Those running flex fuel get in here :)

[hellno]

Put t if ar

Ok, weather permitting I'll be adding my first few gallons of Ethanol to the tank tomorrow. Fingers crossed.

It looks like there's a couple thresholds that can be set to basically turn on when it's using flex fuel tables in terms of alcohol %. Where do you have your set? It's a percentage value. I was think 20% would be a good number? Anything above that and it starts using the flex fuel tables for timing and what not. I'm still learning about this, but I think it uses a multiplier and as more Ethanol is detected you get more from those tables. So it detects 30% ethanol you get 70% of your 93 tables and 30% from the Ethanol tables for example.

put That e85 in it @Speedy! and feel the power

 

[coolblue]

That’s exactly what I have , flex for every day driving and I have a E85 tune for racing that works well with all my pulleys

Stock 02 sensors ?. Curt uses inferred logic (or some such theory) on his tunes where others use different wideband sensors for a truer reading supposedly. But as Curt has stated the diff between hardcore E85 and flex tune is barely noticeable unless your flat out and looking for every last bit at the track. Also, you car has held together unbelievably well so it must work and he must know what he's doing. PLUS, your numbers don't exactly suck either . LOL.
Just curious.

 

[hellno]

Stock 02 sensors ?. Curt uses inferred logic (or some such theory) on his tunes where others use different wideband sensors for a truer reading supposedly. But as Curt has stated the diff between hardcore E85 and flex tune is barely noticeable unless your flat out and looking for every last bit at the track. Also, you car has held together unbelievably well so it must work and he must know what he's doing. PLUS, your numbers don't exactly suck either . LOL.
Just curious.

I use the stock 02sendors

 

[Phast Hemi]

With 93 now 40-50 cents a gallon cheaper than e85, i asked Curt for a tune that i could run pump 93 on with my bigger injectors. He sent me a flex fuel tune which i loaded and started using today. This tune wont be used for racing. Only for daily driving or if need to bug out with all this apocalypse crap. a fill up on 93 today was about $14 ( 1.29/gal).

 

[Phast Hemi]

I've started playing with Flex Fuel a bit now that I have a more beefy fuel system with the dual pump drop in kit. I'll be limited on boost to where I'm at now, which is a Litens 2.72 and I see about 16.5 - 17.5 pounds of boost depending on weather. I'm running ID1000 injectors.

With the dual pump system I have quite a bit of fuel system over head with injectors at 50% DC max and fuel pumps at about 65-70% max DC. Fuel pressure is healthy at about 83psi at WOT.

I'm hoping I can start to play around with the timing a tid bit when I add E85 to the tank.

I'm curious what you guys see for alcohol content on standard 93 octane pump gas. Our local pumps claim "up to 10% ethanol". However I've found some brands of 93 octane read as high as 23% like Racetrack for example where Shell 93 will read 4% in 500HP mode and 11.5% in 707HP mode. I thought that was kinda interesting as well.

Those injectors are a little small. You prolly should keep your ethanol content under 35% if you plan on going WOT with id1000. Assume pump 93 will have 10% which gives you room to add up to 25% ethanol. Your best bet is to creep up on it and gradually add ethanol until your IDC gets to the edge of your comfort range.

 

[fubar569]

All about the fuel system behind them.

Not everyone needs 1300 or 1700 injectors for an upper only car.

 

[Blkout]

All about the fuel system behind them.

Not everyone needs 1300 or 1700 injectors for an upper only car.

I have not seen a reputable tuner recommend anything less and FiC 1200 or ID1300s for E85.

 

[Speedy!]

Those injectors are a little small. You prolly should keep your ethanol content under 35% if you plan on going WOT with id1000. Assume pump 93 will have 10% which gives you room to add up to 25% ethanol. Your best bet is to creep up on it and gradually add ethanol until your IDC gets to the edge of your comfort range.

Yes, sneaking up on it for sure. I had hoped to get to E50 as that seems to be the sweet spot for really getting the advantage from ethanol and it diminished somewhat above that. See below for my results thus far.

All about the fuel system behind them.

Not everyone needs 1300 or 1700 injectors for an upper only car.

I believe it was Livernois that posted up they were running E85 on ID1050x a while back and when I asked them how, they said the fuel system behind them was the key. Remember my car is a simple upper pulley 17-18psi setup. Most folks running flex are running smaller pulleys or upper/lower making 20psi, so I'm hoping my fuel system demands are less and we'll be good to go. Testing will see but if what I'm reading is right, E50 is almost 100 octane and that's far better than just 93. Anyone know the actual octane ratings of the mixes? I read E40 is like 98 octane.

My first test results are in and very promising. Mike@OSTDyno and I have been working on this in pieces, and he and I work well together since we tend to think similarly. Step one was to get alcohol % to read correctly and consistently. I started with Shell 93 in the tank and Mike had to do some adjusting based on our assumption the fuel had around 10% ethanol since pumps say "fuels can contain up to 10% ethanol". We got to where I was seeing 5 - 11.5% in the logs which felt right. I then tried a different brand fuel as a test, Racetrack 93 and it read 18-23%. Mike thought something wasn't right but when I ran that fuel out of the car and put Shell 93 from the same station back in, the readings dropped back to 0-5% after a bit of driving on the Shell brand. I did some reloading of the 93 octane tune, thanks @hellno for that tip, resetting of adaptives, etc to confirm we would get consistent readings and we were. I put in more Shell 93 and one batch just read 0%.

Now that alcohol seemed good time to add some pump E85 and start testing the fueling. I tested the fuel and beaker showed E83. I had just under 3 gallons of Shell 93 in the tank which had been reading 0% alcohol. I put in 7.1 gallons of the pump E83 and started driving. After 2-3 minutes the log showed 10% alcohol, then 15%, then it started going up quickly to 26%, 38.5%, 47%, and finally after 5 minutes or so 57% and leveled off there. I was shooting for E50 and according to my math the 3 gallon 7 gallon mix would put me right around that mark and it did.

I wanted E50 so I could test my injectors and fuel system to see how much we could get to. On gasoline my inj DC was 50% in cold dense 50 degree air and nearly 18psi of boost so I had some overhead. Fuel pump DC was in the low 70s%. I made a quick WOT hit from 4,000 - 6200. It was mid 60s ambient air temp and the car made right at 17psi of boost. Inj DC was 64% and fuel pump was 75% with steady 83psi fuel pressure. Mike reduced the timing in the alcohol tables for this test to not only keep things extra safe but to also confirm the right tables are being used for the change in fuel type and they are. I sent him the logs and we'll see what's next.

One cool thing is he set my onboard AFR gauge in a way that I can tell when it's reading alcohol. When the reading is below 5% the AFR reads 14-14.3 idle and cruise. As alcohol starts to be read the AFR reading richens up. 20% is low 12s idle and cruise, 57% was mid 10s idle and cruise. I like that so I always have a reference point to know it's working as expected.

This is all new to me and it's been fun to start learning about it, but you quickly realize that just when you think you've gotten some tuning stuff figured out there's a whole other ball game to get in to. This is pretty complex and not just some simple tweaks to a tune to make it flex ready. One thing I'm curious about is how the fueling and timing adjust based on the percentage of alcohol detected. For a gasoline and separate E85 tune it's a simple binary tune change. For flex it's going to have to blend fueling and timing tables together in some way and use a percentage of each based on ethanol content. I haven't quite figured out how that works yet but I assume it's some kind of multiplier table and also why flex tunes can't be as aggressive as straight E85 tunes. You have to leave some cushion for an alcohol % calculation factor.

More to come....

 

[coolblue]

Yes, sneaking up on it for sure. I had hoped to get to E50 as that seems to be the sweet spot for really getting the advantage from ethanol and it diminished somewhat above that. See below for my results thus far.



I believe it was Livernois that posted up they were running E85 on ID1050x a while back and when I asked them how, they said the fuel system behind them was the key. Remember my car is a simple upper pulley 17-18psi setup. Most folks running flex are running smaller pulleys or upper/lower making 20psi, so I'm hoping my fuel system demands are less and we'll be good to go. Testing will see but if what I'm reading is right, E50 is almost 100 octane and that's far better than just 93. Anyone know the actual octane ratings of the mixes? I read E40 is like 98 octane.

My first test results are in and very promising. Mike@OSTDyno and I have been working on this in pieces, and he and I work well together since we tend to think similarly. Step one was to get alcohol % to read correctly and consistently. I started with Shell 93 in the tank and Mike had to do some adjusting based on our assumption the fuel had around 10% ethanol since pumps say "fuels can contain up to 10% ethanol". We got to where I was seeing 5 - 11.5% in the logs which felt right. I then tried a different brand fuel as a test, Racetrack 93 and it read 18-23%. Mike thought something wasn't right but when I ran that fuel out of the car and put Shell 93 from the same station back in, the readings dropped back to 0-5% after a bit of driving on the Shell brand. I did some reloading of the 93 octane tune, thanks @hellno for that tip, resetting of adaptives, etc to confirm we would get consistent readings and we were. I put in more Shell 93 and one batch just read 0%.

Now that alcohol seemed good time to add some pump E85 and start testing the fueling. I tested the fuel and beaker showed E83. I had just under 3 gallons of Shell 93 in the tank which had been reading 0% alcohol. I put in 7.1 gallons of the pump E83 and started driving. After 2-3 minutes the log showed 10% alcohol, then 15%, then it started going up quickly to 26%, 38.5%, 47%, and finally after 5 minutes or so 57% and leveled off there. I was shooting for E50 and according to my math the 3 gallon 7 gallon mix would put me right around that mark and it did.

I wanted E50 so I could test my injectors and fuel system to see how much we could get to. On gasoline my inj DC was 50% in cold dense 50 degree air and nearly 18psi of boost so I had some overhead. Fuel pump DC was in the low 70s%. I made a quick WOT hit from 4,000 - 6200. It was mid 60s ambient air temp and the car made right at 17psi of boost. Inj DC was 64% and fuel pump was 75% with steady 83psi fuel pressure. Mike reduced the timing in the alcohol tables for this test to not only keep things extra safe but to also confirm the right tables are being used for the change in fuel type and they are. I sent him the logs and we'll see what's next.

One cool thing is he set my onboard AFR gauge in a way that I can tell when it's reading alcohol. When the reading is below 5% the AFR reads 14-14.3 idle and cruise. As alcohol starts to be read the AFR reading richens up. 20% is low 12s idle and cruise, 57% was mid 10s idle and cruise. I like that so I always have a reference point to know it's working as expected.

This is all new to me and it's been fun to start learning about it, but you quickly realize that just when you think you've gotten some tuning stuff figured out there's a whole other ball game to get in to. This is pretty complex and not just some simple tweaks to a tune to make it flex ready. One thing I'm curious about is how the fueling and timing adjust based on the percentage of alcohol detected. For a gasoline and separate E85 tune it's a simple binary tune change. For flex it's going to have to blend fueling and timing tables together in some way and use a percentage of each based on ethanol content. I haven't quite figured out how that works yet but I assume it's some kind of multiplier table and also why flex tunes can't be as aggressive as straight E85 tunes. You have to leave some cushion for an alcohol % calculation factor.

More to come....

Curt Dusterhoff (No disrespect AT ALL to you or Mike, only stating as a point of common reference) mentioned this along time ago in a thread I cannot find. I also referenced it in another thread not too long ago. He seems to use what I can only reference as 'inferred logic' and uses the stock sensors. He seems to use the same AFR type readings your picking up on with E85 and puts in value for it, then I assume he tunes for it (I have never even talked to Curt ) so I'm putting this together and reading between the lines. He also stated that the diff between all out E85 and a flex tune is negligible for real world street/race combo and only really noticeable for a MAX eta on dedicated track car or hero run. Point is some tuners are using aftermarket alcohol sensors (for a truer alcohol reading), even bigger injectors and more complicated and exotic tuning, and yatta yatta yatta, but if Curt (Or you and Mike) can get 95+ % of what's available with what ya' got for less work and less money it's seems like a no brainer to me to just use the simpler already available system and logic. If I'm on the street (or strip) and putting 900 WHP to the tire, but with the "better" (more work, more expensive, more complicated) tune with more accurate readings gets me 930/950, what's the diff I don't have a 15" tire to hold it ?. Maybe @hellno can address this without giving away the store.

 

[hellno]

Curt Dusterhoff (No disrespect AT ALL to you or Mike, only stating as a point of common reference) mentioned this along time ago in a thread I cannot find. I also referenced it in another thread not too long ago. He seems to use what I can only reference as 'inferred logic' and uses the stock sensors. He seems to use the same AFR type readings your picking up on with E85 and puts in value for it, then I assume he tunes for it (I have never even talked to Curt ) so I'm putting this together and reading between the lines. He also stated that the diff between all out E85 and a flex tune is negligible for real world street/race combo and only really noticeable for a MAX eta on dedicated track car or hero run. Point is some tuners are using aftermarket alcohol sensors (for a truer alcohol reading), even bigger injectors and more complicated and exotic tuning, and yatta yatta yatta, but if Curt (Or you and Mike) can get 95+ % of what's available with what ya' got for less work and less money it's seems like a no brainer to me to just use the simpler already available system and logic. If I'm on the street (or strip) and putting 900 WHP to the tire, but with the "better" (more work, more expensive, more complicated) tune with more accurate readings gets me 930/950, what's the diff I don't have a 15" tire to hold it ?. Maybe @hellno can address this without giving away the store.

I don’t believe that even if you had the alcohol content reading 100 percent it would be able to be tuned any better I usually run anything from 80-90 percent alcohol ( ignite 90 gives about 30 whp) with no tuning changes ) I’m already at 21.5 degrees of timing and could only add up to 23 from what I understand, just make sure when you race to test the alcohol to be sure it’s ready to send

 

[FFBOS]

Inferred logic works, but the customer has to have the FULL knowledge of what is going on.

There is only one "true" flex fuel out right now that uses an actual sensor and controls timing off of the actual ethanol reading at the fuel rail.

 

[Jungle Cat]

I thought owners manual says no more than 15 percent for these cars? Living in a Northern climate I wouldn’t risk it myself. Are any performance benefits worth that risk?

 

[Speedy!]

Curt Dusterhoff (No disrespect AT ALL to you or Mike, only stating as a point of common reference) mentioned this along time ago in a thread I cannot find. I also referenced it in another thread not too long ago. He seems to use what I can only reference as 'inferred logic' and uses the stock sensors. He seems to use the same AFR type readings your picking up on with E85 and puts in value for it, then I assume he tunes for it (I have never even talked to Curt ) so I'm putting this together and reading between the lines. He also stated that the diff between all out E85 and a flex tune is negligible for real world street/race combo and only really noticeable for a MAX eta on dedicated track car or hero run. Point is some tuners are using aftermarket alcohol sensors (for a truer alcohol reading), even bigger injectors and more complicated and exotic tuning, and yatta yatta yatta, but if Curt (Or you and Mike) can get 95+ % of what's available with what ya' got for less work and less money it's seems like a no brainer to me to just use the simpler already available system and logic. If I'm on the street (or strip) and putting 900 WHP to the tire, but with the "better" (more work, more expensive, more complicated) tune with more accurate readings gets me 930/950, what's the diff I don't have a 15" tire to hold it ?. Maybe @hellno can address this without giving away the store.

I think this is pretty accurate from a max performance perspective. I've done a lot or reading up on the pros and cons of E85 and it's one of the reasons I wanted a flex fuel solution vs a dedicated E85 tune. Options are good

There are three primary benefits of E85 as I understand them:

1. Increased octane - E85 is reported to be between 105 - 114 octane depending on who you believe which allows more timing advance
2. Increased cooling - ethanol has a cooling effect
3. Increased volume of fuel - ethanol requires more fuel to be sprayed as we all know, about 30% more, and this increases cylinder pressure (compression) which in turn increases power

I think the primary benefit comes from items 1 and 2 in that order. Each degree of timing is worth around 11rwhp (or more), so if you can add 5 degrees you gain about 55+rwhp. To @hellno comment above that's only true up to a point, you can't just keep adding timing and gaining power, there'll be a timing advance that quits making any more power and you've found the max and should back off a degree or so. You're on the dyno at 21.5 degrees of timing and you add a degree to 22.5 and the power stays the same or goes down, as an example.

Inferred logic works, but the customer has to have the FULL knowledge of what is going on.

There is only one "true" flex fuel out right now that uses an actual sensor and controls timing off of the actual ethanol reading at the fuel rail.

I don't know I'd call that the only "true flex" solution. I used to think the same thing until I talked to Curt and he educated me that Chevy is the ONLY manufacturer that uses an actual ethanol sensor at the fuel rail as an ethanol calculation variable. All others use onboard sensors like wide bands, injector pw, etc to make those decisions. I was surprised to hear this. If you have information to the contrary I'd be interested in reading it though. Dodge makes several flex fuel vehicles these days and none use an actual sensor.

My 2016 Camaro 2SS has a plug in the engine bay for a flex fuel sensor and turning it on in the tune is very simple. The kit is like $300 but the car's NA so I've never bothered.

 

[curt_dusterhofftuning]

Inferred logic works, but the customer has to have the FULL knowledge of what is going on.

There is only one "true" flex fuel out right now that uses an actual sensor and controls timing off of the actual ethanol reading at the fuel rail.

Inferred logic is "true" flex-fuel. I'm not really sure where this misconception came from. It is exactly as FCA and Ford do from the factory on their flex-fuel equipped vehicles. I'm inclined to believe that if the manufacturers thought it was safe enough for a production vehicle with a warranty it's just fine. Not to mention we have been doing this for 3 years now with little issues.

From what I understand, the systems out there that use an inline sensor are doing so at the expense of losing the iat sensor. Not exactly a good tradeoff IMO. I'd rather do inferred flex-fuel than lose the iat on a pd blown car.

 

[Speedy!]

Inferred logic is "true" flex-fuel. I'm not really sure where this misconception came from. It is exactly as FCA and Ford do from the factory on their flex-fuel equipped vehicles. I'm inclined to believe that if the manufacturers thought it was safe enough for a production vehicle with a warranty it's just fine. Not to mention we have been doing this for 3 years now with little issues.

From what I understand, the systems out there that use an inline sensor are doing so at the expense of losing the iat sensor. Not exactly a good tradeoff IMO. I'd rather do inferred flex-fuel than lose the iat on a pd blown car.

If that's true I agree 100%. Plus less complexity and cost as was mentioned previously.

 

[curt_dusterhofftuning]

If that's true I agree 100%. Plus less complexity and cost as was mentioned previously.

This is my understanding. They are using the iat input to simulate flex-fuel. Using the iat spark and fuel adders but it wouldn't cover things like startup fueling transient fueling etc.

 

[hellno]

GO FLEX FUEL AND FLEX YOUR MUSCLES 🦾

 

[coolblue]

Inferred logic is "true" flex-fuel. I'm not really sure where this misconception came from. It is exactly as FCA and Ford do from the factory on their flex-fuel equipped vehicles. I'm inclined to believe that if the manufacturers thought it was safe enough for a production vehicle with a warranty it's just fine. Not to mention we have been doing this for 3 years now with little issues.

From what I understand, the systems out there that use an inline sensor are doing so at the expense of losing the iat sensor. Not exactly a good tradeoff IMO. I'd rather do inferred flex-fuel than lose the iat on a pd blown car.

Thanks Curt for getting involved with this conversation and giving a direct answer. You talk plainly and not from an ivory tower. That should, and is, respected..... But, your known to pal around with @hellno...that I'm not to sure about. . Thanks again.

 

[hellno]

Thanks Curt for getting involved with this conversation and giving a direct answer. You talk plainly and not from an ivory tower. That should, and is, respected..... But, your known to pal around with @hellno...that I'm not to sure about. . Thanks again.

Hey make @curt_dusterhofftuning look good
Stage 4 package that advertises 9.5 145 traps and mines doing 9.5 144 on 15 lbs of boost and 9.20 on 18.5 lbs of boost 148 traps

 

[FFBOS]

This is my understanding. They are using the iat input to simulate flex-fuel. Using the iat spark and fuel adders but it wouldn't cover things like startup fueling transient fueling etc.

There is an actual innovative gauge in the car, but content is displayed via IAT on u-connect if the customer wants. IAT is not lost, just swapped is all.