ALFAGTV6.COM

[Duk]

Alright, it's been way to quiet around here so I figured I'd put up some photo's of my filthy and slowly progressing project on here for sh!ts and giggles.
Engine is a standard 3 litre Potenziata motor but the Motronic has been ditched in favor of an Adaptronic E420c and distributor-less ignition system.
As mentioned in another thread, the ignition coils are Denso jobbies from a pair of Yamaha R6's
Unfortunately the heads have to come off for an overhaul. While they're off I'll tidy the ugly ports up.
The supercharger is a Vortech V5 F trim that I scored from eBay for a good price. Definitely the worse form of forced induction for the Alfa but it should have a charm all its own with a nice progressive torque curve.
The Potenziata's have a 3.73 diff ratio, so it isn't trying to climb up the earlier 3.55 ratio as badly to find some boost pressure. They're not sluggish to begin with and lightened flywheels, specifically tuned programmable computer, tidied up ports and extractors and secondary pipes aim specifically for lowish to mid-range torque should help even more.
Dummy assembly shows how it will pretty much look when assembled, but will be much prettier

[Duk]

A few more various photo's:

[75evo]

Duk,

Are the front shockers Koni? What size threaded sleeve did you get, and spring size? I want to addhelpr spring for my Beninca valved Konis.

Z

[Duk]

Duk,

Are the front shockers Koni? What size threaded sleeve did you get, and spring size? I want to addhelpr spring for my Beninca valved Konis.

Z

Yep they are Koni's.
The springs are Eibach 1.875" (1 7/8"). The threaded sleeves are normally marketed as being for the small bodied Bilstein's. I got them from http://www.speedwaymotors.com/. Note that I had to weld a steel sleeve onto the shock body for the sleeves to sit on and the shocks had to be overhauled after that (popped a small hole in each one when I welded it and the low pressure gas got out). The foot valves were stuffed any way 'cause the previous owner had the car set so low, the soft standard bars and no bump stops meant the shocks bottomed out internally.............
A new lower mount is required and is similar to what is used on the RSR coil overs.
I actually welded up and ground out the top hole further forward so that the spring would fit inside the box section in the chassis. The top control arm is also modified so that I can run more caster without the spring binding on the top control arm.
All in all, a fair bit of f@&king about .

[kevin]

This looks great . I hope Jules is watching closely for his ex 8000 rpm screamer . This car gonna be a beast . Hey don't be afraid to post lots of detailed pics .

[scott.venables]

Looking good Duk. In a post on the AROCA board you said you were making up another pair of extractors with smaller and shorter primaries. What's your thinking?

Also, what are the spacers under the top balljoint for?

Keep it up!

Scott

[Duk]

Looking good Duk. In a post on the AROCA board you said you were making up another pair of extractors with smaller and shorter primaries. What's your thinking?

Also, what are the spacers under the top balljoint for?

Keep it up!

Scott

Het Scott,
yeah I decided that the original set of extractors that I was making was to much work.
They were initially going to use 1.5" pipes for the top sections, 1 5/8" for the bottom sections, and anti-reversion cones in the middle flanges and then the goilet collector at the very end.
That all changed when I realised the huge variation in lengths of the lower section to make it fit. So I decided that I'd use anti reversion cones at the head flanges and make the top sections from 1 5/8" pipe as well. Trouble was, I had made the mid section flanges with 1.5" holes and I just couldn't be bothered dealing with them............
I wasn't looking forward to making the drivers side lower section either. Having to squeeze 3 pipes past the starter motor was not my idea of fun .

Also, in a thread I started about secondary pipe tuning, MD had mentioned some pipe sizes and lengths and commented about for every additional HP you gain up top, you loose 2 lower down lower in the rev range(a bit generic, I know, but you get the point).
This matched quite closely with some comments I had read on Autospeed http://autospeed.com.au/cms/A_108186/article.html about how effective smaller diameter primaries that are about 50cm long, are with secondaries about 65-70cm long. These sort of sizes gave great low to mid-range, part throttle torque, even with the big tractor engine in their test car.
Given the centrifugal Vortech won't be doing squat at low revs, designing the extractors to help low to mid-range torque seems like a better idea.
Much easier to build, too

The spacers are part of the Pace Engineering long shank top ball joint kit. I'm not entirely sure why Vin did it like that, but I do know that the ball joint boot won't go through the hole. Or if it does, it'd be a prick to do.
Another reasons I can think of for the spacers, are to make sure the ball joint is parked roughly in its middle position at static ride height, this would give it plenty of articulation for both bump and droop. Without the spacers the BJ might bind as the suspension is pushed into bump.

[Duk]

An important part of keeping this thing alive will be an effective water injection system as well as dual fuel and ignition maps that can be used at the flick of a switch (a digital input for the Adaptronic allows switching between 2 separate fuel and ignition maps).
I'll be using an FJO water injection solenoid valve controlled by a variable duty cycle driver output from the Adaptronic. A float switch as well as an over ride switch will swap from the 'wet map' to the 'dry map.
The idea is to inject the water after the inlet air temperature sensor and the 'wet map' will be tuned on the basis that the water injection is in operation. I expect to run more on boost ignition advance and maybe slightly leaner high load air fuel ratios (no leaner than 12.5:1, tho).
The 'dry map' will still be safe and detonation free but I just don't expect it to dish out the power because I expect to not be able to run as much on boost ignition advance and I'll probably also run much richer on boost AFR's (11:1 maybe even richer).

The inline water to air intercooler could be a bit of a liability under sustained use and I do plan to have a fairly safe ignition retard to inlet air temperature map to ensure that a heat soaked intercooler won't cause any high load detonation problems. But because the water injection will happen after the IAT sensor, it won't show any reduction in inlet air temperature to the computer. So if the intercooler is struggling with heat soak on a hot day, the ignition timing will still be retarded as per the IAT correction map. This could be more ignition retard than is required when the water injection is working, but a safer condition for if/when the water injection isn't working.

[Greg Gordon]

I don't see any reason this isn't going to work really well. The 3.0 has enough grunt to make up for the centrifugal's lack of low and mid range performance. At high rpm it will really move.

With a decent heat exchanger up front that intercooler will not be a liability under sustained use. For example I rode in a supercharged GTV6 with 10psi from a Roots blower (higher dischage temps than your Vortech) going through a Syclone liquid to air intercooler, which should be comparable to yours. Lap after lap of hard driving and temps stayed 5F-10F above ambient. They never got any higher.

If the liquid to air systems have a weakness, it's heat soaking in traffic, or when the car is parked for a short time. On the track, it's just not an issue.

It seems everyone is worried about ignition timing. With water injection, this really isn't a big deal. I don't know what your compression ratio is, but I can assure you that with water injection you won't need any boost retard up to 10psi.

I know that sounds crazy but it's true. I ran my 2.5 L-Jet, no intercooler, with stock pistons and everything at 10psi. I ran no boost retard. Of course I was spraying water like there was no tomorrow, but water is cheap. Engine tear downs are expensive.

On the subject of ignition timing, I also experimented with more boost and less timing on the dyno. This was before I started with water injection. I found that in all cases I tried, I was better off running a couple pounds less boost and more timing.

Keep in mind, everything here I just wrote applys to supercharging. With turbocharging a lot of this goes out the window due the the pressure differential between the exhaust ports and the intake ports going in the wrong direction.

Hey, is that one of my pulleys I see on the crank?

Greg,
www.hiperformancestore.com
www.okinjectors.com

[75evo]

Greg , duk,

How much boost can an 11:1 3.0 12v with big cams take with intercooling? Im interested in Greg's sprintex kit.

I called up wizard of NOS to ask for a progressive NOS system, but i'm very scared of the nos tank exploding. Also nos doesnt last very long, probably more suitable for drag racers who males a cople of runs.

[Duk]

Hey Greg, I was looking forward to your input.

My engine has had its heads overhauled earlier in its life. What was done to them specifically, I don't know. The Potenziata engines do have a standard 9.5:1 compression ratio, tho what it is now I've no idea.
When I overhaul the heads again, new IAP phosphor/bronze valve guides, teflon seals, heavier duty valve springs and new exhaust valves (after reading on your site that Alfa used steel exhaust guides in the later heads (the d!ck he@ds )), I won't have the heads machined unless I absolutely must.

Water Injection! What a subject!
I am really looking forward to seeing what can be achieved with water injection.
1 thing still nags at me, though. It's the potential for uneven distribution of the water to each cylinder, especially when the water flow rates from 1 or 2 nozzles starts getting higher and the air gets more and more damp/humid. I see the potential for the water to start falling out of the air stream. Maybe I'm reading to much into it.
But it did have me thinking about having 1 primary nozzle in the intercooler plumbing followed by 6 small secondary nozzles mounted in each of the inlet runners just under the plenum chamber. That would require a well made water distribution manifold to ensure each of the 6 nozzles flowed the exact same amount.
I looked at getting 2 of the Innovate TC-4 modules to data log the temperatures of all 6 cylinder's exhaust gasses right next to the heads in the extractor pipes, but $100 for each of the thermocouples (which do look to be very well made) did put me off .

75evo, Greg is definitely the man to answer your questions.
But I'll add some thoughts on your particular situation.
I do think that potentially your cams could be a bit of a hindrance if they have to much overlap. As Greg said in his book, some overlap is good, to much will be a waste.
The 11:1 CR will be the biggest challenge. Water injection would be a must. If you haven't bought Greg's book on supercharging, then I highly recommend it! The section on water injection alone is worth the purchase price. And to give a little taste, water injection is less about cooling the inlet air than most people who sell water injection kits will have you believe. Intercooling will help reduce the knock tendencies, but it's no where near as effective as water injection is.

[Greg Gordon]

Hey Duk,

Thanks for reading my book. I also worried a little about uneven distribution of the water. However based on looking at spark plugs, and after pulling the heads on a water injected Alfa, I think the Alfa V6 Plenum distributes the water pretty evenly with just one nozzle. All the spark plugs, pistons, and combustion chambers seem to stay equally clean. That's hardly scientific, but the fact that I didn't blow a piston reinforces my observations. So far, I have only used the 150psi water/meth pumps. Coolingmist now uses a 250psi pump for even better atomization. I think that would really reduce the chances of uneven distribution.

Another thing to think about is, even if the distribution isn't even, it has to be pretty far out of whack to be a problem. For example, if the water:fuel ratio is .6:1 in some cylinder and .4:1 in others, it's still going to be OK unless you are seriously pushing the limits.

Of course six individual nozzles would insure perfectly (or nearly perfect) distribution. Then again, six tiny nozzles clog a lot more easily than one or two big nozzles. The number one cause of problems with water injection is clogged nozzles.

Greg,
www.hiperformancestore.com
www.okinjectors.com

[MR2 Zig]

I have a question on the location of the water injection nozzles. What is the impact of where the nozzles are located in the system? Better to have them just downstream of the blower? just before the intercooler? At top of intake runners? next to fuel injectors? Up or down stream of the throttle plate?

Just curious.

Scott

[Duk]

The number one cause of problems with water injection is clogged nozzles.

Greg,
http://www.hiperformancestore.com
http://www.okinjectors.com

When I do my water injection system, I plan to use a pre pump water filter, the same that get used in fridge drinking water systems. http://autospeed.com.au/cms/A_110368/article.html.
That should keep any little nasties out of the water nozzle(s) .
If I go for a secondary, 6 small nozzle set up, I'll use an entirely separate pump and plumping system to the primary system. Both would feed from the same tank, though.

[Duk]

I have a question on the location of the water injection nozzles. What is the impact of where the nozzles are located in the system? Better to have them just downstream of the blower? just before the intercooler? At top of intake runners? next to fuel injectors? Up or down stream of the throttle plate?

Just curious.

Scott

This is a rather contentious issue.

A nozzle that mounts before the blower is not recommended. The impact of the water on the soft metal supercharger impeller, screws or lobes (depending on the SC type) could, probably would, cause long term damage to those parts.

Before the intercooler isn't recommended. My thoughts are that the water would collect on the internal surfaces and form drops rather than a fine mist. The finer the mist, the better it travels with the air stream and the more surface area it has to absorb heat energy.

The more time the water can spend in the air stream after the intercooler, the more chance it has to absorb heat. For my mind, injecting the water just after the intercooler is the best approach for that effect. Making sure your intercooler plumbing's internal surface isn't to smooth should also help to make sure that the water mist doesn't collect on the walls, especially at bends and form drop or small puddles.
As I mentioned, my concerns are when you start using higher water to fuel ratios. If you start to inject lots of water at 1 point and expect that water to travel a long way and negotiate a lot of bends and changes in plumbing volume, the changes of air speed could cause the water to distribute unevenly through the plenum chamber. That's why I am thinking of a primary nozzle/injector that is mounted as far from the plenum chamber as I can mount it, plus 6 individual nozzles mounted in the individual inlet runners.
I can't comment with any authority about the effect of evaporation of water when its in air that is higher than atmospheric pressure. What most people know is that water's boiling pointy increases with an increase in pressure.

If you read Greg's book, you'll soon learn where water injection has the biggest effect.

This car http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PyWLE3gMw0 was featured in an Australian car magazine years ago. It's a Cosworth Sierra that dished out PLENTY of power from its (bigger) turbo'd, 2 litre, 16 valve Ford/Cosworth engine. Water injection was the rather expensive Aquamist system.