E85 and the little MP112

Stephen31201

Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2015
Posts
195
Reaction score
0
If you guys have FI and live anywhere close to an E85 station its worth the switch. The HP difference (seat of the pants) is awesome for the $ and I just filled up again for $1.65/gallon. I drove this car over 800 miles last weekend and averaged 24mpgs with Lito's tuning before the corn. Now, on corn that definitely isn't happening but I'm not in it for MPGs. Just letting you guys know, because I was getting 17mpgs with the previous tuner and Lito is worth the $$.
 

roberts

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2011
Posts
1,481
Reaction score
2
Location
Bonne Terre, Missouri
e85 burns a lot hotter than 93 so that's y u lose MPG. I have a love/hate with e85. Love when its in my car but hate I gotta fill up a 50 gal drum for it. But im turbo and I think it helps a lot. but no dyno numbers to prove it!
 

Saleen304

Member
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Posts
451
Reaction score
4
e85 burns a lot hotter than 93 so that's y u lose MPG. I have a love/hate with e85. Love when its in my car but hate I gotta fill up a 50 gal drum for it. But im turbo and I think it helps a lot. but no dyno numbers to prove it!


That is incorrect. E85 requires a 30% richer mixture to burn efficiently (stoich). That's why you lose mpg.
 

BruceH

BBB Big Bore Boss 322
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Posts
13,810
Reaction score
21
Location
Pacific Northwest
e85 burns a lot hotter than 93 so that's y u lose MPG. I have a love/hate with e85. Love when its in my car but hate I gotta fill up a 50 gal drum for it. But im turbo and I think it helps a lot. but no dyno numbers to prove it!

It burns cooler. My 322 inch Big Bore made 587rwhp with a M122 DOB kit and about 7psi on e85. Considering that I was running stock cats and shorty headers I thought that was a great return.

If you can run higher compression the mpg loss isn't as great. IMO the biggest benefit is that it won't detonate. Add spark advance until you start to lose power.
 

Stephen31201

Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2015
Posts
195
Reaction score
0
BruceH what spark did you end up with? I know every car is different but I have around 6.5psi and I am at 26*. I am curious how much is left to go.
 

Saleen304

Member
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Posts
451
Reaction score
4
BruceH what spark did you end up with? I know every car is different but I have around 6.5psi and I am at 26*. I am curious how much is left to go.


I am running 15 psi and Lito has me on 23-24*. Oh and I agree that E85 and Lito are the way to go!
 

Stephen31201

Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2015
Posts
195
Reaction score
0
Have you dyno'd it like that? I was thinking of adding a smaller pulley and get the boost up a couple more psi but nervous about the bottom end as well as IATs running the road course for 30 mins.
 

Saleen304

Member
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Posts
451
Reaction score
4
Have you dyno'd it like that? I was thinking of adding a smaller pulley and get the boost up a couple more psi but nervous about the bottom end as well as IATs running the road course for 30 mins.


No dyno yet. My engine is built so no worries about the bottom end. I got a smaller pulley to take it to 17 psi when I want to go all out. I just did a road course last weekend and my temps were surprisingly low. I am spraying water though which helps. I was seeing around 100 degrees with peaks about 120 for the 20 minute session.
 

BruceH

BBB Big Bore Boss 322
Joined
Sep 13, 2009
Posts
13,810
Reaction score
21
Location
Pacific Northwest
BruceH what spark did you end up with? I know every car is different but I have around 6.5psi and I am at 26*. I am curious how much is left to go.

IIRC it was 23 degrees. I never did take the dob setup any higher because 587 was more than I wanted anyway. I'm pretty sure I took the D1 (699rwhp on 19psi with a .030 over stock stroke motor) a little higher with e85. I think the Paxton setup was around 24 and the whipple was 23.

It's pretty amazing that just changing stoich and swapping to e85 generates so much more power in a forced induction setup without changing spark advance. IIRC the Whipple setup gained about 45rwhp and all we did is change stoich in the tune for a base tune. Adding spark gave us more. If I'm remembering it correctly the total gain was about 75rwhp once the tune was finalized.
 

Stephen31201

Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2015
Posts
195
Reaction score
0
Agreed, its pretty sweet. Plus knowing that detonation isnt an issue anymore is a relief! Great power upgrade for no money if you already have big enough pumps and injectors. I was really impressed for 2 days, now I want to add boost. Enough is never enough.
 

stkjock

---- Madmin ----
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Joined
Jul 10, 2007
Posts
40,538
Reaction score
3,340
Location
Long Island NY
e85 burns a lot hotter than 93 so that's y u lose MPG. I have a love/hate with e85. Love when its in my car but hate I gotta fill up a 50 gal drum for it. But im turbo and I think it helps a lot. but no dyno numbers to prove it!

:thud:

get educated before you comment on a topic please.

That is incorrect. E85 requires a 30% richer mixture to burn efficiently (stoich). That's why you lose mpg.
also not correct.

E85 has less energy per volume of fuel. It takes more fuel to provide the same energy. That's why you need more. It's about 33% lower in energy content.

If you can run higher compression the mpg loss isn't as great. IMO the biggest benefit is that it won't detonate. Add spark advance until you start to lose power.

/\ this!!
 

pacettr

PJ Lover
Joined
Aug 20, 2008
Posts
3,417
Reaction score
14
Location
Yukon, OK
That is incorrect. E85 requires a 30% richer mixture to burn efficiently (stoich). That's why you lose mpg.

It burns cooler. My 322 inch Big Bore made 587rwhp with a M122 DOB kit and about 7psi on e85. Considering that I was running stock cats and shorty headers I thought that was a great return.

If you can run higher compression the mpg loss isn't as great. IMO the biggest benefit is that it won't detonate. Add spark advance until you start to lose power.

:thud:

get educated before you comment on a topic please.


also not correct.

E85 has less energy per volume of fuel. It takes more fuel to provide the same energy. That's why you need more. It's about 33% lower in energy content.



/\ this!!

:beer:
 

Fullboogie

King of the Ski - OG Jr.
Joined
Oct 27, 2008
Posts
8,675
Reaction score
3,254
Location
Houston
also not correct.

E85 has less energy per volume of fuel. It takes more fuel to provide the same energy. That's why you need more. It's about 33% lower in energy content.

Well, to be fair, that is what he was saying. He mentions needing 30% more fuel to reach stoich, which is the same concept (to me).
 

Stephen31201

Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2015
Posts
195
Reaction score
0
Its tit for tat. Actually 33% lower fuel to air ratio for stoich than gas; but would require 33% more fuel and air to reach the equivalent energy level of gas at gas's stoich.
 
Back
Top