One thing to remember, that 91 is based on AKI (average of RON & MON).

RON is European and always higher than MON. AKI is what North America uses and more realistic than RON.

The AKI for Ethanol is about 99.15.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octane_rating

 

Well I loaded tune and drove to work today! I told Torrie to start on the safe side, due to schedule I wouldn't be able to datalog for a bit.

So in this review, you never know what is tune, and what is fuel. But...

As the articles said, certain RPM are better and others are worse. Really funny how hot and cold different RPM's were.

I can't say there was more power over 93 but again, the 93 tune is finalized and this one isn't.

But I did notice MPG doing better. Like much better. Now this was on the highway and a steady rpm rate. Maybe around town would be different.

I cleared the truck dash After I was on the highway. Now 20 is achievable babying it with both fuels. The difference was with 93 if I gunned it it dropped to 19. With the e30. It would work its way back up to 20. So its only one 20 mile trip of result. But that's what I got at this point.

E85 was $2 a gal and 91 was 2.65 so if MPG is the same, its a win. If performance can be the same or better, its really a win.

I'll keep you posted!

 

Keep us updated. If e85 was at all convenient for me I'd be running it mixed as well.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

 

From other turbo vehicle websites I have visited, there is an overwhelming desire to run E85 (if your vehicle can) or E30 if limited.

From what I have read, the benefits are three fold; less detonation, allowing for more spark advance, reduced cylinder temps (due to the evaporative part of the higher ethanol in the fuel) and extra oxygen in ethanol, allowing for extra fuel (and why you run a lower AFR ratio than gasoline). But it is also why people get less fuel economy generally with high ethanol fuels.

I concur with Ducatti, if E85 was readily available where I lived, I too would mix E30 and run it.

 

Well its hard to brag around you guys, but the e85 station shares the road with my kids school. Very convenient.

Bragging further. 93 octane is near everywhere.

OK. Time to regress. . the e85 station has 91... I am not making two stops. Lol. Swiping my card...no car wash...zip code...no receipt TWO times is enough.

 

We only have one e85 station here. But, there's plenty of imports that keep it busy. E30 has been a very fun tune.

 

We only have 0. Lol.

But 93 is plentiful. Actually no 91.

 

So can someone elaborate on the long term effects of running fuels with higher ethanol contents than our trucks components were designed for? Obviously this E30 blend has it's good benefits...I'm just wondering what's the cost we will pay long term running higher ethanol when the components say E15 is the max? Thanks

 

Mike, I had some of those same concerns. I know for a fact that my weed eater hates it. I know I had to clean the carb on my 15 HP lawn mower and found tons of yellow gum. I have fuel treatment stuff that negates it there. But enough about that. I just mean I understand where your coming from.

Did you read those articles above? The links. There is a lot of data to support positive effects of it. I wouldn't leave it sitting in a weekend truck, but I run this daily. Actually runs cooler.

Google for yourself, post back with factual articles to the contrary. I'd love to read them.

I am thinking our trucks are designed to handle some ethanol. Now, I wouldn't feel as confident with an old classic car or even something from pre 2000. But based on what I read there are more than just a benefit to farmers and the environment at the e30 level. The cooler temps help the engine.

Read the links, Google, and post back. Please, I'd welcome it, you have been very informative this far.

 

Today's report is I feel like under 1800 rpm is rough. Around town I think MPG is poor. Highway speed is 2000 rpm. I think MPG is better there actually.

Also, I need to datalog and send to Torrie. Need to get this tune dialed in. I remember the increase as I dialed in my 93 tune.

 

So I just read through the articles, and I agree with the potential performance increases, knock reduction, cooler temps, etc. But I found it odd that E20 in their 11.9:1 CR engine had an almost 5% increase in MPGs while the E30 in their 11.9:1 CR engine had a 3% loss of MPGs. The articles seemed to not match up on fuel economy impacts, with one article saying a 3% decrease in MPGs and the other saying a 2% decrease to 1% increase. Granted maybe they were walking about different engine cycles or loads or something...not sure.

I would definitely give it a shot though, but sadly my 3.5 Eco sits in the garage more than it gets driven. I drive my old '05 Accord V6 (right at 200k on her) to work and back 80 miles round trip M-F, so the blended fuel would just sit in my F150's tank which would likely not be good. Luckily I've got a good Chevron station in my town that their 93 octane consistently gets me a -1.0 on the LOR (Learned Octane Ratio) on my Torque Pro app, so I've got a good fuel supply. There is also a station in town that sells 100% gas, non-ethanol 91 for 20 cents more than the Chevron 93, but it's a no-name station. I ran it once in my truck for kicks and giggles and got about 1.0 MPG better, but it wasn't worth it so I just use it for my power equipment.

Keep us posted on what your datalogs show...it'd also be neat to see temps such as coolant, intake (heat soak may not be as bad if engine runs a little cooler), and cat temps with these cooler fuel blends.

 

I got the impression, and my short while driving seems to be in line, different RPM performs differently. I don't remember what article that was. So maybe a city driving car is at a lower mpg and the highway is better.

Also, I wanted to get back on longevity. The non turbo 150 is e85 capable. I think most of the parts are made to hold up. I won't guess why on the turbo motor they didn't feel to rate it at e85. But its a lot of the same parts.

I run e30

Feel free to jump in and tell me and Mike your findings!

 

I run e30

 

The HPFP cannot keep up with the extra fuel demand. Port fuel injectors are typically larger to accommodate on flex vehicles. I've found that 40% is about the max. It will run(barely) on 100% e85, I ran the tank a bit too low once, and it sucked in some before it mixed.

 

Oddly enough a gas station just opened fairly close to me that has e85.

 

Most egggggcellent

 

Loaded my first tune revision. Blast off occurs after I drop the kids at 6:30 lol

 

Well?


Common sense should be more common

 

Ditto .... WELL????

 

so does it feel faster than your 93 tune?

 

Torrie is good for that. He'll try to make it however you'd like. Great customer service. My last revision, a friend said, was from the devil himself.

 

You sure that wasn't from a company further south?

Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk

 

It's funny. We never really intended to do a lot of racing, but when we found how quick these things can be, we can't get enough. We don't do a lot of street racing, but we are quickly becoming that 'truck to beat'. We've turned down challenges from 10 sec hondas to high-end m6's. They just love watching this thing hang, and often beat some of the faster cars. There's even a tune-only GTR that wants a shot. They're beginning to see the potential in this engine, and we're happy to show it off.

 

Did you ever do a 93 rutt? Any factual data? Or anyone have actually data?

 

Yes, I blended either 100octane with 91, or I used e85 with 100, since it's cheaper. Then I just used e85 and 91 for the finalized version of the 93. Then I went full-on e30. Now, I have 3 e30 tunes, and one 91.(w/without meth, race). I like the e30 so much that it's been months, since I ran on just 91.

 

So an e30 track tune. e30 street.

What else?

You ever try a 89 octane e30? I am on 91 octane e30 now.

 

I also have an e30 without meth. I still have a 98 octane tune that we briefly played with, but the race fuel is pricey. I did have a 89 tune from 5-star, but didn't notice much improvement over stock. The Eco tunes I had from them were a joke.(who likes driving like grandma)
I've never tried blending 89 with e85. This truck's never seen anything less than 91.(which sucks bad enough out here)

 

My blender pump uses 87 and e85 to get to e30.
No issues what so ever

 

No issues. But do you feel feisty when you drive it. Is it better then stock?

 

I wish I had access to e85. At least good 93 is plentiful here.

Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk

 

Here is today's report.

I like Torrie. He is a man of few words.

But. I'm going 80. I go to pass and punch it. Drop from 6 to 3 like the transmission knew it was coming.
(Maybe he will tell you I'm a sissy, I told him to turn up the shifts and in my opinion. It bangs)
so It bangs into gear and off I go.
What is different at 80 over 30 mph? Idk. But the truck begs me... Begs me... At that speed to give it more. Taunts me.

 

He is a man of few words. I've had to become fluent in what I call 'Torrie speak'. I did manage to get an entire sentence out of him once though. Then again, if I had to answer 100+ or more emails a day, I'd answer as quickly as possible as well.

 

My kids get excited whenever we get a new revision. It means the truck's going to go faster to them.

 

I've been burning E30 straight from the pump (easily available here) for several thousand miles on a 5 Star 87 tune. I get somewhere between 87 octane E10 mileage and 91 octane mileage. I have 91 and 93 octane tunes from 5* also, should i try those tunes or pay unleashed? Does anyone know if 5* is offering anything or maybe have a beta version for E30?

FYI one of the pumps in my area actually put a 94 octane sticker on their E30 pump. This isn't required by law to label min octane rating on 'blended' pumps, but performance-minded consumers appreciate it.