Were you richening the mixture by adding more meth or more gas? Thanks for the thread link. I wondered the same thing if you could gain more power by richening the afr if you were running leaner than max power rich. It's hard to find a lot of info on, but from what I've found max power rich and max power lean is a window where the burn makes within 1% of the max power possible. So there isn't a reason to be on the full rich side of it, but theres not much if anything to gain going to the far lean side of it either

This was the thread where I was wondering about it - https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...d.php?t=340112

 

Well I added back some fuel since I was pulling out so much. With how much meth I am spraying my WOT side of the fuel map looked like my crusing.

 

FWIW, My scaling is set to 1083 for my FIC 1050's.. On 93, I see 50-55% IDC's running 28psi.. I am going to switch to E85 really soon, so I can imagine my IDC's will go up in the 70% region after the switch...


Ted, did any latency changes result from the switch, or just scalings? I would think that only the scalings..

 

I'd guess you be in the mid 70% to 80% area. Either way, you have a good amount of headroom so you shouldn't have any worries

 

I was seeing a bit of consistent Mid LTFT correction in the 5% region, so I just bumped the latency up a notch, and that brought it to a rather tidy 1-2%.

 

Another *important* thing to consider . . .

Now, admittedly I am not as well versed in some of the algorithms used by the ECU and Evoscan in their calculations as those who live and breathe it, however, IF you want Evoscan to be accurate in its calculated load computations with E85, you need to tweak your injectors on 93 octane FIRST, paying special attention to getting the Mid LTFT as close to 0 as possible at steady freeway cruise. When you switch to E85, you alter the 93 octane injector scaling value in the ECU as I described in the initial post, I think you would NOT alter it in Evoscan's XML. I believe that value would remain the same as your 93 octane setting.

I believe the accuracy of Evoscan's calculated load calculation will depend on how close your 93 octane trims are to those in your E85 tune. If you change your Evoscan injector scaling in the Evoscan XML to match your ECU's E85 injector scaling, I think you might be wondering what went wrong.

 

The load calculations shouldn't be affected by your injector scaling or trims so you should see accurate results with either fuel.

 

afaik, the 2byte load is not affected by different injectors or trims.

Calculated load, however, is.

 

Yeah, thats true. Also, the fuel consumption formula in evoscan v2.1 or v2.2 needs the injector size edited as well. Thats it I believe.

 

Very well, post #21 changed to specify calculated load. But if one uses 2-byte load (as should everyone), then it's good to know that it won't matter.

 

So, instead of creating a new thread, I thought I would post this here..



First off, everyone keeps talking about the correlation of E85 to Gasoline in terms of lambda on a Gasoline Calibrated wideband. Doesn't the Innovate LC-1 have a setting in it to where you can set it up for E85? What does this setting do? I looked in the LC-1 manual and it isn't really clear as to what changes when you change this from Gasoline to Ethanol.



Also, from what I gather, open loop fueling will not change from 14.7. WOT pulls though, once again, from what I gather, I will be targeting roughly around 11.7-11.8 on a gasoline calibrated wideband at WOT. What AFR's are agressive, semi-agressive, conservative, and just plain rich for E85?



I have pre-set up a map, reduced my 1083 injector scaling to 760 (For a rough 30% decrease) and took my 135-350 load values (Based on my map scaling) and multiplied it all by 0.95. The 100-135 it interpolated to smooth the changed together, and changed my low octane to suit the high octange changes. Timing map I left alone as they are pretty dead nuts for my car at 27.5-28psi 11.5-11.7 afr running 93.



My map scalings should be OK as I was hitting low 320's at peak torque on 93, and the maps are scaled to 350. Do you think 350 will be OK, or better yet, to the people who have switched to E85, how much higher loads were you hitting with timing/boost changes you made?



Hopefully some of you can chime in on this relatively quickly, as tomorrow after work, my tank will be very close to being empty, and as soon as work is done, I am going to put a full tank of E85 in her, and jump in face first. I just want to make sure all my logic and target values to go after are all in line.



Seems like initially I will just be waiting/watching for my fuel trims to start to go up, then reflash with my new map, and see if they level back out. Basically ust tweak the scalings to get the trims as close as I can, them possibly make a few tweaks to the latencies. Once that's done, start to do roll on's to see what the car is doing under higher and higher loads, then go all out with a WOT 3rd gear.



All sound OK? Please add input/advice tips!

 

Arent there supposed to be issues with the internals of the engine and fuel lines degrading due to the usage of E85 and its increased ethanol percentage? It seems like people run E85 with increased performance with no issues, but is this wearing the engine at an advanced rate or is the mitsu engine built with a tolerence to the increased ethanol? I appologize for changing the subject but Im interested in running alternate fuels especally ones that are cheaper and produce more horsepower!

 

If one was to toss in 850cc injectors wouldn't the stock injector scaling be very close to what's needed for E85?

 

Yes, mine was within about 20cc of the stock scaling value with Precision 880s. YMMV.

Still running strong after several tanks of e85. Only downside so far is it takes several cranks to start it on a cold engine, but that doesn't bother me at all.

 

tkklemann, post your results! I'm going with those injectors too, I'll be running on bp92+ alky for a while, then doing an E85 tune come summer. I hope no latency changes are needed, that would suck for us mapswitching/tephrav5 guys...