Which W/M kit is he running? No tune?
No tune, devils own/ DIY eBay stuff.
Maybe this is a stupid question…
Has anyone ever tried running a W/M kit on an RS4 WITH some sort of fuel cleaner mixed with the W/M? For example, add a bottle of Techron F/I cleaner to the W/M mix in the tank. Is this plausible? Both products combust and should cause no harm or wear, both provide their own beinefficientits and both are readily available. Am I missing some big caveat here?
The W/M will do it’s cooling gig and the fuel cleaner will potentially splash on the valves and help clean them or keep them clean.
Assuming a similar set-up like Kryp’s when he had the PES blower. Port injected W/M through the I/M. Blower or not, one can modifiy the I/M to allow for port injection - correct?
School me please.
thanks
Would love to discuss this idea more…anyone? lol.
I brought this up on AZ 2 years ago and Chris K chimed in briefly but then the thread went dead I think…Want to avoid that here, we have the right people to discuss and am interested in thoguhts on the subject.
Small site…takes time for everyone to see the threads.
Agreed.
I’m hoping someone with a W/M kit already installed will try my idea and provide feedback after a couple thousand miles. Would be funny if it actually kept the valves clean after a CC clean and solved the build up issue. Actually, I’d find it hilarious.
it will take one year or so to test unfortunately.
What is the path that water meth travels on the old kryptonik setup?
I don’t know the name but there is a petrol based or something similar marketed just for what you describe. Mayne techron would work, never thought of it.
IIRC, PES had vertical ports at each cylinder that routed the W/M in a fashion similar to port injection. He had a picture of what I’m describing on AZ in his build thread.
I didn’t know someone else had this system or idea in use. Cool.
I’m thinking techron would be perfect - just am not positive.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGKvHUpzMjk
Found a video Kryp made. You can see the W/M nozzles location pretty clearly at the 2 min mark.
Water meth does not inject enough alcohol to clean the valves.
I remember a bp fuels ad where a b6 s4 was running 2 different fuel sistems for the right and left bank out of two different fuel tanks.
One was with bp supercalifragilisticextraalidocious and the other with “normal” fuel from a non-disclosed competitor.
The point was that after a number of miles the bank that was running bp fuel was clean and the other had “Slight” deposits of gunk on intake valves.
To make a long story short. Even having injectors spraying directly onto valves won`t make them squeaky clean.
On another note : youre all addressing the flow issue . The throttle opens 100% at 5500 rpm and the g/s rating of the flow meter increases so everything sounds fine ... right ? WRONG ! People have read the Audi patent files , theyve seen the videos of how fsi works and they still dont get it. Have any of you asked why 70% of the fsi engines audi produce have the same cylinder head geometry ? The tfsi engines ( all of them) , the rs4 engine, the r8 engine( it is different although it shares parts with the rs4) and the v10 fsi engine have the same valve angles, same diameter valves , same injector positioning. Anybody ever asked themselves why ? Because Audi put a shitload of effort into designing a swirl pattern. Thats because if you have air entering the cylinder and then you have fuel entering the cylinder .
Homogeneous mix of air and fuel is what makes hp.
You get gunk on your intake valves so the air comes in and the swirl pattern is affected , the fuel gets injected and doesn`t mix homogeneously with the air so you have lean pockets and rich pockets. Lean pockets will break surface tension and score your cylinders and rich pockets will put your o2 sensors on the wrong track.
I`ll repeat a question that only apr has thought of so far :
Has anybody changed the stock rs4 injectors with s3 injectors (or larger ecotec injectors ) ?
^^^he wasn’t talking about using water meth. He was asking about substituting something with a cleansing effect, rather than just water/meth. The design of the injection system KMD made is what he was interested in, not the liquid. i.e. since the fuel which would normally do some of the housekeeping is injected past the valves, why not look at injecting something before the valves with cleaning properties.
Hey Duud40, glad you’re still perusing over here.
Top part of your response - You’re saying mixing a fuel detergent with W/M and spraying almost directly on the valves won’t get the valves "squeekly clean"but…it may help reduce the build up or keep it soft for lack of a better description. I don’t think any of us know for sure until someone tests the theory. The BP example you gave was straight fuel, correct?
I was (dreaming) that between the W/M helping slightly with reducing temps and the Techron with it’s more heavy duty cleaning agents, might aid to help clean/reduce/mitigate CB build up.
Bottom part of your response: Please expand on the specifics of the S3 injectors. Interesting topic and you have my attention.
Have a look. http://awe-tuning.com/media/products/awe/mk5_k04/fueling/FSI_injectors_comparo.jpg
Theres one missing. Its the new found ecotec injector that apr has been selling for a few years with codes erased off the body .
The point is : as soon as you supercharge the rs4 its closer to the 2l tfsi and how air flows into that engine so you need injectors with a different flow pattern. I think its apr that also includes injectors with the supercharger kit for the rs4 .
RS4 injectors are ok for normally aspirated engines and the reason people are getting more hp from 2l tfsi with rs4 injectors is that they`re reading 12.5 afr when they actually have 13.2-13.3 in the pocket arround the spark plug.
So we went back to the dragstrip last night to re-test Mistro’s car after a carbon clean.
To re-cap, when we went 10 days ago, in DA of around 1200 or so feet when we got there (2000 when we left). Fastest runs were our first couple.
Mistro 13.06 @ 107.6 - stock tune, stock downpipes, stock catback with ECS Hpipe welded in (sound only), 55,000 miles and never carbon cleaned
sakimano 12.92 @ 108.0 - stock everything, 40,000 miles and never carbon cleaned
It was Mistro’s first time at the strip but he did very well, driving very consistently all day. The delta between us was only 1 tenth and 0.4 MPH. We know that my car ran 12.75 @ 108.3 in DA of 281 feet in April, so we can assume Mistro will be into the 12s if he were to run in great conditions like I had back then.
Last week Mistro had a carbon cleaning done. His buildup was pretty typically bad. Not horrendous, and certainly not clean. Standard stuff for a 50,000 mile car really. He also had JHM intake spacers installed which are not a power modification, but more a power preservation modification to limit heat transfer from the block to the intake manifold (and hopefully to help intake air temps…real IAT, not logged IAT!)
Our times last night were interesting. I cracked off a 12.89 @ 108.0, which was basically what I ran last time (within 3 hundredths). Mistro on the other hand…I was a bit worried my RS4 record was in jeopardy. His first couple of runs his transmission wasn’t so cooperative going into 2nd so he had a couple of slow ones. His best run of the day though?
13.0 @ 107.7 (or something). Basically exactly what he was before!
So even though the intake spacers snuck their way in there, this was a pretty simple test, clean, test…and it has to be said the results are not ideal for those who decry the carbon as a plague that hurts the RS4’s value.
Here’s my timeslip. This was against 81bear…a B8 S4 with the following mods
APR stage 2 version 2 93 tune
APR pulley
Strat Intake
034 High Flow Cats
Milltek Catback
APR coolant performance system
18 lb LW wheels
Another myth debunked here lol. Don’t show auditude…he’s convinced a tuned B8 S4 will put 20 car lengths on a stock RS4…nevermind a B8 S4 with $8,000+ in mods! 81’s went a little over a a tenth quicker on an earlier run I believe.
http://i375.photobucket.com/albums/oo193/sakimano/C360_2012-08-30-09-05-36-1.jpg
I like the test methodology! Great info.
My thoughts on carbon buildup have been that overall, it will take away efficiency and performance. Here is an example of my logic:
Carbon buildup on valves is going to change the flow of air into and out of the cylinder, and could restrict the flow. Let’s say that at the least, it changes the flow. If the flow of air is altered to the point that mixing and combustion are effected, then performance can be effected and poor combustion can compound the problem of carbon buildup. I’m talking overall efficiency. Your pumping losses will be greater, heat transfer is changed also you risk valve problems like leakage, worn seats…
Now, all of this stuff may be completely unnoticeable as far as PRACTICAL performance is concerned (timeslips/dynos). And I am not arguing that what I am saying is 100% correct, just saying that these have been my thoughts about it.
*edit: Am I saying I think it is worth it to have your engine carbon cleaned every 5k or 10k miles, no I’m certainly not. I have aprrox 25K on my RS4 and have absolutely ZERO plans of having a carbon cleaning done any time soon unless I really feel there is something wrong.
I know in large diesel engines we have to worry about cold corrosion and piston crown insulation from carbon buildup, valve temps due to the same, seat wear, etc etc, a completely different animal, I know, however some of the theories can certainly be applied to any type of combustion engine.
Just feeding the discussion.
all good points. In theory, I too thought this had to be hurting performance more than just a smidge. In practice however I’ve found NOTHING to support that. That’s kind of weird…you’d think SOMEONE would have a timeslip or pbox run through the gears showing a significant delta if all of these guys are dynoing 20-40 hp better AFTER their cleaning.
Of course many of them are dynoing at the place where they are paying for the $1000 cleaning…
I just find it really weird that to test how ‘fast’ our cars are, rather than busting out some simple testing equipment or going to the dragstrip, guys want to sit around a room and pay some guy $80 so that guy can rev their car up to 8000 RPM in third gear while it is strapped down to giant rollers with fans blowing on it.
Frankly I never sat around thinking of the RS4 saying to myself 'gee, I would love that car. I bet it produces marvelous hp and tq graphs while strapped to giant rollers with fans blowing on it!". Rather, I say ‘gee I would love that car… I bet it drives amazing and RIPS through the gears!’.