Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey guys,

So I just bought a new turbo setup (Hypergear SS3-EG, 6Boost manifold, 50mm Turbosmart gate)

And Im going to bolt it all onto my R33 RB25 with Factory Internals.

Im planing on running dual maps with one for 98 and one for E85

I have heard that E85 allows more boost to be run safely, but have no idea where the limit is.

I was planing on tuning at 17psi for 98, what should I be running on e85?

Also, the closest servo that sells ethanol to me is in fact caltex which is e-flex which I will use most of the time.

When I tune the thing, I was planning on going and getting some proper E85, would it still be alright to run on e-flex after that, or should I do it the other way around?

Cheers

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/400355-how-much-boost-with-e85/
Share on other sites

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I was planing on tuning at 17psi for 98, what should I be running on e85?

I am currently running 20psi for 98

My tuner made it a safe tune to be able to run that.

So really depends on what he feels is good for your car.

I have seen people running 23psi on stock internals on E85

what ecu?

i've never really ran more boost on E85, i know some people do... but Trent has always left the PSI the same.

if you're only running E-flex, don't tune on drum E85 - i've never seen Caltex higher than E70 - on a safe tune, driving on 85% wouldn't make a massive difference, but it's not something you'd want to do all the time.

If you've got a newer ECU which can accept a digital input, thinking about getting a flex-fuel setup.

They're the best! Drive around and give no fark what's in the tank :D

Thats the plan :D

And yeah like SS8_gohan said, flex fuel setup is the safe way to go, but if its just running E85 there are heaps of cars doing it reliabily without it...... Just gotta remember to change the boost level under a certain % of ethanol apparently..

Thats the plan :D

And yeah like SS8_gohan said, flex fuel setup is the safe way to go, but if its just running E85 there are heaps of cars doing it reliabily without it...... Just gotta remember to change the boost level under a certain % of ethanol apparently..

Drove on E85 without the sensor for 12 months. Didn't touch anything. Was a tad richer with the Caltex stuff (going off the wideband) but it never knocked.

Still in two minds about the ECU, tossing up between Nistune and PFC... Its just going to come down to whether or not I can find a PFC for the right price before Im ready to tune.

What ECU's suport the flex fuel sensor?

Still in two minds about the ECU, tossing up between Nistune and PFC... Its just going to come down to whether or not I can find a PFC for the right price before Im ready to tune.

What ECU's suport the flex fuel sensor?

if your considering 'flex fuel' setup the above statement of finding an ECU for the 'right price' wont be an issue, the whole setup is exxy and cant be found at the 'right price'.... there is a whole thread on the flex fuel setup...

Link G4

Haltech

are the ECUs I know can take ethanol feedback for fuel trim... there are more Im sure...

Go the G4, only a couple hundred over a PFC at the end of the day. Chequered Tuning were getting a few in so maybe see if you can jump in on that if you're keen.

Don't have to do flex-fuel straight away but if you have to buy an ECU anyway, you'd be mad not to get a flex capable one now

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...