Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

How much better will the e100 do though, bugger all I would say. I will be looking into it, what's another map when you have 20 on the laptop already. :blink:

With known mapping for E70, 85 and 100 I could automate it with the ethanol content sensor and set up a secondary (4th?) map on the Emanage to adjust, as long as the sensor is reliable... Not having to worry about what fuel I put in would be great. Im sure there will be units that do this coming out of the aftermarket industry as soon as there is infrastructure in place.

I really do like the sound of this.

And I'm currently looking into options to maybe do this with my Haltech PS2000, if it can support it.

I don't really want a laptop sitting in my car the whole time.

A smaller console, like an Ipad or something would be awesome.

Anyway, maybe this'll take another 10 years.

e70 map running e85 would run kinda meh I'd assume.

The other way around, I can only speculate as I'm not familiar with tuning different ethanol contents. I assume 85% map has more timing than a 70% map, as well as more fuel. Probably looking at pinging

E85 to E70 wouldnt make much of a difference unless your car was tuned on the ragged edge.

My car has just had whatever comes out of the bowser and has made big numbers with no pinging or hesitation at all. There have been times where i have filled up and noticed the fuel smelling different, like it had more of a 98 content. But still no dramas with the engine.

the difference between running e85 and e70 on the same map would be less than 1 AFR point, which isnt going to cause any problems. and if you have so much timing in it that it pings with e70 (would be richer aswell having been tuned on e85) your probably past BMT which is pointless and dangerous.

at the end of the day unless your chasing every last killerwasp of power you could just have a conservative tune and run e70, e85 or anything in between and still make much better power than on petrol

what about 570 cc 14mm injectors on RB 25/30 with single 044

too small ?

not looking for massive numbers, maybe another 20- 30 kw or so

Sounds too small to me, If you are maxing your injectors now it would be a good idea to get at least 50% larger. You will require 20 - 30% more flow straight away.

I run 14mm 610cc Deka's with no problem on a VQ25det but on a 3L you may want more fuel than that. 044 should be fine.

Spot on, I had a flat 12 on E85 and 11:1 on E70 when I ran it.
Any dtonation from the lack of ethanol? Octane drop?

Its interesting 15% less ethanol so the octane drops a bit (not sure how much) but then the extra 15% of unleaded fuel would make the car run richer quite possibly negating the drop in octane.

Its interesting 15% less ethanol so the octane drops a bit (not sure how much) but then the extra 15% of unleaded fuel would make the car run richer quite possibly negating the drop in octane.

Does this suggest that you can run E70 on an E85 tune, or the other way around? lol my brain is still waking up...

yeah of course.

Perhaps it would be safer to do what had been suggested previously, and run e85 on an e70 tune. This wouldn't work so well in the colder months with cold start I'd assume, but would be safe from detonation. You'd only lose a small amount of power running higher ethanol content without tuning to take advantage...and still have a buttload more power than running straight 98ron

yeah of course.

Perhaps it would be safer to do what had been suggested previously, and run e85 on an e70 tune. This wouldn't work so well in the colder months with cold start I'd assume, but would be safe from detonation. You'd only lose a small amount of power running higher ethanol content without tuning to take advantage...and still have a buttload more power than running straight 98ron

Running e85 on an e70 tune you have the opposite scenario, car will run 1 AFR point leaner but will have a higher octane. I am beginning to think whichever way you do it wont make much of a difference.

No need for mules, just a wideband so you aren't tuning blindly.

I had some issues with spark breaking down due to the amount of fuel being dumped, It ran fine once the afr's were cleaned up. Really you would want it running rich in summer and lean in winter wouldn't you?

It is very easy to richen an E85 map up by adding 98, harder to lean it out as E100 is hard to come by. Best to run two maps if you want to run Caltex. Where is it by the way? Are there any pumps open yet? I want to give it a go. :rolleyes:

sorta off topic and I'm sure I could work this out with searching, but I don't know where to start to get a definitive answer...

If you suggest running 2 maps, which DOES make the most sense to do....I'll be running a ViPEC V44. Is the tuning software for this ECU free? As in, no license needed? and is it easy to connect to the ECU while parked at a petrol station after filling up to change maps?

If you had e85 in the tank, and filled up with ~55-57L of e70 from the pump, we can assume there will be no issues encountered running the minute mix between the two on an e70 map?

If ViPEC software is free without license, I think I'll get myself a shitty laptop to bring with me when I fill up, as well as having 2 tunes made up for the 2 blends. Can't justify myself paying more than $100 for a software license though.

I have no idea with Vipec software, Emanage disk comes with the unit.

As long as you don't get on boost until the fuel in the lines has been used, you should be fine switching over. Remember if you want to use Caltex E85 you will only need to swap maps twice a year anyway. The hassle comes from swapping back to 98 which I don't do anyway.

My tank is 80L so I don't really notice 5 or 10 litres left.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
×
×
  • Create New...