Stu was also on race gas I believe. Hmmm....

 

Yes it was, and if you recall my statements I said that with race gas the optimum pulley size will drop. He's running a 2.85". Race gas doens't make power on it's own. You have to have a setup made for it or turn up boost/timing to see any gains.

The only intent of my posting is to move this market along. The Cobalt is a car that runs 14's stock. It's more easily modable than nearly any car sold and the majority of this market is running 13's after 3 years. I am familiar with markets and the cycles of modding and how long a market should take to drop average ETs, etc. I have nothing to gain in this thread monitarily. I'm not trying to sell a product or brag about my own car. I'm trying to help people make their cars faster for less money and keep them from blowing up.

The history of ZZPerformance as a company is different than many shops offering aftermarket performance parts. We specialize in pretty hard core stuff and we try and steer people away from things they don't need. Not buying parts is just as important as what you buy. In time this will be established and we believe the market will turn in our direction once people understand that we were steering them correctly and trying to help them all along. When people see the results of what we're doing/saying it will build a trust that will enable future sales of the parts we sell.

In the 3800 market we were laughed at. We were told many times "I would never buy from you because of your attitude". Windshield washer injection was a popular mod. For 2-3 years we fought with consumers and vendors pushing it. They said all of the same things I read here and the people ripped on ZZP for not knowing anything and being wrong. Well, after a few years a pattern emerged. The WI guys were still talking about getting their setup tuned and we were dropping about 1 second in 1/4 mile times per year. Eventually the evidence became too overwhelming to ignore and WI was dropped. Currently if you ask about it in the 3800 market you'll be ridiculed or called a newbie and told it doesn't work. Keep in mind this is after 3 years of me being called dumb for saying the same thing. I suspect this market will be no different but it will take a bunch of parts and a lot of successful track outings to prove it. I'm up for the challenge and I believe it will be beneficial to the entire LSJ market in the long term. So no, I won't drop it. If you want me to, take me up on the $1000 challenge and bring you car here. Prove me wrong and take my $1000.

It's interesting that you think he'd be faster with a smaller pulley. I'm wondering what you have to say about the 1000 guys or so trying to be faster than him that haven't done so yet??? They are running smaller pulleys and meth, why wouldn't they be faster after all these years?
It depends, you haven't given enough information.

What is creating the boost? Is there a parasitic loss that increases with the 2.7?

What rpm is the car being shifted at? Does one pulley allow a better rpm band than the other?

What AF ratio? Cobalts make more power when they are leaner. Lower boost allows a leaner tune.

 

Lol, it's called traction. No one runs DR's on these cars.

Look at the car under his, Rob Archer. Broke 12's over 2 years ago, what did he have done? Oh yeah, 2.5" pulley, intake, 60#, and DR's. Lot less money into that car than Stu's, only a tenth off, and over 2 years ago. Look at stu's mod list compared to the rest of the guys. Everyhing thing he does to that car is for the drag.

All the 2.5" guys have either upgraded to a bigger poweradder, or sold the car.

About the water/meth injection... You can have any car, with whatever modifications done to it. Put the meth injection on it, 100% you can make a little bit more power. Evert 1* timing on these cars is 5whp.

 

Any of my comments had nothing to do with you or ZZP. I'm simply stating my opinion. My opinion is. Same car. Same mods same driver. Only difference is pulley sizes. I believe the smaller pulley will win that race. Just an opinion and has nothing to do with you. If you think it was then that's my fault. They asked a question. I answered with MY OPINION.

 

It's been proven at the track and dyno.

 

whats the 1000 dollar challenge? i could sure use some extra cash to pay for my turbo

 

1degree added is 5 whp on my car. not sure about other cars



i have trapped a lot higher than 90% of this forum with a blower car {turbo cars need not apply}. so trying to compare a tvs car on oe tires to a m62 car on drag radials or slicks is headed for failure.

 

-Rob Archer ran slicks and a blower that no one here has. It was a prototype unit sent to intense and one sent to ZZP before the TVS was released. You cannot compare a different power adder and slicks to the cars here.

-The fastest guy is running 109mph traps. That's pretty good considering a low 60' generally lowers trap speeds. His times are more than just traction.

5WHP from 1 deg of timing gained is not the entire story. You are not factoring in the power lost from putting water in your engine. You could spray CO2 in the engine to and it would be cold. You'd have a denser charge, you could run 26 deg of timing and a 2.5" pulley w/o detonating on pump gas. Despite the increased timing, higher boost, denser air, etc, you'd be WAY down on power. This is simply an example of why you can't cite one part of the equation and make a blanket statement. Substitute Halon, water, or any non combustion supporting substance and the result is the same less power. On the flip side, you can have less boost/timing and increase the combusion with more oxygen (like with nitrous oxide or just pure O2) and make more power.
I did not try and single you out what-so-ever. I don't even remember your post. My apologies if it seemed like that.
You're point is incomplete. Yes, a smaller pulley than stock will win the race. A guy running a 3.1 will beat a guy running the stock pulley (all else being equal) BUT at some point, the guy running the larger pulley will win. ei, guy running a 2.6 will be faster than guy running 2.5. Guy running 2.7 will be faster than guy running 2.6; you cannot make a blanket statement when so many variables are in place. It's hard to discuss without adding a lot of specifics.
I don't have any disagreements with this.
The $1000 challenge was something we came up with years ago to prove our point and show we were confident in our statements at ZZP about water injection. We stated that you cannot make more power with blue washer fluid no matter what than an optimum tune with the same or larger pulley.

In the case of this thread an example would be the 2.6" pulley we are discussing. The general consensus here is that you can add a few mods, meth being one and run a 2.6" pulley with good results. I have $1000 that says if you strap your car on the dyno I will prove that a larger pulley will make more power without the washer fluid than you can make with the 2.6" with it.

In many many years, no one has been able to prove us wrong. There are stipulations of course and if you've read my statements on this topic, you'll understand that water and methanol have nothing in common other than being liquids.

If you like, I can point you to one of the many, many thread where all of this was debated years and years ago for a period of time extending years and years. For me, I'm just watching an old movie.

 

m62

7300

12.4 afr.

 

Zoomer all you do is state the obvious...

you say the guy with a the 2.6 over a 2.5 would win... then youll go on to say that you can lower pulley size when u get mods that support it... isnt that always the case?

When we argue you can use a smaller pulley and win, were obviously not talking on a stock car, were talking about one with the supporting mods and the tune it requires.

 

Last I heard you and intense don;t get along so well...so how are you 100% confident that blower was on Rob's car. Archer also ran on Hoosier QTP's which IIRC are the same ones Stu uses. I went 110 on my ion with a 2.5 intake 60s and tune. not even meth at the time. over 2 years ago.

And your CO2 argument and the water losing power I disproved you on last time you brought this up...even went into the chemistry for you. It should still be on here somewhere.

Why don't you layout your $1000 challenge again with all the details and stipulations again .

 

Understood and I'm not trying to just argue back and forth. I think an exchange of ideas and information doesn't have to be viewed as hostile or involve name calling. (not acusing you of this, just some people)

Many of my points are stating the obvious and to many guys, my rhetoric doesn't apply. But this thread is about guys running a 2.6" pulley. There are no supporting mods being discussed in this thread which enable the effective use of a 2.6" pulley. The topic also discusses water injection to run a small pulley and I covered that in my above postings.
-I don't even know how to answer your question on Rob's blower.

-Stu ran drag radials. That is a steel reinforced radial tire. Archer ran QTPs which are a bias ply sidewall (slick)

-Intense and ZZP do not get along, correct.

-I don't recall the data on the CO2, perhaps you could post it or link it.

-$1000 challenge may be best answered PM if you don't have enough info from my postings.

 

I don't see any cars with 3.0 and larger pulleys coming anywhere near 300whp.

I see 2.5/2.6 pullies doing so.

 

from jt81185:

As for using CO2 as reinforcement for your water argument...its not as simple as that. Water is a polar molecule, made with different elements and in a different molecular composition. These little facts make their reactivity properties different...any entry level chemistry class will teach you that. Big thing here is that water is soluble in alcohols...where as CO2 is not.

 

While true, your statements do not appear to me to apply to what we're talking about.

-What does water being a polar molecule have anything to do with combustion in an engine?

-Yes, the properties are different. Bromotrifluoromethane, or halon, is also different. That's why one is called water, one is called carbon dioxide and one is called Bromotrifluoromethane. There are lots of things we could be putting in the engine and they are all different. My point is that nearly anything which reduces combustion will allow increased boost and timing while at the same time lower horsepower.

-What does water being soluable in alchohol have to do with it being beneficial?

-A question I always get laughed at for asking but I'll ask again. Why not pour windshield washer fluid in your gas tank? Or just pour some water in there with a little methanol so it mixes together. According to the theory, the car should be able to run a lot of boost and timing all the time then right?

 

Thats why i posted that.

thats like tellling the wi people that pouring water in the gas tank does the same thing...

Having water diluted gas would change the properties of the fuel not allowing it to burn..

with wi. the fuel is OBVIOUSLY still burning, because the car is still moving...

theres a difference in having gas diluted with water, and having water being introduced as a molecularly fine mist in the same combustion chamber as fuel.

 

OK, I can see your pretty close to you understanding why WI doesn't work. You just have one small step left to take.

Continuing on examples, why is it that humid air reduces HP? Why not just turn up the boost since the water in the air should 'cool' the charge? Why is it that dyno's have humidity calculated in the correction factor? Answer: Because water reduces HP.

Fuel injection works well because the fuel is turned to vapor before entering the combustion chamber. This is also the purpose of a carborator. This is why fuel isn't just poured into the motor. The engine is exploding a vapor, not burning a liquid. In the same way, water introduced into the engine is turned to a vapor before the combustion cycle begins. Thus the water and the fuel are 'vapor' in the air before the spark plug ignites. The 'mixing' you believe is happening when you pour water in the gas tank ocurrs regardless of whether you inject it at the TB, the valve or pour it in the tank.

Mixing water in the gas tank would acomplish the same thing. There is no 'new' substance that a mixture of water and gas become which is less flamable than gas. The solution is simply less flamable because there is water in it. If you google 'gas dry' you'll learn that any alcohol (ethanol, isopropyl, methanol) will allow the water to mix with the gas. However, you'll also learn that it is not creating a new chemical compound as you stated above. That assertion is incorrect. You still have water, alcohol and gas in a solution. If you look up the chemical definition of solution, you'll read this "5. Chemistry. a. the process by which a gas, liquid, or solid is dispersed homogeneously in a gas, liquid, or solid without chemical change." So actually pouring the water in your gas tank would be the 'perfect' WI system, yet it doesn't work.

 

If you were to pour the water in your tank, the water would NOT be evenly distributed by volume to the gas. Also, i didnt say the chemical compound changed, the properties did, which is that it would be less flamable.

 

if the flash point of M1 was higher than 185 degree's people would not have to run water to raise that temperature.

this is the main reason behind it.

 

And im not sure if you know this... but you do realize that people who are saying they are running meth and gained power from it, are tuning for it..

If you run a high meth low water mix... youll have less power taken away from the water (due to less being injected at a given time), because the power you can gain from advancing will out beat the power loss from the water

 

What I am saying is that there is no difference between spraying water in the motor with a separate jet than pouring it in the gas tank. You understand that putting water in the gas tank makes the gas less flamable. This is due to the fact that water isn't flamable. I just need to get you to understand that injecting water at the TB, the blower or the valve is the same thing as pouring it in the tank.

Water gas and alcohol form a solution when mixed together. By definition it is evenly distributed. That's the definition of a solution. I'm not sure where you got the infor to type in caps that it is not distributed this way but your source is incorrect. Nearly all fuels today have some ethanol in them. This protects cars from the problems of the past when moisture got in the tanks at the stations or your car. You actually can pour some water in the tank and it won't do anything but reduce engine power slightly and eventually cause the need for tuning.

Furthermore, if you did put enough water and some alcohol (to allow a solution instead of a mixture) in your gas tank, you could add boost and timing. You could never add enough to compensate for the loss of power the water created though. And this is the point of my entire dissertation.

Point 1 - I understand people are tuning for it. All my points still hold true.

Point 2 - Yes, this is true but the amount of methanol compared to water is not achieved in windshield washer fluid. If you ran pure methanol, you'd have the potential to gain quite a bit of power. Unfortunately I don't know anyone doing this and if you had access to alcohol (such as E85) you could just pour it in the gas tank and retune. The results would be much better.
Methanol boils at 147 deg F but I'm not sure why that matters. Why would you want to lower the flashpoint in this application?
http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/me...ter-d_987.html
If it's an issue, switch to ethanol. Adding water to your car isn't a good idea for trying to go fast.

 

The last time I was at my local performance shop I was discussing Water/methanol injection with their tuner. At the time I was tuning for -20 degree washer fluid which is approx 33% methanol.

He said that he did not see any substantial hp gains from water/methanol injection kits on the dyno until they ran at least 75% methanol to water. And his recommendation for water/methanol kits was to run straight 100% methanol or spend your money elsewhere.

I ignored him at the time because I had several forums full of people telling me that water/methanol kits where the way to go...

 

The thing your wrong on zoomer.. is that in order to make a solution, they need to mix homogeneously.

Water and gas do not mix, thus they do not make a solution, so in a gas tank... it would NOT be the same.

 

adding water reduces the chance of it catching fire for no reason. the whole clear fire thing bothers me when i see smoke and no fire.

call me silly. i'll just leave my mixture alone.

 

And obvioulsy, people are overcoming the water with power, because they are showing gains.. arent they?