Some WWII fighters (Mustang, Hurricane, Spitfires mebbe)  used water
injection to temporarily boost performance in extreme situations.  Obviously
they were not injecting pure water into the engine - just adding it to the
mix.  But hey, I read this 25 years ago, so don't start asking (me) any
details.  As I recall they could run in this mode for only about 5 minutes
or so, before ruining the engine.

bem
----- Original Message -----
From: "Clive Smith" <clive.harman-smith@NTLWORLD.COM>
To: <vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM>
Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2002 5:31 PM
Subject: Re: Running on Tap Water

> 'I have noticed that most internal combustion engines  seem to run more
> smoothly in very wet weather, assuming there are no wiring concerns and
that
> the engine is fully warmed up, but this could be another issue
altogether.'
>
> So have I, particularly in absolute downpours where the rain hitting the
> gound litterly sucks the temperature down by evaporation and the ater is
not
> necessarly held as vapour but as fine droplets. Just at this point they
seem
> to have the ability to radically alter the combustion process, as I have a
> job believing that the whole effect is solely due to reduced inlet temps
and
> the consequent higher charge mass. Shall we synthesise our 'intuitive'
> experiences here? Simply injecting water into the inlet without thinking a
> lot about exactly simulating the actual parameters that produce this
effect
> might be too simple.
>
> Clive
> '88 Syncro Transporter
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Various" <AllStuff@HANS-WILLY.MYIP.ORG>
> To: <vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2002 7:58 PM
> Subject: Re: Running on Tap Water
>
>
> > Please let me preface my remarks by saying that I am skeptical to the
> point
> > of disbelief whenever someone claims to have invented a perpetual motion
> > machine or broken the laws of thermo dynamics...
> >
> > A few tens of years ago I remember reading (in NEWSWEEK or TIME?) about
> > someone working on a concept about injecting a small amount of water
> (finely
> > atomized) into the hot combustion chamber, just after ignition.  The
> theory,
> > as explained, was that the thermal expansion rate of the finely atomized
> > water was greater than the expansion rate of the combustion gases,
mostly
> > due to the transition from liquid water to gaseous water, and therfore
> gave
> > an extra kick to the piston for "free". Exeptional gas milage was the
> quest,
> > the headline giving hope of a 100 mpg future.
> >
> > The story continued about the Oil companies' concerns and wanting to buy
> him
> > out... The concept seemed to me somewhat possible, but I never heard
about
>
> > the concept since (maybe the conspiracy really does exist ;~)  ).
> >
> > I say that this seems possible, not knowing much about the thermal
> expansion
> > curves of water (steam) and gasoline combustion gases.
> >
> > I have noticed that most internal combustion engines  seem to run more
> > smoothly in very wet weather, assuming there are no wiring concerns and
> that
> > the engine is fully warmed up, but this could be another issue
altogether.
> >
> > So let's see where this one goes.
> >
> > Alias Fred aka Bleu Schtroumpf
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: David Brodbeck [mailto:gull@CYBERSPACE.ORG]
> > Sent: 17 juillet, 2002 10:04
> > To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
> > Subject: Re: Running on Tap Water
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 17 Jul 2002, Timothy Crooks wrote:
> >
> > > I am no chemist, nor physicist, nor do I claim to be, but it has been
> > > demonstrated to, when I was about 14, by a chemist, that water can be
> used
> > > to make a fire burn hotter.  He pointed out that there must be a fuel
> > > present, but when water as in the form of a steam, a true dry steam,
the
> > > caloric output is increased.
> >
> > Is it increased by more than the caloric input needed to make the steam?
> >
> >              _ _
> >   __ _ _   _| | |  | David M. Brodbeck (N8SRE)              Ypsilanti,
MI
> >  / _` | | | | | |
+-----------------------------------------------------
> > | (_| | |_| | | | @ cyberspace.org
> >  \__, |\__,_|_|_| "Geekdom is fantastic at being AGAINST something, and
> >  |___/             it's hopeless at being FOR something."
> >                                       -- Andrew Orlowski in The
Register.
> >