[Scott Roberts]

I think 2 1450's was too much for the motor. I believe with 1 as John suggested,you would see a good increase in hp and torque.

[BruceWilkie]

My 2 cents; flawed tune, or flawed design of the sheet metal intake are the likely causes here. In cfm capacity the terminators themselves not likely but the way they distribute that cfm relative to intake design could be a power killer. Most tunnel ram type intakes need big cfm to get the most from them. (you dont see prostocks running two 750's, even though that is a lot of airflow.) IR effects of tunnel rams need the flow capacity to work to their advantage. I'll add that cam and exhaust design does come into play here as well largely due to greater amount of exhaust volume generated from the higher power capabilities of methanol.

This brings this discussion to the more likely possibility that two domi's set up for methanol might do better, not so much because of lesser cfm, but manifold and throttle body design parameters. A single domi intake should not be able to out power a sheet metal tunnel ram if the tunnel ram and throttle bodies(or carbs) are working together with the headflow, cam, and exhaust.

Something IS very wrong here.

[Ron]

Again I would like to know the EGT's. I run two toilets on a 541 motor. I like my EGT's between 1150-1250.

[TOP 452]

Ron I will find out what the egt's were. Don

[mysticmissle]

Don went to the terminators because the dominators wouldnt fit in his car, I dont think he is going to go back.

[cfmcnc]

Ron, we no longer use EGT's in dyno testing as they can be too misleading.Our dyno is equipped with an Individual cylinder wide band O2 system. A/F ratio at peak torque was a 5.2:1 .

[Gaby Labiosa]

Originally Posted by TOP 452

Going to pick up the motor Tues I will post result when I get back. It was down on both HP and Torque with the meth. Go figure????????????????????? Don

I'm not surprised.

Nothing wrong here. This is actually more in line with the findings of most real engine builders across the country.

A power loss or at best zero gains is what usually happens in REAL LIFE high hp applications when switching to alcohol.

The higher the hp, the more rpm, the more efficient, the less sense it makes to even try it...

[BruceWilkie]

Originally Posted by Gaby@WilsonManifolds

I'm not surprised.

Nothing wrong here. This is actually more in line with the findings of most real engine builders across the country.

A power loss or at best zero gains is what usually happens in REAL LIFE high hp applications when switching to alcohol.

The higher the hp, the more rpm, the more efficient, the less sense it makes to even try it...

Gaby if a manifold swap plus two terminators vs a single domi werent in play here,( He is running ported tigers as well).I tend to agree the fuel switch might not amount to anything. Any thoughts on that?

quote: Ron
"Again I would like to know the EGT's. I run two toilets on a 541 motor. I like my EGT's between 1150-1250."

Ron I quickly found EGT readings to be very motor specific when I was racing two stroke snowmobiles. Some motors did there best at 1350 others would make the pistons look like they encountered a plasma cutter above 1250 degrees. Same probes gauges and distance from the piston. Lots of variables that affect readings there (including ambient temp of the probes thermocouple vs calibration temp). They are excellent for monitoring/adjusting your tune in the field once you establish a solid baseline. They also detect inaudible detonation spikes rather well if you run the quick response probes. 2 strokes are very unforgiving and you learn to believe your plugs 1st then use the egt as your reference point from there. 4 strokes are a bit more forgiving but a/f meter and plug readings first then egt as a monitor if you like.

[johnta1]

Gaby, are you saying that he probably won't see an increase in torque/HP?

[Gaby Labiosa]

John,

That's exactly what I'm saying... On a 1000-1100hp motor, 50hp sounds about right..



Bruce, this post was on the hp increase on methanol, not the manifold and throttle body swap.


However, like Top452 asked the increase in power to methanol is at BEST ZERO in high hp applications.

I was extremely stupified with the numbers thrown out there, anywhere from 80hp to 500hp!!!!!! You yourself claimed a 80 to nearly 200hp gain. Why didn't anyone mention the manifold change BEFORE we all made these crazy claims???

Whoever tunes an engine on the dyno based on EGT's should be shot!!! Wait, that's a little harsh. They will just stay SLOW.....

[shaker455]

Hey Don,
I'll come tune your car!

Glad to see you finally got it!

[BruceWilkie]

Originally Posted by Gaby@WilsonManifolds

John,

That's exactly what I'm saying... On a 1000-1100hp motor, 50hp sounds about right..



Bruce, this post was on the hp increase on methanol, not the manifold and throttle body swap.


However, like Top452 asked the increase in power to methanol is at BEST ZERO in high hp applications.

I was extremely stupified with the numbers thrown out there, anywhere from 80hp to 500hp!!!!!! You yourself claimed a 80 to nearly 200hp gain. Why didn't anyone mention the manifold change BEFORE we all made these crazy claims???

Whoever tunes an engine on the dyno based on EGT's should be shot!!! Wait, that's a little harsh. They will just stay SLOW.....

Dons First post sorry you missed it.

Originally Posted by TOP 452

Broke the motor in on gas.1011 HP and 790 Torque. That was on single dominator. Switchind to methanol on sheet metal with 2 of Rons terminters. Any guess on HP and Torque? Thanks Don

I felt 82 hp approximate might be feasible with the manifold swap twin terminators and cfm increase plus additional cooling possibilities of methanol passing over sheet metal. Of course not having the knowledge of exact design of the sheet metal intake I tried to give the intake builder the benefit of the doubt. I think that 1093 number is feasible with the right intake design. Having personally seen a few BBChevy combos pickup approx 60 hp with barely tweaked cast tunnel rams, 82 hp did not seem unrealistic. Not being a smart a.. here, I think someone of your ability in manifolds would find that extra 82 hp maybe more if you had built the intake.

Sims suggested the absolute best possible could be as much as 189 hp more. I couldnt design that model myself but threw it out there. So much would have to be perfect I doubt that 1200 number.

I couldnt agree with you more on your EGT comments. As I found out real fast (the hard way of course 3 times before I figured it out)doing initial tuneups with them can produce disasterous results. You really need to know your egts after best tune then you have an indication which way to adjust your tune in the event conditions indicate significant lower/higher temps than were optimal. My Yamaha would live 500 ft+(grass drags typically 4-500 ft) at 1450 and not make 300 ft at 1500+ 1350 peak never failed even prolonged temp exposure crossing a lake. My Polaris went to meltdown at 1250 faster than I could react to it. Same gauges probes and probe distance from the piston. I know its the sum of the variables why that was.

[John Langer]

I would guess around 30-40 with the sheet metal intake and twins and nothng on the alcohol. Maybe a loss.

[johnta1]

TOP 452, I'd still like to know what the combo was on your Toilets. (nozzles, jet size, pump, etc)

Going to sell it now?

[Daniel Barton]

Don, I think the runner length is going to end up being the issue here! I too have found zero or a loss on methanol on a highely modified engine, the stuff works great with blowers and also with lesser modified heads or when down nozzles are used in the back of the intake bowl but when used like a carb setup the heads have to be ported differently to even get to the same spot as you would be on gasoline, it takes 2.4 times the amount of methanol to equal the caloric value of gasoline... thats a hell of a lot extra fuel! Give me a call Don and I will go over the specifics with you. Dan

[TOP 452]

Dan I will call you in the AM Thanks Don

[Ron]

When my egine was dynoed it had EGT's and O2's. That is what we used at the dyno session to select jets and pill size. Since then, when racing, I look and log my EGT's and I want them between 1150 and 1250 for my best performance.

[smittyseng]

Originally Posted by cfmcnc

Ron, we no longer use EGT's in dyno testing as they can be too misleading.Our dyno is equipped with an Individual cylinder wide band O2 system. A/F ratio at peak torque was a 5.2:1 .

Have you found 5.2-1 to yield the most SAFE, usable, power? I was thinking 6-1 but that was probably too lean,was it close to detonation? I helped a friend crew on his alchohol bbc sand drag jeep,it was super sensitive when on alchohol,as the weather changed it was a pig (rich) and if you went the other way too much you got to see what molten aluminum looked like,he grew tired of it.
The other thing is I thought to really see a gain in power you almost always have to raise the compression even higher and that even though the octane isn't neccesarily what you would think you would need to support the compression (115 or so) compression as high as 20-1 is not unheard of on 115 octane methanol at 5.5-1 stoich due to the cooling effect of the fuel,Smitty
read line 2 of this reference thread
http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.c...=204700&page=3