E85

[turbotrana]

Gaz, live tuning allows you to make changes to the tune whilst the engine is running and immediately see how the engine reacts. For example there are trimming functions where you can increase/decrease fueling/spark by percentage. When tuning idle parts of the map you trim to see what the engine likes and tune accordingly.

Then with dataloging you can datalog what fuel ratios you are running at every load point in the tuning map. Depending on the ECU there is a tuning map of RPM vs load/kpa. You can make changes and you know what you are going to get, its quick and easy and a manual that tells you exactly what every function does.

With flash tuning, non workshops use HP Tuner. The programmers have decoded alot of the functions of the program. Some stuff is straightforward in how it works but alot is not. We have no proper instruction manual (there are a couple of basic guides) and it is time consuming to see how functions work as you need to reflash it every time and that takes 30-60 seconds or so (used to take minutes and prone to fail to flash years ago).

I am sure Ford themselves have live tuning and a complete instruction manual but its been over 12 years since the BA was released and we are still relying on SCT and HP

[turbotrana]

Ralph, my experiments with lean burn is running around 15.5-16 air fuel ratio brings fuel economy benefits on petrol with good drivability. Go past 16:1 you run into lean misfire or/and torque reduction as you said with reduced drivability.

Edited 19/07/14 03:14 PM by turbotrana

[turbotrana]

Just some info on lean burn, you wont get an aussie Ford running the Honda ratios though.

Honda lean burn systems

One of the newest lean-burn technologies available in automobiles currently in production uses very precise control of fuel injection, a strong air–fuel swirl created in the combustion chamber, a new linear air–fuel sensor (LAF type O2 sensor) and a lean-burn NOx catalyst to further reduce the resulting NOx emissions that increase under "lean-burn" conditions and meet NOx emissions requirements.

This stratified-charge approach to lean-burn combustion means that the air–fuel ratio isn't equal throughout the cylinder. Instead, precise control over fuel injection and intake flow dynamics allows a greater concentration of fuel closer to the spark plug tip (richer), which is required for successful ignition and flame spread for complete combustion. The remainder of the cylinders' intake charge is progressively leaner with an overall average air:fuel ratio falling into the lean-burn category of up to 22:1.

The older Honda engines that used lean burn (not all did) accomplished this by having a parallel fuel and intake system that fed a pre-chamber the "ideal" ratio for initial combustion. This burning mixture was then opened to the main chamber where a much larger and leaner mix then ignited to provide sufficient power. During the time this design was in production this system (CVCC, Compound Vortex Controlled Combustion) primarily allowed lower emissions without the need for a catalytic converter. These were carbureted engines and the relative "imprecise" nature of such limited the MPG abilities of the concept that now under MPI (Multi-Port fuel Injection) allows for higher MPG too.

The newer Honda stratified charge (lean burn engines) operate on air–fuel ratios as high as 22:1. The amount of fuel drawn into the engine is much lower than a typical gasoline engine, which operates at 14.7:1—the chemical stoichiometric ideal for complete combustion when averaging gasoline to the petrochemical industries' accepted standard of C6H8.

This lean-burn ability by the necessity of the limits of physics, and the chemistry of combustion as it applies to a current gasoline engine must be limited to light load and lower RPM conditions. A "top" speed cut-off point is required since leaner gasoline fuel mixtures burn slower and for power to be produced combustion must be "complete" by the time the exhaust valve opens.

[ratter]

Expensive Daewoo used to run 17:1 lean cruise mode on their Late model camira a few years ago, but as emissions tightened, it was ceased.

Ford can not run a stratified charge because they do not have the correct piston design or a direct injection engine.

We use the wrong spark plug gap on our cars to run lean.

The stratified charge is used by a few manufacturers but is limited to direct injection engine and a light cruise situation, the cars that use it generally have a nox convertor in the exhaust system to clean the nox emissions. Our fuel is not good enough for the nox convertors so the import and operation of cars using this system have been limited in Australia.

Euro5 should change some of this as I believe there is standards that our fuel needs to meet.

Many people assume using less fuel means it's cleaner, it's not the case and many people just assume that lean is the only way to get better fuel economy, it's not

[turbotrana]

I still have my 98 VT supercharged Late model camira that I bought from new and pretty sure it has lean burn judging from the a/f ratio meter. Still want to keep the car cause has really good fuel economy.

But coming back to E85, I found it behaved quite alot differently to BP98 when running on lean ratios. Firstly the misfire lean limit seemed to be around the 19:1 and torque drop off was alot less and alot more gradual. I hit some pretty lean ratios way past 19:1 in parts of the map without misfire which surprised me alot.

Although I did not get much economy gains, I did not play with ignition timing which is where I also got gains when economy tuning with BP98.

The reason why I have gone off E85 is cause of the poor economy and always having to fill up.

But my point is that I think E85 is suited to tuning alot leaner in the driving parts of the map cause I felt it was alot more crisper and nicer to drive, but could have been my imagination.

[ratter]

pretty sure VT was the first to have lean cruise

[bjc]

Good reading so far even with all the side tracking.

Surely the new ford 5lt was made ready for direct injection down the track considering the development they put into it?

[ratter]

Looking at what others do with direct injection, I'm going to say no to the 5.0 litre being ready, not unless they have another set of heads ready

[MattyP]

keep on dreaming for Direct Injection. Ford just doesnt have the $$ to spend

[rednose]

Filled up with e-flex at Casula last week and noticed the ethanol content dropped to under their advertised 70% to 66%

This is the first time it has moved by more than 1-2%

Thought the Zeitronix was playing up as AFR's were still ok and car drove fine.

Ran the fuel down to as low as possible and filled up at the Moorebank site this morning and ethanol content is back up to 71%

Just a fyi to anyone that uses the Casula store.

I will wait a couple of weeks before filling up at Casula again and report back.

Hopefully just a one off.

I have emailed Caltex but have yet to get a reply.

Response from Caltex:

George,

Caltex Australia has made no formulation changes to E-Flex petrol and there have been no apparent issues at any of the terminals that blend and supply the product. This product was only ever intended for use in vehicles equipped with engine management systems designed to recognise varying petrol ethanol mixtures in the range 85% down to zero. People operating engines where a fixed (exact) level of ethanol is required would have to make their own arrangements. Out of interest, what industry recognised method (e.g. ASTM/IP etc.) are you using to measure ethanol content?

Regards

Caltex Australia Lubelink

I called Lubelink and got a hold of one of their techs who believes that water may be the culprit (I agree) , they are going to investigate and get back to me.

Sounded like an honest guy who seemed like he wanted to get to the bottom of it.

Will keep you posted.