Thanks for info.Torco also makes race fuels.
I have had good luck with just NOS booster on the dyno with bike motors.

 

Well my tuner said that my 91 log provides slightly better timing than the 94 does. Along with a little more fuel quantity. The 94 required more short term trim than the 91.

Whatever that means...... I asked him what the conclusion was. haha.

 

Good info here! :-)

 

This is really old school thinking with a lot of incorrect information stated. 91 octane with 10% ethanol vs 91 octane without ethanol will have negligible performance differences. It has to do with a cleaner burn and that to me is a good thing for the masses.

 

Well the proof is in my logs. Todd at proto looked at my logs and the conclusion is that the 0 ethanol 91 showed better results than the 10% ethanol 94 octane.

 

Sure; OK in what way is it old school. The chemistry is the same now as it was when they brought out alcohol fuel except for the fact that they have stopped using certain chemicals that were more expensive and that were better for performance.

Care to elaborate?

 

Just because it says something on the pump doesn't mean that's what is actually going into your tank.

OK a couple of things. You imply alcohol has a lower heat of vaporation than gasoline and less of a cooling effect--not true. Alcohol has a higher heat of vaporization and much better cooling effect than gas. You also state that alcohol makes less power but when in fact, it's just the opposite. Alcohol is able to generate more power because you can burn more fuel which creates greater combustion pressures, i.e. worse fuel mileage but more power. Cars in Brazil have been running on alcohol for years due to all the sugar cane production. Gas has just been more convenient for us.

 

He did not quote what he read on the pump, Todd is a tuner that read his durametric log from his engine during a staged test with the two different fuels. The 91 no alcohol fuel was found to be a better performer due to as a result of looking at the engine parameters.



Absolutlely and completely wrong about alcohols heat of vaporization. and regular fuel. Now you can add chemicals to alcohol that change the properties to raise that number. Alcohol does not add more power because you can burn more, it does require more fuel to equal the same amount of thermal units per a certain volume of non alcohol enriched gas though.

I do not know about the chemistry of brazillian fuel but here in North America alcohol enriched fuels are legislated due to government policy; not performance or economic viability; and due to environmental reasons the fuel makers do not use certain chemicals that actually make alcohol enriched fuels a better performance product. Now I am not talking E85 which can be considered a cheap performance fuel; but that is no smoking gun either as a car needs some costly modifications to run the stuff.

Fuel chemistry is a subject that is debated by many an internet expert yet it is understood by so few (Heck I could be one of those un knowing ***** for all anyone here knows) but I can say for a fact that my money goes on good non alcohol enriched fuel. If I want the extra octane I mix race gas into the equation or even use Torco additive.


Sorry Edit.... As most here will not know this... The Torco fuel accelerator died with Torco going under but a product called Green Trail Accelerator is the same product.


Don't trust me ask everyones buddy Jay
http://www.jaylenosgarage.com/video/...-fuel/1288164/

 

This is going in circles.
You should read this article. Don't worry about all the equations. Just look at Fig. 3 which I reproduced below. The x-axis is % alcohol content in gas. The y-axis is enthalpy (heat) of vaporization. It is a linear correlation with a positive slope, i.e. as the alcohol content is increased in gas, the heat of vaporization also increases. If you have data that proves otherwise please show it.

E85 produces more power than gas, that's a given. As for why alcohol produces more power, it has to do with the combustion process.
Couldn't agree more.

 

Your living in the past my friend.. so much misinformation here its disgusting.. Ethanol for 1 is nothing like running alcohol such as methanol that absorbs moisture and is hydroscopic and blah blah blah.. 10% ethanol will do NOTHING harmful to the fuel system, lubrication or anything of that sort.. We have been running 85 and 99% ethanol for going on 5 years and over 40k miles on cars making 250hp per cyl.. we have 0 ill effects to the stock fuel system in terms if corrosion and thats 85% not a measly 10% which is watered down by gas.

unless you have some REAL WORLD DATA not what you read in a book, online or your engineering school told you to prove otherwise you will never convince me of these ill effects.. we have 1500+Hp supras running ethanol all the way down to 450hp evos driving daily for almost 5 years on it.. We have tested back to back on numerous occasions the power we can safely pull out of cars on 93 with and without ethanol and its hands down safer with ethanol and it makes more power PERIOD..

Mike

 

really?? Hmm lets see.. an Evo needs 1200cc injectors 300.00 and a fuel pump 95.00 to run ethanol safely.. Now i don't know what your idea of costly is but 400.00 is pretty cheap to me and my customers seem to think so as well.. so don't use generalized statements like " a car " needs costly modifications.. even a porsche COSTLY to run E85 is still untrue given the price of all the other mods on the car that gain much less power 1.00 for 1.00..

 

You have a car that defies everything we have ever tested on 100s of cars.. Id check the car, the tune, or the fuel because something is DEAD WRONG in that equation my friend..

 

I noticed more power on my Supra and old 996TT with Husky 94 (10% ethanol)
I don't use ethanol blended gas on my Lambo tho...

unless I went TT one day.

 

Well last year I didn't beleive markski either when he told me that Shell 91 was better than husky 94. He even sent me logs showing the ECU dumping fuel on the husky 94 trying to protect itself....

So I had to do some logs myself.....

hoesntly I wish the husky 94 was better, cause It's easy for me to get. Just as easy as shell 91. So I wouldn't mind gas that can make more power and be safer.....

 

Great debate...I see only one post with data (bravo TTdude). Of course no one is considering the measurement error for the tests performed by the tuners. I do know that in CO we have had 10% ethanol (by law) for many years...and cars are still running. Since the higher octane fuels are harder to detonate (therefore less knock), I find it hard to believe the 91 will perform better than the 94 (provided your ECU is mapped to take advantage of this). I have also seen little data to suggest the "additives" actually increase octane by much if at all.