N54 Stock DME Flex Fuel

[JDKruger4]

I'm excited about this and have and continue to patiently wait.

One feature I would personally really like to see would be a map that allows 100% e85 (or whatever % is coming out of the pump) without additional injection. I know, I know it can't be done! But I think it could. Instead of tuning for top power, you limit boost within the constraints of the fuel system (in my case stock + stg2 lpfp). Sure it would put down less power than an E60 mix but would eliminate the need for mixing at the pump (the station by my house has cheap e85 but only 87 oct regular and 91 ethanol free which is crazy expensive and is a waste to turn around and mix with ethanol). I know alot of people will dismiss this but for me it would be a great feature as I don't plan on doing additional injection and would be happy around the 400whp level on e85. From my (ignorant) perspective this would be doable given the Flex Fuel hardware and software. Thoughts?

 

[Jake@MHD]

I'm excited about this and have and continue to patiently wait.

One feature I would personally really like to see would be a map that allows 100% e85 (or whatever % is coming out of the pump) without additional injection. I know, I know it can't be done! But I think it could. Instead of tuning for top power, you limit boost within the constraints of the fuel system (in my case stock + stg2 lpfp). Sure it would put down less power than an E60 mix but would eliminate the need for mixing at the pump (the station by my house has cheap e85 but only 87 oct regular and 91 ethanol free which is crazy expensive and is a waste to turn around and mix with ethanol). I know alot of people will dismiss this but for me it would be a great feature as I don't plan on doing additional injection and would be happy around the 400whp level on e85. From my (ignorant) perspective this would be doable given the Flex Fuel hardware and software. Thoughts?

It can definitely be done, and has been tested. It will be power limited to a good bit less than your "max" power E blend %, but it works fine. Any competent tuner will be able to setup the maps in this way

 

[JDKruger4]

It can definitely be done, and has been tested. It will be power limited to a good bit less than your "max" power E blend %, but it works fine. Any competent tuner will be able to setup the maps in this way

Thanks for the response. I know you don't want to give too much away but would this require a custom tune or could it be done (with a reasonable factor of safety) with an OTS map? Thinking like: Stage2 100% e85 OTS (stock turbo, downpipes, intercooler, lpfp)?

 

[Jake@MHD]

Thanks for the response. I know you don't want to give too much away but would this require a custom tune or could it be done (with a reasonable factor of safety) with an OTS map? Thinking like: Stage2 100% e85 OTS (stock turbo, downpipes, intercooler, lpfp)?

It will be done for the OTS MHD maps in a unique way as well!

 

[JDKruger4]

It will be done for the OTS MHD maps in a unique way as well!

Great! But knowing that features I particularly want will be available isn't making the patience thing any easier!

 

[langsbr]

It can definitely be done, and has been tested. It will be power limited to a good bit less than your "max" power E blend %, but it works fine. Any competent tuner will be able to setup the maps in this way

Can you explain why it would be limited to less than the max power blend would be? Does that mean if I have a custom 93 tune and a custom E50 tune, they can't be the 'minimum' and 'maximum' values? Or are you saying that it's just fueling limited and I wouldn't be able to max out the tune if PI was required or something?

 

[LamboLover]

Fuel flow (and therefore pressure) limits would be the reason on some setups why you would get less output.

Bit more detail: After you can achieve MBT for a given engine load, further increases in ethanol concentration require greater fuel mass to maintain target lambda because of the stoichiometry of ethanol compared to gasoline. You could setup 93 and E50 tables and interpolate between them with a /\ shape for load or torque targets relative to ethanol content (with the peak at E50 if your setup suits that) so that you keep the required fuel mass within a range at which the fuel pressure is maintained. Your target lambda will be likely more steady across a range of ethanol content. Your MBT is likely to retard slightly with increasing ethanol content once you have enough ethanol to remove the knock limit because ethanol deflagration speed is actually faster than gasoline. It is sensible to setup the system to safely cover the full range of ethanol content that could be put in the tank, for example by an uninformed driver.

 

[dyezak]

@jyamona, I hear things have almost wrapped up on this...

 

[mang.vang]

Been impatiently waiting for this.....

 

[dyezak]

And I need a link to the proprietary content analyzer thingy too please.

 

[langsbr]

Obligatory any update post.

 

[Aaron]

Ha. Ya I'm not holding my breath for updates on this. He's real close though. He said so a year ago!

 

[dyezak]

Obligatory any update post.

Oh, I got this...here we go:

We are really close. We have several cars running already with no problems. I expect a release right around the corner.

 

[Jake@MHD]

I really don't understand the hate here. First, it's impossible to accurately predict the timeline for an "unknown territory" project like this, multiplied by 1000x when it's done in your free time. Second, it had a huge setback with the need to add in code security. Third, I already apologized numerous times for posting well before I should have in the development cycle.

You all act like you already paid for something and are waiting for it. You didn't.

 

[dyezak]

@jyamona There is a rule of life I learned just a few years ago that applies here:

Assume positive intent

If you assume positive intent it really does keep you from slipping into a negative state of mind. There is no hate here man, maybe some light ribbing, but definitely no hate. If you assume positive intent you can see langsbr is excited and looking for an update; you can see aaron is saying it took a year and you're close; you can see I was trying to cut if off before it got out of hand by quoting your previous response showing progress. All of those statements had some sarcasm in them, maybe a bit of good natured ribbing, but no hate.

If you assume everyone hates you then you're going to have more miserable days than happy.

 

[mang.vang]

Still impatiently waiting......

 

[langsbr]

@jyamona T you can see langsbr is excited and looking for an update; .

This! Please take no offense Jake. I totally understand where you are coming from with people asking- but it's just eagerness we all have for something that is VERY anticipated.

While I think you've said before you have plenty of beta testers, if you need another one..cough cough, wink wink nudge nudge, I know someone that would be available.

 

[Abacus38]

Yeah man inputting security measures to make nobody pulls a Shiv and debo your shit takes time but as they say good things come to those who wait....

 

[doublespaces]

@jyamona There is no hate here man,

Still impatiently waiting......

lol

 

[veer90]

This! Please take no offense Jake. I totally understand where you are coming from with people asking- but it's just eagerness we all have for something that is VERY anticipated.

While I think you've said before you have plenty of beta testers, if you need another one..cough cough, wink wink nudge nudge, I know someone that would be available.

I talked to Jake H on 9/13, he said beta testers were already selected and that they wouldn't be expanding the pool.