Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

My cars going in to the dyno tomorrow for a "before" run and to get a nice base tune.

Then i'll be filling her up with "Flex Fuel" :D and doing a bit of self tune before i take it back to the dyno.

I can tune the AFR's no worries my self but just want a tip on the ignition timing...

I've read somewhere that some one chucked in 5degrees over the whole map and then fine tuned WOT.

What have you tuners out there done with E85?

Car in question is:

Rb25det NEO, should see somewhere around the 300rwkw mark.

Cheers Pat

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/341633-e85-tuning-question/
Share on other sites

ideally you need some sort of dyno to find MBT, as your likely to reach that before it knocks, unlike ulp which almost always knocks before reaching MBT in turbo cars.

if you really wanna do it on the street you could keep doing runs on the exact same bit of road in the same gear and figure out what makes the most power in each area from how fast you move through that section of map (same way some programs give you a dyno graph from logging rpm vs speed), would be a bit sketchy tho.

the other thing that seams to affect timing with e85 a bit is AFR's, the richer you run it the more timing you need for the same result, as the mixture burns slower than a leaner mixture.

I could do that, there is a nice empty out of the way piece of road that has been used for doing AFR's. I can also log the runs, I guess I would log TP(load), RPM, Injector duty cycle, and anythjing else...

But being seat of the pants dyno there's just too many things to look at, mainly the road infront...

I'm not looking to get it perfect, when i get it onto the dyno i can get it sweet there. Just want i little bit more untill then as I've read how good this jungle juice is.

Also I probably won't even be looking for more top end power, I'm really interested in getting more low down torque and boost response.

yer finishing it off on the dyno would be a good idea. its not really a seat of the pants dyno tho, if you throw in more timing everywhere and your run takes a full second less to get from speed x to speed y in the same conditions then your likely making more power, you'd simply do this for each cell, very time consuming and not ideal but it gives you an idea.

until the dyno just throw in a few degrees everywhere and go from there. you can be pretty agressive everywhere off full boost to get it nice and responsive. i'd keep it under 50 degrees on light load til on the dyno tho

Cheers Jonno, advice is muchly appreciated.

There's actualy 2 cells in the Stock base map that are on 51, but they're on extremely light load and 3krpm-ish...

I'll concentrate on the mid part of the map where the values are ranging from 40 down to 20 or so.

Can't wait to get the juice in and running

yer stock map goes up to around 50 in a couple of spots, but with good fuel you can spread this out and go that high on a much larger area of the map.

for example, this is one of my maps running BP98, ignore all the cells with 10, they're not used

ignmap2.jpg

Edited by JonnoHR31
was sorta halfway through tuning after going from .82 gt30 on stock manifolded 25 to 1.06 TS gt30 30det. boost is around 22psi

Ahh that makes the difference. P16 is your real boost threshold then.

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

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...