[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by rudypoochris

This isn't a concern with any auto tuning piggyback. With the JB4 I fill it up, reset to map 5, hit the on ramp and nail it. First pull the boost is at 91 levels, second pull the e85 mix has hit the injectors and it is learning up and boost raises. By end of second or start of third pull you have full boost.

This data is a bit misleading. The car idled for many minutes and then driving under 3krpm (presumably not WOT). Doesn't really consume much fuel at all. A WOT pull would clear the lines. If you had a very aggressive Cobb tune you might have to worry, but most likely it will just pull timing for one WOT run then be fine.

Additionally, at t=420 you can see the sensor first detect the mix. I dont understand how the sensor data is not damped or lagging since this is a returnless system. As soon as the mix hits the pickup it is headed to the sensor. The sensor should detect the mix percentage almost immediately if it is reading real time ethanol content. It doesn't appear to be doing that so until the sensor figures out what the correct mix is you are leaving performance on the table. That wouldn't be for very long, but neither is doing one pull to get the mix to the injectors.

I too use the e85 station in Oakland btw. Awesome =]

I'm not sure you understand how "autotuning" works in e85 applications. Can you explain how you believe it to work? That's probably a good first step before discussing things.

Shiv

[JamesM3M5]

Originally Posted by dfv2

I can't just look for timing corrections on my AP to find octane-limited MBT on E85?!? Listen, I appreciate the data, sorry for the hijack. I understand this, all of it, I had years of E85 exposure in the 4g63 and ej257 realms. You keep trying to learn me down, why? I knew you on evoM, c'mon now!!

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

I'm not sure if you are joking or not...

Sarcasm doesn't convey on the intarwebs. Looks like he completely missed it.

What is an EJ257?

[pinky_and_me]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

One of the changes we make in the ProcedeFlash is the DME's IAT/ignition compensation table. We give IAT/based ignition retard duties to the Procede instead since it knows how much E85 is in the fuel and how much methanol (if any at all) is being sprayed.

Does that mean that running with the ProcedeFlash without a Procede in hot weather could cause problems?

[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by pinky_and_me

Does that mean that running with the ProcedeFlash without a Procede in hot weather could cause problems?

No because it runs low boost with a conservative timing curve.

[JamesM3M5]

Originally Posted by rudypoochris

This isn't a concern with any auto tuning piggyback...

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

I'm not sure you understand how "autotuning" works in e85 applications. Can you explain how you believe it to work? That's probably a good first step before discussing things.

Shiv

The "autotuning" to which you refer is ignorant of ethanol content and doesn't posses the ability to advance ignition timing or enlean AFRs based on that information. Adding some quantity of ethanol and relying on a pre-tuned map is pretty much what we had up to this point. Some ethanol helps any tune, including the stock tune, with reducing timing events. It takes more to truly exploit all of the added benefits of ethanol. Higher IATs are also handled properly since the in-cylinder cooling benefits are not seen at the TMAP sensor.

Some post their anecdotal, non technical based experience and says that is sufficient use of ethanol, others disagree.

[Vwgrk1]

Originally Posted by JamesM3M5

Sarcasm doesn't convey on the intarwebs. Looks like he completely missed it.

What is an EJ257?

Subaru 2.5L turbo motor.

[A418t81]

Pretty cool data Shiv, thanks for the test. I have noticed with my JB4 during the switch from pump to E85 mix that even though boost does rise to nearly E85 levels relatively quickly after filling up with an E85 mix, the timing (12+ degrees) did not correlate until a good bit later. In my case, I left the car running while filling up and almost immediately got on the interstate at 80+ mph. It took about 5-6 minutes before timing returned to what I consider normal for my car and ethanol mixture.

[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by JamesM3M5

The "autotuning" to which you refer is ignorant of ethanol content and doesn't posses the ability to advance ignition timing or enlean AFRs based on that information. Adding some quantity of ethanol and relying on a pre-tuned map is pretty much what we had up to this point. Some ethanol helps any tune, including the stock tune, with reducing timing events. It takes more to truly exploit all of the added benefits of ethanol. Higher IATs are also handled properly since the in-cylinder cooling benefits are not seen at the TMAP sensor.

Some post their anecdotal, non technical based experience and says that is sufficient use of ethanol, others disagree.

+1

[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by A418t81

Pretty cool data Shiv, thanks for the test. I have noticed with my JB4 during the switch from pump to E85 mix that even though boost does rise to nearly E85 levels relatively quickly after filling up with an E85 mix, the timing (12+ degrees) did not correlate until a good bit later. In my case, I left the car running while filling up and almost immediately got on the interstate at 80+ mph. It took about 5-6 minutes before timing returned to what I consider normal for my car and ethanol mixture.

Yep that sounds about right. You can certainly purge the fuel lines of your old fuel quickly by doing a few wot runs in the non-aggressive map. But many people don't have the ability to do so due to traffic. Or can everyone switch maps on-the-fly while driving.

[cstmx_ryder]

Shiv,

So when is the Procese flash necessary? Is it only when running the Flexfuel kit?

Meaning, I can run E85 mix with rev2.5 or higher with the appropriate E85 maps WITHOUT the Procede flash?

TIA

[rudypoochris]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

I'm not sure you understand how "autotuning" works in e85 applications. Can you explain how you believe it to work? That's probably a good first step before discussing things.

Shiv

I am sure I don't understand how autotuning works nearly as well as you do. I don't make any claim that I do. I make no argument in regards to the tuning strategy.

How about instead of trying to twist me into an argument about autotuning you address the points I had brought up which ARE actually relevant to this thread:

1. Mix time isn't a concern after the first WOT pull with an autotuning piggy back
2. The ethanol content sensor clearly has a damped or otherwise smoothed reaction time

If you feel #1 is an actual concern please substantiate your claim because hundreds if not thousands have been running E85 mixes in this manner for over a year with 0 reported failures due to it - without an E85 sensor.

[JamesM3M5]

Originally Posted by rudypoochris

1. Mix time isn't a concern after the first WOT pull with an autotuning piggy back
2. The ethanol content sensor clearly has a damped or otherwise smoothed reaction time

If you feel #1 is an actual concern please substantiate your claim because hundreds if not thousands have been running E85 mixes in this manner for over a year with 0 reported failures due to it.

Originally Posted by A418t81

Pretty cool data Shiv, thanks for the test. I have noticed with my JB4 during the switch from pump to E85 mix that even though boost does rise to nearly E85 levels relatively quickly after filling up with an E85 mix, the timing (12+ degrees) did not correlate until a good bit later. In my case, I left the car running while filling up and almost immediately got on the interstate at 80+ mph. It took about 5-6 minutes before timing returned to what I consider normal for my car and ethanol mixture.

No failures, which doesn't prove anything, but there is a noticeable mixing time as evidenced by the anecdote above. People who fill up from all gasoline to gas + E85 then switch to an E85 map that would be excessively aggressive on plain gas will have issues. You and all those theoretical "hundreds if not thousands" may be running a map that merely uses some E85 benefits, not a true exploitation of E85. Use full aggression on those first few full throttle runs when the ethanol has not fully mixed yet and you'll be "remodeling the block" to borrow a line from another user.

The returnless system holds a finite but still large amount of fuel between the tank and sensor, and it takes time to consume that fuel, more than pretty much anyone would have guessed. The lines and filter hold a lot of fuel. What benefit would there be to buffer this signal, whether you're adding it on to a system or an OE vehicle developer? This is the same sensor used on flexfuel vehicles on the showroom floor.

[rudypoochris]

Originally Posted by JamesM3M5

No failures, which doesn't prove anything, but there is a noticeable mixing time as evidenced by the anecdote above.

It pretty much proves that E85 mix time is a non issue as far as endangering your motor.

I will have to recheck, but I seem to remember timing being always lower on the first couple pulls with JB4 autotuning.

Originally Posted by JamesM3M5

People who fill up from all gasoline to gas + E85 then switch to an E85 map that would be excessively aggressive on plain gas will have issues.

This is true for an E85 map, but the autotuning maps on JB4 support both pure gas and E85 mix. After refilling the tank you reset the learned values. I don't know if this holds true for other piggybacks

Originally Posted by JamesM3M5

You and all those theoretical "hundreds if not thousands" may be running a map that merely uses some E85 benefits, not a true exploitation of E85.

I am sure of this. No tune is using the full potential of any fuel ever. There is always a margin of safety or variations between each firing of the cylinder. Does the FlexFuel sensor let you get closer to exploiting all of E85s features? Probably. Does it matter in reality? No, not really below 50% mixes. I was making 420whp with DCI only and E85 mix without FlexFuel sensor. How much more could I really exploit for the additional $800? 5hp maybe? Why wouldn't I just buy a COBB AP at that point and have access to even more possibilities?

The threads going of course as this has nothing to do with mixing E85... we can talk about this on PM or in the appropriate thread if you please.

Originally Posted by JamesM3M5

Use full aggression on those first few full throttle runs when the ethanol has not fully mixed yet and you'll be "remodeling the block" to borrow a line from another user.

This hasn't happened to anyone after resetting their autotuning gas/e85 map.

Originally Posted by JamesM3M5

The returnless system holds a finite but still large amount of fuel between the tank and sensor, and it takes time to consume that fuel, more than pretty much anyone would have guessed. The lines and filter hold a lot of fuel. What benefit would there be to buffer this signal, whether you're adding it on to a system or an OE vehicle developer? This is the same sensor used on flexfuel vehicles on the showroom floor.

Obviously the returnless system holds a volume of fuel between the tank and the injectors. I am not saying the response is intentionally damped, I am just saying that it is slow to react.

Imagine the fuel lines being a straw. The pump is pushing the mix through the straw. As soon as the mix hits the sensor it should almost immediately represent exactly the ethanol content in the tank. In these graphs we can see it took from 415 to 560 to register the full mix. This is the slow response of the sensor and not the fuel "mixing" in the straw. It is whatever the mix is going to be when it enters the fuel line, any lag in the sensor reporting the mix % correctly is just that, lag. That is to say the motor is seeing the mix from the tank as soon (or even earlier?) as the E85 sensor curves up at 415, the sensor just doesn't know what the % is until 560.

---

I think this is a good product and I like the idea. As an engineer I believe it is closer to ideal in its method of detecting ethanol content when compared to other strategies. I do believe these sensors will only be used more in the future and that they could add benefit to mixes until the fueling situation is sorted out for 100% E85.

What I don't like is that you need to mail in your DME, that it costs a ridiculous amount of money, and that it is being marketed in such a way as to trick consumers into thinking that this is something they need to run E85 safely and at a high level of performance. It is not. The reality is that the extra bonus in power is either non-existent, or so minimal it would never even nearly pay off the price tag, and that alternative E85 solutions are not damaging any motors.

This isn't a thread about the objective mix time of E85. Its marketing against existing functioning E85 methods.

[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by cstmx_ryder

Shiv,

So when is the Procese flash necessary? Is it only when running the Flexfuel kit?

Meaning, I can run E85 mix with rev2.5 or higher with the appropriate E85 maps WITHOUT the Procede flash?

TIA

The Flash is only necessary with the flexfuel kit which allows up up to 100% E85. The maps specific to the flexfuel kit are also more powerful than the standard 50/50 e85 maps that have been available for some time.

[saxon]

so 100% e85 now works with the flex fuel kit?

will it work with just the flash and 2.5 or is the sensor needed?

[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by rudypoochris

I am sure I don't understand how autotuning works nearly as well as you do. I don't make any claim that I do. I make no argument in regards to the tuning strategy.

Yet you make unfounded claims about the effectiveness of the "autotuning" feature with regards to running different E85/gasoline ratios. I have no dog in this fight and it is clear that you don't really want to learn. But rather just waste the time of others who have tired to educate you on this subject. I'll give this another try. If you want to continue arguing, you can do so by yourself and in another thread.

How about instead of trying to twist me into an argument about autotuning you address the points I had brought up which ARE actually relevant to this thread:

1. Mix time isn't a concern after the first WOT pull with an autotuning piggy back

Again, you don't understand how autotuning works. No where in the autotuning logic does it actually measure ethanol content. It simply looks at average fuel trims and/or knock activity to determine when the tune is too aggressive for the fuel used. This is a reactive system which means that things have to go wrong before the tune attempts to slowly work itself out. This may not have any repercussions when running mild e85 tunes. But it will cause problems when running high power tunes that take full advantage of E85. This is the advantage of the using an actual Flexfuel sensor as you don't have to "guess" or "estimate" knock resistance or alcohol content based upon historical log data.

2. The ethanol content sensor clearly has a damped or otherwise smoothed reaction time

No. The response time of this Siemens sensor is 250ms. Not very damped. Monitored ethanol content doesn't change immediately (even after the "column" of old fuel is consumed) because the mixed fuel in the tank isn't homogenized. Much of this has to do with the saddlebag shape of the gas tank and the way the venturi jets slowly move fuel from one side of the tank to the other.

If you feel #1 is an actual concern please substantiate your claim because hundreds if not thousands have been running E85 mixes in this manner for over a year with 0 reported failures due to it - without an E85 sensor.

You should have a better understanding of things before trying to duke it out with those who know more than you o this subject. It's clear you have a motive here. And unlike most of us on this forum, your motive isn't to learn. Have a nice day.

Cheers
shiv

[Dave W.]

Originally Posted by rudypoochris

It pretty much proves that E85 mix time is a non issue as far as endangering your motor.

I see so much wrong with this.

If we're going to push this platform to higher levels, we need to get more accurate info. A tune that's 'good enough' for the 400hp level may not be good enough for 500hp, and certainly not for 600. If you're happy with your 'good enough' tune at 'good enough' power level, fine. Some of us want more, some of us want something better. Please don't offer your opinion as if we should all be like you.

Originally Posted by rudypoochris

I am sure of this. No tune is using the full potential of any fuel ever. There is always a margin of safety or variations between each firing of the cylinder. Does the FlexFuel sensor let you get closer to exploiting all of E85s features? Probably. Does it matter in reality? No, not really below 50% mixes. I was making 420whp with DCI only and E85 mix without FlexFuel sensor. How much more could I really exploit for the additional $800? 5hp maybe? Why wouldn't I just buy a COBB AP at that point and have access to even more possibilities?

Good questions. Shiv's getting an extra 30hp over your tune with E85. That's a big difference, nothing to sneeze at.

Why would you switch to cobb at this point? They haven't made much more power with E85 than you currently have and you have to either pay a good tuner to bring it up to your current levels or spend days or weeks tuning it yourself with all the inherent risks of amateur self tuning. Cobb is clearly not your best choice for power, safety nor value.

Originally Posted by rudypoochris

Obviously the returnless system holds a volume of fuel between the tank and the injectors. I am not saying the response is intentionally damped, I am just saying that it is slow to react.

Imagine the fuel lines being a straw. The pump is pushing the mix through the straw. As soon as the mix hits the sensor it should almost immediately represent exactly the ethanol content in the tank. In these graphs we can see it took from 415 to 560 to register the full mix. This is the slow response of the sensor and not the fuel "mixing" in the straw. It is whatever the mix is going to be when it enters the fuel line, any lag in the sensor reporting the mix % correctly is just that, lag. That is to say the motor is seeing the mix from the tank as soon (or even earlier?) as the E85 sensor curves up at 415, the sensor just doesn't know what the % is until 560.

That's weird. You say that you understand how a returnless fuel system works, but the quote above shows you clearly do not.
Please try to understand the following;

There is no mixing in the fuel line. All mixing occurs in the tank when you add new fuel. Since it's a returnless system, the new mix of fuel can only travel up the fuel line toward the engine if the engine uses the fuel first. The engine has to use up the entire contents of the fuel rail, volume in the HPFP, and fuel lines before the new mix of fuel reaches the Flex Fuel Sensor. That's why Shiv's datalogs show zero change in ethanol content for the first few minutes. I think he explained this, don't know how you missed it. Other members seem to get it. The sensor is reacting instantly to ethanol content, there's no delay. He's showing the actual delay from adding a new mix of fuel in the tank to the time the new mix reaches the Flex Fuel Sensor. BTW in case you didn't see the pics, the Flex Fuel sensor is located in the engine bay, on the cool side, right next to the HPFP. This is the right way to do it.

Originally Posted by rudypoochris

I think this is a good product and I like the idea. As an engineer I believe it is closer to ideal in its method of detecting ethanol content when compared to other strategies. I do believe these sensors will only be used more in the future and that they could add benefit to mixes until the fueling situation is sorted out for 100% E85.

What I don't like is that you need to mail in your DME, that it costs a ridiculous amount of money, and that it is being marketed in such a way as to trick consumers into thinking that this is something they need to run E85 safely and at a high level of performance. It is not. The reality is that the extra bonus in power is either non-existent, or so minimal it would never even nearly pay off the price tag, and that alternative E85 solutions are not damaging any motors.

This isn't a thread about the objective mix time of E85. Its marketing against existing functioning E85 methods.

sigh

How can you say that?

It's the best tune for E85. No one has made more power. No one else has done it with a broader safety margin. No one gives you greater flexibility.

[Mangler]

Subbed.

Anyone have EGT data for e85?

T

[boostd92]

Originally Posted by rudypoochris

What I don't like is that you need to mail in your DME, that it costs a ridiculous amount of money, and that it is being marketed in such a way as to trick consumers into thinking that this is something they need to run E85 safely and at a high level of performance.

I agree that this may not be all that necessary for people who are spraying Meth as well as using E85....

but for those of us who like to drag race and aren't spraying meth, there currently is no way to keep the DME from pulling timing because of IAT's (that aren't dangerous to the motor if you're running high enough concentrations of E85). If this system lets us run 50/50 or more E85, and pulls DME control of IAT compensation, it certainly serves a useful purpose to quite a few procede owners.

[spool twice]

Originally Posted by A418t81

Pretty cool data Shiv, thanks for the test. I have noticed with my JB4 during the switch from pump to E85 mix that even though boost does rise to nearly E85 levels relatively quickly after filling up with an E85 mix, the timing (12+ degrees) did not correlate until a good bit later. In my case, I left the car running while filling up and almost immediately got on the interstate at 80+ mph. It took about 5-6 minutes before timing returned to what I consider normal for my car and ethanol mixture.

+1, it normally takes a good 10mins of driving after a refill to allow the the mixture to "mix" around to get a good timing curve. Prior to this, My ignition timing doesn't drop, but it stays almost flat around 10 degrees, and the boost is severely cut back. I can provide an comparison example from my logs, but this isn't a JB4 thread. I hit 14.7degrees @ 6905rpm per my logs.

Good data indeed, it's something that I've always knew about since I've filled with E85 earlierthis year (8 months with E85, at least I know the fuel system is good for at least 40-50% E85 content this long! LOL), but never had the data to back up what I've always felt.

[FirstBMWLA]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

The Flash is only necessary with the flexfuel kit which allows up up to 100% E85. The maps specific to the flexfuel kit are also more powerful than the standard 50/50 e85 maps that have been available for some time.

So will some of these mapping changes be passed down to non flexfuel maps such as 5_23 E85?

[dfv2]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

I'm not sure if you are joking or not. But in case you are not, NO you cannot find MBT on the n54 by logging knock correction when running e85. You need a dyno determine the point where additional advance doesn't yield more torque. I don't have a dog in this fight. I just don't appreciate your comment about me getting your post deleted?

[sarcasm]You can't?![/sarcasm]

Thanks for the data, again I apologize for the dickishness. May I please throw some stuff in here that may be OT but are in response to the OP statements?

A no-knock E85 failure would likely be a melted piston due to the lean out mentioned. I've done this on other motors, feels like you drove right into a bed of quicksand but there's nothing exiting the block, much less drama. The thing is, the DME calculates EGT and monitors ECT. I'm somewhat comfortable saying that it would pull timing and do whatever else necessary to avoid temps that melt things. This is primarily anecdotal, based on the sheer absence of this failure mode on the N54. With E85 knock doesn't just pull a koolade man and bust down the block wall, there's no sudden change in octane to introduce failure like there is with say... meth.

To inject some fact based discussion in here - you do not need a dyno to find MBT. It helps a lot, but all you need is a clear mexican roadway and a method to calculate G vs time. A dyno calculates this based on roller accel, I calculate this based on vehicle accel. If this was my job I'd already have purchased enough dyno time to own one myself. As a hobbyist, it's more fun the hard way! The more variables you can clamp the better, a dyno will always win here. But the road offers up real loading due to drag and real airflow which proves out real world behavior.

ATR users don't run "*a*" tune, it's a persistent alpha that gets revised as fast as our fingers can hit + and -. So to say my tune is weak is like saying the song I'm playing is too mellow, it's an odd statement - let me hit next for you.

Sorry for the 'delete' comment - I always view your posts through bs colored glasses and I often miss the good nuggets of info, it's a vendor bias thing that was sewn in other markets and it's being harvested here. I'll take the glasses off now.