e50 vs 85

[Turbolag87]

Hey guys im about to finally get my car rolling out from the shop. I did a lot of work to her, buts another thread all together. Since i live in Canada (Toronto) Ill be buying drums of e98. My question is will i see a HUGe difference in power between the 2. Lund is my current tuner and ill be asking him as well since dont wanne be buring through drums like crazy( i drive her alot)

any of you out there that have any experience on the two...

Thanks

Sponsored

 

[Joshinator99]

Hey guys im about to finally get my car rolling out from the shop. I did a lot of work to her, buts another thread all together. Since i live in Canada (Toronto) Ill be buying drums of e98. My question is will i see a HUGe difference in power between the 2. Lund is my current tuner and ill be asking him as well since dont wanne be buring through drums like crazy( i drive her alot)

any of you out there that have any experience on the two...

Thanks

In my humble opinion I will say no, since the majority of your additional timing advance is all in by E50/E60 anyway. There might be a bit more power at full E since you can probably eek out an extra degree or two of timing, but not what I’d consider a “huge” difference vs E50. Just my 2 cents.

 

[engineermike]

What’s the combo?

 

[Angrey]

The advantages of E85 aren't just timing up to borderline. Ethanol cools the air/fuel mixture more when going from liquid to gas (heat of vaporization) which reveals it's benefits when IAT's are hotter, boost is higher, cylinder head temps climb under load and are heat soaked, etc.

You won't see a huge jump in perfect condition knock resistance on a dyno or an engine lab test, but you'll see benefits with temperature control which means E85 will provide more protection and resistance to knock and preignition and also be easier on your ring expansion and CHT's.

It does come at the price of being lower energy density so you need more injector and pump.

 

[engineermike]

We dynod one on pump 93 and e85. This particular combo only gained 10 rwhp from 880 to 890 by switching from one to the other. However, 10 deg more timing gained us 180 more hp. But on this case (pd sc) the airflow is set by the supercharger. I think na, turbo, or centrif will gain a little more with just the fuel switch due to the increased airflow.

 

[Angrey]

All other things being equal (N/A or set boost level) E85 will result in significant gains if you run the timing out to borderline. Furthermore, E85 will be much more resistant to less than optimal conditions. You don't need to add more sauce, it just enables you to take advantage of a given amount of it.

Most folks focus on the peak numbers, but where E85 really shines is in 2 ways. First, it's gains usually all along the curves, particularly low rpm where gasoline is more restrictive for timing. So even a 20 hp bump is more compelling than it seems because it's usually consistent gains all across the curve.

Second, an ethanol blend at least gives you the ability to get an idea of the quality of the fuel. With 93, you're stuck either rolling the dice or adding boosters to every tank in hopes of negating any bad fuel (and E85 doesn't share a nozzle with other grades).

It's obviously not an option for everyone where availability comes in and admittedly, the reduction in range is significant (especially when already reduced by a power adder). Chemical resistance really isn't an issue anymore because all OEM's started fielding flex fuel capable components early last decade. It does have moisture contamination issues if you like to go long periods between fill ups OR you live somewhere that the nightly lows and daily highs are very large swings. It also cuts oil more, especially if you don't get the motor up to full operating temps to burn off lighter contaminants (so it's not a short run to the convenience store kinda fuel).

Watching my knock and advance, I can qualitatively tell when I'm getting less than quality E just based upon how much timing the car is allowing, especially when cruising. (although I have a dedicated ethanol sensor).

Before the advent of "flex fuel" most mustang builds were relegated to race fuel out of a can or limitations of pump gas. E85 is widely available race fuel and the price swap (for economy loss) with 93 is generally pretty close (you lose 30% but it's generally 20-30% cheaper by the gallon).

If you've invested all the hassle of finding an E85 pump, about the only advantage of running a lesser content blend would be additional range and if we're using it for a high hp application, that's probably not high on the list of priorities.

 

[Deleted member 72210]

In my humble opinion I will say no, since the majority of your additional timing advance is all in by E50/E60 anyway. There might be a bit more power at full E since you can probably eek out an extra degree or two of timing, but not what I’d consider a “huge” difference vs E50. Just my 2 cents.

 

[Deleted member 72210]

If anyone honestly believes there's no significant difference between E50 and E85 they aren't getting tested true E85.

 

[EFI]

If anyone honestly believes there's no significant difference between E50 and E85 they aren't getting tested true E85.

Define significant.

20hp at stock power levels is a decent gain. 20hp at 1000+ is pretty insignificant.

 

[Joshinator99]

Define significant.

20hp at stock power levels is a decent gain. 20hp at 1000+ is pretty insignificant.

Agreed. My 1059 WHP Camaro has all the additional timing advance from running E all in by E50…! Even if I got one more degree of timing by pushing towards E85 it’s probably 20 WHP. Not worth the massive jump In fuel system strain that running full E at that power level requires.

 

[Angrey]

Agreed. My 1059 WHP Camaro has all the additional timing advance from running E all in by E50…! Even if I got one more degree of timing by pushing towards E85 it’s probably 20 WHP. Not worth the massive jump In fuel system strain that running full E at that power level requires.

Maybe I wasn't clear. Just because you can see all the timing on a dyno run by E50, doesn't mean there's no spare capacity for knock resistance on the street in heat soaked conditions.

I can personally watch my knock retard and when the fuel is E70 or below, the car will bury at -6 when cruising on even a slight incline to maintain cruise speed. It pulls less timing when it's E80+.

The benefits are more than just how much peak power you can see with borderline knock. E85 will be much more compliant with real world conditions when the ambients are hotter, the IAT's are elevated and the cylinder head temps are elevated. That translates into REAL world power because it's less likely to go into knock and less likely to pull timing.

Methanol is even better, but with more severe drawbacks.

I don't really see the point in intentionally shorting to E50 unless you're homebrewing out of a canister. If you've already had the hassle of finding an E85 station, I'm not sure what's to be gained by cutting it with 93.

The THERMAL advantages are still there and will help in reducing preignition and detonation and knock.

 

[Joshinator99]

Maybe I wasn't clear. Just because you can see all the timing on a dyno run by E50, doesn't mean there's no spare capacity for knock resistance on the street in heat soaked conditions.

I can personally watch my knock retard and when the fuel is E70 or below, the car will bury at -6 when cruising on even a slight incline to maintain cruise speed. It pulls less timing when it's E80+.

The benefits are more than just how much peak power you can see with borderline knock. E85 will be much more compliant with real world conditions when the ambients are hotter, the IAT's are elevated and the cylinder head temps are elevated. That translates into REAL world power because it's less likely to go into knock and less likely to pull timing.

Methanol is even better, but with more severe drawbacks.

I don't really see the point in intentionally shorting to E50 unless you're homebrewing out of a canister. If you've already had the hassle of finding an E85 station, I'm not sure what's to be gained by cutting it with 93.

The THERMAL advantages are still there and will help in reducing preignition and detonation and knock.

While I don’t disagree, keep in mind that at big power levels the fuel volume is significant to run full E85 and if you can get 90+% of the benefits at E50, that’s not a bad deal.

Unleashing 1K WHP on the street is few and far between in my experience so any perceived or real benefit of E85 vs E50 is marginal at best IMO. E50 has no problem dealing with the heat soak of a hot summer track day in my experience.

Again, *not saying* I wouldn’t prefer full E85. But the volume needed means the struggle is real for some of us.

 

[Turbolag87]

What’s the combo?

paxton 2200
gen 3 18 mt6
6 speed rst clutch
4.09 gears
fore system
bret barber ported intake
alum driveshaft etc........

currently running 3.6 pulley.. planning on stepping it down later on in the yr

 

[Turbolag87]

In my humble opinion I will say no, since the majority of your additional timing advance is all in by E50/E60 anyway. There might be a bit more power at full E since you can probably eek out an extra degree or two of timing, but not what I’d consider a “huge” difference vs E50. Just my 2 cents.

Noted ;)

 

[Turbolag87]

Define significant.

20hp at stock power levels is a decent gain. 20hp at 1000+ is pretty insignificant.

well said

Sponsored