E85 Discussion - HPFP lubrication and Flow issues

[Realgib3]

Ok, well now that that's settled...

I am NOT a fan of over scaling your maf in either direction for any reason. We were forced to do it in the load cap days, but we shouldn't have to now. The reasons I don't like this kind of scaling are well know. The MAF cal plays a huuuge role in how everything else in the tune is calculated... so instead of scaling the MAF up to run E... you may just want to target the correct AFR's for you Exx mix.

I think this is where all this craziness today started with Superskater. Soooo here's my worksheet on finding which AFR to run for you mix of E without scaling your MAF for it...

Assumptions:

Gasoline Stoich (1L) ~ 14.68
E85 Stoich (1L )~ 9.76

Gasoline Max Power (Rich) ~ 12.5 (.85L)
Gasoline Max Power (Lean) ~13.23 (.90L)

E85 Max Power (Rich) ~ 6.98 (.72L)
E85 Max Power (Lean)~ 8.47 (.87L)

So... keeping it really simple... A good Lambda to run, no matter your mix would be around .86L (As Bucker is) because this is in the Max Power range of BOTH gasoline and E85. This means, with less E you could run leaner and with more E you could run richer... but so you don't have to mess with it at all to stay in each Max Power range... just use .86L

With this in mind, your AP/DH will still be reading in AFR, so we'll essentially be targeting (.86*14.68)= 12.62 AFR so THAT is the AFR you should be seeing on your gauges.

Sooo if you want to change your AFR Targets instead of scaling the MAF, these calculations should get you on the right track.

Note: Both MAF scaling and lowering AFR targets are using the same ideas and accomplishing the same thing. I'm just not a fan of MAF scaling, so I figured I'd show this way as well.

[Enki]

This must be at least part of the reason running the OTS boost tune I'm getting a big kick in the pants from running mix; without the MAF cal, it's dropping me right on to 11.6 measured AFR (so just about perfect according to your above chart).

[rfinkle2]

Originally Posted by Enki This must be at least part of the reason running the OTS boost tune I'm getting a big kick in the pants from running mix; without the MAF cal, it's dropping me right on to 11.6 measured AFR (so just about perfect according to your above chart).

I want a kick in the pants too.

[Enki]

Originally Posted by rfinkle2 I want a kick in the pants too.

Let's take this forepla--I mean conversation to PM.

[Ziggo]

Originally Posted by Realgib3 Ok, well now that that's settled... I am NOT a fan of over scaling your maf in either direction for any reason. We were forced to do it in the load cap days, but we shouldn't have to now. The reasons I don't like this kind of scaling are well know. The MAF cal plays a huuuge role in how everything else in the tune is calculated... so instead of scaling the MAF up to run E... you may just want to target the correct AFR's for you Exx mix. I think this is where all this craziness today started with Superskater. Soooo here's my worksheet on finding which AFR to run for you mix of E without scaling your MAF for it... Assumptions: Gasoline Stoich (1L) ~ 14.68 E85 Stoich (1L )~ 9.76 Gasoline Max Power (Rich) ~ 12.5 (.85L) Gasoline Max Power (Lean) ~13.23 (.90L) E85 Max Power (Rich) ~ 6.98 (.72L) E85 Max Power (Lean)~ 8.47 (.87L) So... keeping it really simple... A good Lambda to run, no matter your mix would be around .86L (As Bucker is) because this is in the Max Power range of BOTH gasoline and E85. This means, with less E you could run leaner and with more E you could run richer... but so you don't have to mess with it at all to stay in each Max Power range... just use .86L With this in mind, your AP/DH will still be reading in AFR, so we'll essentially be targeting (.86*14.68)= 12.62 AFR so THAT is the AFR you should be seeing on your gauges. Sooo if you want to change your AFR Targets instead of scaling the MAF, these calculations should get you on the right track. Note: Both MAF scaling and lowering AFR targets are using the same ideas and accomplishing the same thing. I'm just not a fan of MAF scaling, so I figured I'd show this way as well.

Only thing I would add to this is that you want to only change the targets in the OL tables, and that if you do not rescale your MAF, you are going to throw cels on E85. Also, most of the information I have seen shows the best power on E85 in the .78-.82 range, so .86 is a little lean.

[Realgib3]

Originally Posted by Ziggo Only thing I would add to this is that you want to only change the targets in the OL tables, and that if you do not rescale your MAF, you are going to throw cels on E85. Also, most of the information I have seen shows the best power on E85 in the .78-.82 range, so .86 is a little lean.

Yes you'll need to do just your ol targets and the cl/ol transition. Transitioning to ol early will make a smooth transition easier to accomplish.

Also, some more simple math could be done to find the optimal %L for each mix but I was just using the. 86 for simplicity since it does fall inti the efficiency of both fuels.

[Ziggo]

Just found something interesting when working the spreadsheet. Two wrongs do make a right.

If you were not to scale your MAF and instead use a skewed lambda target, the AFR readout would be correct. Basically, you want to run .78 lambda (7.6 AFR E85), but you didn't scale your maf, so you would command a .52 lambda target to achieve a .78 lambda. Guess what a .52 lambda target is when adjusted for what ATR/ECU will interpert it as. (hint: 7.6)

What that means, if you want to skew the fuel targets instead of the MAFCAL, just enter what AFR is max power for the blend you are running into ATR, and it will calculate the skewed lambda target for you.

[Tomas]

I've been experimenting with 4g to a tank of E85 Ueber Cool Super Fuel but my results are dispiriting. I don't see any higher knock resistance at all. I am at exactly the same point I was when I maxed out my ATP3071 on 93 oct and a D03 nozzle. The attached logs show attempting to increase load by about 10 points which starts to show signs of knock.
Running DP TP SRI.
No MAF scaling. Just lowered WOT OT values to account for higher LTFTs which are at about 9-15 higher.
I probably need to get a better EM and a big MAF housing but I was hoping I could at least get me some 20 gs or so more flow with a E85 blend. Not happening so far. Timing is pretty conservative I think.
Anyone else not seeing the promise land ?

3071-17-4th gear on 4gE85.xls

3071-17-4th gear-2 on 4g e85.xls

[Ziggo]

E85 interpolation spreadsheet. enter values in the green cells, it will interpolate the rest for the blends. MSF doesn't allow me to upload the native .ods format, so I saves as a .xls, but I don't know how good the open office translator is.

My % scaling doesn't account for the slightly higher density of E85 compared to gasoline, so its conservative. If you use it as a starting point, it will tend to result in richer than intended results.

[Ziggo]

Originally Posted by Tomas I've been experimenting with 4g to a tank of E85 Ueber Cool Super Fuel but my results are dispiriting. I don't see any higher knock resistance at all. I am at exactly the same point I was when I maxed out my ATP3071 on 93 oct and a D03 nozzle. The attached logs show attempting to increase load by about 10 points which starts to show signs of knock. Running DP TP SRI. No MAF scaling. Just lowered WOT OT values to account for higher LTFTs which are at about 9-15 higher. I probably need to get a better EM and a big MAF housing but I was hoping I could at least get me some 20 gs or so more flow with a E85 blend. Not happening so far. Timing is pretty conservative I think. Anyone else not seeing the promise land ? Attachment 41679 Attachment 41680

With that much E85, at 19psi and that timing I would have to think that is false knock. That looks like one of my logs @20psi, 120*BATs & similar timing with pump 93.

[Tomas]

Originally Posted by Ziggo With that much E85, at 19psi and that timing I would have to think that is false knock. That looks like one of my logs @20psi, 120*BATs & similar timing with pump 93.

I doubt it. The knock disappears completely if I lower timing 2 degs. That's why I also don't think seals are the problem. But may be I am missing something.

[Ziggo]

Originally Posted by Tomas I doubt it. The knock disappears completely if I lower timing 2 degs. That's why I also don't think seals are the problem. But may be I am missing something.

I don't like your story.... I am going to be down in plano next week for the cobb first thursday meet and I was planning on picking up 10gal of e85 for testing. I am hoping it will resolve my knock issues, which are very similar to yours. 1-2* counts @ ~6300, 10* timing and 20psi. I am seriously considering enabling the ignition comp/cyl and putting a -1 in cyl 3 to see if it helps too.

[superskaterxes]

so wait, why would u only edit the OL tables? why cant u set all your CL cruise tables to like E85 stoich so your trims are perfect?

P.S. im glad i started this crazy storm because it sounds like we learned alot! (at least i did)

[Bucker]

Honestly, unless the table to scale L is discovered, I will stick with the MAF scaling for the sake of myself, people I help, and sanity as a whole.

[Ziggo]

Originally Posted by superskaterxes so wait, why would u only edit the OL tables? why cant u set all your CL cruise tables to like E85 stoich so your trims are perfect? P.S. im glad i started this crazy storm because it sounds like we learned alot! (at least i did)

It will hit it's targets just fine in CL, it will just have to adjust trims to get there, which on high enough blends will be enough to throw CELs. If you adjust the targets, it will just trim to hit the new ones, that's the nature of closed loop. Because the blend requires more fuel than it's expecting, there will always be a trim in closed loop, no matter what you set the targets to, unless you rescale the MAF.

In OL, it won't hit the targets because it never checks the actual vs the commanded thus the need to slew them to be correct.


Zigatapatalka

[Nataphen]

Forgive me if you guys are saying this already and I'm just not getting it. The O2 sensor reads in lambda and is translated to AFR in ATR/AP, correct? When targeting and logging 14.68 AFR, would it be technically reading 1 lambda, no matter what fuel you using? When you target an AFR, is it just reading lambda and translating it to AFR for gasoline?

[Ziggo]

Originally Posted by Nataphen Forgive me if you guys are saying this already and I'm just not getting it. The O2 sensor reads in lambda and is translated to AFR in ATR/AP, correct? When targeting and logging 14.68 AFR, would it be technically reading 1 lambda, no matter what fuel you using? When you target an AFR, is it just reading lambda and translating it to AFR for gasoline?

Exactly, cept when you target a AFR, it's translating that into a lambda target based on gasoline. Then the ecu is generating a pulse width to send based on MAF+RPM (load), the lambda target and a constant based on gasoline. Since we don't have access to this constant we have to modify either the MAF or the lambda target to get the desired pulsewidth/fueling.

In CL the ECU will auto correct to hit it's lambda target using the trims.

[sleepyspeed6]

Originally Posted by Realgib3 Ok, well now that that's settled... I am NOT a fan of over scaling your maf in either direction for any reason. We were forced to do it in the load cap days, but we shouldn't have to now. The reasons I don't like this kind of scaling are well know. The MAF cal plays a huuuge role in how everything else in the tune is calculated... so instead of scaling the MAF up to run E... you may just want to target the correct AFR's for you Exx mix. I think this is where all this craziness today started with Superskater. Soooo here's my worksheet on finding which AFR to run for you mix of E without scaling your MAF for it... Assumptions: Gasoline Stoich (1L) ~ 14.68 E85 Stoich (1L )~ 9.76 Gasoline Max Power (Rich) ~ 12.5 (.85L) Gasoline Max Power (Lean) ~13.23 (.90L) E85 Max Power (Rich) ~ 6.98 (.72L) E85 Max Power (Lean)~ 8.47 (.87L) So... keeping it really simple... A good Lambda to run, no matter your mix would be around .86L (As Bucker is) because this is in the Max Power range of BOTH gasoline and E85. This means, with less E you could run leaner and with more E you could run richer... but so you don't have to mess with it at all to stay in each Max Power range... just use .86L With this in mind, your AP/DH will still be reading in AFR, so we'll essentially be targeting (.86*14.68)= 12.62 AFR so THAT is the AFR you should be seeing on your gauges. Sooo if you want to change your AFR Targets instead of scaling the MAF, these calculations should get you on the right track. Note: Both MAF scaling and lowering AFR targets are using the same ideas and accomplishing the same thing. I'm just not a fan of MAF scaling, so I figured I'd show this way as well.

This would make alot of sense, I was running a 12.7 AFR with 13.5~14.5* timing with no knock. This was done with only 2 gallons of e85 and I haven't done a maf/cal yet I might still have my log. I will check later I'm not on my computer right now.

I thought I would add, that I was a little worried about it being so high. So I went Richer and I started to see KR, I had changed nothing but the AFR. I don't really understand this, maybe someone knows the answer. Looks like I will be going back up in to the 12's until I dyno and can see what timing I can get out of it before MBT.

[Dano]

Great stuff here

e25-30 checking in [3/9 mix] ...no maf scale...WOT trims are perfect...CL trims only +5 cruse and +11 [ouch] at idle so I'll scale those 3 volts LOL

I am seeing no WOT AF shift due to E85 yet and 12pk saw no WOT AF shift until around e40 IIRC...

so I am, and have been on, the "non maf scale" wagon. Maybe its left over trauma from the load cap scaling days IDK

So that only leaves us that are running say 2-3 gallons of E, good maf cal, with only adjusting AF targets for max power. [not even skewing the AF targets if your WOT commanded = actual ]

these last few pages have told us what AF/lambda to target for max power

hats off to the math gurus and chem engineers for providing us with super cool tools to make our speeds that much faster!!

With all that said, I'll leave it to realgib to run 13.5 + AF LOL

[cld12pk2go]

Wow...seems like we are really over thinking things here.

Either way, 21° timing up top is pretty fun:





Hoping for a dyno opportunity in the morning with ~40°F ambient temps...

[cld12pk2go]

Looks like a no-go on the dyno tomorrow tomorrow morning.

Will have to wait for the next 40°F or colder opportunity.

Bummer.

[J-Liss]

clint has very close to the same numbers...with a intake, dp, and internals lol.


BTW he took me for a ride in it today, car is just silly.

[Nataphen]

Dude, spell it "tuned."
Phate's car has to be a beast with that spool time and that much torque. The steering wheel would just be trying to put you in the ditch every time you went near the throttle.

[Bucker]

Originally Posted by Nataphen Dude, spell it "tuned." Phate's car has to be a beast with that spool time and that much torque. The steering wheel would just be trying to put you in the ditch every time you went near the throttle.

I don't make near the torque he does, my my shit gets squirrely in 4th on the highway, lol. 3rd isn't as bad because its spinning.

@Bob Loblaw

[GLORIFIEDBOZO]

Hopefully tomorrow it will begin, 100% E85

[phate]

OK, guys, fun story:

Last week, I was getting some intermittent pressure loss because the solenoid was sticking. So Friday night, I pulled the entire fuel pump and broke it down completely (cause I bought some new Torx bits, and I like working on my car instead of partying or something like that ). It's been ~3k miles since I last did this, and that includes the tail of the dragon trip where I switched to 93 octane.

Everything came out pretty damn CLEAN. I mean, there was a very, very slight residue on the spill valve, and there was a tiny bit of buildup in the piece that holds the piston, but overall, this is the cleanest I've seen it since I started running E85. I did a total cleansing of the fuel pump, so I'll continue to monitor this, but I'm a little relieved.

The problem, of course, is that I changed multiple things at once. Internals, ITFP, and now the switch to winter blend could be causing this. Not sure which factor was the key here :/

[RichieRichness]

I'm sure someone has posted this already but I found this e85 calculator @ Miles Per Dollar Calculator

also found this article on ethanol blends suggesting some better gas milage numbers opposed to e10 mixtures

[silvapain]

Slightly OT, but I had a chance to drive phate's car over the weekend, and my GOD that thing pulls hard. I'm very surprised (and disappointed) more cars aren't going straight E85.

I'm hooked. Pump internals are hopefully going in my car this month, then I'm switching to straight E85.


Tapadatass

[rfinkle2]

I just had a thought that I think would be of help.

I know that the gen1 and gen2 have a cluster test that can be performed, and I believe

that a pretty accurate display of the fuel level in the tank can be viewed digitally.

For those mixing e-85 with 93, I thought it would be handy to use.

Instructions here:
http://www.mazdaspeedforums.org/foru...er-test-75877/

[silvapain]

The DH also can read the fuel level PID and displays in %.


Tapadatass

[Lex]

Hmm, time to start an E85 import business into Canada. Most timing we can run on our "94 octane" here on the west coast is 7-7.5 degrees at redline.

Yup, you read that right. Verified on many local cars now.

[BlueStreak]

Originally Posted by Lex Hmm, time to start an E85 import business into Canada. Most timing we can run on our "94 octane" here on the west coast is 7-7.5 degrees at redline. Yup, you read that right. Verified on many local cars now.

Lex, I ran 11-12 max at redline with the 3071 on Ultra 94.

With meth, I went up to 16 then got scared since at that point, nobody knew where MBT was.

[Tomas]

Originally Posted by BlueStreak Lex, I ran 11-12 max at redline with the 3071 on Ultra 94. With meth, I went up to 16 then got scared since at that point, nobody knew where MBT was.

at what boost pressure at red line?

[BlueStreak]

Originally Posted by Tomas at what boost pressure at red line?

20.5PSI from spoolup to redline.

[Lex]

Originally Posted by BlueStreak Lex, I ran 11-12 max at redline with the 3071 on Ultra 94. With meth, I went up to 16 then got scared since at that point, nobody knew where MBT was.

~17-18 psi (~1.6 load) on the K04 at 6k RPM. East coast gas is better even in Canada.

Essentially with the stock turbo we're stuck in the 280-290whp max range here with the best gas we can get.

[Bucker]

Originally Posted by RichieRichness I'm sure someone has posted this already but I found this e85 calculator @ Miles Per Dollar Calculator also found this article on ethanol blends suggesting some better gas milage numbers opposed to e10 mixtures

I read the executive summary of the ACE Blend study and it seems interesting that there was increased MPG at ~ E20 - E30 fuel. Remember though, this is without a tune and on non-flex fuel cars. I would attribute the fuel savings to the AFR being at a higher efficiency range without a tune on these cars. Pretty neat findings, though!

[event]

Originally Posted by silvapain Slightly OT, but I had a chance to drive phate's car over the weekend, and my GOD that thing pulls hard. I'm very surprised (and disappointed) more cars aren't going straight E85. I'm hooked. Pump internals are hopefully going in my car this month, then I'm switching to straight E85. Tapadatass

Am I the only person in Nator IL who hasn't been in Clint's car?

[phate]

Originally Posted by event Am I the only person in Nator IL who hasn't been in Clint's car?

Pretty much.

[Bucker]

Lol, I want a ride in it...

[superskaterxes]

so just to make sure i have this straight, people arent seeing a change in WOT targets until greater then E40?

i was running the same tank of E20 for the last week and i originally had my targets set to 12.2, then i bumped them to 12.7 and all of a sudden im seeing mid 13's on my log tapering to 12.7 near RL. not sure what happened but i just added some more E85 to make E30 total and im gona keep playing with it.