Docsknotinn
Veteran Member
Daryl, Do you own anything motorized that you have not fiddled with in some way ? Two words come to mind.....Bone Stock /forums/images/graemlins/smirk.gif Try it some time. Dave
WATER INJECTION??
- Thread starter 5030
- Start date
- Views: 2487
OP
5030
Epic Contributor
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2003
- Messages
- 26,986
- Location
- SE Michigan in the middle of nowhere
- Tractor
- Kubota M9000 HDCC3 M9000 HDC
Dave:
I haven't fiddled with the Kubota engine itself. I did shroud the cooling air flow in order to improve air conditioning response but the engine itself, no. I am tempted to twist the pump a little. Maybe when it's out of warranty.
I fiddle with everything mechanical. I always look for more power and/or efficiency. That's why I have a machine shop. I can make what I envision.
I probably shouldn't get into it here, but you can also inject water in a diesel. Pulling tractors have water injection to keep them cooler internally. I toyed with putting NOS on my lawnmower!!
I haven't fiddled with the Kubota engine itself. I did shroud the cooling air flow in order to improve air conditioning response but the engine itself, no. I am tempted to twist the pump a little. Maybe when it's out of warranty.
I fiddle with everything mechanical. I always look for more power and/or efficiency. That's why I have a machine shop. I can make what I envision.
I probably shouldn't get into it here, but you can also inject water in a diesel. Pulling tractors have water injection to keep them cooler internally. I toyed with putting NOS on my lawnmower!!
ronjhall
Super Star Member
<font color="blue"> I toyed with putting NOS on my lawnmower!! </font>
Daryl
This will probably pull this thread off topic. /forums/images/graemlins/crazy.gif
What were the results?? /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
Daryl
This will probably pull this thread off topic. /forums/images/graemlins/crazy.gif
What were the results?? /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
OP
5030
Epic Contributor
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2003
- Messages
- 26,986
- Location
- SE Michigan in the middle of nowhere
- Tractor
- Kubota M9000 HDCC3 M9000 HDC
Ron:
It's just a thought. I don't know if the Briggs would take the strain. At least the pistons face forward, if they let go, I wouldn't get hit with one.
I did inadvertently put diesel in it last summer. Ran terrible.
Back on the water injection. I was considering putting it on my wife's Ford Ranger. She has a really odd Ranger. It gets poor mileage, I mean really poor, about 12 to the gallon, city.
That is why I put it on the Suzuki, to see what detrimental effects it would have to the beater car. That's also why I am asking our collective brains for input here on TBYNet.
Her Ranger is an '02 but it has a special engine. The factory engine came out at about 5K. In went an engine and trans from Ford SVO in Dearborn. Her brother is an engineer there and built the engine and trans. The SVO boys installed it at the dealership after the factory engine crapped. It's been balanced/blueprinted, ported, polished and tucked into bed. My wife has a Ranger that will run with a SVO Mustang. Problem is, it gets such poor mileage. I was wondering if the water injection would help the mileage or at least allow her to put regular gas in instead of premium??
She has the only Ranger I have ever seen that will light the tires in 4wd on dry pavement.
It's just a thought. I don't know if the Briggs would take the strain. At least the pistons face forward, if they let go, I wouldn't get hit with one.
I did inadvertently put diesel in it last summer. Ran terrible.
Back on the water injection. I was considering putting it on my wife's Ford Ranger. She has a really odd Ranger. It gets poor mileage, I mean really poor, about 12 to the gallon, city.
That is why I put it on the Suzuki, to see what detrimental effects it would have to the beater car. That's also why I am asking our collective brains for input here on TBYNet.
Her Ranger is an '02 but it has a special engine. The factory engine came out at about 5K. In went an engine and trans from Ford SVO in Dearborn. Her brother is an engineer there and built the engine and trans. The SVO boys installed it at the dealership after the factory engine crapped. It's been balanced/blueprinted, ported, polished and tucked into bed. My wife has a Ranger that will run with a SVO Mustang. Problem is, it gets such poor mileage. I was wondering if the water injection would help the mileage or at least allow her to put regular gas in instead of premium??
She has the only Ranger I have ever seen that will light the tires in 4wd on dry pavement.
Docsknotinn
Veteran Member
I am all for a faster lawn mower /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
ronjhall
Super Star Member
<font color="blue"> I am all for a faster lawn mower </font>
Get a bigger tractor. /forums/images/graemlins/crazy.gif /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
Get a bigger tractor. /forums/images/graemlins/crazy.gif /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
ronjhall
Super Star Member
<font color="blue"> I mean really poor, about 12 to the gallon, city. </font>
I would guess that the increase would be about the same percentage as the Suzuki. /forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif
About 1.8 mpg. /forums/images/graemlins/shocked.gif
The drive train may be geared for the smaller engine.
I would guess that the increase would be about the same percentage as the Suzuki. /forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif
About 1.8 mpg. /forums/images/graemlins/shocked.gif
The drive train may be geared for the smaller engine.
Docsknotinn
Veteran Member
lol, My piggy bank is still empty from the last one /forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif Besides, If I bought a belly mower for the 2210 I could mow my lawn in about 10 minutes, But there neighbors would think I am crazier than they already do. /forums/images/graemlins/smirk.gif Dave
JerryG
Super Member
Daryl,
I have seen dozen of vehicles with water injection. Most have been installed in the same manner as yours. They do work, but there is one problem with an installation like this. The problem is the engine can use the water to more effect if more is applied as the vacuum diminishes. At idle the vacuum in high and as the pedal is pushed down the vacuum drops as I am sure you are aware. Just simply plugging in a hose to a vacuum port gives the engine the water or with hold it in the exact opposite that is needed. It will still help, but not as much as it should. There use to be kits on the market that increased the dispensing of water as the vacuum dropped. I don't know if they are still available or not.
I have seen dozen of vehicles with water injection. Most have been installed in the same manner as yours. They do work, but there is one problem with an installation like this. The problem is the engine can use the water to more effect if more is applied as the vacuum diminishes. At idle the vacuum in high and as the pedal is pushed down the vacuum drops as I am sure you are aware. Just simply plugging in a hose to a vacuum port gives the engine the water or with hold it in the exact opposite that is needed. It will still help, but not as much as it should. There use to be kits on the market that increased the dispensing of water as the vacuum dropped. I don't know if they are still available or not.
TresCrows
Elite Member
"My wife has a Ranger that will run with a SVO Mustang."
I really doubt that /forums/images/graemlins/smirk.gif but it is fun thinking that. The SVO Mustang was a 2.3 litre, intercooled turbo 4 cylinder with 14 psi boost maximum in standard trim built in 1984, 85 and ending in 1986. The car had Koni suspension, 4 vented disc brakes mounted to 16 inch aluminum rims with Goodyear Gatorbacks. The SVO Mustang was identified by the functional hoodscoop for the intercooler and the rear Bi-wing spoiler. The use of the Turbo 4 reduced front weight giving the SVO a much more neutral feel than the V8 GT5.0. The GT plowed on the front while the SVO did not. The GT also had 15 inch wheels and measly disc drum set up. The SVO also sat lower than just about any car I have come across including the Corvette and had class leading skid pad numbers. Mine was an early 1986 model, the last few equipped with the water cooled turbocharger. Several "chip" kits allowed boost up to 21 psi but severe detonation would quickly destroy such an engine unless several other mods were performed as well. The came stock with the Hurst 5 speed transmission and limited slip differential. Stock, they were a good bit quicker and faster than the 5.0GT 0f 1986. In head to head drags mine was faster than the Buick Grand National supercharged V6 of that era of course, my car was not exactly stock /forums/images/graemlins/smirk.gif. Zero to 60 was way under 6 seconds, more in the range of 5 seconds with the first to second shift kinda slowing things down. From about 40MPH to 120 MPH nothing ever put it down. I am sure there were faster cars, especially nowadays, but 5 seconds zero to 60 including a shift was and is still top notch performance. I don't think I would want to be in a Ranger at 160MPH /forums/images/graemlins/shocked.gif, a speed easily obtainable in my SVO /forums/images/graemlins/smirk.gif without using the nitrous system. If the hail storm had not destroyed it I am sure I would still have it as a garage toy. The 05 Mustang I hear is going to be really cool, maybe, I will buy one, who knows. J
I really doubt that /forums/images/graemlins/smirk.gif but it is fun thinking that. The SVO Mustang was a 2.3 litre, intercooled turbo 4 cylinder with 14 psi boost maximum in standard trim built in 1984, 85 and ending in 1986. The car had Koni suspension, 4 vented disc brakes mounted to 16 inch aluminum rims with Goodyear Gatorbacks. The SVO Mustang was identified by the functional hoodscoop for the intercooler and the rear Bi-wing spoiler. The use of the Turbo 4 reduced front weight giving the SVO a much more neutral feel than the V8 GT5.0. The GT plowed on the front while the SVO did not. The GT also had 15 inch wheels and measly disc drum set up. The SVO also sat lower than just about any car I have come across including the Corvette and had class leading skid pad numbers. Mine was an early 1986 model, the last few equipped with the water cooled turbocharger. Several "chip" kits allowed boost up to 21 psi but severe detonation would quickly destroy such an engine unless several other mods were performed as well. The came stock with the Hurst 5 speed transmission and limited slip differential. Stock, they were a good bit quicker and faster than the 5.0GT 0f 1986. In head to head drags mine was faster than the Buick Grand National supercharged V6 of that era of course, my car was not exactly stock /forums/images/graemlins/smirk.gif. Zero to 60 was way under 6 seconds, more in the range of 5 seconds with the first to second shift kinda slowing things down. From about 40MPH to 120 MPH nothing ever put it down. I am sure there were faster cars, especially nowadays, but 5 seconds zero to 60 including a shift was and is still top notch performance. I don't think I would want to be in a Ranger at 160MPH /forums/images/graemlins/shocked.gif, a speed easily obtainable in my SVO /forums/images/graemlins/smirk.gif without using the nitrous system. If the hail storm had not destroyed it I am sure I would still have it as a garage toy. The 05 Mustang I hear is going to be really cool, maybe, I will buy one, who knows. J
