engine hydrolocking misconceptions

[Mogobs30th]

Re: engine hydrolocking misconceptions

theres no way the water will cool the combustion chamber down that much, remember, at 1000 rpm, the piston is going up and down approx 16 times a second, each second, thats 8 explosions per second, after the spark, the combustion temperature of the fuel is higher than 1800*F

So given that combustion temps are 1800 degrees, wouldn't it be safe (from what YOU say) to say that because the temps are that high, it would burn off ALL water accumulated in a CC, so long as the spark and fuel are allowed to detonate? I simply cannot see this being true. I can't see there being water in the CC, then instantly steam so long as the combustion is allowed to happen. I cannot see a non-combustible fluid at anywhere from 80* to 210* INSTANTLY steaming in the CC, seeing as the combustion only lasts roughly .12 seconds (give or take a few milliseconds).

So basically what you're saying is that NO MATTER THE VOLUME of the water in the CC, so long as the explosion from the combustion cycle is allowed to happen, the water will steam, NO MATTER THE AMOUNT. I find that difficult to believe.

You're also under the assumption that Im talking about an already warmed up engine. What about an engine that has sat overnight for example, with a nice dew in the air, on a decently cooler day? Much more prone to hydrolocking in these conditions.

if you could possibly get a combustion chamber so cold that water would condense inside i could see you becoming a millionaire, because all of the auto racing teams would LOVE to talk to you

When the **** did I say that? I never said ANYTHING about water condensing in a running engine. I said something about condensation on a cold engine, but that was it. But this also brings me to what SSMS was saying. You can notice that meth injection cools EGT's drastically, in his example, by almost 500*. The concept is the same if there is an ACCUMULATION (not condensing) of water in the engine, for example, from a busted water jacket.

[OneEightSeven]

Re: engine hydrolocking misconceptions

So basically what you're saying is that NO MATTER THE VOLUME of the water in the CC, so long as the explosion from the combustion cycle is allowed to happen, the water will steam, NO MATTER THE AMOUNT. I find that difficult to believe.

No one has been saying "no matter the amount"... You went from "a few drops" to "no matter the amount" in your argument. In fact cam98aro even says that a cup of water would be a large amount of water.

What about an engine that has sat overnight for example, with a nice dew in the air, on a decently cooler day? Much more prone to hydrolocking in these conditions.

No, because dew is not the same as a cup of water down the intake. It would not hydro-lock. This goes back to my initial comment about this subject:

If you just have a few drops or even a bit of water in a cylinder or multiple cylinders the air around it will still compress. The water just takes up room.

The dew/few drops of water will be gone before you know it. Have you ever ran the motor for even 20 seconds and then turned it off and touched the headers? Try it some time with gloves on, or without gloves if you want a more profound understanding of engine temperatures.

Basically we are going around in circles. A few drops of water won't hydro-lock the motor. If water starts to accumulate faster than it's burned such as having a large amount of water dumped down the intake, then we're no longer talking about a small amount of water. So the argument is no longer valid past that.

[Mogobs30th]

Re: engine hydrolocking misconceptions

Its the accumulation that no one has YET to acknowledge. Ive said it throughout this thread, yet no one has said anything about it. Im not talking about a cup being sucked in at once, Im talking about a steady accumulation, one that overwhelms the CC and can't burn it all off. Accumulation that can be as little as a few drops initially, and turn into a hydrolocked engine.

And when I said "no matter the amount" it is in response to Cam98aro. Its not part of my argument. Its not for you to answer, because it wasn't your comment I was asking about.

BTW, feeling the temp of the headers isn't going to give you an accurate temp of the CC's, seeing as the CC's are cooled and the headers are not. Instant or flash temps aren't as big of a worry as sustained temps, which are WELL BELOW the temps of a header when talking about the CC's. CC's are lubricated and cooled with oil and water respectively. Headers take all the heat and exhaust gases and give them a path out of the engine bay. Header temps can be double what the temp of an engine block is (block temps being anywhere around 400-600* depending on the material used to make the block, in comparison to 600-1200* for a header, again, depending on the material, type of engine, etc.). So the comparison is stupid.

[OneEightSeven]

Re: engine hydrolocking misconceptions

Its the accumulation that no one has YET to acknowledge.

I've acknowledged it in my last post at the bottom. Accumulation of a lot of water is not the same as a few drops... The accumulation either needs to be fast such as dumping a bunch of water in quickly or it can be slow such as water slowly collecting in a block sitting outside and NOT RUNNING. If a damp night and morning dew would hydro-lock a motor like you suggested earlier we would have people buying new motors every odd day...

And when I said "no matter the amount" it is in response to Cam98aro. Its not part of my argument. Its not for you to answer, because it wasn't your comment I was asking about.

I know it was for cam98aro, hence why I referred to him in my answer to you.

BTW, feeling the temp of the headers isn't going to give you an accurate temp of the CC's, seeing as the CC's are cooled and the headers are not.

Right I know it's not the same as the cylinder temp, but its a demonstration of the kind of heat being produced from the cylinders in a very short span of time. You can't seriously believe some moisture from damp mornings would stay in the motor day after day until a year later the motor hydro-locks.....

[cam98aro]

Re: engine hydrolocking misconceptions

Its the accumulation that no one has YET to acknowledge. Ive said it throughout this thread, yet no one has said anything about it. Im not talking about a cup being sucked in at once, Im talking about a steady accumulation, one that overwhelms the CC and can't burn it all off. Accumulation that can be as little as a few drops initially, and turn into a hydrolocked engine.

And when I said "no matter the amount" it is in response to Cam98aro. Its not part of my argument. Its not for you to answer, because it wasn't your comment I was asking about.

BTW, feeling the temp of the headers isn't going to give you an accurate temp of the CC's, seeing as the CC's are cooled and the headers are not. Instant or flash temps aren't as big of a worry as sustained temps, which are WELL BELOW the temps of a header when talking about the CC's. CC's are lubricated and cooled with oil and water respectively. Headers take all the heat and exhaust gases and give them a path out of the engine bay. Header temps can be double what the temp of an engine block is (block temps being anywhere around 400-600* depending on the material used to make the block, in comparison to 600-1200* for a header, again, depending on the material, type of engine, etc.). So the comparison is stupid.

the engine will stall and quit running in that situation before it will hydrolock

when this much fluid builds up it will probably kill the spark and shut the engine down, especially since water is non combustible.

[OneEightSeven]

Re: engine hydrolocking misconceptions

From Wikipedia on Hydrolock:

---
If liquid is introduced at a volume greater than the volume of the combustion chamber at its minimum (top of the piston's stroke), the piston cannot complete its travel. Either the engine must stop rotating or a mechanical failure will occur.
---

So yes you need a great deal of water so that the piston can't reach TDC.

[Mogobs30th]

Re: engine hydrolocking misconceptions

Right I know it's not the same as the cylinder temp, but its a demonstration of the kind of heat being produced from the cylinders in a very short span of time. You can't seriously believe some moisture from damp mornings would stay in the motor day after day until a year later the motor hydro-locks.....

Yes, I do believe that. I hydrolocked my first car because of this. 1980 Dodge Aspen with a 225 c.i. slant 6 engine. Shattered the 3rd piston because of it. The car sat for almost a year, and day after day the water accumulated in the engine. I was only 16 at the time, didn't have the means of having insurance on it, so it had sat till I could get insurance on it. Started it up, and BLAMO went the piston. Didn't do it instantly, did it after about 5 seconds of running the car on a cool March day. The condensation, due to the intake design, accumulated in the engine. When I started it, there was enough water to prevent it from all being burned off at once. Couple that with a cracked head leaking water, didn't run very long at all. I drained the oil, never seen any large amount of water, certainly not a cups worth. The mechanic I had taken the car to told me it had hydrolocked, and that although it doesn't happen often, its possible for a car that has sat for some time with mechanical issues to hydrolock. I got my Buick after this car. The Buick also sat for years, but I was smart enough this time to remove the spark plugs before I tried to start it. Let the oil circulate, clear out the CC's if there was accumulated water.

Is it going to happen everytime a car sits, or a car has a hairline crack or whatever leaking fluid into the engine, or from condensation, no, and I never said that. But the possibility is there, THATS what I have been trying to say.

the engine will stall and quit running in that situation before it will hydrolock

That is only if its not limited to ONE CC. If the leakage into the CC is limited to just the one CC, the others will still fire or even pre-detonate, up until you have mechanical damage.

Im done with this thread. I seriously haven't seen such a lack of attention than I have seen here. I explained certain scenarios, and no one has read them.

[OneEightSeven]

Re: engine hydrolocking misconceptions

Well that means over a year it collected enough water that it couldn't make it to TDC and sadly the motor was done for. This also means that you did not have a small amount of water in the cylinder. As I mentioned in my post earlier:

The accumulation either needs to be fast such as dumping a bunch of water in quickly or it can be slow such as water slowly collecting in a block sitting outside and NOT RUNNING. If a damp night and morning dew would hydro-lock a motor like you suggested earlier we would have people buying new motors every odd day...

This means that yes a NON RUNNING vehicle could have this problem upon start-up after long term outdoor storage. This is what you personally experienced. You had a large amount of water stored over time with the motor never running during the storage of that vehicle. At best what you experienced is a very low risk to those that have project cars they rarely drive. It's not a risk to anyone who drives their car once in a while or stores their car indoors.

This whole topic started because it was stated that a few drops of water could hydro-lock a motor. It has now went to the point that we're talking about small drops of water accumulating until they fill the cylinders over a year of outdoor storage. This is barely related to the topic at hand since a few drops that turned into a lot of water is no longer a few drops, it's a lot of water.

[ssms5411]

Re: engine hydrolocking misconceptions

I have gotten lost in this post , will a few drops of water in a hot CC hydolock a engine highly doubtfull, since people run methanol or distilled water on N/A cars. Also mine being soaked in antifrezze overnight and still fired up. What you have to watch for is the rings going bad and loosening compression in the case of small amounts sitting in the CC's.

[Mogobs30th]

Re: engine hydrolocking misconceptions

Well that means over a year it collected enough water that it couldn't make it to TDC and sadly the motor was done for.

You had a large amount of water stored over time with the motor never running during the storage of that vehicle

This is what I said already...

Didn't do it instantly, did it after about 5 seconds of running the car on a cool March day.

I drained the oil, never seen any large amount of water, certainly not a cups worth.

If I had to guess on the amount of water, it was probably around a tablespoon and a half.

This whole topic started because it was stated that a few drops of water could hydro-lock a motor.

No, this whole topic was started as an offshoot of a thread about people wanting to pour water down their intake to "steam clean" the carbon in their intakes. You have failed to read this thread in its entirety from the beginning.

[cam98aro]

Re: engine hydrolocking misconceptions

So given that combustion temps are 1800 degrees, wouldn't it be safe (from what YOU say) to say that because the temps are that high, it would burn off ALL water accumulated in a CC, so long as the spark and fuel are allowed to detonate? I simply cannot see this being true. I can't see there being water in the CC, then instantly steam so long as the combustion is allowed to happen. I cannot see a non-combustible fluid at anywhere from 80* to 210* INSTANTLY steaming in the CC, seeing as the combustion only lasts roughly .12 seconds (give or take a few milliseconds).

So basically what you're saying is that NO MATTER THE VOLUME of the water in the CC, so long as the explosion from the combustion cycle is allowed to happen, the water will steam, NO MATTER THE AMOUNT. I find that difficult to believe.

You're also under the assumption that Im talking about an already warmed up engine. What about an engine that has sat overnight for example, with a nice dew in the air, on a decently cooler day? Much more prone to hydrolocking in these conditions.



When the **** did I say that? I never said ANYTHING about water condensing in a running engine. I said something about condensation on a cold engine, but that was it. But this also brings me to what SSMS was saying. You can notice that meth injection cools EGT's drastically, in his example, by almost 500*. The concept is the same if there is an ACCUMULATION (not condensing) of water in the engine, for example, from a busted water jacket.

the combustion process is happening 8 times per second at 1000 rpm, if the water didnt burn off the first time, it will the next, or the next.

it doesnt matter how hot the engine itself is, the piston/combustion area will already be hot after the engine running for only seconds.. like previously mentioned, feel a header after an engine is running for 5 seconds, it is already pretty warm.

if an engine is sitting over night, and an accumulation of water gets into the chamber, its probably going to either knock really bad due to detonation, or the starter wont be able to turn it over "hydrolocking" the engine.

i may have been a bit misleading by my post, but i was saying if you could get the combustion chamber so cold that the water wont evaporate due to the temperatures, but build up, many people would love to talk to you.

if there was an engine that had a busted water jacket, i think there would be an internal failure before it would actually hydrolock

[cam98aro]

Re: engine hydrolocking misconceptions

Yes, I do believe that. I hydrolocked my first car because of this. 1980 Dodge Aspen with a 225 c.i. slant 6 engine. Shattered the 3rd piston because of it. The car sat for almost a year, and day after day the water accumulated in the engine. I was only 16 at the time, didn't have the means of having insurance on it, so it had sat till I could get insurance on it. Started it up, and BLAMO went the piston. Didn't do it instantly, did it after about 5 seconds of running the car on a cool March day. The condensation, due to the intake design, accumulated in the engine. When I started it, there was enough water to prevent it from all being burned off at once. Couple that with a cracked head leaking water, didn't run very long at all. I drained the oil, never seen any large amount of water, certainly not a cups worth. The mechanic I had taken the car to told me it had hydrolocked, and that although it doesn't happen often, its possible for a car that has sat for some time with mechanical issues to hydrolock. I got my Buick after this car. The Buick also sat for years, but I was smart enough this time to remove the spark plugs before I tried to start it. Let the oil circulate, clear out the CC's if there was accumulated water.

Is it going to happen everytime a car sits, or a car has a hairline crack or whatever leaking fluid into the engine, or from condensation, no, and I never said that. But the possibility is there, THATS what I have been trying to say.



That is only if its not limited to ONE CC. If the leakage into the CC is limited to just the one CC, the others will still fire or even pre-detonate, up until you have mechanical damage.

Im done with this thread. I seriously haven't seen such a lack of attention than I have seen here. I explained certain scenarios, and no one has read them.

i dont think anyone is fighting you that an engine sitting for months building up water wont hydrolock, i have said it from the beginning that it probably would hydrolock from the starter, or run very rough and cause detonation and destroying the piston.

if you want my opinion, i would say that your mechanic was wrong and it did NOT hydrolock, but the engine detonated so badly that it cracked the piston. I say this, because is it was indeed a true hydrolock, the starter would not have been able to turn the engine over to even get it started. the piston should be strong enough to withstand the force of a hydrolock, which is usually why the rods will bend, then cause engine failure

think about it for a second, hydrolocking means the engine locks up from a non compressible substance preventing it from turning, if the piston breaks the engine doesnt lock up

No, this whole topic was started as an offshoot of a thread about people wanting to pour water down their intake to "steam clean" the carbon in their intakes. You have failed to read this thread in its entirety from the beginning.

i started the thread because it hit a nerve when people basically said that pouring water into the engine can and WILL cause it to lock up, and the thread was locked because it was considered bad advise, when in reality it isnt bad advise at all. Yes, it is dangerous, but in all seriousness, there is almost as much chance of hydrolocking with seafoam as there is water.

the ONLY reason seafoam works is BECAUSE it "steam cleans" the piston the same exact way water does. If it worked any other way, why dont people just mix it with their gas?

[97rs4life]

Re: engine hydrolocking misconceptions

no it is bad advice if it isn't done correctly. We have a lot of 16yr old noobs who barely have changed their oil coming on here reading up on things and trying things themselves. So when they come across a post saying to pour water into their engine to steam clean it and they go out and do just that without understanding how little it needs, then hydrolock their engine because of what they read on the internet, it is bad advice.

Sure it can be done, and people do it. However people that do it understand their engine and how it runs and functions. Each car is different and will only be able to handle certain amounts of water, not all cars are the same. Especially when people start modding the engine and changing compression ratios and internal parts they can't go by what others have done with the engine.

So as protection of the noobs that don't know any better, broad non-descriptive threads get closed as we all hate to see blown engines due to owner stupidity.

YES, you can steam clean an engine with water....not denying that, just not for the beginner just getting into cars.



For the future, if anyone is going to start a thread about doing something on a car that isn't seen to often, get in depth, show pictures, back with hard evidence, and teach the new modders that visit the site. It will help the site in a whole and maybe get out of the "lounge only" mentality.