Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey all,

 

Is an ethanol content sensor required for an E85 only tune?

I was under the impression it was due to the variable nature of pump E85- which can vary wildy in ethanol content.

I guess my question is- can a tuner compensate for this with a flex fuel sensor or is it not required for straight E85?
 

I just bought one but i'm unsure if I should just return it.

Cheers all!

It's not strictly necessary, because, whilst the wildly "variable nature of pump E85" is a thing, it doesn't really vary so much that it has to be a problem. It can often be as low as 70, from what I understand, and even somewhat higher than 85. But here's the thing. The knock resistance from ethanol content pretty much reaches a maximum somewhere around 45% ethanol content. Thereafter the extra ethanol doesn't really provide much more ability to put in timing, safety from knock, etc. What it does do though is affect the required stoichiometry. For lower E content, you get richer (for a fuel system/table that assumes E85). So you get safer. And slower. Above 85%, unless the tune is pretty close to the edge of being too lean, you should still be fine. So if you want to keep your tune nicely optimised against varying E content, then....you need a sensor.

If it were me, I'd put a sensor in. The downside here is that you must do the full flex tune to get the benefit from it. You have to have a base map on one fuel and another on the opposite extreme of the E content to interpolate against. I wouldn't think that tuning on exactly E85 (or whatever happened to be coming out of the pump that day) would give the ECU anywhere to adjust to based on what the ethanol sensor is saying, unless there's that other fuel's tune in there also.

  • Like 1

I think it depends on whether you are using pump or can e85, the stuff direct from the refinery is pretty strict e85 I understand while the pump stuff varies from season to season to give you a chance starting the car on a cold morning.

I'd 100% put it in if I was even considering some ethanol.

  • Thanks 1

Personally even if I planned on running straight E85 all the time with no variability to account for cold start I would run a flex fuel sensor purely because any time you switch between pump gas and E85 you'd have to either fully drain the tank. I want to be able to switch to pump gas halfway, end up with E30 or whatever it ends up being and just keep driving without having to deal with AFR trims being all over the place.

If you were 100% sure that you will never ever run anything other then pump e85, then sure you could get away without running a flex sensor. 

Lets say the car was tuned on a tank of e80 and everything was setup perfectly on that %blend, as you drove the car and the ethanol content varied from e70 to e85 depending on what the fuel bowser was filled with at the time, you would not notice any change in how the car behaves. It would make the same power and drive exactly the same regardless of if it was currently at e70 or e85 or anything in-between. 

The only way you would notice anything is if you had a dash/gauge telling you that something was different, e.g. AFR is  currently 11.3 however when tuned it was 11.5 under the same circumstances. These small changes will be impossible to feel in the way the car actually performs.

So, should you use the flex sensor? I'd say yes, even if it was just to give you the option to use pump 98. There might be a situation in the future you haven't accounted for where you run out of e85 or it's not available for whatever reason, now at least you can still run the car happily on 98. 

Can you run without it, yes.

Should you, probably not.

My car runs 1 as it's flex tuned. I run e85 all the time, may run 98 once a year just to purge the system out.

In Victoria, the ethanol content from United pump e85 seems very consistent, my sensor reads it as 78-79%, have seen 80-81% a couple of times. I haven't verified how accurate my sensor is but wouldn't be too far off. This is over 5 years, never been under or over those figures.

On another note, you could get one of those portable ethanol test kits but you would need to take a sample each time. 

Since you already have the sensor, why not just use it. In future you may decide to run flex and it would be 1 less thing required.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Thank you all for the great replies.

The car plan is straight E85- as the engine isn't in great health with 130psi across all 6 cylinders on a factory 25DET- so low compression.

I want to prolong it while I save up for a rebuild. But I do hope for mid 400whp with E85 in the meantime.

I am thinking about not using the Flex sensor- unless the tuner will drop a bit of 98 in the tank to bring it down to say E60-70- but they'd probably not do this and just tell me to get a flex fuel tune.

I haven't put it in yet and $250 back into my bank account will certainly be beneficial to me right now.

So basically a good idea if running flex, bad/pointless if running straight E85 since it won't effect knock anyway- only stoich point- that's the summary i've got.

35 minutes ago, CLEM0 said:

Thank you all for the great replies.

The car plan is straight E85- as the engine isn't in great health with 130psi across all 6 cylinders on a factory 25DET- so low compression.

I want to prolong it while I save up for a rebuild. But I do hope for mid 400whp with E85 in the meantime.

I am thinking about not using the Flex sensor- unless the tuner will drop a bit of 98 in the tank to bring it down to say E60-70- but they'd probably not do this and just tell me to get a flex fuel tune.

I haven't put it in yet and $250 back into my bank account will certainly be beneficial to me right now.

So basically a good idea if running flex, bad/pointless if running straight E85 since it won't effect knock anyway- only stoich point- that's the summary i've got.

Why would you want to tune the car on e60-e70?

I don't think anyone said it was bad or pointless to use a flex sensor if running pump e85 100% of the time. 

I would say the summary is closer to - 

* Yes you can run the car on pump e85 without a flex sensor

* There are benefits to using a flex sensor even if you are always on pump e85. It's up to you if you think those benefits are worth the very small outlay to install the flex sensor.

 

5 minutes ago, Murray_Calavera said:

Why would you want to tune the car on e60-e70?

I don't think anyone said it was bad or pointless to use a flex sensor if running pump e85 100% of the time. 

I would say the summary is closer to - 

* Yes you can run the car on pump e85 without a flex sensor

* There are benefits to using a flex sensor even if you are always on pump e85. It's up to you if you think those benefits are worth the very small outlay to install the flex sensor.

 

Thank you- that came across better than how I summarised it.

I would not be getting the car tuned on 98, and if E45 and E85 are minimal in regard to knock resistance, then if I got a bad batch of E85 it wouldn't be detrimental to the performance or safety of the car- so essentially unless I do plan to run flex/98, the only benefit i'd get is consistent fuel trims/AFR and more consistent economy/cold starts.

Install the flex sensor.

One day you're going to rock up to United on a low tank of fuel thinking you'll fill up, then to find out their tanks are empty.

Now you have probably 5L of fuel left in your tank and wonder how you'll get home. That tow truck emergency call out fee + towing fees will cost more than your flex sensor.

 

  • Like 4

There's no real downside and it's not strictly required. Caltex used to serve E70 to E85. As Bill mentioned up above, United has been E80-85 pretty much forever. Never ever saw that change. I suppose the offensive price gouging for the product is worth something.

(then again, Ethanol lowers the price of 91... so... they're probably maximizing the 'cheap stuff' by keeping that Ethanol content up in E85)

1 hour ago, Murray_Calavera said:

Why would you want to tune the car on e60-e70?

I don't think anyone said it was bad or pointless to use a flex sensor if running pump e85 100% of the time. 

I would say the summary is closer to - 

* Yes you can run the car on pump e85 without a flex sensor

* There are benefits to using a flex sensor even if you are always on pump e85. It's up to you if you think those benefits are worth the very small outlay to install the flex sensor.

 

E30 is popular in my area to bump up octane enough to make enough power on our terrible fuel quality in California while not suffering too much of a range deficit. It also helps with not destroying HPFPs in GDI applications.

On 3/22/2023 at 2:10 PM, GTSBoy said:

Be aware that a worn set of rings will let more water-filled blowby gases into the sump. You will want to change your oil close to twice as often as would normally be expected for E85, unless you're happy for it to all go to shit down there.

Thanks.

I did a wet test and it jumped about 7-8psi. So i'd say rings aren't amazing.

How often would you suggest a change in oil?

10 hours ago, Dose Pipe Sutututu said:

When it smells like fuel and/or looks milky from E85 and/or when it's a dark colour.

I dunno about the smell, oil will smell like E85 if you do so much as drive it out of your driveway... 

11 minutes ago, Kinkstaah said:

I dunno about the smell, oil will smell like E85 if you do so much as drive it out of your driveway... 

jesus, how much enrichment do you have on cold start? lol...

 

2 minutes ago, Dose Pipe Sutututu said:

jesus, how much enrichment do you have on cold start? lol...

 

Not sure, I have no need for Expensive-Gouge-Juice anymore, though I do have the capacity.

I remember not needing to touch any of the enrichment tables for start with the ol Haltech PS2000. Would start perfectly with full ethanol in the middle of winter without any issues. Never had any cold start problems at all, or hot start for that matter, was the most overblown 'problem' E85 ever had. At least for me..

But ye, do an oil change then drive for 100km then smell the oil filler cap. It smells like E85 really fast in my experience and isn't an indicator that the oil is ready to be changed yet.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Well, after the full circus this week (new gearbag, 14 psi actuator on, injectors and AFM upgraded, and.....turbo repair) the diagnosis on the wastegate is in. It was broken. It was broken in a really strange way. The weld that holds the lever arm onto the wastegate flapper shaft broke. Broke completely, but broke in such a way that it could go back together in the "correct" position, or it could rearrange itself somewhere else along the fracture plane and sit with the flapper not parallel to the lever. So, who knows how and when exactly what happened? No-one will ever know. Was it broken like this the first time it spat the circlip and wedged itself deep into the dump? Or was it only broken when I tried to pry it back into place? (I didn't try that hard, but who knows?). Or did it break first? Or did it break between the first and second event of wierdness? Meh. It doesn't matter now. It is welded back together. And it is now held closed by a 14 psi actuator, so...the car has been tuned with the supporting mods (and the order of operations there is that the supporting mods and dyno needed to be able to be done first before adding boost, because it was pinging on <<14 psi with the new turbo with only a 6 psi actuator). And then tuned up a bit, and with the boost controller turned off throughout that process. So it was only running WG pressure and so only hit about 15-16 psi. The turbo is still ever so slightly lazier than might be preferred - like it is still a bit on the big side for the engine. I haven't tested it on the road properly in any way - just driven it around in traffic for a half hour or so. But it is like chalk and cheese compared to what it was. Between dyno numbers and driving feedback: It makes 100 kW at 3k rpm, which is OK, could be better. That's stock 2JZ territory, or RB20 with G series 550. It actually starts building boost from 2k, which is certainly better than it did recently (with all the WG flapper bullshit). Although it's hard to remember what it was like prior to all that - it certainly seems much, much better. And that makes sense, given the WG was probably starting to blow open at anything above about 3 psi anyway (with the 6 psi actuator). It doesn't really get to "full boost" (say 16 psi) until >>4k rpm. I am hopeful that this is a feature of the lack of boost controller keeping boost pressure off the actuator, because it was turned off for the dyno and off for the drives afterward. There's more to be found here, I'm sure. It made 230 rwkW at not a lot more than 6k and held it to over 7k, so there seems to be plenty of potential to get it up to 250-260rwkW with 18 psi or so, which would be a decent effort, considering the stock sized turbo inlet pipework and AFM, and the return flow cooler. According to Tao, those things should definitely put a bit of a limit on it by that sort of number. I must stress that I have not opened the throttle 100% on the road yet - well, at least not 100% and allowed it to wind all the way up. It'll have to wait until some reasonable opportunity. I'm quite looking forward to that - it feels massively better than it has in a loooong time. It's back to its old self, plus about 20% extra powers over the best it ever did before. I'm going to get the boost controller set up to maximise spool and settle at no more than ~17 psi (for now) and then go back on the dyno to see what we can squeeze out of it. There is other interesting news too. I put together a replacement tube to fit the R35 AFM in the stock location. This is the first time the tuner has worked with one, because anyone else he has tuned for has gone from Z32 territory to aftermarket ECU. No-one has ever wanted to stay Nistuned and do what I've done. Anyway, his feedback is that the R35 AFM is super super super responsive. Tiny little changes in throttle position or load turn up immediately as a cell change on the maps. Way, way more responsive than any of the old skool AFMs. Makes it quite diffifult to tune as you have to stay right on top of that so you don't wander off the cell you wanted to tune. But it certainly seems to help with real world throttle response. That's hard to separate from all the other things that changed, but the "pedal feel" is certainly crisp.
    • I'm a bit confused by this post, so I'll address the bit I understand lol.  Use an air compressor and blow away the guide coat sanding residue. All the better if you have a moisture trap for your compressor. You'd want to do this a few times as you sand the area, you wouldn't for example sand the entire area till you think its perfect and then 'confirm' that is it by blowing away the guide coat residue.  Sand the area, blow away the guide coat residue, inspect the panel, back to sanding... rinse and repeat. 
    • The detail level is about right for the money they charge for the full kit... AU$21.00 each issue, 110 issues for a total of $2,300 (I mentioned $2.2K in the first post when the exchange rate was better). $20/week is doable... 馃槓
    • If planning on joining us for the day(s) please indicate by filling in this form. https://forms.gle/Ma8Nn4DzYVA8uDHg7
    • You put the driver's seat on the wrong side! Incredible detail on all of this. It looks like you could learn a lot about the car just from assembling the kit.
  • Create New...