-
a fan will use as much if not more electricity than a pump, but used with an intercooler would mean no water on board so would save on weight. a problem i see with using a carb for feeding water is the surface tension of water, i think it would cause major problems with the water release, it would feed out in droplets as more water collects at the nozzle, as opposed to a constant stream. i can see that causing some pretty major problems. running methanol or another additive would then make it pricey in the long term.
so far i think the options available are....
front mount intercooler - too much pipework, wouldnt work
rear mount intercooler protruding from bodywork or vented - disturbance to airflow, so wouldnt work
rear mount intercooler in engine bay with fan blowing air - possibility. fan will drain power, but intercooler will save weight
chargecooler with rad up front and own pump - pump drains power, adds lots of weight
chargecooler with rad at rear - will disturb airflow, so wouldnt work
chargecooler using engine coolant system - no power drain, wont be as efficient as separate system
water injection with ECU setup - probably the most effective setup. but expensive and adds weight
water injection with carb - potential problems but might be doable. adds weight
i think those are all of the options thus far. its a question of weighing up the pros and cons of each and figuring out which one hinders me the least. they all have major drawbacks, but theres always a compromise somewhere
so far as using water as ballast goes - im space framing most of the car and running double wishbone suspension all round. so what works on stock AW11 is pretty much irrelevant lol. im more concerned with having the absolute minimum of weight without spending a fortune
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules