"Since the 1960s, all cars have been manufactured with alcohol resistant hoses, connections, O-rings, seals, and plastics. This was necessary because of the popular use of alcohol base gas line antifreeze additives, and the use of ethanol mixes in automotive fuel."

If anyone has any more info please chime in. I know there is a thread on here about this but it has jack squat for information and a lot of it is useless. For those of you that don't know E85 is pretty cheap and its getting a lot more common at all the gas stations and burns at about 104 octane.




Post Title: Re: E85 Interesting finds and more research done (S13FX)
Posted by: onosqv at 3:30 PM 12/5/2006

Eventually, yes, we have to figure out a better way than just regular gasoline... however, from the research I did w/ e55 (just a different mix percentage) back in my research project in college, you have to look beyond the consumer...

Yes, e85/55/whatever % you want, will emit less greenhouse gasses & such on the consumer side; even then, it is hard to figure out the balance because it requires more eXX to produce the same amt of energy as gas... However, guess what fuel is used to process grain... you guessed it, fossil fuels; not just a little bit of fossil fuel, but A LOT. IIRC, all modern grain processing uses fossil fuels.

The problem with most alternative fuels now is that they are processed using fossil fuels; many of which require more fossil fuel to produce relative to power output, than if we just ran fossil fuels ourselves.

That's just one "small" problem with it.

Basically:
eXX - cheaper? no. more efficient vs gas? no. eliminates need for fossil fuels? no (at least not in its current state).

Other minor details for practicality on a consumer level:

Some e85 presentation from: http://www.nmma.org/

basic negatives:
Negative technical dimensions
* Driving ability of ethanol is lower.
- Lower per litre energy value (EV);
- Takes more to drive the same distance;
- Consumers have to fill their cars more often;
- And they have to pay more for ethanol fuel.

Negative technical dimensions (cont.)
* Ethanol can absorb water & if water enters the fuel tank
* It dilutes ethanol, reducing its value as a fuel;
* It causes problems with corrosion and phase separation in the gasoline mixture.
* Ethanol dissolves almost everything.
* It absorbs and carries dirt inside the fuel lines and fuel tank, thus contaminanting the car engine system.
* Ethanol is rich in octane content.
* It is highly flammable and explosive compared to gasoline.
* It requires more attention to handle in daily life.




Post Title: Re: E85 Interesting finds and more research done (brokeAs240sx)
Posted by: crzycav86 at 8:41 AM 12/6/2006

I also wrote a paper this summer on how much ethanol fuel sucks. I brought up the points in the previous post. However, I was writing it from a consumer perspective.

Performance-wise, E85 might have more potential. Particle per particle, Gasoline does have higher BTU's(heat energy) versus ethanol. (117,000 vs 76,000 per gallon). However, the stoichometric ratio of ethanol is 9:1 versus gasoline's 14.7:1. This is bad for fuel economy, but good for performance because you can use more ethanol per cycle to make up for its fewer BTU's.

If ethanol and gasoline particle densities were the same, you would be able to use stoich and energy ratios to directly compare the amount of energy per engine cycle. I don't want to look that stuff up, but for arguments sake, lets say they are the same.

So you would have...

76,000/9 = 8444
117000/14.7 = 7959

I'm not sure what the units on those two bad boys are, but I know that it's an effective comparison between the energy released per engine cycle. As you can see, this comparison shows that ethanol actually has a slight performance advantage. Considering the fact that I assumed they had the same density, this number is probably wrong, but it's probably pretty close.

So since the BTU argument isn't a big deal anymore, lets look into the fact that E85 does in fact have a higher octane rating. A quick google search shows results ranging from 100-110, which is significantly higher than gasoline. This means you can run more timing more boost, and make more power.

Switching to E85 might be difficult, but you will probably like the new performance potential.



Post Title: Re: E85 Interesting finds and more research done (S13FX)
Posted by: nelson8708 at 8:41 AM 12/6/2006

Yes it takes more fuel to get that power and your mpg will decrease a little but he is paying 1.70 a gallon. So in the end he is still saving a little money when comparing to running gas at 2.40 a gallon.



Post Title: Re: E85 Interesting finds and more research done (nelson8708)
Posted by: S13FX at 8:51 AM 12/6/2006

Something to keep in mind for a next engine rebuild.



Post Title: Re: E85 Interesting finds and more research done (S13FX)
Posted by: WDRacing at 10:47 AM 12/6/2006

Personally, I'm into propane and alky, but thats just me.

WD



Post Title: Re: E85 Interesting finds and more research done (WDRacing)
Posted by: PapaSmurf2k3 at 8:50 AM 12/7/2006

Also Im the type of person when I see something new I right away try to think of a DIY way to make it work for me where as other just preffere to use what's already there which isnt a bad thing too.

If I didnt get so damned baked all the time a lot of the **** I created and build some of it is not even car realted, I bet I would be able to sell it for a good profit but oh well..



Post Title: Re: E85 Interesting finds and more research done (PapaSmurf2k3)
Posted by: onosqv at 10:53 AM 12/7/2006

Quote, originally posted by PapaSmurf2k3 »

I don't exactly understand why people say it takes more energy to produce the ethanol than the ammount of energy that the ethanol yields. (takes more fossil fuel to make it). How is that even possible... and if it were correct, then why the hell is ethanol so damn cheap? p.s. this isnt a jab at anyone here, I've heard this other places too... I really want to know

Well, here's one overview... not the most scientific source, persay, but take it as you will:

Ethanol Fuel Energy Balance - Wikipedia

Has references at the bottom that can lead you to more papers/articles if you are interested enough. There is plenty of information out there (online & otherwise), you just have to seek it out.



Post Title: Re: E85 Interesting finds and more research done (brokeAs240sx)
Posted by: S13FX at 11:03 AM 12/7/2006

You my friend are 100% correct, I just wanted to see if anyone attempted something like this here cause regardless sooner or later I will. And if anyone has, I wanted to see what problems they ran into to. Either way I'm going to start out simple and maybe in the next year or so Il have something more to work with .



Post Title: Re: E85 Interesting finds and more research done (S13FX)
Posted by: FRSport at 11:15 AM 12/7/2006

Quote, originally posted by S13FX »

You my friend are 100% correct, I just wanted to see if anyone attempted something like this here cause regardless sooner or later I will. And if anyone has, I wanted to see what problems they ran into to. Either way I'm going to start out simple and maybe in the next year or so Il have something more to work with .

Seriously doubt most of us have done anything productive w/ e85, etc. Closest we have done so far is alcohol injection . Look how long it took us to turbo our KA's, hee hee.

If you want a better lead tho, check out the VW forums. I have a buddy w/ a VW and he's always mentioning the VW guys are trying to run all sorts of **** & building their own Bio-Diesel, etc equipment.



Post Title: Re: E85 Interesting finds and more research done (FRSport)
Posted by: PapaSmurf2k3 at 12:45 PM 12/7/2006

yeah man Im in Germany right now and they have so much crazy stuff going on here. I was watching the deutsch version of pimp my ride or something, except it had nothing to do with MTV or the actual pimp my ride, but they took an old chevy blazer (Uber rare here) and "gepimped" it. They installed this huge *** tank thing that holds something that they call "autogas" and its this type of air that boost fuel economy when tied into the intake system. It might have been natural gas or something... not gonna lie there was a little lost in the translation, but it was Way cheaper than petroleum or deisel.



Post Title:
Posted by: S13FX at 1:09 PM 12/7/2006

Vishnu made an E85 Evo, which made 30hp more than their regular Evo. IIRC they only needed bigger injectors and a fuel pump(with a tune of course). Supposedly it has racegas potential at a pump gas price. I'd like it in my Evo and will definetly try it when it comes around. 1000cc injectors, walbro, tune, MORE POWER!



Post Title:
Posted by: Chezedik at 10:49 PM 12/9/2006

BTW, I was impressed by Broke ***' point, it was spot on. I did a lot of fuels studies for a course of mine. Also, I did a write up in the articles section on the matter, it can help explain Vapor Pressure for you. It's how I got the custom title.



Post Title: Re: (Chezedik)
Posted by: Swedish Mike at 2:02 AM 12/10/2006

E85 is great and we save some tree´s too.



Post Title:
Posted by: S13FX at 1:26 PM 12/10/2006

But like I said E85 is the future performance fuel you heard it here first .



Post Title: Re: (S13FX)
Posted by: Swedish Mike at 1:33 PM 12/10/2006

Old news, both rally cars and 1000 hp drag cars run E85 over here. Cheapest race fuel ever!



Post Title:
Posted by: S13FX at 4:00 PM 12/10/2006

Just for the record, that's not too uncommon. Roots blowers don't have the cylinder pressures you find with centrifugal chargers and turbos. The compression happens internally, so the high CR isn't such an issue. Lots of Hondas have been running 10:1 CR and roots blowers (Jackson Racing) for many years.



Post Title: Re: (KATwo40)
Posted by: WDRacing at 9:03 PM 12/10/2006

I hear your words, but I know what you really mean.

I guess I should add my $.02 on the actual thread subject matter.

E85...very interesting points of view in this thread.

On the one hand, I totally understand the issue of economy. You'll have to stop about twice as often for refueling on a road trip. Also, as far as cost, I think it's about a wash. If you stop twice as often, but it's half the cost of gasoline, guess what...same overall cost.

Additionally, the cost of setup is a major concern. Everyone seems to forget a small detail here. Sure, you'll need some fuel plumbing and supply components, but what about tuning? You're going to not only need a new tune for the E85, but also a way to toggle between E85 and pump gas maps.

What if you're driving across the state and they don't have E85 where you're going? Now you have mixed fuel. Which map will you use, depending on your new mixture?

On the other hand, from a performance standpoint, I'm totally for it. If E85 was super common across the country (only 2-3 stations in TN that sell it!), I'd convert right now. Sure, the initial setup might be a pain and I'd have to refuel more often, but there's that street legal, daily driven 104 octane. Mmmmmm. I love it.

But, as it stands, E85 is not readily available to all, so I'm out. However, do not interpret that as claiming it's no good or illogical to ever consider. I'm all for alternative fueling. We'd better get on the ball and do something soon, or we'll all be walking from fuel shortage, racing freewheeling gocarts down hill, screaming at each other, "I'm tha drivah!"



Post Title:
Posted by: WDRacing at 10:26 PM 12/10/2006

Wanna drive across the country, well even the safc has two maps you can use.

E85 means lots of boost and no need to retard timing, or A TON of boost and some retard once you surpass say 15 lbs of boost. Just thinking about this makes me horny.

WD



Post Title: Re: (WDRacing)
Posted by: nelson8708 at 5:44 AM 12/11/2006

Post Title:
Posted by: S13FX at 7:11 AM 12/11/2006

lol. I'd like to see someone try to get their 240sx running right on E85 with just an safc.



Post Title: Re: (crzycav86)
Posted by: crzycav86 at 9:30 AM 12/11/2006

One other thing I was wondering was about the stock narrowband oxygen sensor. The stock one reads stoich as 14.7:1, but ethanol is somewhere around 9:1, so is there a narrowband sensor that can read E85? If you do in fact need a separate "e85 oxygen sensor", when switching between fill-ups from e85 to regular gas, you will not only have to switch between tunes, but you will also have to switch between oxygen sensors.

if the stock sensor will respond correctly to e85, then you can disregard this post.



Post Title: Re: (crzycav86)
Posted by: WDRacing at 9:32 AM 12/11/2006

WD



Post Title: Re: (WDRacing)
Posted by: crzycav86 at 9:36 AM 12/11/2006

running on e85 would be difficult to tune because it isn't injected just at WOT or under boost. you have to make it run right under all rpm's and loads, which the safc can't really do. i love safc and i have it on my kat. it's really easy to use, but it is very limited in what it can do.



Post Title:
Posted by: WDRacing at 9:40 AM 12/11/2006

By making reference to the meth/alky injection, I was talking about how one has to know the different lamda numbers for any given fuel to be at stoich. I was running a variable spray kit on my Skyline and I'd actually remove pump gas on boost and increase methonal. Tuning that way gets tricky, because you use the lamda readings not the AFR.

WD



Post Title: Re: (WDRacing)
Posted by: crzycav86 at 10:24 AM 12/11/2006

I think you have that backwards, Roots blowers develop boost when air backs up in the intake, turbos and centrifugals develop it internally when it throws air from the center to the outside.

EDIT: The reason the Hondas can do that is because the Jackson kits use 5 psi-7psi, and Honda heads are all clover leafed for better detonation resistance. This is why Hondas can run such high compression on such low octane fuel.

Modified by Chezedik at 9:26 PM 12/11/2006



Post Title:
Posted by: KATwo40 at 7:32 PM 12/11/2006

that's part of why they're so inefficient. it takes a lot more work to move all of the flowing air into the engine individually(roots method) rather than compress it first and move it as a bundle(centrifugal method).



Post Title:
Posted by: KATwo40 at 8:27 PM 12/11/2006

Ooops!



Post Title:
Posted by: WDRacing at 9:16 PM 12/11/2006

The Canadians are supposed to be developing a process that will make a special kind of mold do the work on brush grass and trash. This will help bring down the cost.

After all, let's not forget that while we all sit here and talk about the stuff, the Gov't is putting lots of your tax dollars where their mouths are. For instance, a gallon of pure ethanol costs about $7.00 to produce (which is one reason they mix it, the other is it's very low Vapor Pressure), so the reason it is so 'cheap' is because we are subsidizing the hell out of it. Most of this is because it is being made from Corn, the rest is because the process is time consuming, and somewhat dangerous.

So why aren't we the ones looking for the better process, instead of the Canadians? Because the people spearheading this debate are good ol' boys - the American Corn Farmer.

Would you rather be a slave to an Arab or a Redneck?



Post Title: Re: (Chezedik)
Posted by: WDRacing at 9:09 AM 12/12/2006

The reason Ethonal is so far behind is because oil makes people rich. I'm not talking about the rich you and I think of. I'm talking rich enough to effect an entire nations leadership.

Billions upon billions covered in billions is the only reason the oil industry is still the main source of fuel. As much as anyone wants to argue why we're in the middle east, the fact is because of the oil..period dot. You know why we don't assist all the other nations in crisis, like Africa...hello, no oil.

I'm all for E85 and getting the good ole rednecks back in charge of our country. E85 FTW baby....better get on board now fella's.

WD



Post Title:
Posted by: Chezedik at 9:15 AM 12/12/2006

To prove my point, how many of you were talking about Ethanol before gas hit $3.00 per gallon. It is simple economics, Ethanol isn't a good deal until Gasoline becomes a worse deal.

EDIT: Also, I think you know as well as I, WD, that the oil companies are going to be the ones selling us this stuff. So long story short, we will still be supporting the same US-sellout Fat Cats we have been. The difference will be that the decision not to sell out our country will not be 'economically sound'.



Post Title: Re: (Chezedik)
Posted by: WDRacing at 9:22 AM 12/12/2006

E85 FTW...



Post Title: Re: (Chezedik)
Posted by: Swedish Mike at 9:28 AM 12/12/2006

They tested this a lot before they launched the first ethanol cars here.

There´s only two bad things with E85 in my opinion, thirsty cars and hard to start at winter.
They solved the last thing with heated fuel lines in the Volvo´s.

What´s the normal E85 price in USA? Hard to find gas stations?



Post Title: Re: (Chezedik)
Posted by: S13FX at 10:04 AM 12/12/2006

In any case my biggest reason why I want to use E85 is because of performance. We all know that if we can use something in our turbo setup that's burns a lot cooler and at a much higher octane we are drastically improving our performance and yet reducing the chance of killing our engines. There will be An E85 240, and it will kick *** I don't care what anyone's point of view is anymore, once you bring Haj into this it got personal.



Post Title:
Posted by: Chezedik at 10:11 AM 12/12/2006

The fuel lines are only heated the last meter (3 feet?) and heat up in seconds when you put in the key. Runs on battery voltage and got a sensor, never turns on during summer or hot engine.

Repair costs? The car is a pure E85 car. Many stations here, no problem to find fuel.



Post Title: Re: (Swedish Mike)
Posted by: WDRacing at 10:48 AM 12/12/2006

As far as runnign E100 or E85, the part that fails the most often and the quickest is the pump. For obvious reasons...so I have twin MSD pumps that are external and alcohol ready. I use these pumps with my DIY Alcohol injection all the time.

I'd like to focus this thread on what exactly its going to take to switch over a 95 240SX to run completely on E85. I have two stations right here in Tucson. I'm sourcing a new motor right now, I'm rebuilding an exhaust manifold, rebuilding my turbo and welding 4 injector bungs onto my intake manifold.

This is going to happen, I think it will be a great article to have documented for Nico as well as aa place to start for everyone in KAT to start making good power with just a SAFCII, no timing change needed.

Lets keep this on target and keep the posts literate and concise. Link your resources, and provide as much info as possible. I want to have the first E85 converted 240 to come from Nico...stateside anyway.

Swedish Mike, welcome to KAT!!! I love having input from Europe

WD




Post Title: Re: (WDRacing)
Posted by: WDRacing at 11:06 AM 12/12/2006

More to come...



Post Title: Re: (WDRacing)
Posted by: Swedish Mike at 11:07 AM 12/12/2006

Hi!

I can write a list of things I do when I convert from gas to E85.

* Bigger injectors or adjustable FPR, injectors are the better option.
* Remove/replace aluminum parts from the inside of the tank. (Normally nothing)
* Change fuel filter before and a few miles after the conversion. E85 will clean your tank and lines.

If you are extra careful and got a newer car, make a custom ECU remap on a dyno and check AFR. 11:1 is optimal and 8 to 9:1 is safe on a turbo car.

On my daily drivers (N/A´s) I only swap injectors and filters, no problems yet.
Pretty sure some cars might run into fuel pump problems but not Volvo or Nissan (so far...).

/Mike




Post Title:
Posted by: WDRacing at 11:20 AM 12/12/2006

I'll also be running Marvel Mystery Oil in my gas tank. I used to used this when I ran methonal. It keeps all of your parts from becoming correoded. So the pumps will last and the lines should be good to go.

I'm opting for 8 42lb injectors for fuel supply. I have 4 installed already and I'm in the process of adding an additional 4 to make up for the additional 30% required. That way I have some room to crank up the boost.

My personal goal is over 300WHP with 10 psi or less.

WD



Post Title: Re: (WDRacing)
Posted by: PapaSmurf2k3 at 11:33 AM 12/12/2006

E85 FTW baby



Post Title: Re: (PapaSmurf2k3)
Posted by: Swedish Mike at 11:42 AM 12/12/2006

Nothing will get damaged, lower EGT and all. No problem with ODB.

I actually took a well tuned Cosworth to smog inspection a few years ago, only an empty cat cover on a 3" exhaust system. Passed with better numbers than stock!



Post Title: Re: (Swedish Mike)
Posted by: S13FX at 12:13 PM 12/12/2006

True. And E85 get thick if you cool it down a lot, hard to get good injector spray pattern.

But this is nothing you have to worry about at summer or warm winters, only here where the polar bears rule.



Post Title:
Posted by: WDRacing at 12:46 PM 12/12/2006

I am not saying it is not viable. Also, with the right advances, it could be where we go (afterall, we lost power/mileage at first with injection too), but we are just not there yet. The people who make the advances will be those who have done so for years - the oil companies. And they are going to do so on their schedule, not ours.

I however, am excited to see the day when I can pull into an E85 station, but that is not happening tommorrow.

Modified by Chezedik at 1:06 PM 12/14/2006



Post Title: Re: (Chezedik)
Posted by: Swedish Mike at 3:05 PM 12/12/2006

Where do you guys buy E85? Not gas stations?

Price per gallon?



Post Title: Re: (Chezedik)
Posted by: WDRacing at 5:30 PM 12/12/2006

We get our E85 right from the gas station Mike. I think its ranging from $2.50 to $3.00 a gallon. Which is cheap in comparison to 105 Octane race gas.

I'm getting stoked about this project.

WD



Post Title:
Posted by: Chezedik at 9:33 PM 12/12/2006

anyway, I have never seen an E85 pump on the east coast, I think right now its mostly a mid-west type thing.



Post Title:
Posted by: Chris@AMS at 9:02 AM 12/13/2006

Really nice to read about E85 at a US forum, I thought we were the only fans.



Post Title: Re: (Swedish Mike)
Posted by: S13FX at 10:17 AM 12/13/2006

The big hp guys use Mallory or MSD external pumps and the 500 hp guys normally use dual internal Bosch 040 or external 044 pumps.




Post Title:
Posted by: S13FX at 10:44 AM 12/13/2006

Right on man this is going to be very interesting



Post Title: Re: (WDRacing)
Posted by: Chezedik at 11:59 AM 12/13/2006

Quote, originally posted by WDRacing »

I am not retarded, just realistic. I love the idea of the stuff, and to be honest, if I could find E55 then I would run it, maybe even E85. But the fact that I cannot find it makes this whole conversation theoretical. Also, it would have to be economic. Here is Pitt, we have E15, and I run it all of the time. Why? Because 89 octance is cheaper than 87 octane. Also, since it is such a low concentration of Ethanol it IMPROVES mileage on cars that run rich.

I am just saying that an E85 future looks great, but it isn't in the US just yet. I find the arguement slightly less useless then the discussions over Hydrogen (which is 50-100 years out, at best). Basically, people have been talking about using Ethanol since the first Oil Chrisis, but when the price of gas went down/availability went up, support all but dried up. As we all know, history repeats itself.

That time Arabs were to blame, and this time they may not be, but the result will be the same, we are talking about something that is another 10-15 years out, if we are lucky.

You and I (and everyone else in here) knows this will happen, the question is when. The answer to that question is when the $G > or = $E * .8. That is, when the price of gasoline is greater than or equal to the price of Ethanol minus the expected economy loss of 20%. It will not happen a day sooner. This may be through improvements in process, or more likely, when the cost of fuel becomes unreasonable. Why would the oil companies or anyone else for that matter spend money researching improvements in Ethanol production when Gasoline is cheaper.

Humans are not a group of people to be proactive, as a rule. I do not know what would be different about this situation, unless either the price of Gasoline becomes an issue, or the EPA's emissions regs become so stringent that it can no longer be done without Alcohol.

The reason you all even know about this (with the exception of Swedish Mike) is because the media has been making a big deal of it, in a rather uniformed way. The reason you see it in Cali is because of new regs requiring the removal of MTBE from fuel, and the need for a new 'oxygen adder'.

WD, I understand that you are new to the topic, but try to be more realistic. It is good that people are getting on board, but it will take more than that. If this is something you are TRULY ready for, then put your money where your mouth is. Buy more expensive fuel ($.75 to the gallon more in most places with a 20% decrease in mileage, remind you), and/or donate money to research more cost effective ways to produce it. Otherwise, everyone here is just blowing smoke.

If you still think my point retarded, feel free to Hasselhoff me.



Post Title: Re: (Chezedik)
Posted by: S13FX at 1:47 PM 12/13/2006

So E85 is not that new and I think its going to make a big hit a lot sooner then anyone thinks. And when it hits, well Il be ready for it.

Oh and the compatiblity issues with E85 of everyone saying how corosive it is and this and that thats all ****in BS. Unless your car stands around for a long time with that **** in the lines then yes you will be in trouble but if you let it evap you are good to go and when I mean long time I mean like a year at a time. Next time you go to a liquer store get some everclear, get a rubber hose pour it in there let it stand for 2 weeks and tell me what happend. Also to make a car E85 compatible is a LOOOT easier then everyone thinks.

Sorry to say well Im not, but E85 is here and it's here to stay, I dont know where you are from but here every one knows about it and talks about.




Post Title: Re: (Chezedik)
Posted by: WDRacing at 3:28 PM 12/13/2006

I'm not entirely new to Ethonal, granted my knowledge is mostly related to running eother a full methonal system or a methonal injection. But they are very similar.

My main goal with the ethonal is only to run it in my car and make alot of power doing so. I could really care less if the country end ups going with. Would it be nice, hell yes it would, but I'm not holding my breath.

I love the fact that I can run 105 octane fuel in my car for a fairly cheap price compared to 105 octane race fuel. Hell, If I run a pump gas combo, it won't corrode anything, it will start fine, I won't have to swap anything and I'll still have like 98-99 octane. For every octane point you increase, you can raise your boost about 1 psi. I know thats not alot, but it could end up being 50WHP or so...

Thats quite a bit in the grand scheme of things.

WD



Post Title: Re: (WDRacing)
Posted by: PapaSmurf2k3 at 4:55 PM 12/13/2006

well yeah, nothing happens over night. i'm assuming everyone interested in this project wants it to run for over a year though.

what do you mean "let it evap"? if you have ethanol in the lines, it will corrode. it's not like the gas magically leaves the lines when you turn the car off.

replacing fuel lines isn't really difficult either, so it's not a big deal, but it's still something that needs to be done.



Post Title:
Posted by: Chezedik at 7:21 PM 12/13/2006

The point I was making is that I spent some serious time studying this, and so I think it is worth considering my point of view.

There are many nations using it, and for various reasons. I am just saying, this is how the free market will work. It will only get used when it is economically feasible or ecologically necessary. This is the reality of the American Free Market Economy, sorry.

Also, you will LOSE HP when using it. This is at least initially, like my point of EFI, eventually technology will provide us with solutions that will fix this. Example 1988 Honda Civic SI HP = 96chp, 2007 Honda Civic SI HP = 197chp. Technology made EFI the obvious choice, but at first there was a serious loss of power.

Eventually, we will find E85 to be a better solution, but there are many factors, not just because it is the right thing to do. Which we all know that it is.

Also, I feel like the octane argument is flawed because that is not the only key characteristic of fuels. One of the most important to us is that of power content (AKA BTU's). As Cav or Two40 (one of you guys) pointed out, ethanol has 76K BTU per lb, and gasoline is about 115K depending on the contents (which hydrocarbons). Also, given that a gallon of gas is 5.8-6.5lbs (depending on the level of cycloparrifins C6 or higher - typically a product of it's octane level) vs. 6.5lbs for ethanol.

This means that a gallon of ethanol can yield 6.5 * 76000 = 494000/2542.5 (constant for converting BTU's/hr to HP) = 194.3HP
5.8 * 115000 = 667000/2542.5 = 262.34HP. This is a power loss of about 26%.

So you have to run about 2.276 lbs more mass to make ethanol make the same power (about 35% more fuel). Compound that with the fact that the stoich ratio is 9:1 means that you may be running more fuel just to make stoich, running rich may work similarly to fuel, where an overly rich mixture causes a further power loss.

More to come.

It will happen, but it will be a series of baby steps not the performance gain you were looking for.

If you want higher octane, the most economical answer is to get Xylene or Toulene from the paint store, and mix it with your fuel. It has an AKI (anti-knock index) of 107 or so. This means something in the 120+ octane range. Mixed with fuel, it can create a great increase in octane, for only $10 or so a gallon. Also, since it has a higher specific gravity, you can lean out further to achieve a stoich ratio. There is your performance answer.

What you need to ask yourself, is with a BTU content of about 135K per lbs in Diesel, why isn't it your performance choice?



Post Title: Re: (Chezedik)
Posted by: PapaSmurf2k3 at 7:50 PM 12/13/2006

I think this argument is a little misleading or incorrect altogether.

Your argument seems to imply that ethanol will make less because it has lower BTU/gallon. However, you only consider the power output per gallon of fuel, and you tie it into engine output, but your comparison is flawed. You compare the hp differences at the same fuel flow rate(1 gallon/1 hour), which is is not possible because of the different stoich ratios.

What I tried to point out in my initial post was that although E85 has fewer BTU's per gallon, it also has a much richer stoich ratio(which you pointed out as a flaw..?), so you will be able to make up for the fact that ethanol is "less potent" by adding more of it in each engine cycle - making up for its lack of quality(in the BTU dept. anyway) with sheer quantity.

This in itself might make up for BTU/engine cycle difference, but coupled with the fact that higher octane will allow you to run more boost, tune ignition closer to MBT, and run higher compression, E85 as a performance fuel is a no-brainer.

However, I do agree with your economics argument.. but that's the only reason why I won't be using it for my next project. There just aren't enough gas stations with E85.

Modified by crzycav86 at 12:24 AM 12/14/2006

Modified by crzycav86 at 12:27 AM 12/14/2006



Post Title:
Posted by: Chezedik at 7:58 AM 12/14/2006

WD



Post Title:
Posted by: Chezedik at 11:02 AM 12/14/2006

I think the jury is still out that you can inject a more and get the same power (meaning to reach a stoich ratio). From what I am finding, there is a very slight power loss, which as everyone pointed out can be offset by more aggressive tuning measures. So it seems the principle drawbacks are lack of availability, and price per mile.

So I have said it a dozen times already, when it becomes available and cheaper than gasoline I will use it.

BTW, it's not about high boost for me, but higher compression and relatively high boost, FTW. <= Better Thermal Efficiency



Post Title:
Posted by: WDRacing at 11:20 AM 12/14/2006

I ran a ton of Meth on my Skyline over in Oki. I wouldn't have been able to hit 498whp without it. The intake manifold was alot better designed though. The TB is placed in the center of the intake runners, so methonal injection is evenly dispersed...I worry about that on the KA. Atleast I worry about running such a high boost and relying on the methonal as a fuel source, not just detonation prevention.

What are you're thoughts on the initial timing map. I was thinking I'll advance it 5 degree's, then have it pull .5 out per lb of boost to start my tuning. Maybe a full degree to start the tuning, then bring it back. I was only retarding it .5 while running pump gas though...

Good times ahead.



Post Title:
Posted by: Chezedik at 11:27 AM 12/14/2006

My timing is only being contrlled by the BTM, which sucks, but I already have it installed so...

I have a boost controller installed inline, so I can limit the amount of boost the unit see's. That allows me a tiny bit more flexibilty. I'll start at pulling .5 per lb and work back from there.

I need to go grab a new motor so I can actually begin working on this.

Let me know when you arrive man, first round is on me.

WD



Post Title: Re: (Chezedik)
Posted by: Swedish Mike at 11:32 AM 12/14/2006

Totally understand your price thought but I use E85 as race fuel in first hand, a lot cheaper than VSP fuel and we dyno the same numbers as race fuel.
The big hp cars here ran VSP on the streets before and now E85 to a 10:th of the price per gallon (over here).

You only need to run really rich at boost and still possible to tune it cheap for daily driving. Some piggy back or standalone users got a gas program as back up for daily driving but not that common.

Another thing we noticed is the EGT, a lot lower and this will save both turbo, O2 sensor and manifold.

And last, feels good to help our tree´s live a few years longer. We need to start using other types of fuel soon and why not start slow now?
Probably stupid to discuss nature with US guys but yeah..



Post Title:
Posted by: Chezedik at 11:33 AM 12/14/2006

I don't want to hear about nature unless I am mining it, cutting it down, or pouring things in it!



Post Title: Re: (Chezedik)
Posted by: WDRacing at 11:36 AM 12/14/2006

Quote, originally posted by Craving4Boost »

what are the downfalls of using toluene? also, with e85, how will this affect smog? better? worse? I live in CA and it's very easy to find someone to skip the visual. However, I can't say the same for every other process. Also, I heard toluene makes your exhaust stink like

Toluene is a great help for getting Cancer.

E85 will make your smog guys happy, very happy.



Post Title:
Posted by: WDRacing at 11:40 AM 12/14/2006

WD



Post Title: Re: (WDRacing)
Posted by: Swedish Mike at 12:06 PM 12/14/2006

AS far as nitromthane as my example here, Top Fuel cars last I heard burn some 25 gallons of Nitormethane on each run. While this is an extreme case, the lower A/F requirement of nitromethane requires a lot of air as well. As you know, to make more power, or even comparable levels of power to gasoline, you need to pump more air through the motor. This lends these altrernative fuels better suited to forced induction motors and/or larger motors. Larger motors, would probably not be a great idea as the increased reciprocating and rotating mass would appear to work against itself and it's quest for better fuel economy. Leaving forced iduction as the better choice. Ethanol is cleaner is it not? If so, this may be an opening for turbos to make it back into the mainstream of automotive production. Perhaps less of the issues we have had with gasoline. From a racing perspective, ethonal appears it may have some advantages, but for passenger cars, getting less than 300 mile+ cruise range on long trips might be hard for many to swallow.

But this leads me to my next question. I know ethanol production is still in it's infancy compared to gasoline, but how viable is it to produce on the scale needed to fuel the US? I have heard of new technology to better use the corn stalk as well as the corn to produce ethanol, but how much of our land will have to be dedicated to corn to make this work on such a large scale? Is it even possible?



Post Title: Re: (C-Kwik)
Posted by: WDRacing at 2:31 PM 12/14/2006

With all of the advancements in tech we have, fuel economy has the potential to be a non issue with any fuel. You guys should really look into this direct injection. We've only started to touch the surface on this. DI is expensive to do because of the cost of the injectors alone.

If we had a KA and it were running under DI with whatever fuel, we would be running AFR's in the mid 20's. The injector fires directly into the combustion chamber. This allows for way more precise fuel curves and very lean mixture.

So if mixed, Ethonal would be a great combo with DI. Huge leaps in ignition could be made, emmissions would go down and power would go up. Honestly I see it as a win win.

But thats years away. Until then I'll settle for tons of boost and 105 octane. I'm definitly not retarding my timing at all, even under 20PSI. Worst case, since 20psi will be a race only boost setting, I'll use water injection...

WD



Post Title: Re: (WDRacing)
Posted by: S13FX at 7:58 AM 12/15/2006

I will have the whole car running today, and I will have E85 running by next weekend and, whats best there is BP gas station lik 2 miles from my house and they have E85 AND Race fuel. Whats even better the E85 is a Buck 45. I already have a tune ready with stock timing, 550cc injectors, and a Z32 MAF. The Safc is allready to go. And my chips are burned. All im going to do is attach my knock sensor to my lower intake Manifold, Hook up the knock light and tune away. Guys I am so excited I could **** my car in the downpipe right now LOL.



Post Title:
Posted by: WDRacing at 8:08 AM 12/15/2006

Well Done.



Post Title: Re: (Chezedik)
Posted by: WDRacing at 11:53 AM 12/15/2006

WD



Post Title: Re: (Chezedik)
Posted by: crzycav86 at 12:15 PM 12/15/2006

There are only a handful in houston, and all of them are a good 30 minute drive from my house.



Post Title:
Posted by: Chezedik at 12:44 PM 12/15/2006

1: Alcohal approved fuel cell
2: Alcohal approved External Fuel Pump
3: Alcohal approved fuel lines and filter
4:Greddy E-Manage ultimate
5: AMS Gt32 Turbo
6: AMS pro kit internals
7: Complete upgrade in the valve train
8: Bottom mount turbo mani
9: All the othe various crap thats gonna cost big $$$
10: Worlds Largest Bottle Of Asperin for all the headaches im gonna have
11; Unlimited dyno time <---- gonna get pricey

Sounds simple <---- ha yeah right

well ill keep everyone posted on how it goes. car should be up and running by march hopefully.



Post Title: E85 Fuel Turbo Build
Posted by: Spike240SX at 10:40 AM 12/19/2006

Sounds simple <---- ha yeah right

well ill keep everyone posted on how it goes. car should be up and running by march hopefully.




Post Title:
Posted by: S13FX at 10:41 AM 12/19/2006

Most fuel cells will take E85, it wont dry out the plastic like methanol do.

I´ve use both Walbro and Bosch pumps to E85, no problemo. Bosch got a great external pump called -044, you might need two!



Post Title: Re: E85 Fuel Turbo Build (Swedish Mike)
Posted by: Spike240SX at 11:04 AM 12/19/2006

Got one more, you can use a fuel filter from Volvo 940.
They can flow well over 600 hp and got beefy connectors with threads, with an adaptor you can screw it right on the fuel pump. Porn...

You can wipe off the Volvo text with some paper and E85.



Post Title: Re: E85 Fuel Turbo Build (Swedish Mike)
Posted by: Spike240SX at 11:24 AM 12/19/2006

Yeah, my last CA had E85 for lunch. Worked fine and impossible to get warm at winter, bigger cooling system and E85, bad combo.



Post Title: Re: E85 Fuel Turbo Build (Swedish Mike)
Posted by: Spike240SX at 11:48 AM 12/19/2006

Nope, I used it at summer. Took it out a few times at winter but not in really cold weather.



Post Title: Re: E85 Fuel Turbo Build (Swedish Mike)
Posted by: Spike240SX at 12:05 PM 12/19/2006

I had heat problems at hot track days before, when I switched to E85 I kept the bigger radiator system but the engine already ran colder, no need to go bigger system with E85.

About the heated fuel lines, this is a OEM thing, nothing for real men!
Ïf you live in Iceland and need it, mount it later.



Post Title: Re: E85 Fuel Turbo Build (Swedish Mike)
Posted by: PapaSmurf2k3 at 12:30 PM 12/19/2006

No AIM, sorry. The Mitsu GDI engine is only used in a few models of S/V40.
Way to complicated injection to convert, wouldn´t do it.

The big main pump on the engine is very fragile and often break, E85 would probably jam it.
Also hard to give it more fuel, special injectors and impossible to adjust fuel pressure since this is made in the pump.



Post Title: Re: E85 Fuel Turbo Build (Swedish Mike)
Posted by: PapaSmurf2k3 at 12:49 PM 12/19/2006

damn, oh well. I wasn't considering converting on a KA, just theory in general. I just think E85 would be a better route to go with because of lower combustion temperatures, and one of the main problems with direct injectors is that they are burning up. Also, with direct injection its capable of running an AFR of 65:1 with gasoline, and was wondering the possibilites of AFR with E85, and its effects on turbo applications. The future of internal combustion engines should be cool... now only if they dont gay up everything around the motor (body, etc)
this is the best thing nissan has released since the 350z:
http://www.nissanusa.com/altimaCoupe/



Post Title: Re: (S13FX)
Posted by: S13FX at 7:04 PM 12/19/2006

Quote, originally posted by Spike240SX »

ok so what happened here. i started my own thread about my E85 project and it made its way into here? im lost! no moderator post or anything telling me they did it!

Haha, I´m totally lost as well.



Post Title: Re: (Spike240SX)
Posted by: WDRacing at 10:16 AM 12/21/2006

There is no sense having two exactly the same threads going on at once. This is a family and we work as a team, there's no need to feel you have to have your own thread. By working together and sharing idea's we'll be able to come up with the best methods for what is already the same goal.

The other reason I did this is simple. I've been modding Nico for just over 4 years. I've seen some great threads simply slip by the way side that contained really good information. I didn't want that to happen here, so I merged the two threads in hopes of having one really good final product. I want other websites linking here because we rock.

If you honestly have an issue, I'll be more then happy to discuss things over AIM, I'm WDRacin, or email me WDRacing2003@yahoo.com

WD



Post Title: Re: (WDRacing)
Posted by: S13FX at 10:25 AM 12/21/2006

http://www.oakton.edu/user/~mnowosielski/turbo/

More pictures of fuel line setup and fuel pump setup coming up, also a complete write up of how Im going to tune it too. Just gotta gimme some time cause my eprom burner is kicking my *** right now lol.



Post Title: Re: (WDRacing)
Posted by: Spike240SX at 1:47 AM 12/22/2006

2 litre limit, 8500 rpm limit and now running 300 bhp.




Post Title: Re: (Swedish Mike)
Posted by: WDRacing at 11:11 AM 12/22/2006

WD



Post Title: Re: (WDRacing)
Posted by: Swedish Mike at 11:21 AM 12/22/2006

Nope, read it in a magazine. The STCC engines are top secret stuff, even if I had a link they wouldn´t tell or show pics.
Many brands and they all want the wildest engine.
The Volvo Team even promised more power using E85, I think they use 108 octane race fuel now.



Post Title: Re: (Swedish Mike)
Posted by: Swedish Mike at 12:13 PM 1/26/2007

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anWyryJXr-A



Post Title: Re: (Swedish Mike)
Posted by: S13FX at 12:29 PM 1/26/2007

EDIT: This is on a very low reading mustang dyno. Add about 15-20% ad it'll be close to dynojet numbers.



Post Title: Re: (GTR PrYdE)
Posted by: crzycav86 at 3:45 PM 2/2/2007

if you guys find any interesting articles on e85, i will forward the request over to him, and we'll see if he can get them.

sae paper search engine is here: http://www.sae.org/jsp/jsps/advancesearch.jsp

just link up the ones you think might be helpful in this discussion.



Post Title: Re: (crzycav86)
Posted by: Kaleo55 at 7:28 PM 2/2/2007

With E85 you can run very aggressive mapping and make gobs of power at a low boost before you even think about retarding timing.

I was actually thinking about going with a high compression KA and using E85 to facilitate a low boost setup. Say 8 psi max...

That would make for a very fun car to drive everyday.



Post Title:
Posted by: CrazyInteg at 9:45 PM 4/24/2007

FYI, Im talking about the line from the gas tank to the motor that runs under the car.



Post Title: Re: (CrazyInteg)
Posted by: S13FX at 8:14 AM 4/25/2007

I'll be running it once I finish my move to TX in Oct.

WD



Post Title: Re: (S13FX)
Posted by: CrazyInteg at 1:28 PM 4/25/2007

I can't get much more detailed than that.



Post Title: Re: (CrazyInteg)
Posted by: WDRacing at 7:02 PM 4/25/2007

After some very basic math and a tad bit of research here are some approximate financial numbers you will be looking at when goin E85.

In terms of what I would pay per year for fuel

Gasoline - $1200
E85 - $1142

here is the equation I used:

[(Weekly Miles x 52) / Miles per Gallon] x Cost of Fuel = How much money you spend on fuel per year

For Gasoline I used 25 MPG which is what auto trader says a 1990 240SX gets on highway. (NOT THE MPG OF A KA-T)

E85 requires 30% more fuel in order to get to the same level as Gasoline. And these are in terms of WOT which you wont always be at. **NEVC (National Ethanol Vehicle Coalition) claims that there will be a 10-15% drop in fuel economy** So actual daily driving conditions will raise the MPG which will lower the annual cost. Anyways I used 30% to be safe and a 30% drop in fuel economy from 25MPG is 17.5 MPG

For miles i used roughly 200 miles per week and rounded it off to about 10,000 miles a year for easy math since i didn't have a calculator.

So really that number is the "theoretical" estimate of the most one would pay for E85 a year.

Of course these are ideal and theoretical conditions in which the price of gas will never rise or drop. And the E85 price is different in every state. I happen to live in Illinois where gas is $3.00/gallon and E85 is $2.00/gallon. Which is why i gave an equation that you guys could play around and adjust according to the MPG you have recorded in your car and how much gas costs by you. The only way we will get SOLID numbers is to get an E85 240 up and running.

Only thing I am unsure of is my calculation of the MPG for E85 but it seems logical.

Can we get this thread started up again? Hopefully this will put some life back into it but as much fun as it is to talk about the politics of fuel in America it isnt very productive so lets try and stay on the subject of what is involved in converting a 240 into an E85 machine.

-Tomek

Post Title:
Posted by: sstomek at 2:40 PM 4/27/2007

Does it take more energy to produce a gallon of ethanol than the energy we get out of it?

Response:

No. This has been a common misconception of the ethanol industry, that it takes more energy to make ethanol than is available to the final consumer. Remember, ethanol is produced from plant matter, today dominated by corn, wheat, potatoes, sorgum, etc. Plants grow through the use of energy provided by the sun and are a renewable resources. In the future, ethanol will be produced from waste products or "energy crops." In fact, a partner of the NEVC, BC International (BCI), is currently constructing an ethanol production plant in Louisiana that will use sugar cane waste to produce ethanol. Additionally, BCI is considering the establishment of ethanol production facilities in California that would use the waste hulls from rice growers and wood waste from the forrest industry to produce ethanol. Energy crops such as perennial switch grasses, timothy, and other high-output/low-input crops will be used in the future.

Current research prepared by Argonne National Laboratory (a U.S. Department of Energy Laboratory), indicates a 38% gain in the overall energy input/output equation for the corn-to-ethanol process. That is, if 100 BTUs of energy is used to plant corn, harvest the crop, transport it, etc., 138 BTUs of energy is available in the fuel ethanol. Corn yields and processing technologies have improved significantly over the past 20 years and they continue to do so, making ethanol production less and less energy intensive.

Here is a link to their FAQ, pretty interesting stuff. But then again this is like asking AMS if their products are good, of course they are gonna say yes even if its just to sell their products (hehe j/k) but you guys see what im saying. I havent found an unbiased source yet but this is a good start. Anyways here is the link

http://www.e85fuel.com/e85101/questions.php

-Tomek

Modified by sstomek at 3:22 PM 4/27/2007



Post Title:
Posted by: WDRacing at 3:11 PM 4/27/2007

yea I really am interested in getting my 240 running on E85 but first we gotta finish b00sting it.

Let's hear the detailed plans you have to get your next 240 running on E85. Screw it I want your next post to be a 240SX E85 How-To with easy to read steps, pictures, and links to other sites/resources



Post Title: Re: (sstomek)
Posted by: WDRacing at 3:48 PM 4/27/2007

Hows that?



Post Title: Re: (WDRacing)
Posted by: sstomek at 4:02 PM 4/27/2007

hey now i'm the one attempting to start this thread up again



Post Title:
Posted by: extreme135 at 3:46 PM 4/29/2007

Water-Powered Car
For more than three decades now, Daniel Dingel has been claiming that his car can run with water as fuel. An article from the Philippine Daily Inquirer said that Dingle built his engine as early as 1969. Dingel built a car reactor that uses electricity from a 12-volt car battery to split the ordinary tap water into hydrogen and oxygen components. The hydrogen can then be used to power the car engine.
Dingel said that a number of foreign car companies have expressed interest in his invention. The officials of the Department of Science and Technology (DOST) have dismissed Dingel's water-powered car as a hoax. In return, Dingel accused them of conspiring with oil producing countries. Dingel, however, was the not the only man on earth who is testing water as an alternative fuel. American inventors Rudolf Gunnerman and Stanley Meyer and the researchers of the U.S. Department of Energy's National Renewable Energy Laboratory have been pursuing similar experiments.
Video explaining it
http://video.google.com/videop...35391




Post Title: Re: (WDRacing)
Posted by: CrazyInteg at 9:53 AM 4/30/2007

wtf? This is a joke, right?



Post Title: Re: (CrazyInteg)
Posted by: WDRacing at 10:15 AM 4/30/2007

As a race fuel this stiuff is awesome.



Post Title: Re: (extreme135)
Posted by: S13FX at 10:35 AM 5/2/2007

Actually I didn't want to say anything on here yet, and wont for a while. But I do have a really good friend thats a PHD Candidate and works here at the Fermi Lab in Chicago.

Right now he is working on a prototype project that will actually make the car a hybrid Hydrogen car. Meaning you will still need fuel but it will improve gas millage of up to 45%. I will be testing this prototype here in the next 2 or 3 weeks. As soon as the results come in I will post a full article about it.



Post Title: Re: (S13FX)
Posted by: Edub1 at 4:33 PM 5/2/2007

As for the cost - if E85 is $2.00 per gallon but requires an additional 45% consumption you can simply multiply $2.00 * 1.45 to get $2.90 as opposed to $300 for straight gas. If those numbers are correct.

Also, I don't think E85 has any environmental benefit as it will still produce CO2 - perhaps there is some IDK. The main thing is that we are not giving our money to nut jobs that want to kill us.

But for us, it would simply be a low cost racing fuel. This would make the most difference to someone already pushing hella boost. I am limited by the strength of my stock internals so I see no real benefit save maybee a bit more low end, low boost torque.

I do know there are like 2 places withing a couple of hours from Detroit that sell it. And they are a couple hours away.

BTW - the price of corn syrup and many other products has gone through the roof since corn is being diverted to ethanol production so be prepaired to pay through the nose at the supermarket. I produce soft drinks and the price of my sugar is up 45% - I pay about $5,000 per month for sugar. It's so bad that Coke is looking into alternative sweetners.



Post Title: Re: (elks 240)
Posted by: elks 240 at 11:15 PM 5/3/2007

I must say, I had a couple of chemistry profs that were into alternative fuels and I remember one telling me that there is not enough physical space on the planet to meet our energy needs via ethanol. This was several years ago.



Post Title: Re: (Edub1)
Posted by: PapaSmurf2k3 at 8:12 AM 5/5/2007

http://www.businessweek.com/au...sight



Post Title: Re: (Edub1)
Posted by: WDRacing at 8:23 AM 5/5/2007

There isn't enough oil/ethanol or any other petro product on this entire planet to keep us happy for a lot longer. We are wasters and consumers with 90% of the population not giving a crap what happens to anything or anyone.

We're destroying the planet, that's PURE FACT right there. We put a dude on the moon FOREVER ago. We have the technology to do almost anything right now, we just choose not to. The people in power across the globe are going to choose to line their pockets and stay in power as long as possible.

We could all be driving 200whp 1.3 liter turbocharged cars that get 40+ MPG in the city. The people who control the oil have SO much money that they can influence almost any decision in their favor. It doesn't help that we've had nothing but a corrupt white house for the last 12 friggin years either.

If I can make a few hardworking farmers rich, so be it. I'll gladly pay more per gallon and give the money to American farmers.

E85 and Propane along with a slew of other options are definitely the answer to the future of internal combustion. I'll get off my soapbox now...

Oh, everyone forgets that oil isn't just used for gas and lubrication products, its in almost everything you use everyday. The keyboard you're using and the monitor you're looking at right now are oil products.

WD



Post Title:
Posted by: Edub1 at 8:18 AM 5/6/2007

The simple fact is that the average American has too much money and really doesn't care too much about high fuel prices. Sure, that might change a little if gas tops $5 per gallon but untill then people will drive their gas guzzlers.

Really, the only solution is to get people out of their cars. If we make super efficient cars people will just drive more. The real answer is a move back toward city living and building vertically as opposed to horizontally. Many cities have for years had height restrictions on buildings. This forces builders to build horizontally, which it turn makes people drive a lot more. This is why strip malls each take up a half mile of road. This also makes mass transit futile because things are just too spread out. Would you get off a bus at one end of a mile long strip mall and walk to the other end to where you need to go and then back to the bus stop? Not me.

I think there will need to be some major changes in the way we do things before the fuel problem can even begin to be addressed.



Post Title:
Posted by: WDRacing at 11:33 AM 5/6/2007

LOL, I'm speaking more in terms of commercial buildings although city living is not a new concept. You think the way NY city is built is dumb?

People would still live outside the city as well - it's not a all or nothing deal. And it's not about better transit it's about not destroying the atmoshphere, depleating our resources and giving our money to nut jobs who will spend it on weapons to kill us.

Where will the children play when all our land is contaminated from nuclear fallout?



Post Title: Re: (Edub1)
Posted by: S13FX at 8:32 PM 5/6/2007

The answers to the whole transportation thing my friends is right under our noses, Europe got it damn right perfectly, and America really can't.

Its called Public Transportation. Here in America you see people everyday driving their huge cars every where, and when you look in them what do you see only one person in the car. This kind of stuff is probably the number one source for our problems.

Another thing is Brian hit the nail on the head. E85 isn't here to burn cleaner or save the atmosphere. It's here to preserve the oil. Like I said Brian hit it right on the head.

Everything we pretty much look at, we use everyday, Is made out of using oil, if we loose that, it will cause a huge inflation on our market, fuel will be the last thing to worry about.

Now the answer does lie in making hydrogen powerd, or electric powered cars. And honestly speaking belive it or not we are closer to producing a fully hydrogen powered car then we are to producing full electric car, what I mean by that is it being fully reliable and easily refueld.

Using water to produce hydrogen powered cars isn't hard, all it takes is splitting some molecules and keeping them under control. But in all honestly what government in their right mind would allow for such a thing.

Think about it.
Mike

Post Title: Re: (S13FX)
Posted by: Edub1 at 11:07 AM 5/7/2007

Ethanol is not a viable fuel alternative.

Now let's return the thread to it's original topic - ethanol is a great low cost race fuel.



Post Title: Re: (Edub1)
Posted by: WDRacing at 6:50 PM 5/7/2007

I hate kids anyway...



Post Title: Re: (GTR PrYdE)
Posted by: drape123 at 12:22 AM 5/18/2007

if you can get e85 in your area, i highly recommend it. i have tuned a few ka-t's and 1 high compression ka with it and have had great results.

Quote, originally posted by GTR PrYdE »

Im eagerly awaiting e85, a guy on the evo forums is pushing 510whp daily with a 35r and e85 fuel only! He made 475whp on 93+alky. An awesome gain over straight 93. Cheap Racegas thats eco-friendly FTW! EDIT: This is on a very low reading mustang dyno. Add about 15-20% ad it'll be close to dynojet numbers.

Post Title: Re: (drape123)
Posted by: Edub1 at 6:44 AM 5/18/2007

Unless you have an E85 station at the end of your block and you fill up daily, the time will come when you get stranded. Perhaps you could carry a can of denatured alcohol in your trunk.



Post Title: Re: (Edub1)
Posted by: PapaSmurf2k3 at 7:29 AM 5/18/2007

so ill be able to run gas or e85. i have a few questions..

why do u need to change pumps?

would a single walbro be enough? a 255hlp . im not shooting for 600hp.. im gona run a t28 at 8-10psi...

Post Title: Re: (Edub1)
Posted by: drape123 at 11:22 PM 5/18/2007

i am running 14* total timing at WOT right now @ 22psi. it is very conservative.

i'll admit it takes more E85 (about 30% more) but if i am not mashing on the pedal i dont really feel the difference. plus it is $2.80 for 105 octane.
so i add 2.80 x 0.30 = 3.64 a gallon for 105 octane. i like that.

i go through a tank every week. but my 100lb injectors take a lot of fuel



Post Title: Re: (zero_gripS13)
Posted by: drape123 at 11:24 PM 5/18/2007

absolutely. i run 400whp with 1 walbro and e85 at 22psi. just rewire your fuel pump for a direct 12v line. i believe there is a write up on here or freshalloy how to do it.



Post Title: Re: (drape123)
Posted by: GTR PrYdE at 12:17 AM 5/19/2007

The best I have seen, was 400 and I am sure you can make a little bit more but I have yet to see 500 on a single.

I have seen 500 on a single walbro running racegas but not on E85



Post Title:
Posted by: 180sx at 2:57 PM 5/19/2007

walbro 255 might flow enough for 500hp with gasoline, but e85 is not gasoline. e85 kat's require more fuel than gasoline for the same power numbers.



Post Title:
Posted by: WDRacing at 7:45 AM 5/20/2007

You will need more then a 255lph pump to run 500 on E85. But dropping in two isn't that difficult. I would just assume run twin MSD pumps externally mounted.



Post Title: Re: (WDRacing)
Posted by: Swedish Mike at 1:57 PM 5/20/2007

The big gasoline companies controls a lot in this world, I never trust anything I see on TV these days and this is one thing I wont accept.
I´m 100% sure the gas companies will do all in their power to stop E85 and other new ideas.

A year ago you could read test´s regarding E85 and how good it is and now when many people use it, you hear the opposite.
Pure BS in my ears.

If you are a gas lover and refuse to use E85 daily, at least give it a chanse in your race car. Use it as a pure race fuel.

Modified by Swedish Mike at 2:21 PM 5/20/2007



Post Title: Re: (Swedish Mike)
Posted by: WDRacing at 2:11 PM 5/20/2007

Haha, yeah, yeah...

A guy over here tried to commit suicide using a hose from the exhaust and into the car.
He tried for hours but nothing happened and finally gave up.
Later he understood why he failed, he forgot that he had a E85 car!

Read this in a news mag a while ago.



Post Title: Re: (elks 240)
Posted by: GTR PrYdE at 3:17 PM 5/20/2007

Bare in mind that this is just some basic theory I whipped up in like 15 seconds, but it's sound.

Might as well try it out...



Post Title: Re: (crzycav86)
Posted by: drape123 at 10:41 PM 5/20/2007

I'm going to see how high the 255 can flow with E85. im at 22psi already but my act xtreme clutch is slipping real bad it cant handle 430+ wtq ( i am throwing a rb20 flywheel and jwt 350z clutch in tomorrow so i am going to see what it takes to max this pump out. then i got a supra pump i am going to throw in (290lph)



Post Title: Re: (WDRacing)
Posted by: GTR PrYdE at 2:08 AM 5/21/2007

If you want to tune a lot of cars and fast ones, get a microphone and head set knock guard.
The only way to be 100%, many electronic knock devices miss the small and dangerous detonations.

The only downside is that you only use it for tuning, not mounted in the car.




Post Title: Re: (Swedish Mike)
Posted by: S13FX at 10:18 AM 5/21/2007

Thats true Mike, except with the J&S he uses an actual sonar type device so it works a little bit differently, it basically detects it before it even happens.

I know sounds kinda weird but it works.



Post Title: Re: (S13FX)
Posted by: Swedish Mike at 10:33 AM 5/21/2007

Never heard of it but sounds like a nice piece. Probably detect the knocks at early stage, you can hear the same thing in the headset type, you hear them build up and can stop them before it happens.

We tested a few cheap knock detectors a few years ago and they couldn´t tell the difference between a knock and angry cams pounding. Red light all the way.

One small knock can kill the engine and many devices on the market need one knock to react, that´s the bad part.

Post Title: Re: (Swedish Mike)
Posted by: S13FX at 10:38 AM 5/21/2007

Thats just a little bit from the description. I read somewhere that the guy that invented this used to be some sort of a sonar tech in th Air Force.



Post Title: Re: (S13FX)
Posted by: Swedish Mike at 10:48 AM 5/21/2007

Cool, I got to read more about this. Never heard the word sonar before.



Post Title: Re: (Swedish Mike)
Posted by: elks 240 at 10:48 AM 5/21/2007

jandssafeguard.com

Back to E85....

We were using AN-6 fuel feed line, dual walbros and it maxed out The feed line at 560WHP. Another setup was dual pump AN-8 feed line with stock return on a 2.0 and they were making 660 whp.So I am not sure how far stock lines will let it go. With 1 pump and stock lines I have seen 396whp. Now, maybe running a bigger fuel feed line will make more power with a single pump, I dunno but maybe worth a shot.



Post Title: Re: (sstomek)
Posted by: sstomek at 2:15 PM 5/21/2007

and maybe some dyno numbers?



Post Title: Re: (sstomek)
Posted by: 240sxmech at 9:45 AM 5/26/2007

The question is, why would you want to. It's only cost effective when used as race fuel - it offers no other advantage except making a handfull of people rich and allowing the auto makers to circumvent the CAFE standards and produce gas guzzling SUVs.

I learned recently that many people in Mexico can not afford corn tortillas any more because of this ethanol scam. Think of how many food products are made from corn - all of these are doubling in price. It's horrible.



Post Title:
Posted by: The_Chosen_One at 11:32 PM 6/1/2007

Post Title: Re: (Edub1)
Posted by: S13FX at 8:24 AM 6/4/2007

Well first off, E85 would be a lot nicer for people to use that only run between 7 to 14 psi, and don't really want to worry about TIMING, which seems to be a big issue among a lot of KA-t'ers,

Second of all I do agree with you that you don't save a penny using E85 over normal pump gas, but it is still a nice option to have..

Third of all who cares what the freaking price of a tortilla is in Mexico.

This is a car forum and we are in America (although I fully understand that there is people in other countries visiting the forum which is a GREAT thing BUT) we have much bigger problems to worry about here in America then the fact of how much someone has to pay for their food in other countries.

On that note if you want to get your self some inexpensive race fuel I say go straight for E85. It is not hard at all now days to have two differ maps ready to go, in case you can't put something other then E85 in your car.



Post Title: Re: (Edub1)
Posted by: WDRacing at 3:28 PM 6/4/2007

Hey bro...I've defended you when it's come to bringing up various options that have gone against conventional thinking, don't be a hipocrit.

Honestly, I could give a crap about every other country on the entire planet. I'm an American...period dot. Am I prejudice...you bet your a$$ I am, I hate stupid. I think all stupid people should jump into a huge woodchipper and I'll throw the switch myself...hell you can send me the electric bill.

Give me a friggin break, DO NOT talk about BS like that in MY forum when we're talking about the cheapest race fuel to be offered in this country at the moment...thats just simple fact.



Post Title: Re: (WDRacing)
Posted by: Edub1 at 3:50 PM 6/4/2007

Man, did you read what I wrote? I said E85 is a good low cost race fuel. The other stuff speaks to the environmental / practical benefit of using E85 as an alternative fuel source. 99.9% of people who would consider using it would use it for these reasons, not for racing.

But even if you are a rotten SOB and don't care about causing mass starvation, an E85 only tune is still a dumb idea for a street driven car because there is a 100% chance you will strand yourself somewhere where it can't be found. Anyone who says different, I say "famous last words" and please post your story so I can have a good laugh. And if you get back to your car with a gas can and find all your sh1t stolen I'm going to laugh even harder.

Then I'm going to mail out your Darwin award.

Post Title:
Posted by: WDRacing at 6:56 PM 6/4/2007

E85 is a win win.



Post Title: Re: (WDRacing)
Posted by: S13FX at 8:04 PM 6/4/2007

Quote »

map switching is easy, the moates.net 2timer module makes it a

So there you have it.



Post Title: Re: (Edub1)
Posted by: PapaSmurf2k3 at 10:28 AM 6/5/2007

First of all, there are other things to eat besides corn, so let the mexicans do what they want. Second of all, saying one day you will get stranded from lack of E85 is like saying one day you will get stranded if you don't have a cell phone. People got along fine for thousands of years without them, they still can today. A little planning goes a long way.

Besides, I would think that the way foreign relations are, you have a bigger chance of getting stranded if you own a gasoline ONLY vehicle. What happens when OPEC cuts us off cos we pissed them off? The E85 guys laugh. I give that a better chance then "getting stranded because you couldn't find E85". Most people don't drive their cars cross country every week, they stay around home, where they know they can get E85.

Anyone els with me here?



Post Title:
Posted by: GTR PrYdE at 1:47 PM 6/15/2007

Post Title: Re: (eazye2000)
Posted by: PapaSmurf2k3 at 1:51 PM 8/27/2007

Anyway, it says that MIT designed a motor specifically for ethanol capabilites. Using direct ethanol injection, which was kept in a separate tank from the fuel, they overcame the "knock limit" or something, which is basically what has been preventing gasoline engines from developing in leaps and bounds. Using their direct injection method, they somehow acheived the equivalent of around 130 octane. They strapped on a turbo, boosted the **** out of it, and acheived power levels of a much much bigger motor. So they cut the size of the motor in half, and continued using the previous equation. What they got was a motor that was 20-30% more efficient than a modern day (so, brand new technology) gasoline engine with the same power output. Best of all, it would only add about $1000 to the price of a new vehicle, opposed to the $3000-$5000 of a hybrid. It also reduces the weight of the vehicle because the motor is essentially half the size.

It also had a bunch of other stuff about ethanol in different articles too. I'll see if I can snap some pics of it (I copied it at work and took it home with me muaahaha).



Post Title:
Posted by: WDRacing at 2:13 PM 8/27/2007

Ethanol is simply alcohol with a little gasoline in it.

If you were to take your KA and add one ethanol injector to each runner, you'd be able to 12:1 compression pistons AND boost. Or just a ton of boost.

Knock and detonation are THE only thing keeping any motor from making huge numbers, aside from internal fatigue that is. So raise the octane and you effectively enable the increase in boost and or compression.

WD



Post Title: Re: (WDRacing)
Posted by: PapaSmurf2k3 at 2:41 PM 8/27/2007

Another article spoke about the whole "is ethanol really better than petroleum" debate. The conclusion was, that they are about the same if you don't take into effect the byproducts of the production process. Aparantly when ethanol is produced from corn cernals, it creates a byproduct of incredibly high protein cattle feed type stuff, so if you sell that, ehtanol does in fact come out ahead of the game (considering for that ammount of cattle feed, they didn't produce the same ammount of normal cattle feed). Really interesting article. I didn't read the whole thing so I could have something to read on the plane ride home on Friday.



Post Title: Re: (PapaSmurf2k3)
Posted by: WDRacing at 2:58 PM 8/27/2007

Crank the static compression and run direct injected Ethanol and you'll have a very efficient, yet very sporty, commuter car.



Post Title: Re:
Posted by: trainwreck at 3:16 AM 12/31/2007

As for it not starting below 60°F, that's not true either. It's been averaging in the mid to upper teens here recently and even been down in the single digits. The car is admittedly rough to start, but by no means impossible. I've never had to turn it over more than twice.

I'm very happy with E85 and have no intention of going back to petroleum.



Post Title: Re: (float_6969)
Posted by: WDRacing at 8:22 AM 1/27/2008

Kroger is really the only company that sells E85 in TX, but they still aren't close enough to home!!

A guy on this forum or another made a quick write up on using E85 if there are no stations near by.

He simply bought 55 gallon drums(I think 3) from a plastics recycling place for like 5 bucks each! Then every 3 months or so, rent a small trailer from UHAUL and tow it back home(about a 2 hour drive). Then he bought an inexpensive hand pump to use. Sounds like a little trouble, but I think it's well worth the hassle rather than using race gas...



Post Title: Re: (WDRacing)
Posted by: float_6969 at 10:46 PM 1/27/2008

I also think I can add some more timing back in. I tuned it the day I switched over and the way I tune ignition timing is to add advance until I sense knock or I quit making power. I started knocking, so I pulled out 2° and let it go. When I got out on the road it still knocked ever so slightly, so I just pulled the boost back. Well today I turned it back up and even with higher ambient temps it didn't knock. I think the ethanol has cleaned up my dirty combustion chambers and I'm not getting the hot spots I used to.

Quote, originally posted by GTR PrYdE »

Sounds great. Do you know if your E85 stations are using "winter blend"? It's supposedly E70 for easier starting. Kroger is really the only company that sells E85 in TX, but they still aren't close enough to home!! A guy on this forum or another made a quick write up on using E85 if there are no stations near by. He simply bought 55 gallon drums(I think 3) from a plastics recycling place for like 5 bucks each! Then every 3 months or so, rent a small trailer from UHAUL and tow it back home(about a 2 hour drive). Then he bought an inexpensive hand pump to use. Sounds like a little trouble, but I think it's well worth the hassle rather than using race gas...

Yes, they're using the winter blend, so we'll see if I need to change things in the spring, but I doubt it.

I've got plans to build a still that will consistently produce 198 proof alcohol. I also have a compound available through my work that will allow me to get it to full 200 proof. That will let me mix it with gasoline at that point if I so desire.



Post Title: Re: (float_6969)
Posted by: GTR PrYdE at 12:39 AM 1/28/2008

Either way you're making good power. What injector size are you running?



Post Title: Re: (GTR PrYdE)
Posted by: nelson8708 at 3:38 AM 1/28/2008

Second:
When tuning with a gas calibrated wideband what afr would you tune for. I heard 9:1 at idle and 7:1 under boost but i have also hear 12:1 idle and 9:1 under boost. I want to figure out the equvilant to 14.7:1 gas for E85 and what 11:1 in gas would be for E85. This way i can write a tune to be on the safe side. A little bit on the rich side under boost.

Third:
Around what hp level or boost level would i have to start to retard timing with e-85. I read it is good up to about 7-10psi.

Thanks



Post Title: Re: (float_6969)
Posted by: WDRacing at 5:52 AM 1/28/2008

When you're talking about tuning the timing, do you mean total timing and then retard with the MAF or MAP? Can the SDS retard .5 degree's per psi or is always a full degree?

Did you use the handy little fuel mixture knob thing? We had to because when we started to tune his car, he was running 100lb injectors and had no idea how much fuel to add for a base map. The enrichment knob totally helped with startup.

I know this is a tad off topic, but not many people use the SDS for some reason. What size injectors are you running?

WD



Post Title: Re: (GTR PrYdE)
Posted by: float_6969 at 11:33 AM 1/28/2008

Under boost 7:1 is about right, but once again, you should be tuning on the dyno, and tune for whatever makes the best power. If you start tuning a car based on what it's SUPPOSED to be at, you'll be disappointed. The beauty of the E-85 is it's octane will let you run leaner AFR's w/o det. If the car makes better power and doesn't det. at what is supposed to lean, who cares?

Quote, originally posted by nelson8708 »

Third: Around what hp level or boost level would i have to start to retard timing with e-85. I read it is good up to about 7-10psi.

I start with 1° retard per 1lb of boost. If I don't get any det. then I start to add timing back in until it does, then I pull out 2°. IMHO, timing is the hardest part of an engine to tune and is also the most important. You'll just have to play with it and see what makes power. Remember though that more advance isn't always better. If you add timing and it doesn't make power, then go back to the previous timing advance. Anything more just starts to wear the internals.

Quote, originally posted by WDRacing »

How do you like the SDS? I helped a friend tune his on a 3 Rotor over in JDM Land. But it was tuned with a EGT and narrow band. No knock sensor, no real AFRs. It was pretty user friendly though, I have the LM1 which is compatible with the SDS so you can see the AFR's for every rpm etc.

I LOVE it. I'm tuning a haltech for a local shop right now and I hate it. It's awesome if you have a gazillion different things that you want to control, but IMHO, it's overkill for most street cars.

Quote, originally posted by WDRacing »

When you're talking about tuning the timing, do you mean total timing and then retard with the MAF or MAP? Can the SDS retard .5 degree's per psi or is always a full degree?

The SDS has 3 settings that effect timing. Base timing as set per each RPM point, MAP timing that either adds or subtracts timing from the RPM point's timing, and then knock timing which subtracts timing under knock (obviously). For tuning purposes the knock timing is irrelivent as it's a safety measure, so that just leaves RPM and MAP. I have about 10° from 500-1000 RPM. Then it increase to about 32° at 2750-3000 RPM (I don't remember which off the top of my head) From there the MAP either adds timing in the vac ranges to help fuel economy, or retards timing in the boost ranges to prevent det.

Timing can only be adjusted in 1° increments.

Quote, originally posted by WDRacing »

Did you use the handy little fuel mixture knob thing? We had to because when we started to tune his car, he was running 100lb injectors and had no idea how much fuel to add for a base map. The enrichment knob totally helped with startup.

That knob is awesome. It helps with startup and tuning. It makes it very easy to make fuel changes and see the effect on the dyno and then tune accordingly. Yet another reason the SDS is so easy to tune.

Quote, originally posted by WDRacing »

What size injectors are you running? WD

NISMO 555cc CA18DET specific injectors.



Post Title: Re: (float_6969)
Posted by: GTR PrYdE at 3:02 PM 1/28/2008

ok for idle i just tune it to so it can hold a steady idle but what about cruising speed like interstate driving? Since straight ethanol is 9:1 should stoich for E85 be around 10:1?

If you run a lean afr but dont detonate dont you need to worry about the egt's? Possibly melt a piston or something of that matter or does ethanol burn cooler?



Post Title: Re: (nelson8708)
Posted by: WDRacing at 6:18 PM 1/30/2008

Laymen terms, Lambda stays constant even when the AFR changes.

Here are the 3 most common ones, bare in mind this is tuning for power.

AFR at the motor / Lambda
Gas = 12.8 / Lambda = 0.87
E85 = 7.9 / Lambda = 0.80
Meth = 5.7 / Lambda = 0.88

Post Title: Re: (nelson8708)
Posted by: float_6969 at 8:18 PM 1/30/2008

Also remember that peak EGT occurs at stoichiometry. Click HERE to read more.



Post Title: Re: (WDRacing)
Posted by: GTR PrYdE at 11:33 PM 1/30/2008

Both have very similar qualities, but E85 seems safer(no meth failure possibility).

Which makes more power?

They seem to cost about the same to set up.
$400 for meth + tuning, $200-350 for bigger injectors + tuning.



Post Title: Re: (GTR PrYdE)
Posted by: WDRacing at 6:54 AM 1/31/2008

cool. I plan on switching to e85 when gas prices rise this spring(3.50+). Right now it is not worth it for me to switch. Regular is 2.99 and e85 is 2.84. I am going to convert my 93 civic (stock daily) to run e85 before i do it to the ka-t. I check a few forums last night and the stock honda fuel system can run e85. Plus chrome is so easy to tune. I am just going to start in the first column and add 15% more fuel and then every column after that i add 2% more (15, 17, 19 ect). It ends up making the last column 33% more fuel over gas. Then i am going to add 3 degrees timing to the lower half of the map. However i heard it is a good idea to have a extra fuel filter with you because all the dirt in your fuel system will clog it up real quick.

Thanks for the info

p.s.
my wideband (tech edge) can display lambda so i am going to start tuning with it. I am just so used to afr's.



Post Title:
Posted by: float_6969 at 9:27 PM 1/31/2008

So explain to me. The AFR's display different than the Lambda? And all you have to do is swap your Wide Band to display Lambda, and you're all set?
So what is the 'cruise' and 'WOT' Lambda settings? Sort of like 14.8 AFR, and 11.8 AFR respectively..

I fail. You can say it...



Post Title:
Posted by: float_6969 at 9:54 PM 1/31/2008

The stoichiometric AFR is different for every fuel. For Gasoline it's 14.7:1, Propane is 15:1, Compressed Natural Gas is 17:1, Ethanol (not E85) is 9:1, etc.

Most widebands read the AFR so if you switch fuels, they aren't really giving you the correct reading anymore. The innovate (and maybe others) allows you to tell it what fuel your using and it will output the correct reading.



Post Title: Re: (float_6969)
Posted by: eazye2000 at 11:59 PM 1/31/2008

Where as 0 Centigrade is Freezing, and 32 Fahrenheit
Lambda is 1 for stoichiometric, and 14.7 for AFR stoichiometric? <--Gas
Lambda is 1 for stoichiometric, and 9 for AFR for Corn Gas(E85)?

Lambda just goes 1 down the line, for stoichiometric mixture, no matter what fuel...?

Sorry guys, I really abuse this stuff. I need to hit google.. lol But what sucks if I don't know what I'm looking for, I can't really find it...?

...I'm going to bed.




Post Title: Re: (eazye2000)
Posted by: WDRacing at 9:09 AM 2/1/2008

When I first started using alcohol injection, I only had a knock alert from MSD. I'd crank the boost till I registered a slight knock, then I would add alcohol 2 psi earlier then that point. Obviously the problem here is that you have no idea how much alcohol, you're injecting and you need more then one stage to avoid bogging the motor in order to run ALOT of boost. I was running enough boost that my injectors maxed out and I was using the alcohol as a fuel source. Because it was just easier to keep the stock injectors/ecu tune and add a bunch of alcohol.

This is where I ran into problems. To much alcohol will not only bog the motor, but it will unspool the turbo because it burns so much colder. Atleast when it's injected using the method I was at the time.

I ended up buying the Innovate LM1 wide band O2 meter and swear by it to this day. The only thing I knew at this point from reading through the Buick forums was that alcohol has a lower stoich point then pump gas. Since I was using alcohol as a fuel source on high boost, when the alcohol injection turned on, I made sure my afr's were in the 10:1 range since I was still using pump gas as well the alcohol.

Then I read about tuning for Lambda. Since Lambda is a constant I could tune for .8 lambda under WOT no matter what combination of fuel I was running. I'm pretty sure this is how the flex fuel vehicles work also.

All my friends over on Okinawa couldn't believe how much power I was putting down with a stock RB20 using alcohol. It was pretty new at that point, at least on Skylines.

Does that make sense to anyone besides me...lol?

Here's another graph I found.

Post Title:
Posted by: float_6969 at 11:11 AM 2/2/2008

I think the LC-1/cheap narrowband gauge is a good combo. Until I can find a dedicated, standalone lambda gauge that I can run the output from the LC-1 into, I'll keep using it.



Post Title:
Posted by: inuyasha3466 at 12:57 PM 2/21/2008

Ive got a 1992 240sx with a High Compression KA24DE. 11:1 compression forged aluminum pistons.

I plan on using 370cc injectors, and a walboro fuel pump. Also gonna use an additive that is supposed to keep the E85 from eating up things and also makes your car smell like fruit/candy. My buddy uses the additive on his E85 turbo civic hatch that makes well over 600hp.

This sound like its gonna work? Am i gonna have to go out and get a wideband o2/lambda sensor too?

I am not going to boost it.

Thanks!



Post Title:
Posted by: float_6969 at 1:03 PM 2/21/2008

If you're doing the tuning yourself, you'll NEED it.

How are you planning on compensating for the additional fuel requirements?



Post Title: Re: (float_6969)
Posted by: inuyasha3466 at 1:50 PM 2/21/2008

I also asked Quincy from Q-Garage about tuning my ecu. He mention of someone who is running a totally stock 240 with 370 injectors, a walboro pump, and E85 and making more power out of it with stock ECU no tune. Now with my high comp. pistons and cams i should be able to benefit from this also...

Now im worried about the o2 sensor freaking out the ECU since it would be running on E85.

Post Title:
Posted by: float_6969 at 7:12 PM 2/21/2008

He will probably need bigger injectors if he is going to run E85 though.



Post Title: Re: (PapaSmurf2k3)
Posted by: GTR PrYdE at 8:09 PM 2/21/2008

My whole perpose of running E85 is to get more power out of it by changing the timing and and eventually pull some more power by getting the ECU tuned.

Does anyone thing im going to run into a major problem running the same o2 sensor i ran with gasoline? I still dont quite get that part...



Post Title: Re: (inuyasha3466)
Posted by: GTR PrYdE at 6:57 AM 2/22/2008

It won't affect your stock o2 sensor either, but for a wideband you need one that can read down to 7-8:1 AFR. Innovate widebands can do this, to name one.



Post Title: Re: (GTR PrYdE)
Posted by: WDRacing at 8:48 AM 2/22/2008

The alcohol can damage your stock fuel pump because it lacks the lubricant that regular pump gas has, or at least the amount of the lubricant. Yes there are people that have run and are running E85 with basically no changes to their stock stuff, other then increasing fuel. But it "can" cause problems.

I just don't want everyone skipping to the end of this thread and thinking there are no hazards at all.

WD



Post Title: Re: (WDRacing)
Posted by: inuyasha3466 at 9:06 AM 2/22/2008

Im running 11:1 compression ratio according to JE Pistons. Thats my excuse for the possible "need" for E85.

I know this is a KAT thread and im sorry for NA'ing is all up lol. Im trying to get as much as possible out of this KA to prove what it is capable of NA. So far ive spend more that a SR swap on this but not by much. I built the whole thing myself with some help from others and people like you all that answer my questions on the forum. Id like to say thanks in advance for helping me out with this!

Its true i may not need the additive but with the forged aluminum pistons im running, i dont want to take the chance.



Post Title: Re: (inuyasha3466)
Posted by: WDRacing at 9:32 AM 2/22/2008

Lots of timing and 11:1 should be fun...but you'll never hit 200whp.

WD



Post Title: Re: (WDRacing)
Posted by: GTR PrYdE at 9:35 AM 2/22/2008

AMS did a test on letting various fuel parts from an evo plus a walbro in jars of E85 for months. No corrosion was found at all. The only useful bit of that was that it's proven that walbro's can take it



Post Title: Re: (GTR PrYdE)
Posted by: WDRacing at 9:53 AM 2/22/2008

WD



Post Title:
Posted by: stylin99 at 8:09 PM 2/29/2008

WD



Post Title: Re: (WDRacing)
Posted by: crzycav86 at 5:31 PM 3/2/2008

it's true that the high octane of e85 won't inherently make more power on a non-knock limited engine. however, stoich combustion of e85 releases more heat than combustion of regular gasoline. the extra heat increases the pressure, resulting in more power.

you can look up the heating values for e85 and gasoline, and divide them by their respective stoich ratios to verify this.

Post Title: Re: (crzycav86)
Posted by: PapaSmurf2k3 at 5:36 PM 3/2/2008

EGT data says so.



Post Title: Re: (PapaSmurf2k3)
Posted by: driftin_sr20det at 7:04 AM 3/4/2008

My statement stands uncorrected. E85 has NO benefit on a NA motor or one without increased compression and or timing. BTU's aside...

WD



Post Title: Re: (WDRacing)
Posted by: crzycav86 at 7:21 AM 3/4/2008

i'm gonna try to look something up...

Modified by crzycav86 at 10:22 AM 3/4/2008



Post Title: Re: (crzycav86)
Posted by: WDRacing at 7:30 AM 3/4/2008

WD



Post Title: Re: (WDRacing)
Posted by: WDRacing at 7:48 AM 3/4/2008

"Actually, when referring to alcohol fuels, the word "octane" does not apply, since octane (in its pure form) is merely the hydrocarbon in gasoline which is assigned the numerical value of 100 for fuel-rating purposes. The octane number given automotive fuels is really an indication of the ability of the fuel to resist premature detonation within the combustion chamber. (Premature detonation, or engine knock, comes about when the fuel/air mixture ignites spontaneously toward the end of the compression stroke because of intense heat and pressure within the combustion chamber. Since the spark plug is supposed to ignite the mixture at a slightly later point in the engine cycle, pre-ignition is undesirable, and can actually damage or even ruin an engine.)

Because a high compression ratio in an engine results in more power per stroke, greater efficiency, and better economy, it's easy to see why a fuel that resists pre-ignition even under high compression conditions is especially desirable ... and alcohol is, on the average, about 16 points higher on the research octane scale than premium gasoline.

HEAT VALUE

The heating value of a fuel is a measure of how much energy we can get from it on a per-unit basis, be it pounds or gallons. When comparing alcohol to gasoline using this "measuring stick", it's obvious that ethanol contains only about 63% of the energy that gasoline does ... mainly because of the presence of oxygen in the alcohol's structure. But since alcohol undergoes different changes as it's vaporized and compressed in an engine, the outright heating value of the ethanol isn't as important when it's used as a motor fuel.

The fact that there's oxygen in the alcohol's structure also means that this fuel will naturally be "leaner" in comparison to gasoline fuel without making any changes to the jets in the carburetor. This is one reason why we must enrich the air/fuel mixture (add more fuel) when burning alcohol by increasing the size of the jets, which we'll discuss further in another section.

VOLATILITY

The volatility of a fuel refers to its ability to be vaporized. This is an important factor, because if vaporization doesn't occur readily, the fuel can't be evenly mixed with air and is of little value in an engine. Some substances that are highly volatile can't easily be used as a motor fuel ... and others, which have excellent heating value, aren't volatile enough to be used in an engine (such as tars and waxes).

Another point to keep in mind is that a very volatile fuel is potentially dangerous, because of the chance of explosion from heat or sparks. This is one reason why alcohol, with a higher flash point than gasoline, is a much safer automotive fuel ... especially considering that the average car's storage tank is really quite vulnerable.

LATENT HEAT OF VAPORIZATION

Latent heat of vaporization is the phenomenon that results in an alcohol-powered engine's running cooler than its gasoline-fueled counterpart. When a substance is about to undergo a change in form (from a liquid to a vapor, in this case), it must absorb a certain amount of additional heat from its surroundings in order for the change to take place. Since alcohol must absorb roughly 2-1/2 times the amount of heat that gasoline does, and the heat naturally is taken from the engine block, the engine should operate at a much lower temperature ... in theory, that is.

What happens in reality is that the alcohol/air mixture doesn't have time to absorb all the heat it could during its short trip through the engine manifold. So instead of running 2-1/2 times cooler on alcohol than it does on gasoline (which, by the way, would not be desirable ... since an engine must retain a certain amount of heat to run efficiently), the engine operates at temperatures only slightly cooler - about 20-40 deg F lower, depending on the specific engine when using alcohol fuel."

WD




Post Title: Re: (WDRacing)
Posted by: crzycav86 at 8:33 AM 3/4/2008

For now, I will modify what I said above: e85 combustion does produce more energy at a stoich air-fuel ratio compared to gasoline, but because it starts at a significantly cooler temperature, e85 combustion does not results in higher temperatures required to produce more torque.

I am going to run some numbers to convince myself though. Good call.



Post Title: Re: (WDRacing)
Posted by: nelson8708 at 1:41 PM 3/4/2008

If its a lubricating problem them could you run a little marvel mystery oil in every tank or every other tank. You can pick up a pretty big bottle for a few buck. It would probably last 6 month and that is going through a tank a week. I just dont know if it is mystery oil is ok to mix with e85. You can run it with gas, diesel, and in your crank case so i think it would be ok.

What do you think?



Post Title: Re: (nelson8708)
Posted by: WDRacing at 2:15 PM 3/4/2008

WD



Post Title: Re: (WDRacing)
Posted by: 240addiction at 8:41 AM 3/7/2008

overall the car just runs better and has a lot more topend. These pulls were done in third gear (it was fourth for the manual)at about 22-24psi. I have multiple stations near my house so it is easy to get and cheaper than $6.00+ for race gas.



Post Title:
Posted by: xckid at 3:16 AM 3/10/2008

At first i ran it as low as possible before i filled up. The went and bought some E85 and instantly when i drove a block and let it idle i could tell the car was having problems Idling. On the drive home i opend it up..as well as it would and they way My RPM's climbed was as if my MAF was bad. They climbed slow and at times i could feel flat spots and even saw it in the rpm gauge . I tried to spin the tires in first...lol i got a chirp...this was on bald tires..

Once i arrived home i listen to the motor you could hear injectors struggling, So i turned it off I popped of the spark plugs closed the gap a bit and advanced the timing on the distributor as much as possible. To try and get all this gas to burn right as well as the stock ka ecu could. Also..my spark plugs 2 and 4 were toasted after this. I started her up again...she settled down ran better then previous drive..but still not its full potential. No im back to 93 oct. and for now that feels good, as im sure i got alot of build up out of there.

just thought id let you guys know ....if theres anything else id be willing to help...

oh also..i think it might have killed my o2 sensor...and i just replaced it....-_-



Post Title: Re: (xckid)
Posted by: GTR PrYdE at 9:23 AM 3/10/2008

I was going to type out a long detailed reply, but I don't have the time nor patience. Suffice it to say that you did everything wrong that could be done wrong...

THIS IS NOT THE CORRECT WAY TO RUN E85, IN FACT, IT'S EXACTLY HOW NOT TO DO IT.

WD



Post Title:
Posted by: xckid at 12:43 PM 3/10/2008

Quote, originally posted by xckid »

ok, well then if you dont mind id like to hear how the correct way to run E85 is...i know you need a tune and bigger injectors. At least, i was just trying to see what the stock 240 can take

Modified by GTR PrYdE at 3:52 PM 3/10/2008



Post Title: Re: (GTR PrYdE)
Posted by: WDRacing at 1:12 PM 3/10/2008

Woah dude...you can't just tell someone to read...LOL.

Post Title:
Posted by: xckid at 1:16 PM 3/10/2008

i made my first post here while i was reading on page 3, and i was readily to try and help so i made the post and then fell asleep......



Post Title: Re: (WDRacing)
Posted by: GTR PrYdE at 1:53 PM 3/10/2008

Fixed!



Post Title:
Posted by: inuyasha3466 at 6:00 AM 3/11/2008

I bet with 370cc injectors, the car wouldve ran a lot better but might not have run better that 93 octane since there are no other mods on the car... idk.



Post Title: Re: (inuyasha3466)
Posted by: S13FX at 8:44 AM 3/11/2008

Lack fo station of E85 is true, here in Chicago it's a little bit more common now then it was. But now days it's not that hard to have two maps and switch between them depending on whats available.

As for the 370cc injectors, yeah sure the car would have ran a lot better with 370's untuned on on NA, but thats cause they would spray about 35% more fuel which is needed for E85 to burn properly.

As for performance you wouldn't really see any, just a lot more gas consumption LOL.



Post Title: Re: (S13FX)
Posted by: nelson8708 at 2:23 PM 3/11/2008

Any one have a idea on how much mpg i will lose. I am getting 30mpg now and i figured 25mpg on e85 since you are supposed to run about 15 to 20% more fuel during cruising and 30% more at WOT. Its a honda so there is no point in going WOT. ..lol



Post Title: Re: (nelson8708)
Posted by: WDRacing at 2:42 PM 3/11/2008

Just my way of saying F you to big oil.



Post Title:
Posted by: float_6969 at 9:40 PM 3/11/2008

Tune it with crome. At full throttle, you need to bump the volume up by 30%, but at part throttle, the higher octane allows you to run leaner safely, so you can cut that down to only about 15% at part throttle.



Post Title: Re: (float_6969)
Posted by: nelson8708 at 2:46 AM 3/12/2008

Yeah i thought you only had to do 15% at part throttle but have heard different things hear and there so....My wide band only shows afr for gasoline so i will just tune for 14.7 at cruising speeds and probably 12-11afr under load just to make it safe. If fuel consumption only goes up 15% i should still be getting 25mpg ...

WD

I will defintally look into the propane thing. I remember seeing a propane datsun for sale on one of the local forums a while ago.

In the end i just want to give the middle finger to the oil companies

(I know that smilie is just waving no no but, just consider it a middle finger to the oil companies for now.)



Post Title: Re: (nelson8708)
Posted by: WDRacing at 3:28 AM 3/13/2008

WD



Post Title: Re: (WDRacing)
Posted by: PapaSmurf2k3 at 3:11 PM 3/13/2008

i have an enthalpy tune for 370's, n60 maf
now to run e85, i can just plop in 480's and go? (370*1.3=481 iirc)
are the ignition maps the same for gas and e85 (or at least very close?)

i also have an safc2 so im thinking of doing 550's and upping the boost to near 300hp reliably on stock block. my question is how big of injectors will safc control? everyone always says 550/no bigger than 680/whatever... will the enthalpy tune allow me to get 740's/820's on e85 so i dont have to buy more injectors when i rebuild my motor(eventually) or would the idle be crappy with a big cruising mpg loss? how big would you guys go?

Post Title: Re: (egan)
Posted by: CrazyInteg at 11:41 AM 3/18/2008

His whole fuel system is probably filled with this stuff.



Post Title: Re: (nelson8708)
Posted by: GTR PrYdE at 7:02 PM 3/18/2008

the gas in my 240 has been sitting for about 5 months but i put some stabil in it before i stored it. Even though i did i wont get on it until i get some frest gas in there. I just dont want the old gas to clog up the injectors.

WD:

Do you drain out the gas before you store it or just drive it year around?



Post Title: Re: (nelson8708)
Posted by: WDRacing at 7:01 AM 3/21/2008

Has worked for me so far.

WD



Post Title:
Posted by: drape123 at 11:32 AM 5/6/2008

Some of you may know i tune for and always recommend e85 if you have it locally.. there are a few things i tell everyone when converting over to e85

First thing you need is a wideband, it is very very important... i browse through this thread and see people knocking e85 saying it made their motor sound weird.. thats because you're burning a 19:1 afr you need more fuel.. approx 32% more

second thing you need is either a good retune or a alcohol tolerant FPR (e.g. aeromototive)
after a few tanks of e85 you will need to change your fuel filter as all the crap built up in your tank will clean out and accumulate in it remember e85 is a solvent and will clean out all the deposits

now your car should run good.. now comes the tuning part (recommeded) for low throttle you want to tune to around 14.7:1 afr (gas scale) but WOT on boosted motors i have found out that 13:1 afr is about ideal when running e85.. higher octane allows you to run leaner safely

if you guys have any other questions about converting over to ethanol please dont hesitate to email/message me



Post Title: Re: (drape123)
Posted by: LEMHEAD16 at 12:31 PM 5/6/2008

when you say "Great for smog" what exactly do you mean.

Run it on pure E85 or mix gas and E85 for the test.

I'd like to know because I have to pass smog in a few months and I know my 240 won't without a wink and a handshake

hit up my email if you don't want to discuss it on the boards

Joshuadcollins(at)gmail.com



Post Title: Re: (LEMHEAD16)
Posted by: WDRacing at 3:45 PM 5/6/2008

Win Win...



Post Title: Re: (WDRacing)
Posted by: CrazyInteg at 11:21 AM 5/8/2008

So in your opinion can I buy 33% larger injectors (555 -> 740), adjust the FPR to get the proper AFR and call it a day? Would I want to advance my timing a degree or two? I know that it's not ideal for daily driving, but I would just be running rich which isn't horrible.

Specs : fully built SR, upgraded turbo, Enthalpy tune, Tomei FPR, Walboro 255 pump



Post Title: Re: (CrazyInteg)
Posted by: WDRacing at 11:35 AM 5/8/2008

I have a quick question though. When he tuned it he disabled the stock o2 sensor but, i made him re-enable it before he burned my final chip. I wanted to keep it for small changes in the weather such as air temp. and humidity. He said that if i run the o2 sensor it will make me run lean because of the difference between gas and e85 afr's, but since the o2 sensor is searching for 1 lamba that would be the correct whether its e85 or gas right?



Post Title:
Posted by: WDRacing at 12:42 PM 5/8/2008

*EDIT*

Sorry we're talking idle, 1 is on the money for stoich. Is the ECU MAP or MAF...MAP huh...hate you.



Post Title: Re: (WDRacing)
Posted by: nelson8708 at 2:18 PM 5/8/2008

Some guy was talking about using HHO gas system or some thing like that in the 240sx general section. It caught my interest because of how simple the setup is. That might be something for me to look into instead or running the e85.....or even better.....use them both. Pay 2.70 for e85 while still getting regular gas mpg.

EDIT:

check it out.

http://www.runyourcarwithwater...H0-Ug

they want 50$ for a how to manual but, i suspect i can find out how to make a system for free if i search.

Modified by nelson8708 at 5:38 PM 5/8/2008



Post Title: Re: (KATwo40)
Posted by: jsherm007 at 9:59 PM 5/8/2008

LEMHEAD16 --- exactly what WDRacing said, it releases less HC and burns cooler than gas so it does not release as much NOX

Quote, originally posted by CrazyInteg »

drape123 I want to know your opinion. E85 is about $1 cheaper per gallon than premium here and we have about 5 stations in my city that sell it at a wide variety of prices. So in your opinion can I buy 33% larger injectors (555 -> 740), adjust the FPR to get the proper AFR and call it a day? Would I want to advance my timing a degree or two? I know that it's not ideal for daily driving, but I would just be running rich which isn't horrible. Specs : fully built SR, upgraded turbo, Enthalpy tune, Tomei FPR, Walboro 255 pump

Correct if you have a tune set for 550's you can run 740s and your car should run OK.. or what i tell a lot of 240 owners just throw some 370cc injectors in there.. that will run great and will actually lean you out a little bit on the stock computer which is GOOD for power since E85 has a higher octane.

one thing you might notice on a stock ecu though is cold starts suck... the car will misfire until it gets warm.. that is because you really need to advance the timing 7 degrees on the Cold start map because again it burns cooler and has a higher octane

If you'd like me to send you a retune for your enthalpy ecu for e85 lmk.. i can also tune it for SARD 850cc injectors which are the biggest sidefeeds available and cheaper than deatschwerks (and sard are brand new)

Quote, originally posted by WDRacing »

You can't just "run" E85. You need a way to increase the fuel flow, since E85 requires roughly 30% more fuel then pump gas does.

True, you can either turn the fuel pressure up or get larger injectors.. for a NA car looking for a few extra HP you can drop in 370cc injectors and advance the timing 5 degrees and call it a day.. other than that you need a retune.

hope this helps out
Jason



Post Title: Re: (WDRacing)
Posted by: jsherm007 at 7:33 AM 5/21/2008

In a 2006 Accord I did run E85 with no problems, no alterations, exept the check engine light kept tripping due to the O2 sensor. But aside from that the car started, ran just fine for the couple months I did it until E85 and regular gas got too close in price to justify the use of E85.

I never researched it, but how much can the stock injectors increase flow on their own?



Post Title: Re: (jsherm007)
Posted by: eazye2000 at 8:12 AM 5/21/2008

I'm looking at going with some E85. I'd like to get some new chips from you Jay. Then swap for when I feel froggy.

I also need to install the 3076r. Probably this weekend.

Werd 'em up



Post Title: Re: (eazye2000)
Posted by: CrazyInteg at 12:59 PM 5/28/2008

I think I smell some popcorn

EDIT: $475 shipped from EAT. Badass!

Modified by CrazyInteg at 2:00 PM 5/30/2008



Post Title: Re: (CrazyInteg)
Posted by: CrazyInteg at 11:24 AM 7/8/2008

The close e85 station prices suck (3.60) but, if i make a 15-20min drive i can get it for 2.76 ......

EDIT:

The only mod i plan to do other than the injectors and tune would be to replace all the fuel line with new. Does e85 have any adverse affects on wideband o2 sensors...like a shorter life span?

Also, how much timing should i add in the cruising loads? I dont have a knock sensor so i was thinking 3 degress would be good and for under boost i would just leave the stock timing (only 6-8psi).

Opinions welcome......jason and WD

Modified by nelson8708 at 11:06 PM 7/9/2008

Modified by nelson8708 at 6:19 PM 7/10/2008



Post Title: Re: (CrazyInteg)
Posted by: WDRacing at 11:45 AM 7/10/2008

Um, running higher octane fuel has NO added benefits unless you increase boost or timing. Especially since you're going to be burning more fuel then compared to pump since the soich of E85 is about 30% richer.

WD



Post Title: Re: (WDRacing)
Posted by: S13FX at 12:43 PM 7/10/2008

My friend and me went as far as going to 14psi on stock timing with e85, and had no detonation at all.

My guess would be anywhere after 14psi thats also depending which turbo you use.

We are using a Precision GT32. We haven't gone over 14psi on stock timing he has been driving like this for a couple months now. But I think that up to 14psi on that turbo stock timing is fine, and see very nice gains.

After that you might need to monitor timing closely and start pulling but I'm sure it wouldn't have to be much.



Post Title: Re: (S13FX)
Posted by: drape123 at 12:54 PM 7/10/2008

yeah E85 is miracle fuel. im running 16 degrees total timing up top at 30+ psi no detonation on a gt35



Post Title: Re: (WDRacing)
Posted by: CrazyInteg at 7:34 AM 7/11/2008

Well anyways, you know how it goes. Dyno owner is out of town and so we rescheduled for next Friday.



Post Title: Re: (CrazyInteg)
Posted by: nelson8708 at 7:41 PM 7/13/2008

"If i see him i want to kick him square in the nuts!" (cartman voice)



Post Title: Re: (nelson8708)
Posted by: drape123 at 8:56 AM 7/20/2008

these runs were around 30psi on e85 which is netting me over 550whp i am sure. this equal length manifold blows my jgs one out of the water. boost was so much smoother...

anyhow i almost died a few times cause at this track they only spray traction compound at the launch pad needless to say half way down the track i got sideways once

anyhow heres the vids, enjoy! (some of them are dark the first few seconds that is because they dont allow cameras in car so we had to hide them)

500 whp chevy truck with nitrous

http://www.youtube.com/v/efjHwcCeIhk

mujstang gt with boltons i bogged out of the hole big time but caught up

http://www.youtube.com/v/nZwoqGN-y_c

70's transam sounded mean but slowwwwwwwww
http://www.youtube.com/v/S9lc6j7rVvk

golf gti w/400whp

http://www.youtube.com/v/QG6JA4QMcts

Modified by drape123 at 9:16 AM 7/20/2008



Post Title: Re: (drape123)
Posted by: nelson8708 at 7:50 PM 10/12/2008

How much power can you make 850cc injectors on e85? If i can make 400whp with out maxing the 850's then that is what i am going to get. As long as i am good to about 15psi is all i am looking for.

Also how much timing should i pull for 12psi on e85. I was thinking .5 degrees after 7psi so about 2.5degrees off of the stock timing. The ka24e has low comp. (8.6) anyways, so i was hoping that would be safe. I am not looking for big power, just safe power.



Post Title: Re: (nelson8708)
Posted by: GTR PrYdE at 8:47 PM 10/12/2008

also- I believe e85 likes either alot of timing or alot of boost.

from what ive read on other forums, 850s would probably max around 360-380whp.



Post Title: Re: (GTR PrYdE)
Posted by: nelson8708 at 3:48 AM 10/13/2008

Do you think i would have trouble controlling them with resistors?



Post Title: Re: (nelson8708)
Posted by: WDRacing at 10:38 AM 10/13/2008

Just think of 850's as 420's, whatever boost you can run with a 420 is about what you'll get with a 850.

As far as timing goes, ramp up the off boost timing and retard it a touch on boost. But only retard it on boost if you've increased the base timing for better driveability off boost. Make sense?

Alcohol burns cold, it likes timing and boost...alot.

WD



Post Title: Re: (WDRacing)
Posted by: nelson8708 at 3:19 PM 10/13/2008

Can a walbro push 1000cc injectors or is it maxed before that.



Post Title: Re: (nelson8708)
Posted by: GTR PrYdE at 9:16 PM 10/13/2008

To correct WD- 850cc's with E85 are like 590cc's on gasoline.

A single walbro 255 has been maxxed out around 500whp on E85, so for goals around 400 it'll be perfectly fine.

Unless you know someone who can tune 1000's really good, don't mess with them... go with something you know can be tuned. I believe Enthalpy states he can comfortably tune up to 900cc's on the KA/SR's.



Post Title: Re: (GTR PrYdE)
Posted by: nelson8708 at 3:50 AM 10/14/2008

Running E85 and 370cc's = 93oct and stock 270cc's

How much power can you make on stock injectors? 160-170whp?

So... run like 1-2psi...? Not a good idea. Do it right and save your engine



Post Title: Re: (GTR PrYdE)
Posted by: driftin_sr20det at 9:05 PM 10/14/2008

Come spring, ill be ordering some bigger injectors and maybe an n62 maf and push the stock sohc to the limits. HP figures will be posted if all goes well.



Post Title:
Posted by: float_6969 at 6:07 AM 10/29/2008

-Re-do IC pipes to clean up the engine bay
-Buy pig tail for my z32 mafs (and install new injectors)
-Finish installing e85 friendly fuel lines (engine bay lines done already)
-Recirc Dump tube (tired of being loud)
-Put a flex section in my exhaust (all solid pipe at the moment )
-Tune for e85 and have some fun this year (only made it out maybe 6 times this whole season with the car.)

E85 is a 1.60 @ gallon by my house right now



Post Title: Re: (nelson8708)
Posted by: WDRacing at 4:50 PM 10/29/2008

Quote, originally posted by nelson8708 »

E85 is a 1.60 @ gallon by my house right now

Damn dude, that makes me want to run E real bad. I would LOVE to see that kind of dollar-gallon ratio when im filling up at the pump.. Nostalgic or something lol.



Post Title: Re: (480sx)
Posted by: nelson8708 at 8:39 PM 10/29/2008

I'm sure it wont be like that very long. I just hope when gas goes back up there will be enough e85 plants to keep the prices down a little more than it did this past summer. Everything in colorado seems to run on the stuff so there is a growing market for it. Defintally keep you guys updated on the progress though.

1.60 is nice but, when gas is 2.10 its not as big of a deal. Still nice to see that 1 dollar sign though.

How's that leasing job treating you WD?



Post Title: Re: (nelson8708)
Posted by: nelson8708 at 4:42 AM 3/6/2009

Quote, originally posted by "hotrod" »

Quote » 4. When you say e85 burns faster than gas at power mixtures are you comparing it to 105 or 93 octane gas? I was under the impression that e85 burned slower than gas (93 pump). That is a common belief but is not supported by a couple lines of evidence. E85 will allow the use of very large ignition advance numbers but that does not mean it needs lots of ignition advance. In tests University of Michigan did some tests on small engines where they adjusted them for MBT timing (minimum best torque timing) while running the engines on E85. At low loads the engines wanted exactly the same ignition timing that they did on gasoline. They showed a very slight tendency to use less timing under high load. To find MBT timing, near torque peak advance timing until you hit your max number, then start backing off the timing until you can just detect about a 1% drop in torque. That is you MBT timing. Because of ethanol's high detonation resistance it will allow you to advance the timing way beyond that number but you gain very little other that causing huge increases in cylinder pressures and stress on bearings and head gaskets. On a 400 hp engine you would be giving up only 4 hp to gain huge increases in safety on the tune, and protection against things like unplanned lean outs etc. It is a tuning principle that has been in use for over a hundred years by professions (you know like the guys that designed supercharged WWII fighter plane engines, where maximum performance was a matter of life and death). Quote » Under light loads does e85 burn slower? I was told you should add alittle timing in that area to help get some mpg's back. It burns about the same speed as gasoline under light load. Lots of folks do that and it is harmless as at light load you can't hurt the engine with extra timing (within reason). What you are actually doing it creating an artificially high compression ratio under light load by starting the burn early and raising cylinder pressures, and cylinder temperatures for a cleaner burn. Some engines like it others don't care, I think it depends on cylinder head design and quench and the mixture motion in that particular engine. Ethanol's burn speed changes much more drastically than gasoline does as fuel air mixture changes. At rich max power mixtures it burns faster, when too rich or too lean it burns at the same speed as gasoline. If you change your fuel air mixture by any significant amount you need to revisit timing at that load setting too, because you have changed the mixtures burn rate. Larry

Quote, originally posted by "hotrod" »

Quote » The way it was orginally explained to me is that since e85 is a higher octane fuel it burns slower and needs the extra timing.....consider that erased from the memory banks Yes that phrase should read higher octane fuel will allow more ignition advance, but it may not need more ignition advance. Where people go wrong is many engines cannot run ideal ignition timing for the fuel due to its low octane. When they put high octane fuel in it then for the first time, they can run proper timing which in their case is more timing than is possible on low octane fuel. They are mixing up the cause and the effect. The ideal ignition timing is determined by the mechanical design of the engine. How much mixture motion it has, how the cam and valve timing events are timed, cylinder head design, squish in the combustion chamber, etc. and is largely a fixed number. You then try to find a fuel that will allow you to run enough timing to get to that ideal timing to put max cylinder pressure in the area of 12-14 degrees after top dead center. They also forget burn speed changes with fuel air mixture. A rich max power mixture burns quite a bit faster than a lean idle fuel air mixture, so the ideal timing changes with fuel mixture too. That is why entire engine families have very similar ignition timing. You talk to two small block Chevy builders that live 3000 miles apart and I bet their ignition timing recommendations for similar engine builds is within about 2 degrees of timing, frequently in the low mid 30 degree range. The new fast burn heads will be on the low end of that range and the classic muscle car era heads will want in the mid 30 degree range. The old Chrysler Hemi's had less mixture motion due to the hemispherical cylinder head and obstruction of the flame front by high dome pistons, and some of them wanted 40 degrees of advance to make big power. It was not the fuel it was the engine design. Larry

I have also finished up my winter modifications and even got a set of coilovers last week. Once i run the tank empty of this old gas from last season the e85 or should i say e70 will be going in with the 1000cc injectors. I already have made a base map for it.

Post Title: Re: (nelson8708)
Posted by: WDRacing at 11:08 AM 3/6/2009

Wow...guess I missed that one aye...

I actually got laid off 2 months ago. No worries though, I'm doing the Mr Mom thing and I'm getting ready to open up my own business. Turbo's and Subinjection stuff FTMFW



Post Title: Re: (WDRacing)
Posted by: GTR PrYdE at 4:47 PM 3/15/2009

Have the New Bosch 1000cc's been mentioned in this thread yet?

A must have for E85... considering they're the best of both worlds with tuning and flowing up to 1500cc's worth of fuel



Post Title:
Posted by: float_6969 at 7:42 PM 3/15/2009

Regardless, the new Bosch 1000cc injectors are VERY awesome from what I hear and I hope to be running them on my CA18 this year.



Post Title: Re: (float_6969)
Posted by: GTR PrYdE at 8:01 PM 3/15/2009

Yup! 100 base fp is alot, but with the lack of 240 fuel systems, I would suspect a dual walbro (intank and inline) or aftermarket external fuel pump (weldon) would be necessary.

I'd do a fuel cell, external fuel pump for E85 when the time comes



Post Title: Re: (GTR PrYdE)
Posted by: CrazyInteg at 7:50 AM 3/17/2009

Quote, originally posted by nelson8708 »

I dont know if any of you watch mad money on the today show but, i caught a little bit of it this evening and the guy was a moron when he came to a question about e85. He said it takes 30% of the corn crop to produce enough e85 to cancel out 3% of the gas we use. I guess he doesnt know that most e85 now it produced from switch blade grass and paper based waste products. On top of that i think he was being paid by some of the gas companies for some of the other things he said. He said to ease the pain of paying for gas would be to buy shares of gas companies and use the dividends to ease the pain. He does have a point, but the dividends would be so small unless you purchased a crap load of shares. He even said that we should be paying around 6$ a gallon instead of 4.00-4.50$ a gallon. It seemed that since he was talking trash about e85 and said to invest in gas companies that he might have been paid to help give the gas companies a good name. "If i see him i want to kick him square in the nuts!" (cartman voice)

The only thing i need to figure out now is why my egt's are so high. After just cruising on the interstate and not even hitting boost i pop my hood and the turbine / part of the manifold are red. You can only see it when its pitch black outside and there are no lights. Cruising afr is 14.5:1-15:1 and my cam timing is correct along with my ign timing. I'm using stock timing values on the light load portion of the timing map. When i had my t25 / fmu setup part of the manifold would glow red but, the turbine would not and that was with a completely stock ecu. I'm going to drive it later this week / weekend and bump the timing at the dizzy 3 degrees both ways to see if that helps. As long as the turbine is not red......... i'll that that

Any ideas



Post Title: Re: (nelson8708)
Posted by: cypher02xd at 2:32 PM 5/3/2009

^that is the only part that is red

Meijer needs to cut their grass



Post Title: Re: (nelson8708)
Posted by: nelson8708 at 7:05 PM 5/19/2009

Hopefully she will last this season on that boost level....also hoping for around 280-300whp with a little more than that in torque @ 14psi



Post Title: Re: (nelson8708)
Posted by: sorrowfulkiller at 10:20 PM 5/23/2009

Quote, originally posted by nelson8708 »

the limit of the stock ecu + resistors is 1000cc injectors ...my idle is around 11:1 but, cruising is 14.7:1. Now that i have the injectors to back up my desired boost level its going to 14psi. I'm wanting to trap 110 at the strip on street tires with open diff Hopefully she will last this season on that boost level....also hoping for around 280-300whp with a little more than that in torque @ 14psi

It would be a good idea depending on your location to keep afr near idle lower, for cold starts.

As you said before that you're running 12.5 AFR at WOT. As long as you are not knocking then don't worry about it, you may want to richen it to 12:1 though to keep your manifold from glowing (warping flanges sucks a**)



Post Title: Re: (sorrowfulkiller)
Posted by: nelson8708 at 3:08 PM 5/24/2009

E85 Generally runs 200 degrees cooler egt's, and if your manifold is red, something is wrong.

then again, if you are getting a new manifold, swap the manifolds without changing the tune and see if that does stop the glowing mani.

There's a reason I don't like cast manifolds. Bad flow and absolutely have to replace them if they crack.



Post Title: Re: (nelson8708)
Posted by: nelson8708 at 10:27 PM 5/24/2009

i had the timing light on the car with it idling....15btdc



Post Title:
Posted by: DrifterProdigy85 at 7:38 PM 5/25/2009

like I said, swap out the manifolds, see if there is any difference.



Post Title: Re: (DrifterProdigy85)
Posted by: nelson8708 at 12:19 AM 5/26/2009

you really dont need one in a 240sx. If you just wanting to run e85 in a stock ka24de i've seen people drop in sr 370's with no tuning and run e85 with no problems. You just need to change the tune if you want to run stock injectors. It can be done with the stocker's but, idc is probably 100% if you run stock fuel pressure.

Quote, originally posted by sorrowfulkiller »

hmmm, seems low, but the again I come from subies so idk what the ka24de's run stock. A stock wrx runs like 42 degrees advanced at idle from the factory so It's quite a difference from what nissan's run I figure. like I said, swap out the manifolds, see if there is any difference.

I found today that it wasn't the manifold when i pulled the old one off today. The turbo didn't spin very freely so i'm thinking that the restriction from the turbo is what caused the high heat. Since i already bought another manifold i'm going to swap anyways. I have a lot of work ahead of me to switch to this new manifold (DP, hot pipe, intake pipe, re-locate coil). I hope to have her back together in a month......going to rebuild the turbo also.....if its ok.



Post Title: Re: (nelson8708)
Posted by: sorrowfulkiller at 12:12 PM 5/26/2009

If you can, try taking apart the chra assembly, from there you will be able to find out if you need to change bearings and seals.

Get turbo rebuild kit, rebuild turbo, put it all back together.

Depending on what kind of turbo you have you're going to either need a very large snap ring pliers or just normal sockets to take off v-band clamps and bolts holding the compressor housing onto the chra housing.

In the turbo's I've taken apart, the compressor wheel stud was reverse threaded AKA lefty tighty righty loosy the turbo side should be normal style threaded.

I would ask a company that rebuilds turbos what sort of torque you should put on the compressor bolt when you rebuild so you don't have this problem again.

Another thing, if your turbo is only oil cooled plan on buying a turbo timer (ebay knockoffs work just fine) I would generally say to let it idle for atleast a minute even if you haven't been boosting.

My guess is that your oil is getting coked up in the bearings



Post Title: Re: (sorrowfulkiller)
Posted by: nelson8708 at 6:56 PM 5/26/2009

I have everything apart except the chra....both fans look great. Time to get back on topic......i'm sure WD is about ready to lay the smack down...."Do you smell what the WD is cookin"

E85 clean burning FTW.

Post Title:
Posted by: DrifterProdigy85 at 7:48 PM 5/26/2009

1 Walbro can flow up to 255 lph, so 2 would be 510 lph.

Also for injectors if your using a boost referencing rising rate fuel pressure regulator you should take that into account before you buy injectors.

the rc engineering website should have all the info you need under their "injector sizing" area




Post Title: Re: (DrifterProdigy85)
Posted by: GTR PrYdE at 8:49 PM 5/26/2009

you might want to look into an external fuel pump

Quote, originally posted by DrifterProdigy85 »

How much HP can Dual Walbros support on e85? Im looking at upgrading to e85 for my T67 SR20. I need something 750hp Capable.

Post Title: Re: (DrifterProdigy85)
Posted by: nelson8708 at 2:19 PM 5/27/2009

I know of two ka's that are making 700+whp and one rb26det making 800whp on e85 that are running dual walbro's They aren't having fuel pressure problems as of yet as far as i know. If you already have one walbro i would look into having a bosch 044 as a inline and the walbro feed it.



Post Title:
Posted by: DrifterProdigy85 at 5:40 PM 5/27/2009

However- it'd be a waste of corn fuel on a stockish n/a setup, and def not enough fuel for any turbo app



Post Title:
Posted by: slidewayz808 at 12:25 PM 9/10/2009

Where E85 shines in a situation where you have exceeded the capabilities of pump gas. What I mean by this is that if you have to run more fuel &/ less timing to keep the motor from detonation due to the octane rating of your fuel, THEN E85 is a great option compared to race gas.

This is exactly the reason why flex fuel vehicles are basically a bad idea. They'll never get the fuel economy that the same sized gasoline engine will. BUT if you were to design a motor to run on purely E85, not only would you be able to make it smaller and lighter with out sacrificing power, but it would get at least the same, if not BETTER fuel economy than the gasoline engine it replaced.

And to really mess with your head, imagine coupling that idea with hybrid technology. You could literally have a 500cc engine with a 150hp/L output that gets gas mileage better than gasoline and weighs CONSIDERABLY less.



Post Title: Re: (slidewayz808)
Posted by: nelson8708 at 3:22 PM 9/15/2009

Throw a set of sohc pistons in there for a hi-comp build and then it might be worth running e85 so you dont have to pull timing.



Post Title:
Posted by: slidewayz808 at 4:09 PM 9/16/2009

< Contact Us - NICO >