|
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
05-26-2006, 08:57 PM | #376 | |
Scooby Guru
Member#: 242
Join Date: Sep 1999
Chapter/Region:
MWSOC
Location: Carol Stream, IL USA
Vehicle:MY05 PSM GGA !STOCK MY99 RS-RIP / MY95 MX-5 |
Quote:
Can't really blame the tuner, they have taken a long time building up their reputation. Well, if all else fails, its time to do road tuning like back when the we were all dependent on our own resources for tuning. Give me a call sometime if you need a codriver to keep an eye on your readings or if you need a driver while you do tuning.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
|
|
05-26-2006, 11:00 PM | #377 |
Scooby Guru
Member#: 6124
Join Date: Apr 2001
Chapter/Region:
MWSOC
Location: Glendale Hts, IL, USA
Vehicle:2000 NFR AP1 S2000 '07 Honda FIT sport (5MT) |
fatray, master, kax, and revision...
Your all wrong! I'm not worried about blowing up the engine. I'm worried about blowing up RAY. This is what's pounded in my head right now... There's a certain percentage of alcohol certified as being safe with the components of our engines and fuel systems. That level is NOT 85%. Frankly, the amount of time ya'll have spent trying to find that limit is admirable, but NOT tangible for anyone in their right mind to consider safe over a long term. I choose not to have my conscience weigh with the fear that inevitably (yes, inevitably), something will let go; potentially taking not only my customer, but my friend with it! Until some of ya'll understand the stress, responsability and trust put on you when it comes to tuning someone elses car, then and only then can you comment about my, or any of my peers motives in preserving our professional responsability to you! Jorge (RiftsWRX) www.ProjectWRX.com |
05-26-2006, 11:41 PM | #378 | |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 63292
Join Date: Jun 2004
Chapter/Region:
South East
Location: Warner Robins, GA
Vehicle:2000 Subaru 2.5RS 2002 WRX powered |
Quote:
oh i think we know the stress you go through. its about the same as giving our cars away into the hands of someone we dont know and letting them drive it and change everything about it. dont act like were ignorant please |
|
05-27-2006, 12:19 AM | #379 | |
Scooby Guru
Member#: 6124
Join Date: Apr 2001
Chapter/Region:
MWSOC
Location: Glendale Hts, IL, USA
Vehicle:2000 NFR AP1 S2000 '07 Honda FIT sport (5MT) |
Quote:
If I entrust something with someone and they screw up, I suffer anger, resentment, betrayal, and a sense of loss that is eventually rectified in some or in whole. When you're the one being entrusted and you screw up, you suffer guilt, dispair, stress, embarrasment, wounded ego, monetary loss, loss of reputation and credit, plus a lot of other things. It's clearly NOT the same thing. Fact remains.... make a wrong decision, and you can find someone else. >I< make a wrong decision, and it's a matter of time before my career is over. When it's your livelyhood, and your family depends on those decisions to put food in their mouth's and a roof over their head, it further adds to that stress. So sorry if I offend.... But I'm still not going to tune a 100% E85 mix... Jorge (RiftsWRX) www.ProjectWRX.com |
|
05-27-2006, 12:47 AM | #380 |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 14141
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: [email protected] @ 5800 ft on 13T
Vehicle:2002 Impreza WRX |
Jorge:
No problem --- its easy to understand that you need to make those sort of decisions. Every business person make similar decisions whether it is an aligment shop that won't touch a modified suspension, or a tire shop that won't mount a tire they feel is not safe. I think everyone understands that only you can make that sort of a risk benefit decision and they should respect your choice in the matter. Same goes for someone that did not feel comfortable tuning with a nitrous setup or any other mod package they did not have experience in. Hopefully in the not to distant future I can give everyone some background data on a 100% tune so folks know what AFR's and such work. Its a work in progress! Larry |
05-27-2006, 04:00 AM | #381 |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 2112
Join Date: Aug 2000
Chapter/Region:
South East
Location: Below 900ft. Mach .9
Vehicle:2000 Impreza 2.5RS BRP |
I'd have to agree with Jorge on this one. It makes sense from his perspective. I thought either one of our cars would have let go a long time ago but just haven't yet. If the motor held, it would eventually be a tranny or differential to go out. Not having kids or a commute made the gamble somewhat smaller for me. It always sucks when something explodes, especially for the guy on the recieving end.
|
05-27-2006, 09:05 AM | #382 |
Scooby Guru
Member#: 242
Join Date: Sep 1999
Chapter/Region:
MWSOC
Location: Carol Stream, IL USA
Vehicle:MY05 PSM GGA !STOCK MY99 RS-RIP / MY95 MX-5 |
I though I left my statement pretty clear. Blowing up the engine and blowing up your client are pretty much tantamount to the same thing. The tuner gets the blame no matter what anyone says. Thus my statement about reputation. It is the tuner's responsibility to make judgement calls on the condition and tunablility of the car in question, it is also the owner's responsibility, but the tuner gets hurt more in terms of reputation in the event of a failure.
Concerning E85 longevity and E10 rated components. This is something that has not been addressed between the local tuners and myself. Most of the discussion was concerning the disbelief that E85 could make power and what kinds of burn characteristics differentiate it from regular gasoline and race fuels. Most of the concern was toward addressing timing issues for a fuel that was suppose to use stock timing, but was rated as a 105 octane fuel. So if I misconstrued any ideas about the concerns of the local tuners, then you have my apologies. If I misrepresented any statements concerning the experience with any of the local tuners with the use of E85. Then I apologize, but I am fairly certain that I know most of the local E85 conversion users and none have had their cars dyno tuned yet. I do know that many tuners have trepidations about tuning for E85 because they have not tried it on their own cars yet and don't want to risk a client vehicle for that testing and exploration. As for longevity and tuning. Everyone here should know by now that increasing the power of a stock car carries risk and that increasing the power of a stock car reduces the life of the components in that car considerably. Personally, I don't see a real difference between tuning a car for power and tuning for a new type of fuel. Having had installed a tuned a turboed RS on my own and watched it slowly deteriorate from the increased power, I can say that pioneering anything new is a risk and personally _I_ don't see a difference between turboing a RS and tuning a WRX for E85. There are known dangers such as the possibility of components failing due to the corrosive acid created from mixing E85 and water. Or even the standard failure due to too much stress on stock components. Or even the danger of handing a high power vehicle to an underexperienced driver. In the end its just another judgement call. "How fast do you want to go? How much do you want to spend?" So again I state that when a business declines a client due to unknown factors such as tuning a car for E85, then it is understandable. But on the other hand, if a forum member decries a fellow member for trying something new, then it is hypocritical (personal opinions aside of course ). |
05-27-2006, 10:24 AM | #383 |
Scooby Guru
Member#: 6124
Join Date: Apr 2001
Chapter/Region:
MWSOC
Location: Glendale Hts, IL, USA
Vehicle:2000 NFR AP1 S2000 '07 Honda FIT sport (5MT) |
Andrew, with all due respect...
The car, the engine, etc... is not my concern. My concern is in the LIFE of the individual. If your engine blows up on you, it sucks (been there, done that)... but you don't go up in a fireball that will be felt 100 yards away. God forbid you have a failure of your rail feed line, or one of the rail junction lines (which sit under the intake manifold by #3. Now, say that fuel pumps out all over your nice glowing turbo and super heated up-pipe. I've seen fires start from oil drips on pinched turbo oil returns after ONE pull on a dyno. Much less spraying 130+ LPH of fuel over it. To hell with the car... I could care less about THAT. I can't replace one of you guys! Jorge (RiftsWRX) www.ProjectWRX.com |
05-27-2006, 08:24 PM | #384 |
Scooby Guru
Member#: 242
Join Date: Sep 1999
Chapter/Region:
MWSOC
Location: Carol Stream, IL USA
Vehicle:MY05 PSM GGA !STOCK MY99 RS-RIP / MY95 MX-5 |
Jorge, we're working with ethanol. Not jetfuel and definitely not methanol. Heck there are guys out there playing around with Hydrogen injection to the air intake before the MAF! Ethanol burns just like conventional gasoline, only its harder to light off. The only fuel that "fireballs" is jetfuel that is because of the way it atomizes on hitting air. We won't even get into how methanol burns without any visible flames or how a malfunctioning battery leaking hydrogen can go off with the force of two stick of dynamite. Therefore in my mind, converting a car to run on ethanol is not beyond the scope of a reasonable mind nor is it more unsafe as any other tuning done to a car.
So stop worrying about us. |
05-27-2006, 09:17 PM | #385 |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 18150
Join Date: Apr 2002
Chapter/Region:
MAIC
Location: Baltimore MD
Vehicle:2002 WRX Wagon EJ207 Velocity Red, Liberal kit |
Yea last time I was at pump I spilled a bunch on the ground and my hand. Guess what? I'm still here and so is my car.
|
05-27-2006, 10:20 PM | #386 |
Scooby Guru
Member#: 6124
Join Date: Apr 2001
Chapter/Region:
MWSOC
Location: Glendale Hts, IL, USA
Vehicle:2000 NFR AP1 S2000 '07 Honda FIT sport (5MT) |
You both are incredible. 385 posts on the topic, and the primary point of failure surprisingly is moot to you both.
Like I said in my original post. The fact that you guys are doing this is admirable, it REALLY is. >I< just refuse to push the limit on something that has been warned to cause the type of failures that can cause massive incindiary damage. Jorge (RiftsWRX) www.ProjectWRX.com |
05-28-2006, 10:17 AM | #387 |
Scooby Guru
Member#: 242
Join Date: Sep 1999
Chapter/Region:
MWSOC
Location: Carol Stream, IL USA
Vehicle:MY05 PSM GGA !STOCK MY99 RS-RIP / MY95 MX-5 |
Jorge, please post the link to the warning that using E85 causes massive incindiary damage.
|
05-28-2006, 02:13 PM | #388 | ||||
Scooby Guru
Member#: 6124
Join Date: Apr 2001
Chapter/Region:
MWSOC
Location: Glendale Hts, IL, USA
Vehicle:2000 NFR AP1 S2000 '07 Honda FIT sport (5MT) |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Words like corrosion, damage, "not greater then...." etc.... should be warning enough. I've known you a long time Andrew, and I know your methodical nature, but the fact remains that if you're going to stand here and play word games with what you KNOW will happen to the rubber components of our fuel system, then I really had you all wrong. Jorge (RiftsWRX) www.ProjectWRX.com |
||||
05-28-2006, 04:43 PM | #389 |
Scooby Newbie
Member#: 15316
Join Date: Feb 2002
Chapter/Region:
SCIC
Location: Irvine
Vehicle:2005 Saabaru 9-2x Black |
I just heard that next year the Indy racers will be going to 100% ethanol instead of the methanol they use now. This I is more good news about ethanol. The more people that know about it the sooner I can stop driving to San Diego to get my Drink.
Also I just have to put in my 2 cents on this little debate. I think Jorge has made the right decision not to work with E85 because he is right that he has not seen good evidence to show that something won’t happen. I don’t think that anyone here has all the hard proof needed to say the E85 will be just as safe as any other gas or blend in our cars. That said, I think that Jorge should do a little more research into the fuel system and what materials are used and how they will be affected by E85. "not greater than..." does not mean that it will or even might make the car explode when in a document from RFA that is about fuel recommendations. In this case they are giving a general liability recommendation for every Subaru out there. That does not say or imply that using more than 10% will cause fuel lines the leak or that it will have any effect on the car at all. Any agency like RFA that makes recommendations about fuel usage would be liable to get sued to hell if they recommended something that was not backed up by the manufacturer of the car. Subaru won’t back up the use of more than 10% ethanol until they have cars that are specifically made for higher than 10%. This is not necessarily for safety reasons but the car just may not work right with too much ethanol, and cars that don’t work right give a car company a bad name. But mainly if I put only E85 (no gas) in my car it would break it, but it probably would not explode. It may not even break just run very badly. If I did that and complained to Subaru they would say "We told you not to." and never see a lawsuit go far in court. If they didn't have that warning I could break my car with E85 and then say "But you didn't say not to" and force them to go through a big court battle that would cost them a lot of money. This kind or warning is to prevent liability not necessarily for safety or to prevent damage to a car. Jorge, if you have a business then it would very wise of you to stay ahead of the game when it comes to this kind of thing. E85 will be used in the future and many people will be looking for a tuner who does 100% E85. If you can establish now that the parts in Subarus are made of ethanol safe materials, or find repalcment parts that are safe, then you should get good at high E85 blends before others do and take business away from you. Again your decision to not run it until you know that is a good one, but I think you are reading too much into the liability warnings and can get much better technical resources to use for such an important business decision, including much of the information on this forum. There is a lot of good technical info out there and the others on this forum should not argue with Jorge about his decision but help him find the hard evidence that shows he will be safe working with E85 not just "Oh it worked for the rest of us.” Until you can find that evidence respect his decision, but help educate him. I need the education as well. Last edited by Trottingwolf; 05-28-2006 at 04:57 PM. |
05-28-2006, 05:47 PM | #390 |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 37617
Join Date: May 2003
Vehicle:2007 |
I noticed that hotrod had posted a while ago that he felt the OEM fuel hoses were just fine for running ethanol. I decided to see if there was any evidence to further support this.
Check out the fuel lines in the engine bay. They're clearly marked "FPM" "ECO." I am assuming that these markings stand for the elastomers "Fluorocarbon rubber, viton," and "Epichlorohydrin." So how do these rate for resistance against ethanol (ethyl alcohol)? They rate as "good." More information: http://www.amazonhose.com/chemical.asp http://www.parker.com/indhose/pdf/Ch..._Reference.pdf Another PDF As far as I am concerned, that, along with hotrod's observations, rule out the soft fuel lines as a potential problem area. Now if someone can just figure out what the hard lines and fuel tank are made of... |
05-28-2006, 05:58 PM | #391 |
Scooby Guru
Member#: 99289
Join Date: Oct 2005
|
I don't think asking a tuner to verify the materials, manufacturing, and reactivity of Subaru's fuel system is very realistic. Enough people got their panties in a twist when the incorrect information about gear width change over was passed around.
Subaru has tolerances, requirements, and material variations that may allow for one car to run perfectly fine with 100% E85, while another will have fuel leak problems, etc. I think the best we can hope for is Subaru to issue a statement about what parts to change out to be 100% E85 compliant, multiple tuners pooling their resources and research on non customer vehicles, or someone makes a retrofit kit. If/when E85 becomes readily available, I wouldn't be surprise to see any or all of those happening. I think the people that are doing this on their own are very commendable, but taking on that liability as a tuner/shop to go beyond what SOA has recommend may be too much. One related car fire, and it very well could be game over for both the customer(death) and the tuner(lawsuit). |
05-28-2006, 06:19 PM | #392 | |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 14141
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: [email protected] @ 5800 ft on 13T
Vehicle:2002 Impreza WRX |
I've been watching this debate here for a while, and first would like to suggest that this discussion be taken to a different thread now that the issue has been opened. As extended "debate" will just clutter up this FAQ at this point.
I respect Jorge's decision from a business mans perspective. If he is that concerned about fuel system problems I would rather he not do tunes on E85. By the same token the OEM fuel system without the TSB upgrade has a clearly demonstrated tendency to (running the recommended gasoline) do exactly what he is concerned about on E85. After investigation of this gasoline leakage issue the NTSB came to the conclusion that there was no significant fire risk assocated with the leaking and it did not justify a recall. I tend to disagree with their conclusion but the fact remains that they could not find a clear pattern of fires (or to my knowledge any fires-- associated with fuel system leakage). Such leakage by the way has a very effective built in warning system as the fuel smell is overpowering for the occupants of the car. The fact is, none of us who have been experimenting with E85 have been able to find any signs of deterioration in spite of the fact we have been actively looking for them. The same goes for other makes and models. We have a large body of experimenters all over the world mostly in Europe and here in the U.S. that have been using ethanol fuel blends above manufactures recommendations for quite a few years, on several different makes and models. To date I am unaware of a single episode on a post 1980's car where "any" problem due to simple materials compatibility has cropped up. In my case I have over 2 - 1/2 years on my WRX running high ethanol fuel blends ranging from 33% to 100%. I also am running my 1988 Subaru GL wagon on between 33% - 50 %E85 with no modifications. I recently removed a segment of my OEM fuel line precisely to look for the signs of deterioration that are so widely "predicted". I pulled the fuel hose which went from the firewall hard lines to the fuel filter which has been in the car since new. After 6 years of use, on 10% ethanol pump blends, including several years of running xylene and toluene, and acetone spiked gasoline, high aeromatic race gas and 2 1/2 years of high ethanol fuel blends including over a year on 100% E85 here is what I found. The fuel line was in as new condition. It was firm and flexible and when cut lengthwise and spread open to examine the interior of the hose, it looked like a new piece of hose. I then left it to dry for a week and then bent it double 180 degrees with the inside of the line facing outward to check for cracking and checking of the hose liner. Even after drying it behaved as a new hose, with no signs of deterioration of any kind. At the same time I also pulled out my 550 cc pink injectors and examined their O-rings. They also were firm, flexible and showed no signs of swelling checking or cracking. Others have made similar periodic checks and have found the same evidence that the stock fuel system on the USDM WRX copes very well with E85 and in fact shows no identifiable signs of deterioration. In addition to these "experimenter" results we also have the historical results of controlled tests run in Brazil in the late 1970s' where they found that even cars of that period ran just fine with no modifications on up to 22% blends, with some minor modifications required for their high ethanol fuels which did not have the anticorrosion inhibitors which are in E85 and they also were not as pure as modern fuel ethanol blends with regard to water and acid contamination. Also Australia and the U.S. have run controlled tests of typical cars on high ethanol blends with good results in spite of the manufactures warnings. Manufactures warnings are just that --- warnings to protect them from complaints and frivolous law suits, not necessarily statements of fact. Chrysler corporation just recently removed their recommendation that a special oil be used in their FFV's as it "is no longer needed". This was a well known fact in the fuel ethanol community 10 years ago, but you had to wait for their lawyers to catch up to reality. I personally have been driving on ethanol enhanced fuels for over 30 years. I have seen what happens to a fuel line that is not compatible with ethanol. It fails and shows clear signs of deterioration in a matter of weeks. My 1968 Volkeswagon fuel line began to leak like a sieve a couple weeks after 10% ethanol fuels were introduced here in Colorado. I replaced it with over the counter fuel hose manufactured in 1980 and never had a problem after that. The fuel hose compatibility issue has been resolved for about 25 years now. Every fuel line manufacture makes replacement line that is compatible with ethanol. Methanol is a different issue and completely unrelated to this FAQ. Quote:
Larry Last edited by hotrod; 05-29-2006 at 12:52 AM. |
|
05-28-2006, 06:59 PM | #393 |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 63292
Join Date: Jun 2004
Chapter/Region:
South East
Location: Warner Robins, GA
Vehicle:2000 Subaru 2.5RS 2002 WRX powered |
if your worried about corrosion and the like of your fuel system why not find out the materials used in the ethanol capable cars that are out now? it seems ours are fine, but if your not satisfied with the examples given, then it wont hurt to go one step further and replace these things.
|
05-29-2006, 12:42 AM | #394 | |
Scooby Newbie
Member#: 15316
Join Date: Feb 2002
Chapter/Region:
SCIC
Location: Irvine
Vehicle:2005 Saabaru 9-2x Black |
Quote:
Thanks to hotrod. He has given just the kind of information I was hoping for, and I would hope that Jorge would consider it and if not change his mind at least understand that the danger is not as great as he seems to think. |
|
05-29-2006, 07:32 PM | #395 |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 98000
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: MO
Vehicle:05 sti e85@420hp |
RiftsWRX I take it you are a tuner. I have questions for you, or any other tuner for that matter, and I don't mean this in a bad way or dissing you or anything like that. How many cars have you tuned that were running ~30% e85? What differences, if any did you see? Does, or can it, make more power than 93? more than high octane race fuel? Have you seen any advantages/disadvantages at all? If you have yet to tune a car at ~30% e85, what do you expect to see? The reason I ask is I've been running my STI on ~30% and want to know if a pro tune on that ratio would net me some more hp over a tune on 93 and a rough guesstimate of how much. I could run the 30% map most of the time only having to switch to the 93 on trips where e85 wasn't available.
Again, this is not to slam you in any way at all, I would just like a professional opinion in my search for a little more power going down a little different road. |
05-29-2006, 07:42 PM | #396 |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 37617
Join Date: May 2003
Vehicle:2007 |
Running 30% ethanol is ~96 octane. In addition to the higher octane, that much ethanol should lower EGTs a bit. I would expect this to be a good for some more power...
Jorge will be tuning my car tomorrow afternoon with a 30%/70% ethanol/gas mixture. I will report back with my findings, and I'm sure he'll want to post his thoughts as well. As far as I know, I am the first person running a >10% ethanol blend to be tuned by Jorge. |
05-29-2006, 08:35 PM | #397 |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 14141
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: [email protected] @ 5800 ft on 13T
Vehicle:2002 Impreza WRX |
Due to the combined effects of inproved octane, cylinder cooling and chemical oxygen available from the Ethanol I would estimate it would be good ro 1-2% over what you can get with a similar octane gasoline.
It will be very interesting to see. In the research I've done reported power increases for 100% E85 have been in the 5% - 8% range but I suspect based on my drag strip times, there is more on the table than that for turbocharged cars. Larry |
05-29-2006, 09:56 PM | #398 | |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 98000
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: MO
Vehicle:05 sti e85@420hp |
Quote:
Please don't forget to post the results. Both with and without the ethanol. There have been a lot of butt dynos showing gains, but hard facts with and without have been far and few. It would also be nice to know what if any aspects were different from a gas tune or if there were any suprises. Also when looking over the dyno's of the various headers Rainman tested, it looks like some of the graphs show some kind of timing loss ~5200. Wonder if it will fill in with the e85? |
|
05-29-2006, 10:16 PM | #399 | |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 37617
Join Date: May 2003
Vehicle:2007 |
Quote:
|
|
05-30-2006, 02:31 AM | #400 |
Scooby Newbie
Member#: 62131
Join Date: May 2004
Chapter/Region:
MWSOC
Location: Fort Wayne, IN
Vehicle:2005 Impreza WRX STi Crystal Grey Metallic |
www.e85subaru.com
Deleted
Last edited by trininox; 07-17-2007 at 08:34 PM. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
What do you need to do to use E85 fuel? | wantsti | Rocky Mountains Impreza Club Forum -- RMIC | 37 | 02-20-2014 01:27 AM |
E85 fueling question- 850cc + fpgreen...adjustable FPR? | Blown95ImpalaSS | Factory 2.5L Turbo Powertrain (EJ Series Factory 2.5L Turbo) | 5 | 09-29-2009 07:37 PM |
E85-Fueled Z06, 30th Anniversary Corvettes to Pace ‘08 Indy 500 | AVANTI R5 | Non-Subaru News & Rumors | 0 | 12-27-2007 01:56 PM |
E85 fuel available now in Arvada 9/22/06 | hotrod | Rocky Mountains Impreza Club Forum -- RMIC | 9 | 09-25-2006 02:29 PM |
E85 Fuel in Austin? When? | dromango | Texas Impreza Club Forum -- TXIC | 8 | 06-29-2006 01:32 PM |