Devils Own WMI kit question

So another question...what liquid is everyone running in their WMI kits and if running a water/methanol mix, what ratios?
 
100% methanol all the way. Many folks start with 50/50 and creep their way up to it. AFAIK, the majority (more than 50%) of methanol folks spray 100%. Rob from Hypnotic has spoken about this, and FWIH recommends to just go 100% and never look back. Some info says cars do better on 50/50. That doesn't seem to be true with Speeds, especially if they're using decent-sized nozzles. If you run a fairly large/large nozzle and are spraying 50/50, all that water can quench your flamefront and mess up your burn.

Anyone else heard/experienced this too?
 
I was thinking of running 100% anyway. All of systems that I've seen sell their own fluids at 50/50, but I was trying to find a pure 100% methanol product to run.
 
Dedlyvirus said:
I was thinking of running 100% anyway. All of systems that I've seen sell their own fluids at 50/50, but I was trying to find a pure 100% methanol product to run.
Click to expand...
But M1 methanol (not M3 or M5, M1 specifically - it has no additives). Many race tracks and race shops sell all sorts of specialty fuels, including M1. I get mine for ~$4/gallon.
 
I run 50/50.

tumblr_njbn3ppvnj1rlo1q2o1_1280.gif


I'll probably up it when I get re-tuned. Only having to pick up meth once a year is kind of nice though.
 
DO kits arnt bad. Dont ground the controller in cab. Run the ground to a good quality chassis ground. as far as kits going wonky, they all have that potential. Mount an inline manual switch if your that concerned.
 
I run 100% methanol. Wasn`t planning on it, it just came about that way and I stuck to it. For cooling purposes, 50/50 really is superior but for aux fueling it`s been good so far (even go so far to say that my AFR has been on the rich end with IDC getting lower and lower). But I also get my methanol from the same place Red does; the good stuff and at $4 a gallon.
 
my AEM stage2 on boost control worked fine for many years on a k04 or gt28. They commonly work on controlling the negative return of the pump exept xome specific ones. But you can connect an added relay or a solenoid valve to make sure it won't leak while you aren't under boost. (Or when the car is off) The new aem got this added output feature (but you need to buy a 12v sol)
Boost logic will inject about the same amount at spool rpm than it will inject at redline if you have a linear boost curve. So the ''progressiveness'' of the controller mostly works when you are in cruizing mode and the rest of the time, it is an ON/off device with a trim pot that let you adjust the maximum amount of meth passing thru the same jet....
When you need meth as a controlled fuel adder, because fuel needs increase with rpm following the flow passing thru the maf, a Maf based logic sound better to me.
Controller having a 0-5v input can do both while one with a build in map will be limited to boost control....

Models with a build in map used in cold conditions can also make condensation and freeze because you run a line inside the car and when this happen, map remain under pressure and inject meth at iddle thinking you run full boost....My aem did that 2 times under -30deg C conditions...

AEM check valve seem to be fine but i never used the other brands...

Fail safe made with a flow meter have more chances that the flow meter fail than the system,....The ones reading the current curves will last forever regardless of % of meth in the mix...
 
VoodooJef said:
I run 100% methanol. Wasn`t planning on it, it just came about that way and I stuck to it. For cooling purposes, 50/50 really is superior but for aux fueling it`s been good so far (even go so far to say that my AFR has been on the rich end with IDC getting lower and lower). But I also get my methanol from the same place Red does; the good stuff and at $4 a gallon.
Click to expand...
For cylinder cooling, 50/50 may be superior due to water's ability to absorb more heat. Having said this, my BATs have been far lower on 100% than on 50/50. I did a lot of experimentation to confirm this on my own car. The is one of the reasons the Rob Finkle (Hypnotic Tuning) always recommends running 100% methanol. YMMV.
[doublepost=1494436326][/doublepost]
Jeff23spl said:
my AEM stage2 on boost control worked fine for many years on a k04 or gt28. They commonly work on controlling the negative return of the pump exept xome specific ones. But you can connect an added relay or a solenoid valve to make sure it won't leak while you aren't under boost. (Or when the car is off) The new aem got this added output feature (but you need to buy a 12v sol)
Boost logic will inject about the same amount at spool rpm than it will inject at redline if you have a linear boost curve. So the ''progressiveness'' of the controller mostly works when you are in cruizing mode and the rest of the time, it is an ON/off device with a trim pot that let you adjust the maximum amount of meth passing thru the same jet....
When you need meth as a controlled fuel adder, because fuel needs increase with rpm following the flow passing thru the maf, a Maf based logic sound better to me.
Controller having a 0-5v input can do both while one with a build in map will be limited to boost control....

Models with a build in map used in cold conditions can also make condensation and freeze because you run a line inside the car and when this happen, map remain under pressure and inject meth at iddle thinking you run full boost....My aem did that 2 times under -30deg C conditions...

AEM check valve seem to be fine but i never used the other brands...
Fail safe made with a flow meter have more chances that the flow meter fail than the system,....The ones reading the current curves will last forever regardless of % of meth in the mix...
Click to expand...
This is why I run a solenoid and a master switch. Between the two, I get a lot of peace of mind.
 
The only real bad beside possibility of wasting some meth, is with a large jet: You cannot synchronise the boost point where it flow with your MAF cal. to reduce the g/s that drive the stock injectors for the added fuel/meth. But the wideband work so well on these cars that for a cooling jet, it isn't a big deal.
 
Jeff23spl said:
The only real bad beside possibility of wasting some meth, is with a large jet: You cannot synchronise the boost point where it flow with your MAF cal. to reduce the g/s that drive the stock injectors for the added fuel/meth. But the wideband work so well on these cars that for a cooling jet, it isn't a big deal.
Click to expand...
It's never been a problem for me. You'll never see beyond a certain grams/second range until you WOT/start spraying anyways. Tuners know and can adjust for this. My AFRs are seamless. This is with a CM10 spraying 100%. And my MAF has been scaled down in the necessary range by ~15-20%. If your tuner knows his stuff, you could be spraying 3 CM10s and have the same outcome as mine, but a progressive controller would probably be a little better for those kinds of setups. I use a simple boost-switch set to 15psi.
 
Redline said:
Most people just used boost-referenced WMI systems. They work great, even for up to a CM10 spraying 100% methanol, like I use at my power level (390whp.)

If you're going to go over that with an S4, I'd go progressive controller that's boost-referenced. I'd probably recommend AEM, Cooling Mist, or Snow Performance over Devil's Own for the simple fact that a couple of Devil's Own controllers have gone wacky in the middle of the night and hydrolocked the motor with methanol. Apparently they're wired to a constant hot (instead of just a switched power source), so if they fail, it could be really bad.

I personally like Cooling Mist the most. Their Stage 2 controller looks like a digital boost gauge (with numbers, not a needle) and fits into a gauge pod. You can monitor boost with it too by leaving it in that setting mode, so bang-for-your-buck.
Click to expand...
Why not just wire it to a switched source then?

I've been running a dvc30 stage 2 for around 2 maybe 3 years without issue (minus the nylon line developing a leak). I run a d14 with 100% meth.
But I also have a twinscroll gtx3076 hitting 30psi from 3800 to redline lol.

I'd go with the maf hookup vs the boost hookup. 50/50 seems fine (no science backing this from me) when you need cooling. If you want fueling, 100% is what I've been told.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
 
Binary Assault said:
Why not just wire it to a switched source then?

I've been running a dvc30 stage 2 for around 2 maybe 3 years without issue (minus the nylon line developing a leak). I run a d14 with 100% meth.
But I also have a twinscroll gtx3076 hitting 30psi from 3800 to redline lol.

I'd go with the maf hookup vs the boost hookup. 50/50 seems fine (no science backing this from me) when you need cooling. If you want fueling, 100% is what I've been told.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
One thing to watch out for: if you're spraying a lot of WMI, 50/50 can actually be very bad. It can quench the flamefront and caus power loss if you're injecting too much water - very easy to do on larger/more nozzles.

Depending on the turbo, you can sweep past the engagement point for the methanol system in a second or even less. This slows down on very large turbos, but my tuner said he vastly prefers MAP-based engagement. It is directly related to flow into the engine, just like running off the MAF, but boost pressure is a much better indicator for initial set point on full flow set point on progressive controllers (again, according to reputable tuners on the platform). 1/2 of max boost for start of flow, 3/4 of maximum boost for full flow (general rule of thumb).

This is just my experience. Do whatever you want. Try what you like and report your findings, but I can tell you firsthand that my MAP-based system works flawlessly, smooth AFR and everything. Even with a progressive controller, going from partial to full flow on a BNR S3 takes literally a fraction of a second; it's essentially instantaneous. It may help more of a slower ramp up of flow on bigger (i.e., much slower spooling) turbos. That's a non-issue for me on my nearly-K04 spooling turbo.
 
i also read we should not get more than 10% water vs the total amount of fuel...So a 50/50mix for a 500cc jet is just fine on our engine but 500cc of water from a 1000cc jet may not be as fun...I calculated for my case a 70/30 (300cc of water) would make the 10% ration if i add the stock fuel injector into it...Or something approximatively close.

For the MAP vs MAF, it may depend of tuners because Stratified just tell the opposite to one of my friend using a DVC and a gtx2971. And both way probably works too but to me, it seem easier to trim the g/s where you know for sure meth will start because you are using the same refference data.

Using boost is something that move in the same direction but sometimes, you can have some boost at low rpm and low flow or you can have the same boost in part throttle at higher rpm where the engine suck more air and would need more fuel. In a maf based kit for these 2 situation, you will have different amount of meth but a boost based will send the same amount.
So Boost based will help knock at low rpm by cooling a bit more but if you mostly look to add fuel, you constantly add the maximum of meth at wot under all rpm regardless regardless if it is boost progressive or boost fixed.

I dont see how a tuner can easily fine tune the part throttle around a progressive boost based controller that start at 5psi for exemple. He can probably make an average trim of the g/s in the area where it should start under wot. And trim it a little more till the end...If he trim the start for WOT conditions, in part thtrottle, same flow won't be injecting as much meth and will be lean. So i would probably try a midpoint + wideband self adjust....???
My experiment with aem and a large jet made me think it would be easier to switch to MAF :)

With your switched system, the meth amount is either 0 or 100% and you can expect to be WOT or near WOT above 15psi most of the time (be off in part throttle) so taking the MAF value where it happen on the log and return this to the maf cal sound a little bit easier?

With maf: if 3v = 50% of meth you can start reducing your maf cal at 3v and follow meth controller progression. This way regardless of the road condition any time it read 3v, meth start and stock injector get reduced....

I may be wrong but i'm in the process of trying it with MAF :)

The best of both may remain to find larger injector or add injectors kit and use meth just for cooling on boost but money remain a factor...
 
Jeff23spl said:
i also read we should not get more than 10% water vs the total amount of fuel...So a 50/50mix for a 500cc jet is just fine on our engine but 500cc of water from a 1000cc jet may not be as fun...I calculated for my case a 70/30 (300cc of water) would make the 10% ration if i add the stock fuel injector into it...Or something approximatively close.

For the MAP vs MAF, it may depend of tuners because Stratified just tell the opposite to one of my friend using a DVC and a gtx2971. And both way probably works too but to me, it seem easier to trim the g/s where you know for sure meth will start because you are using the same refference data.

Using boost is something that move in the same direction but sometimes, you can have some boost at low rpm and low flow or you can have the same boost in part throttle at higher rpm where the engine suck more air and would need more fuel. In a maf based kit for these 2 situation, you will have different amount of meth but a boost based will send the same amount.
So Boost based will help knock at low rpm by cooling a bit more but if you mostly look to add fuel, you constantly add the maximum of meth at wot under all rpm regardless regardless if it is boost progressive or boost fixed.

I dont see how a tuner can easily fine tune the part throttle around a progressive boost based controller that start at 5psi for exemple. He can probably make an average trim of the g/s in the area where it should start under wot. And trim it a little more till the end...If he trim the start for WOT conditions, in part thtrottle, same flow won't be injecting as much meth and will be lean. So i would probably try a midpoint + wideband self adjust....???
My experiment with aem and a large jet made me think it would be easier to switch to MAF :)

With your switched system, the meth amount is either 0 or 100% and you can expect to be WOT or near WOT above 15psi most of the time (be off in part throttle) so taking the MAF value where it happen on the log and return this to the maf cal sound a little bit easier?

With maf: if 3v = 50% of meth you can start reducing your maf cal at 3v and follow meth controller progression. This way regardless of the road condition any time it read 3v, meth start and stock injector get reduced....

I may be wrong but i'm in the process of trying it with MAF :)

The best of both may remain to find larger injector or add injectors kit and use meth just for cooling on boost but money remain a factor...
Click to expand...
TL;DR incoming wall of explanatory text, LOL. Stop here if that's not your thing ;)

Grams/second are a lot like LTFTs, once you really start getting into the throttle, you will be in open-loop fueling and your LTFTs will zero out, showing this. A similar phenomenon occurs with boost. There are certain amounts of airflow that I'll never see without being WOT, and that threshold includes flow rates that are all above my WMI activating boost pressure. Also, the transition from vacuum to full-on boost happens very quickly (partly because I never WOT <3,000 rpms, partly because my S3 spools quick and early in the powerband). So the delay from vacuum (cruising) driving to 20+psi occurs in ~250rpms - very quickly. At that point, I'm in full methanol-spraying mode.

Looking at my logs, I never need methanol below ~185 grams/second (based on my scaled MAF curve), so the solution is simple: only scale the MAF above that point. And I never even see close to 185+ grams/second unless I'm WOT. My degree of scaling is pretty significant: at my same horsepower level, I used to see 380+ grams/second on E28; now, with my methanol enabled and the necessary MAF scaling, I only see 330 grams/second at the same power level (385-390whp).

I don't need methanol to control knock at all. My in-tank ethanol is more than capable of handling it on its own. I only added methanol for 4 reasons: 1) lower IDCs to be easier on the fuel system; I'm not methanol fueling dependent; 2) an extra safety layer/cooler combustion chamber, even though E28 alone was sufficient, it's one of those things that I figure more safety threshold is better; 3) equalizing my power year-round by having much cooler BATs (in the summer, for instance); 4) cleaning/maintaining valves from buildup.

As far as MAP vs. MAF, MAP has served me very well. Stratified may like MAF-based as a function of them doing load-based tunes. When you scale the MAF, it impacts your calculated load. Since their tunes are based on calculated load, it is no surprise to me that they'd want to go a route that doesn't have them chasing moving load targets every revision, which would make the who process take longer.

I'm hybrid tuned, so I don't have that issue. And going strictly based on MAP (i.e., boost pressure) has worked flawlessly for me. Therefore, going off the MAF voltage is simpler because once you've identified the voltage at which the methanol needs to turn on, you're golden. You won't have to change this. When your MAF is scaled and you're trying to determine what grams/second you need to start scaling the MAF for the extra fuel of methanol, you're aiming for a target that moves every time you scale the MAF. So from that perspective, it's much easier to tune according to a specific voltage rather than grams/second, which is an inputted value. Voltage changes only according to actual airflow, so it's a constant, therefore once you determine the MAF voltage at which you'll start needing to adjust for the extra fueling, you're golden in terms of knowing exactly what MAF voltage methanol should start spraying.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top