BC

Its down to VEMS (little support, but less expensive and exeeds the power of most units) or Autronic - 928 specific - but 3 or 4 times more expensive.

Both can do individual trim, ala sequential injection and ignition.

RyanPerrella

but they dont run on E85 which Hacker if you were paying attention you would know requires more fuel.

I knew you couldn't go without posting and mentioning Murf LOL, Honestly if you hadnt i would have thought something happened to you. Glad to know your still alive up there after #4's retirement.

BC

I think the cost, as it has been referred to here, has been a little over blown. With reference to E85, and its 15% gas percentage, it does not need the same corrosion and lubricity protection as straight "200 proof" ethanol. The lines are aluminum, but I think they have a coating on thier inside.

An increase in fuel pressure or SLIGHTLY larger injectors, as well as a decision on a different tank, and replacing the little rubber that exists in the system are the only concerns in NA.

Does anyone have an OEM fuel rail handy? Can they see inside it?

FUSE69

Yeah costs have been exagerated a bit, but it's still not exactly cheap...

That said, majority of the parts required, you would be purchasing already if you happened to be installing a form of forced induction....

In my case I estimate the biggest costs to be a shark tuner and probably the fuel tank....

Checked the fuel lines on my S4 and they are definately steel with some kind of outer coating.
Steel will still work, but eventually corrode away, I guess because ethanol is electrically conductive it is 'galvanic corrossion' that does the most damage to metal components....

Is the only way to increase compression ratio on a 32v to change pistons?
I'm guessing there would be valve/piston clearance issues if you attempted to deck / shave the head?

BC

That could be a concern - I don't know how close the valves are at regular gasket/head thicknesses. Maybe a thinner gasket? I think cometic makes those. Steel is a problem, indeed, because of the galvanic corrosion. The aluminum fuel lines I was talking about are the ones under the car.

FUSE69

Perhaps Porsche changed material specs on those lines at some point (or its a ROW - USA thing)... mine are steel.

Or I have one of those special magnets that Kibbort needs, to see if his intake is aluminium

I'll have to do more investigation on the compression thing.... I've got no idea what a standard gasket thickness is...

BC

Indeed. I am strictly talking about the green lines that run under the car, and I could easily be wrong, as I am working from memory, as I no longer have these lines.

hacker-pschorr

What worries me the most is fluctuating octane levels. If you tune the car for 110 today, then next week the pump down the street is 100 octane, that could be a problem. There is no guarntee that E85 will always be a certain octane level. In colder areas they are dropping it down to E70 or lower during cold months.

BC

With aftermarket EFI, the GM sensor that tests levels of ethanol (or maybe 02) in the fuel would be able to compensate. Without that sensor, yes, that is a problem. Here, in San Diego, I do not believe they change back and forth. Its always between 50 and 100 here. Mostly between 65-85.

andy-gts

I know this is tangential from topic but I put E85 in for 2 tankfuls (in an E85 compatable Tahoe ) and compared cost per mile :
E85 @ 2.69 was 21 cents per mile
87 octane regular @ 3.10 was 20.5 cents per mile.

E85 for just reg driving is no bargain...but for your boost project seems just the ticket from reading our thread!
Andy

BC

When an engine is not designed for it, and its not tuned for it, and you get no power boost from it, no, other than technically burning cleaner, and being a renewable resource like any bio-fuel, no - its not that great.

ideola

I have a 1980 Euro that I will be putting a hybrid motor into. It consists of a 5.0L short block from a 1985 car (balanced and pistons notched) that will be mated to a 16v 4.7L euro spec top end. It is essentially a duplicate of the race motor David Lloyd runs (ran), as he did all of the prep work for me. CR is expected to be 11:1. Hence my interest in E85. Would be PERFECT for my application.

Does anyone know whether the early 16v cars had steel or plastic tanks? I know the 924s of that era are all steel, and those didn't change over until somewhere around 1985 (or later) in the 944/924S. That would be a huge variable out of the way for me.

As for the fuel lines, I'm not concerned about any of the steel lines. I would simply replace any of the rubber or neoprene lines with stainless.

Now for the kicker: since I would prefer not to switch over to EFI, and would like to retain CIS, why not just run the UT-CIS programmable WUR, and set up a map specifically for E85??? I'm pretty confident the stock injectors will flow the fuel I need (target BHP is ~350).

Any thoughts on this? Seems like a pretty simple and cost effective conversion provided the tank isn't plastic:
- replace all rubber & neoprene as mentioned
- replace stock WUR with UT-CIS, and program accordingly
- maybe run a new / higher capacity fuel pump
- tweak timing

In my case, this would be VERY economical, as this motor essentially requires race fuel. The price differential on the fuel alone would probably pay for the conversion in a season or two...

Thoughts?

BC

...Every year is plastic. And its not a very strong plastic either. Thick though.

Teflon SS AN lines, right? I thinki Aeroquip and others make them.

Its a great fuel. I plan on at least having the 78 run on it, if not my new 82. Here is the thing though - even though it has 15% gas in it, your CIS system is iffy for ethanol, imo. The lubricity levels are very low, (not as low as E98), and that could cause undue issues like sticking injectors, and of course the fuel distributor. I suppose since its a track car you could run the fuel lube that redline makes, and watch everything closely. The Fuel is very easy for af ratios. The richer the better as long as you don't mind the fuel economy.

People will chide you for doing it, saying the fuel is bad, and its political ramifications are horrible, and that you don't need it. Tell them they can stuff it. 11:1 is reason enough. 5% more power from the increase in total burnable material is another.

ideola

Bummer about the gas tank. I didn't realize they were using plastic tanks that early. That in and of itself could be a serious inhibitor from a cost perspective...will have to do some real noodling over that.

Yes, I meant teflon-lined stainless steel flex lines.

Interesting note about the lubricity factor...I've read a little about it, but hadn't given consideration to the potential impact on the CIS fuel distributor, as my other planned application is on an EFI-converted 931. I'll definitely take into consideration the Redline lubricant, probably not a bad proactive measure to take.

Any thoughts on the UT-CIS approach to adjustability of the fueling?

As for the naysayers, trust me, I've never let them stop me from figuring out solutions!!! And I could care less about political correctness. The car is going to run race fuel anyway, so economy and ecology aren't anywhere near the top of my concerns ;-)

BC

The plastic tank may survive in the short term. But you should pay attention to the galvanic action of the fuel in usage - in take pumps = NO NO. Its conducts electricity, and could cause issue in what I believe is certain brass pieces in the CIS? Don't quote me. But you pretty much want coated steel, coated aluminum, or telfon.