Building the motor

[robmustang201528]

From what I'm gathering from this tread for my situation, how I use the car, I think 10:1 compression is my best bet. I hear both arguments but for me personally... the reliability factor is number one on my list then power. I want to be able to drive this car on 500 mile trip without issues.. beat on it a couple times on the way to my destination, without worrying if I have E85 in the tank, just in case somebody tries me on the way to my destination. For example. A group of us are driving down to Mustang Week. I know will probably do some fun rolls on the way down there. I don't want to think that something will go wrong because I don't have E85 in the tank. I want to be able to bust ass on 93 then turn this bitch up on E85 when i want. I've cracked ringland in this car which is the reason why I doing this build. Either the tune or 93... I'm more so leaning towards the tune. I think I'm going to go back to Lund and let them tune it. I should've never left in the first place smh.

Sponsored

 

[Angrey]

From what I'm gathering from this tread for my situation, how I use the car, I think 10:1 compression is my best bet. I hear both arguments but for me personally... the reliability factor is number one on my list then power. I want to be able to drive this car on 500 mile trip without issues.. beat on it a couple times on the way to my destination, without worrying if I have E85 in the tank, just in case somebody tries me on the way to my destination. For example. A group of us are driving down to Mustang Week. I know will probably do some fun rolls on the way down there. I don't want to think that something will go wrong because I don't have E85 in the tank. I want to be able to bust ass on 93 then turn this bitch up on E85 when i want. I've cracked ringland in this car which is the reason why I doing this build. Either the tune or 93... I'm more so leaning towards the tune. I think I'm going to go back to Lund and let them tune it. I should've never left in the first place smh.

It's false security my brother. It only takes one bad batch of 93 to create sad face. And there's quite a few ways that can happen. Ranging from the station are crooks and watering down their 93 and selling it to reduce costs, to the tanker driver just messed up and filled the wrong blend in the wrong tank. Then there's the "last user" issue where your chances are greater than 50% that the last person who filled up was pumping 87. Not a huge volume, but it erodes the overall octane rating of your tank.

Is it more of a pain in the ass with E-85? Absolutely, but at least I can test and get a crude confirmation of it's quality. With 93, it's a roll of the dice EVERY time and it only takes one bad batch and a hot day and a mash of your foot to smoke the motor. Lower compression and a conservative tune will help, but there's a reason why tuners love E-85. In my mind it's widely available low grade race fuel (which is basically what it is). And it's on a dedicated pump nozzle and it can be tested.

Of course you can always dump octane booster every tank, but that has other drawbacks (cost being one of them)

If I were running N/A I'd say......bang away, most modern motors can handle a bad fuel stretch, they're designed with some safety from the get.

If I lived in cold weather climate where the IAT's are reasonable most of the year I'd say 93 might be okay.

I live where IAT's at a stop light can climb to 130-140 very easily most of the year. I need every bit of insurance I can get. 93 under those types of conditions (even good fuel) is just dangerous with boost.

To each their own. 10:1 with less than 10 lbs of boost should be fine with a built motor and most junk 93. Then again, you're not going to set any dyno records on that setup.

 

[Dennisn]

If your gonna have Lund tune it get their opinion. I would guess they’ll tell you stock compression. Run a conservative flex tune and let her live a happy life.

 

[robmustang201528]

It's false security my brother. It only takes one bad batch of 93 to create sad face. And there's quite a few ways that can happen. Ranging from the station are crooks and watering down their 93 and selling it to reduce costs, to the tanker driver just messed up and filled the wrong blend in the wrong tank. Then there's the "last user" issue where your chances are greater than 50% that the last person who filled up was pumping 87. Not a huge volume, but it erodes the overall octane rating of your tank.

Is it more of a pain in the ass with E-85? Absolutely, but at least I can test and get a crude confirmation of it's quality. With 93, it's a roll of the dice EVERY time and it only takes one bad batch and a hot day and a mash of your foot to smoke the motor. Lower compression and a conservative tune will help, but there's a reason why tuners love E-85. In my mind it's widely available low grade race fuel (which is basically what it is). And it's on a dedicated pump nozzle and it can be tested.

Of course you can always dump octane booster every tank, but that has other drawbacks (cost being one of them)

If I were running N/A I'd say......bang away, most modern motors can handle a bad fuel stretch, they're designed with some safety from the get.

If I lived in cold weather climate where the IAT's are reasonable most of the year I'd say 93 might be okay.

I live where IAT's at a stop light can climb to 130-140 very easily most of the year. I need every bit of insurance I can get. 93 under those types of conditions (even good fuel) is just dangerous with boost.

To each their own. 10:1 with less than 10 lbs of boost should be fine with a built motor and most junk 93. Then again, you're not going to set any dyno records on that setup.

I'm still going to get a fuel system down the line. As long as I can get a tune that allows me to use E85 when I want to race and 93 when I want to cruise...I'll be happy. Does Lund offer a tune like that? I don't want to run E85 all the time

 

[SolarFlare]

I'm still going to get a fuel system down the line. As long as I can get a tune that allows me to use E85 when I want to race and 93 when I want to cruise...I'll be happy. Does Lund offer a tune like that? I don't want to run E85 all the time

Not gonna happen, and the fact that it’s 2020 and mustang guys don’t know this, especially people who have gone so far down the proverbial rabbit hole of mods.

 

[Angrey]

I've never seen a reputable tuner offer a "flex" tune for a blown setup. Too much risk and the calculations are all pretty much a workaround from the wideband instead of a dedicated E-85 monitor.

And switching back and forth only really works one way. That is, unless you're gonna pop the lock ring and suck out the remaining 93, or pump it out with the fuel line adaptor, it'll dilute that first batch of E in the tank (probably to the point where you wouldn't want to risk it).

You could have the tuner set you up for both tunes and you can switch, but it's not like it would be a nifty swap back and forth affair. It's more like a (I'm going to spend the weekend draining, driving the tank down and swapping over).

For all the fearmongering it's really NOT that bad. E-85 is much more common than the anti-corn guys realize. It's not on every corner, but it's not like there's a hundred miles in between each.

It does give you way less fuel mileage (about 30% from the get go and more than that because it's usually involving a tune/setup that makes you want to mash all the time). It does require more fuel pump/injector, there's a few down sides.

But what you do get is much more peace of mind in hot weather and high IAT conditions. I personally wouldn't run a blown setup without it unless it was just a 650 hp set it and forget it type setup that's bullet proof.

 

[robmustang201528]

Not gonna happen, and the fact that it’s 2020 and mustang guys don’t know this, especially people who have gone so far down the proverbial rabbit hole of mods.

It's either 93 or E85? Can't go back and forth? Even with a fuel system?

 

[Angrey]

It's either 93 or E85? Can't go back and forth? Even with a fuel system?

you can, but it's not like a flex.

Going from E to 93 is easy. You just head the station, turn the car off. Fill up the tank with 93, reflash, start up and give it a few miles to relearn a few things.

From 93 back to E isn't so easy. You have to drain the tank ALL THE WAY DOWN or at the very least nearly all the way and then fill up with E, reflash and baby it until you burn through that tank and fill up with quality E. You don't want to risk running 65 or 70% batch if your tuner set you up for 80%+.

Of course you need an Ngauge or flash device and you'll have to pay for 2 different tunes (which means the 2 tunes and the time the tuner has to spend on the dyno draining or swapping you out if in the same session).

However, it has limitations. I might do what you're getting at for a very safe 93 setup if I ever find myself in a jam and just can't get some E. I can reflash, limp home and then swap back later.

 

[engineermike]

It's either 93 or E85? Can't go back and forth? Even with a fuel system?

Whipple was working on a true flex fuel setup in 2018. Most of the programming needed is already in the ECM. The key component that’s missing is the ethanol sensor that they were adding. Some f-150 tuners claim they can do flex fuel without the sensor but I wouldn’t trust it.

 

[Angrey]

Whipple was working on a true flex fuel setup in 2018. Most of the programming needed is already in the ECM. The key component that’s missing is the ethanol sensor that they were adding. Some f-150 tuners claim they can do flex fuel without the sensor but I wouldn’t trust it.

I think I've heard or read somewhere the Fathouse cars are using some sort of flex/E-sensor in combination with Motec and boost control settings.

Problems arise with more extreme setups and a blower because 1700 or even 1300cc injectors sized for E get pretty grumpy at lower rpms trying to not wash down the cylinders. That and if you're running a tiny pulley that spins to the moon, running a pure 93 tune could be frowny face (see our discussion above about high compression and big boost). I guess for a mild setup and reasonable sized injectors you could flex back and forth.

 

[SolarFlare]

It's either 93 or E85? Can't go back and forth? Even with a fuel system?

tuners wont do it because coyotes don't have an ethanol sensor or input for one, its calculated and therefore very risky.

 

[Dennisn]

tuners wont do it because coyotes don't have an ethanol sensor or input for one, its calculated and therefore very risky.

I suggested flex tune. Forgot they won’t do flex with boosted.

that said it’s not difficult going from e85 to gas. Usually most will run e85 til the fuel goes to shit then make the switch for the winter months.

 

[Dominant1]

Im at 750whp on 93, there are no e-85 stations for 40 miles where I live, So i run Sunoco 93 + Half a bottle of lucas octane booster with every fill up. You can get a 12 pack of lucas octane booster for about $80 on Amazon. Its a lot less expensive then running e-85 when you compare it to the poor fuel mileage you get with E-85. I don't use the Lucas to add power per say, i use it for protection against bad gas. If I go to the track I just buy a 5 gallon can of vp racing unleaded fuel at the track.

 

[80FoxCoupe]

Im at 750whp on 93, there are no e-85 stations for 40 miles where I live, So i run Sunoco 93 + Half a bottle of lucas octane booster with every fill up. You can get a 12 pack of lucas octane booster for about $90 on Amazon. Its a lot less expensive then running e-85 when you compare it to the poor fuel mileage you get with E-85. I don't use the Lucas to add power per say, i use it for protection against bad gas. If I go to the track I just buy a 5 gallon can of vp racing unleaded fuel at the track.

What are the prices of 93 and e85 in your area?

 

[Angrey]

Im at 750whp on 93, there are no e-85 stations for 40 miles where I live, So i run Sunoco 93 + Half a bottle of lucas octane booster with every fill up. You can get a 12 pack of lucas octane booster for about $80 on Amazon. Its a lot less expensive then running e-85 when you compare it to the poor fuel mileage you get with E-85. I don't use the Lucas to add power per say, i use it for protection against bad gas. If I go to the track I just buy a 5 gallon can of vp racing unleaded fuel at the track.

Yeah, I come out nearly even with E85. It's about 30% less fuel economy and a little less than that savings wise as the pump prices. It's hard to imagine buying premium and adding on booster cost for each tank and ending up cheaper than E but I guess it depends on local pricing.

Sponsored