Rescaling Your ECU for E85 - It's Easy
#16
Evolving Member
iTrader: (4)
all I can say is good luck ted, I tried the same thing with me running ALOT of meth. DLL said I made more power but I went thru plug like you wont believe. here the thread wont go too far into detail. my equation was a little off @ first LOL, a little sleepless thinking
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...=316480&page=2
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...=316480&page=2
This was the thread where I was wondering about it - https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...d.php?t=340112
#18
Evolved Member
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Charleston, SC
Posts: 1,228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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..
#21
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.
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.
Last edited by Ted B; Apr 24, 2008 at 04:08 PM.
#26
Evolved Member
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Charleston, SC
Posts: 1,228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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!
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!
#27
Evolved Member
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Chicago
Posts: 956
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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!
#29
Evolved Member
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Farmington, NM
Posts: 591
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
#30
iTrader: (10)
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..
Ted, did any latency changes result from the switch, or just scalings? I would think that only the scalings..