Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

taken off another forum

User 1 - Caltex are only and have only produced 70% Ethanol content fuel.

Its consistant 70% all year around at three local servo's here.

User 2 - He's telling me he emailed them today and they are switching to a summer blend 85% on november 30

He has gone with the decision to tune for united and then run caltex if needed.

sits tight and waits for confirmation :D

i was running Eflex at the beginning of all this, and despite a batch or two or low to mid 60's, after that, my sensor only ever read E70,bang on every time. Even in summer. We know that Caltex up until this point has never switched to a summer blend.

Then united came back in the game (big time here in Melb) and they've been very consistent, i've never seen lower then 82 or higher than 85.

I'm more than happy to run a tank of Eflex after Nov 30th to confirm this for you :)

cool cheers might make it like a week after to make sure their tanks have been over 90% refilled with a new blend

i found a quote from Martin Donnon saying Caltex had capped their E85 @ 70% for the first 2 years maybe theyre at the end of that 2 years

i will go look for quote

Q: Whats better United E85 or Caltex E-Flex?

A: That depends on the application. The major difference is that United tends to test at around 85% - 88% Ethanol content while Caltex have frozen their E-Flex at 70% Ethanol for the first two years of production. This means that although there is around a 2% greater power potential with United, the Caltex is better in 'fuel system limited' applications where the injectors and or pump are becoming marginal

Source

to me (and i've just realised this.... hahahaha) it's like having Lindt's 70% dark chocolate compared to Greens organic single origin 85% dark chocolate... you can't go back, 70% is too sweet - you need the hard stuff from then on :D

maybe my subconscious has been directing me to choose the 85% dark chocolate lol :D haha, can't believe i haven't made this connection before!

seriously though, Greens 85% is the absolute shizzle.... just like United's E85 :D

but bring on the Caltex E85! It feels like a cop out using it at the moment, more 'true' E85 outlets the better!!

I will just stick to united 85 for now. Amazing how the powerfc is so robust still with an e85 tune still.

My car is still using the nismo intank fuel pump. Not far off from reaching the 400kw mark on basic mods. The id1000s are only maxing out between 73-78% duty. So definitely impressed it with.

Go to Trent at Chequered for any sort of tune :)

  • 2 weeks later...

Great write up Daniel.

I have a sensor ready to install in my boat, I was just wondering why you tee'd off your fuel return line and didn't run all the return fuel through the sensor?

Is the sensor restrictive?

I have twin 044's and was hoping to run the return through the sensor...

Great write up Daniel.

I have a sensor ready to install in my boat, I was just wondering why you tee'd off your fuel return line and didn't run all the return fuel through the sensor?

Is the sensor restrictive?

I have twin 044's and was hoping to run the return through the sensor...

It's too small. Tee it off

It's only in the return line, it won't affect the maximum flow as the injectors are before it.

If you look inside your reg you will probably find a 2-3mm hole for the return bypass. It won't be an issue imo. I would still 'T' it off though just to be sure.

weird how Syd seems to vary more, and seems to be more on the high side? my united has been bang on E85 last few times, and before that it generally was 82-83 - but it's still been a very tight range.

It's only in the return line, it won't affect the maximum flow as the injectors are before it.

If you look inside your reg you will probably find a 2-3mm hole for the return bypass. It won't be an issue imo. I would still 'T' it off though just to be sure.

uhh yeah. restriction in the return so will bump up fuel pressure if anything, brain fade!

its fine running it full return on a few 400 +rwkw cars now.

Wouldn't it depend on what the fuel system setup is? IE having 2 x 044's at full noise at idle (if they ain't setup in a staggered setup).

its fine running it full return on a few 400 +rwkw cars now.

So you don't have any weird fuel pressure related issues at really low load with a big (300+lph worth) where the FPR would be dumping fuel back to the return?

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

    • Hello, sorry for being late to join the discussion, but my clock just died on me.   Ive tried to look at Michaels digital clock repair.docx and it doesnt work maybe the file has expired.   Please let me know if you can re upload it or take some youtube videos to show us how to get the clock installed? thanks
    • I thought that might be the case, thats what I'll start saving for. Thanks for the info 
    • Ps i found the below forum and it seems to be the same scenario Im dealing with. Going to check my ECU coolant temp wire tomorrow    From NICOclub forum: s1 RB25det flooding at start up Thu Apr 11, 2013 7:23 am I am completely lost on this. Car ran perfectly fine when I parked it at the end of the year. I took the engine out and painted the engine bay, and put a fuel cell with an inline walbro 255 instead of the in tank unit I had last year. After reinstalling everything, the engine floods when the fuel pump primes. if i pull the fuel pump fuse it'll start, and as soon as I put the fuse back in it starts running ridiculously rich. I checked the tps voltage, and its fine. Cleaned the maf as it had some dust from sitting on a shelf all winter, fuel pressure is correct while running, but wont fire until there is less than 5psi in the lines. The fuel lines are run correctly. I have found a few threads with the same problem but no actual explanation of what fixed it, the threads just ended. Any help would be appreciated. Rb25det s1 walbro255 fuel pump nismo fpr holset hx35 turbo fmic 3" exhaust freddy intake manifold q45tb q45 maf   Re: s1 RB25det flooding at start up Fri Apr 12, 2013 5:07 am No, I didn't. I found the problem though. There was a break in one of the ecu coolant temp sensor wires. Once it was repaired it fired right up with no problems. I would have never thought a non working coolant temp sensor would have caused such an issue.
    • Hi sorry late reply I didnt get a chance to take any pics (my mechanics on the other side of the city) but the plugs were fouled from being too rich. I noticed the MAF wasn't genuine, so I replaced it with a genuine green label unit. I also swapped in a different ignitor, but the issue remains. I've narrowed it down a bit now: - If I unplug and reconnect the fuel lines and install fresh spark plugs, the car starts right up and runs perfectly. Took it around the block with no issues - As soon as I shut it off and try to restart, it won't start again - Fuel pressure while cranking is steady around 40 psi, injectors have good spray, return line is clear, and the FPR vacuum is working. It just seems like it's getting flooded after the first start I unplugged coolant sensors to see if its related to ECU flooding but that didnt make a difference. Im thinking its related to this because this issue only started happening after fixing coolant leaks and replacing the bottom part of the stock manifolds coolant pipe. My mechanic took off the inlet to get to get to do these repairs. My mechanics actually just an old mate who's retired now so ill be taking it to a different mechanic who i know has exp with RBs to see if they find anything. If you have any ideas please send em lll give it a try. Ive tried other things like swapping the injectors, fuel rail, different fuel pressure regs, different ignitor, spark plugs, comp test and MAF but the same issue persists.
    • My return flow is custom and puts the return behind the reo, instead of at the bottom. All my core is in the air flow, rather than losing some of it up behind the reo. I realise that the core really acts more as a spiky heatsink than as a constant rate heat exchanger, and that therefore size is important.... but mine fits everything I needed and wanted without having to cut anything, and that's worth something too. And there won't be a hot patch of core up behind the reo after every hit, releasing heat back into the intake air.
×
×
  • Create New...