren't propagated. Unfortunately its stories like the one above that cause a lot of these system to be discontinued. Someone either jury-rigs a system or misuses a system and everyone one passes on the story of how it damaged the engine. If they had just spent the money they wasted on time and energy the system could have worked fine. A better example is someone that buys a used nitrous oxide system that has been mismatched. If they install it and it torches the engine, they complain to everyone that will listen. Conveniently they forget to mention that they followed no manual and had no experience with such systems. (Climbing down from soapbox...) Sorry touchy subject thanks to lawyers! John Faubion jfaubion@xxx.mil ------------------------------ From: Clint Sharp Date: Mon, 22 Jul 1996 18:54:14 GMT Subject: Re: Re: water injection questions > > A lot of people mix Methanol (50/50) with the water. Water alone will act > > to slow the combustion process; equivalent to raising the Octane rating (All How about running a hydrogen peroxide injection system? If I remember my chemistry correctly that stuff decomposes with heat to water and oxygen? Water injection and more oxygen in one go? - -- If you have a problem with excess cash, mail all those unwanted notes in plain packing to; clint@xxx.uk ------------------------------ From: Thomas Burns Date: Mon, 22 Jul 1996 15:09:44 -0500 Subject: Re: water injection questions Stupid Question Coming... By intake charge, are you referring to the amount of air coming in? - -Tom At 09:23 AM 7/22/96 +0000, you wrote: > >-> A lot of people mix Methanol (50/50) with the water. Water alone >-> will act to slow the combustion process; equivalent to raising the >-> Octane rating (All Octane rating is, is a gauge of how fast a >-> particular gasoline fuel burns in a combustion chamber). > > > > Octane rating has *nothing* to do with how fast the fuel burns. An >octane rating is a measure of an engine's resistance to detonation, as >empirically measured in a standard engine under standard conditions, >compared to a standard fuel, which is called octane. Flame front speed >is very similar for all gasolines regardless of octane rating. > > Water does not slow the combustion process. Its primary function is to >reduce the intake charge and combustion chamber temperatures, which help >the engine avoid detonation. > > >====dave.williams@xxx.us========================DoD#978======= > can you help me...help me get out of this place?...slow sedation... >ain't my style, ain't my pace...giving me a number...NINE, SEVEN, EIGHT >==5.0 RX7 -> Tyrannosaurus RX! == SAE '82 == Denizens of Doom M/C '92== > > > ------------------------------ From: "Tony Bryant" Date: Tue, 23 Jul 1996 08:43:53 +1200 Subject: Re: smd components > > If you need to remove a chip without > > destroying it, use a thin isolated wire - put the wire under the > > chip, and then warm up one pin at a time simultaneously pulling the > > wire gently under the pin. This will work almost every time on SOIC, > > but PLCC package is another story. > > PLCC requires, almost definitely, the use of hot air. Solder-wick is > the way to go with SOIC parts, IMHO, then use the wire like above. > The solder-wick will pull off most of the solder. > Two words - Blow torch. A small pencil type butane blow torch is the perfect weapon for removing smd chips (for the hobbyist). If you dont care about the chip, heat the thing in the middle until all the pads get hot enough, and tap the board on the table, and voila! the chip falls off with no damage to the board. If you dont care about the board go around the chip (keep moving), playing the flame on the pins, and as above tap the board on the table (or stick a jeweller's screwdriver under a corner). If you care about both, use the above technique. With a bit of practice, its easy to do without damage to either. Works for DIP components too, but is generally more brutal on the board. Still less damage than stuffing around with solder wick or cutting pins. For bulk junk board desoldering use an oxy-acetylene gas axe (and a gas mask). This message brought to you by: Pyro solutions inc. *********************************************************** * "Insanity is the only sane response to an insane world" * * >> bryantt@xxx.nz << * *********************************************************** ------------------------------ From: atsakiri@xxx.com Date: Mon, 22 Jul 96 16:39:30 -0400 Subject: Re: water injection questions > How about running a hydrogen peroxide injection system? Just a cautious thought out of the blue (i.e. I don't know the answer) ... it might be a good idea to check on the corrosiveness first, especially if you have aluminum heads. Any chemists out there? Anthony Tsakiris - --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The opinions expressed are my own and not necessarily those of my employer. ------------------------------ From: "Tony Bryant" Date: Tue, 23 Jul 1996 09:39:03 +1200 Subject: re: smd > > If you need to remove a chip without > > destroying it, use a thin isolated wire - put the > > wire under the chip, and then warm up one pin at a > > time simultaneously pulling the wire gently under > > the pin. This will work almost every time on SOIC, > > but PLCC package is another story. > > PLCC requires, almost definitely, the use of hot air. > Solder-wick is the way to go with SOIC parts, IMHO, > then use the wire like above. The solder-wick will > pull off most of the solder. > Two words - Blow torch. A small pencil type butane blow torch is the perfect weapon for removing smd chips (for the hobbyist). If you dont care about the chip, heat the thing in the middle until all the pads get hot enough, and tap the board on the table, and voila! the chip falls off with no damage to the board. If you dont care about the board go around the chip (keep moving), playing the flame on the pins, and as above tap the board on the table (or stick a jeweller's screwdriver under a corner). If you care about both, use the above technique. With a bit of practice, its easy to do without damage to either. Works for DIP components too, but is generally more brutal on the board. Still less damage than stuffing around with solder wick or cutting pins. For bulk junk board desoldering use an oxy-acetylene gas axe (and a gas mask). This message brought to you by: Pyro solutions inc. :-) *********************************************************** * "Insanity is the only sane response to an insane world" * * >> bryantt@xxx.nz << * *********************************************************** ------------------------------ From: Michael Fawke Date: Tue, 23 Jul 1996 08:15:30 +1100 Subject: Re: water injection questions >-> A lot of people mix Methanol (50/50) with the water. Water alone >-> will act to slow the combustion process; equivalent to raising the >-> Octane rating (All Octane rating is, is a gauge of how fast a >-> particular gasoline fuel burns in a combustion chamber). > > > > Octane rating has *nothing* to do with how fast the fuel burns. An >octane rating is a measure of an engine's resistance to detonation, as >empirically measured in a standard engine under standard conditions, >compared to a standard fuel, which is called octane. Flame front speed >is very similar for all gasolines regardless of octane rating. > >From memory....... the standard fuels are Heptane and Iso-Heptane. The Octane rating relates to the ratio of Heptane to Iso-Heptane which gives the same knock resistance as the test fuel. It also is a measure of how fast the fuel burns - the higher the octane rating, the slower the burn rate. > Water does not slow the combustion process. Its primary function is to >reduce the intake charge and combustion chamber temperatures, which help >the engine avoid detonation. > Also from memory, cold fuel/air burns slower that hot fuel/air. I think this can be equated to slowing the combustion process. I would go back and check the textbook, but it is on loan to a friend who lives ~300 Km away. Maybe someone else would like to go and check this out? Michael Fawke Canberra, Australia. fawkacs@xxx.au ------------------------------ From: "Robert E. Yorke" Date: Mon, 22 Jul 1996 16:27:17 -0700 Subject: Re: water injection questions You raise a good possibility; but I suspect that a chemical analysis comparison between Hydrogen Peroxide and Nitrous Oxide would reveal why Nitrous is universally used vice Hydrogen Peroxide for Horsepower-in-a-Bottle purposes. I think it may be a promising alternative to Nitrous, but probably the same ammount of real hard work would be required to zero in on the correct set of functional characteristics and design parameters as was required for success with Nitrous. I remember the early attempts with Nitrous Oxide; all were almost instant disasters.... ------------------------------ From: "Robert E. Yorke" Date: Mon, 22 Jul 1996 16:50:22 -0700 Subject: Re: water injection questions I believe both sets of remarks in response to my post are correct; the primary effect of water injection IS a lowering of the temperature, which I think DOES have the consequence of a slower burn rate. Slower because each droplet of fuel has to vaporize before it can combust; I've read that liquid gasoline is non-flammable; only it's vapors can enter into combustion. That was THE primary problem with all those incessant attempts in the '70s to find a way to successfully vaporize gasoline (i.e.) effectively AND safely; since gasoline is a mixture/compound of I think over 400 elements, the more volatile ones vaporize real fast so you quickly wind up with an uncontollable burn. As I recall, the presence of an extremely rapid and uncontrolled burn process defines the word EXPLOSION. By the way, I'm a little puzzled. My original post was a response to someone on fiero|net to their question about the availability of water injection, and who sells it; how did everything squirt over to DIY? ------------------------------ From: Darrell Norquay Date: Mon, 22 Jul 96 22:43 PDT Subject: Re: water injection questions At 09:38 AM 7/22/96 -0400, you wrote: >>With Methanol, you have a more pronounced effect >> (The equivalent Octane rating for Methanol is 105). >> >> The amount of methanol you would be injecting is really very small compared to the amount of gasoline, (you generally use a gallon or so of mixture per tankfull of gas) so the effect of methanol's 105 octane rating is minimal. The main principle behind water injection is that the steam produced when the gasoline burns in the cylinder slows down combustion, thus giving a pseudo octane increase. >I've always been told and under the impression that the octane ratings on >gasoline (not sure how it compares with Methanol) were not ratings as to how >slow the fuel burned, but a rating of its resistance to pre-mature burn - -- i.e. >ignition from combustion chamber heat while being compressed... But here, you >are saying the octane determines the rate it burns ... If that were the case, >wouldn't increasing the octane w/ignition advance give exactly the same results >as lowering the octane w/ignition retard? -- I guess the point is to have a >repeatible mixture that is consistant (i.e. not having pre-mature ignition on >some cycles and delayed ignition on others)... >Donald Whisnant Octane is derived mainly from experiments done on a special engine (motor octane) along with a chemical method (research octane). The two are averaged to get "pump octane". While octane rating is not stictly a measure of combustion speed, it is closely tied to it. It all has to do with peak cylinder pressures. The peak cylinder pressure is reached sooner with low octane fuels, so with even a small amount of ignition advance, the peak pressure may be reached before the cylinder reaches TDC, causing knock. With a higher octane fuel, the mixture burns slower, so you can ignite it sooner and still reach peak cylinder pressure just after TDC, which results in an increase in power. If you run less advance, the peak cylinder pressure occurs too late in the cycle, wasting power and pushing unburned fuel out the exhaust, because combustion has not completed before the exhaust valve opens. regards dn dnorquay@xxx.com ------------------------------ From: Darrell Norquay Date: Mon, 22 Jul 96 22:43 PDT Subject: Re: water injection questions At 08:38 PM 7/21/96 -0700, you wrote: >A lot of people mix Methanol (50/50) with the water. Water alone will act >to slow the combustion process; equivalent to raising the Octane rating With Methanol, you have a more pronounced effect (The equivalent Octane rating for Methanol is 105). Try Acetone. It works even better than methanol. Mixes with water as well. I used to run 25% methanol, 25% acetone, and 50% water. Worked really well. It was a little on the expensive side, though, turned out to be cheaper to just run octane boost. >If anybody tries this, be extremely careful. If you forget to keep the tank >filled and you don't have sophisticated controls to either tell you of this >or to shut the advance curve down to stock when there is no injection taking >place, you will cause yourself a problem.... Reminds me of the old Corvair Turbo Spyder's. (Original application of the "turbo" muffler). They came from the factory with water injection, trouble was everybody forgot to fill the reservoir. That's one reason why they are almost impossible to find anymore... regards dn dnorquay@xxx.com ------------------------------ From: Krister Wikstrom Date: Tue, 23 Jul 1996 10:00:14 +0200 Subject: smd >> To mount a component, put little solder on each pad, >Actually, you are better off only putting solder on one pad, then >soldering that one to hold the part while you solder the rest of the >part. Remember to heat the joint between the pad and the pin, not >just the pin, then apply solder to the joint, not the iron. If the >joint is not hot enough to melt the solder, then you will get a >cold-joint. It is pretty safe to re-heat all your SMT joints after >the component is mounted. Thats how I also did it, but then I noticed, that it was easier (for me that is) to first put some solder, and add it only as needed. This helps to avoid solder bridges as I don't have the correct "thin" solder, and it is very easy to put too much solder. >> It is very easy to remove smd resistors etc by using two soldering >> irons, or by shortly warming both pads many times. >Careful because often times the parts are glued to the board as well >as being soldered. Dunno if this applies to car electronics, but True, most are glued, but usually the glue seems to be quite weak. On removing parts I forgot to mention (like noticed..) that first you really should remove all the solder possible. I got a large box of obsolete computer boards, and my short experience on smd is mostly based on removing useful components of them. At first it seemed difficult, but soon you learn to work with them. If there is someone afraid of doing anything with smd parts, just go for it, but it might be a good idea to first practice on something cheap ;-) Krister Wikstrom kwi@xxx.fi ------------------------------ From: Robert Yorke Date: Tue, 23 Jul 1996 01:15:01 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: water injection questions At 10:43 PM 7/22/96 PDT, you wrote: >At 08:38 PM 7/21/96 -0700, you wrote: snipped Your use of Acetone with the Water-Methanol mixture sounds interesting; I intend buying the Spearco kit for my toy. I'm trying to get the last bit of (Hopefully) reliable power out of an '88GT Fiero which has a bored/stroked 3.2L w/T3 intercooled turbo@xxx. When I finally get the proper injector sizing figured out and the PROM calibrated I want to be as confident as I can that the damned thing will hold together (This time!), so I'd like to try the Acetone-Water-Methanol as a final. Can you remember what kinds of flow rates you were using? My ultimate goal is to obliterate another nearby member of the Fiero bunch who has an LT-1 stuffed into HIS toy! A major problem is I haven't been able to reverse engineer the machine code that the Fiero computer uses, to re-program it myself, and there are very few non-high-dollar guys around who have the smarts to do it.... I remember the Turbo Spyders; but had forgotten they provided water injection with that car! >Try Acetone. It works even better than methanol. Mixes with water as well. >I used to run 25% methanol, 25% acetone, and 50% water. Worked really well. >It was a little on the expensive side, though, turned out to be cheaper to >just run octane boost. > >>If anybody tries this, be extremely careful. If you forget to keep the tank >>filled and you don't have sophisticated controls to either tell you of this >>or to shut the advance curve down to stock when there is no injection taking >>place, you will cause yourself a problem.... > >Reminds me of the old Corvair Turbo Spyder's. (Original application of the >"turbo" muffler). They came from the factory with water injection, trouble >was everybody forgot to fill the reservoir. That's one reason why they are >almost impossible to find anymore... > > > >regards >dn >dnorquay@xxx.com > > > 2 "88 GTs, both autos! ------------------------------ End of DIY_EFI Digest V1 #206 ***************************** To subscribe to DIY_EFI-Digest, send the command: subscribe diy_efi-digest in the body of a message to "Majordomo@xxx. A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to subscribe to that instead, replace "diy_efi-digest" in the command above with "diy_efi".