Likely his base tune is conservative so should not really show a gain. If the tune was for 94 with 10% ethanol results would be different.

 

Yeah mike that was a great article on the enthalpy of vaporization 6 years ago; it was only pertinent up until about 2 years ago.


2 of the Authors ( Sergey Karpov & Roman Balabin) published a follow up article in the start of 2011 that talked about the new fuel chemistry of E10 fuels. I have a first issue copy of this article of my own.


Since late 2010 the fuel makers started adding certain Diamine's to E5 & 10 fuels; other constituent elements were removed with there use.

In particular the two chemicals --> (Ethylenediamine & p-Phenylenediamine)
The two chemicals have an adverse effect on the molar hear of vaporization.
They added some stability to the fuel and it help curb the fuels toxicity towards rubber compounds.

Ethylenediamine (ED) in its non Ligand form --> Tetraacetylethylenediamine is used as a surfactant to help break up the molecular adhesion created by the new chemistry of alcohol fuels.
The p-Phenyllenediamine (PPD) is used to help protect rubbers by sacrificing itself after forming light polar bonds with rubber products. It replaced or reduced levels of Naphthyl and other similar more toxic chemicals in fuels.

I could not find the article on line but I will scan a few pages later today.


And you are right about the fact that most of the modern vehicles will take E10 without really much problems and the Cost of modding a car to make more power really does overshadow making it more alcohol friendly.

It does not take away from the fact that alcohol fuels create other issues.

But to add to the story we are in for another fuel chemistry shift real soon.

Alcohol is a cheap oxygenator of fuel that is a fact; but the biggest downside to its use is the consistency it is found in at the pump varies way more than non alcohol fuel. And really I work in the auto industry too, many tuners do a lot of stupid things just to make customers happy and to just get numbers.

Really there is just so much to this whole subject. I am sure the shop you work at uses it with great success, many do.

I guess my biggest opposition to the fuel is that making 1 tank of E85 uses enough food to feed a fat north American for 1 year, not to even mention how many underfeeds it would feed and how much it has driven up the cost of bulk foods.

 

I dont know what the husky 94 really is but in the US if you real 94 octane fuel with 10% ethanol its going to make more power than 91 without hands down..

As far as the car trying to protect itself and such IMO is nonsense.. I forgot to mention one other thing that slipped my mind for Engine Guy..

I took E85 from the pump and DUMPED it into a 997.2 3.8L Gt3 and tuned it to 435whp which is the highest HP we have ever seen on a Gt3 3.8L NON RS.. So the cost for that modification was 0.00 and just the price of fuel aside from a tune which it needs anyway regardless of fuel..

I also did my personal 3.6L 997.1 GT3 with E85 but i jumped the gun and added injectors thinking it would need it but it didnt.. and it made 412whp which again was the highest we had seen from a 997.1 Gt3 to the wheels..

So its not really my opinion but pretty good FACT that it works, it makes more power and i havent seen any ill effects as of yet.. the only drawback was hard starting in the cold.. oh and of course worse gas mileage than 93..

So i would GUESS since im not 100% since i dont use HUSKY 94 that the ecu is not trying to protect anything from a higher octane 10% ethanol blend.. Im not doubting markski and every car is different along with tuners as well but my 1st hand experience is ethanol works no matter 10% or 85% in a porsche..

Mike

 

As of now we are dialing in timing and such. When we get closer to the final tune. Maybe I can try another tank of husky 94 and see some more results.

 

Huskey 94 is the same as any E10 94 ron gas you guys have in the states, it's just a brand like any of yours.

And as I mentioned in one of my other posts E85 is a whole different animal.

Now if you wanted a better fuel and you have your heart set on alcohol mix E85 into premium pump gas to get 10% alcohol by volume and then you would have a better fuel then normal E10 pump fuel.

 

The proper way is to use E100 and blend into 93 not using E85 that you still dont know the actual ethanol content into e10 that once again you dont know the ethanol content..

To me thats a waste of time anyway.. we tune on 93oct here and E85 from the pump.. 93 usually makes 150hp/cyl safely and E85, well we have never found the limit.. 250hp/cyl is the most we have done on E85 and it hasnt held us back yet..

Mike

 

Mixing E100 would be the 100% right way of doing it but you can not buy E100 at the pumps in north america. But that being said you can buy E85 and other premium fuels that do not contain ethanol. So to keep things simple E85 plus Premium fuel not containing ethanol would work. The content of ethanol in E85 is fairly closely adhered to, so mixing the two would give you levels that you would not have to worry about in terms of getting a mixture that would be too low. The biggest error would come from ratio error with the person doing the mixing the fuels.

Either way mike you make some good points, there is always more than one way to skin a cat and some are definately better than others.

What is also hard to control with all pump fuels is contamination and degredation.

Myself, I work with 15,000+ Rpm motors that are running to there limit quite often; quite often I have customers wanting max HP motors so the term I get them to memorize is (RACE GAS).

 

I wont beat a dead horse on this topic.. what works for one doesnt always work for the other is what i say..

as for the term race gas.. I havent given VP ( race fuel ) 1.00 in 4 years and i hope never to have to again either.. If they close the E85 stations ill brew my own..

 

The fuel in question (Husky 94) is 94 RON?

That's your problem right there.

 

This is a moving target. First you were claiming ethanol lowers the heat of vaporization which was incorrect now you're shifting the discussion to ethylenediamine and p-phenylenediamine?

Yup. Things start to make sense now.

 

Again and back to the OP, E10 94 at Husky, yeah you can get it, but there's now e10 94 at Petro Can in Alberta. There's 2 stations right near my place in edmonton, check the website to find an Ultra94 station near you http://retail.petro-canada.ca/en/ind...3557.aspx?B=UL

According to Wiki, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octane_rating

"regular" gas in Auz, NZ, Canada and the US has a RON of 91-92. This is in accord with everything written above.

The wiki doesn't list Husky 94, but it DOES list the new PetroCan Ultra 94. And it shows that the Petrocan gas has a RON of 101.5. This coincides with what my friend told me about the Petrocan gas being better than the Husky gas.

So, I don't know which way you're leaning, but if you want to run E10, I'd say to get it from your local gov't station......

 

Ummm Yeah sorry that should be Pon not Ron.

 

I looked into that. The petro-Canada stations with 94 are nowhere near my house. So that won't be something I woulD look into. I can get race gas just as easy as petrocanada 94. Husky 94 is pretty much everywhere.

 

Keep checking. When I first posted in this thread 5 days ago, there were just 2 near me (and only 2 in the city). Already now there's 5 nearish me, and 7 in the city.

 

Well look at that. There are more now. And some decently close to me.