ethanol sunoco ultra 94?
03-31-2007, 04:22 PM
#17
Three Wheelin'
Originally Posted by Mark Lue
I was at a meet last monday night and over heard some guys from the Grand Am Cup Series saying that the Sunoco 94 actually gave less HP because of the ethonol but they have no choice but to run it as it was the spec gasoline for the series.
Correct me if I am wrong, if it cost more per litre and give less HP and milage than straight gasoline why the h3ll would we want to use it?
Correct me if I am wrong, if it cost more per litre and give less HP and milage than straight gasoline why the h3ll would we want to use it?
Of course you could offset the power discrepancy by turning up the wick on the Boost Controller for the turbo peeps. muahahahaa
03-31-2007, 04:29 PM
#18
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Originally Posted by 99three
If that's the argument then I'd settle for a few less ponies than looking at a broken motor due to det.
Of course you could offset the power discrepancy by turning up the wick on the Boost Controller for the turbo peeps. muahahahaa
Of course you could offset the power discrepancy by turning up the wick on the Boost Controller for the turbo peeps. muahahahaa
03-31-2007, 05:05 PM
#19
Drifting
Originally Posted by 99three
If that's the argument then I'd settle for a few less ponies than looking at a broken motor due to det.
03-31-2007, 06:29 PM
#21
Three Wheelin'
Originally Posted by The DareDevil
Is that a TT in your avatar?
Last year I was only able to squeeze around 569rwhp @ 19 pounds on a strict diet of 94 pump gas. Albeit a very humid day I still needed to be conservative. Race gas would have yielded a larger number likely 600+whp @ 27psi. Here is a dyno run chart.
Last edited by 99three; 11-14-2013 at 02:13 PM.
03-31-2007, 06:30 PM
#22
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
On a related note, I asked Steve Wong about ethanol & his chips. His answer:
"The keep it stock brigade AFAIK has always been *******, and a few that have never tried my chip. Most critical to my chip designs are that they are not to ping for any customer's car. If anything, my chips are very conservatively programmed for this, and I would not be surprised if I can further increase the power of all the UK owners running 98 RON especially at the upper rpms, because I don't really run all that much ignition timing in their chips! I never hear of pinging from them, which leads me to believe another few degrees and perhaps 5-7 more hp is still left on the table.
As for the lower compression North American cars such as we have, you would be amazed as the transformation to the engine's drivability, response, and power increase. The 358 chip is not all that spectacular, and you may notice that the engine lags in power and response below 4000 rpm. Post chipping, the lag is gone, with power coming on as early as 1500 rpm. You can in fact drive on the street at 1500 rpm in 5th gear, with good torque, elasticity, and drivability delivered from the motor without lugging it. The hp increase at the upper end is on the order of 16 hp at 6000, with areas such as at 5000 with a 20 hp increase, and 6500 with a 30-35 hp increase. If you order the default 91 CLC octane chip, it is programmed so that it must not ping with California 91 octane, and we have the worst gas in the entire nation.
Ethanol has been a component of fuels in the U.S. for over a decade now, and has almost always been part of the fuel here in California. Ethanol has about half the specific energy output as that of pure gasoline, so therefore it takes about double the amount of alcohol by volume to equal gasoline. This affects the density of gasoline so that a 10% ethanol mix, has a 95% density of pure gasoline. (Pure ethanol also has a high octane inherently - I forget but it's something like 105-110 octane) The result is it takes more fuel to deliver the same power, thus typically a decrease in fuel efficiency is noted with such fuels. To compensate, an increase in the fuel map injector trims are made to deliver sufficient fuel to prevent lean mixtures, and bring the air/fuel ratio to the optimum power ratio. Chips for North American cars are tuned and dyno developed using oxygenated fuel such as 10% ethanol to ensure it runs properly no matter what type of fuel you are using. It is interesting to note, when I analyze dyno data from UK cars, they typically show richer mixtures for a given fuel map, because their fuels are not mixed up with alcohols. Cars using race fuel also show the same trends."
Posted on impactbumpers.com but you have to be logged in to read it.
Ian
"The keep it stock brigade AFAIK has always been *******, and a few that have never tried my chip. Most critical to my chip designs are that they are not to ping for any customer's car. If anything, my chips are very conservatively programmed for this, and I would not be surprised if I can further increase the power of all the UK owners running 98 RON especially at the upper rpms, because I don't really run all that much ignition timing in their chips! I never hear of pinging from them, which leads me to believe another few degrees and perhaps 5-7 more hp is still left on the table.
As for the lower compression North American cars such as we have, you would be amazed as the transformation to the engine's drivability, response, and power increase. The 358 chip is not all that spectacular, and you may notice that the engine lags in power and response below 4000 rpm. Post chipping, the lag is gone, with power coming on as early as 1500 rpm. You can in fact drive on the street at 1500 rpm in 5th gear, with good torque, elasticity, and drivability delivered from the motor without lugging it. The hp increase at the upper end is on the order of 16 hp at 6000, with areas such as at 5000 with a 20 hp increase, and 6500 with a 30-35 hp increase. If you order the default 91 CLC octane chip, it is programmed so that it must not ping with California 91 octane, and we have the worst gas in the entire nation.
Ethanol has been a component of fuels in the U.S. for over a decade now, and has almost always been part of the fuel here in California. Ethanol has about half the specific energy output as that of pure gasoline, so therefore it takes about double the amount of alcohol by volume to equal gasoline. This affects the density of gasoline so that a 10% ethanol mix, has a 95% density of pure gasoline. (Pure ethanol also has a high octane inherently - I forget but it's something like 105-110 octane) The result is it takes more fuel to deliver the same power, thus typically a decrease in fuel efficiency is noted with such fuels. To compensate, an increase in the fuel map injector trims are made to deliver sufficient fuel to prevent lean mixtures, and bring the air/fuel ratio to the optimum power ratio. Chips for North American cars are tuned and dyno developed using oxygenated fuel such as 10% ethanol to ensure it runs properly no matter what type of fuel you are using. It is interesting to note, when I analyze dyno data from UK cars, they typically show richer mixtures for a given fuel map, because their fuels are not mixed up with alcohols. Cars using race fuel also show the same trends."
Posted on impactbumpers.com but you have to be logged in to read it.
Ian
03-31-2007, 06:32 PM
#23
Drifting
Originally Posted by Jake Ok
So is 91 better than 94??
03-31-2007, 06:33 PM
#24
Burning Brakes
So is 91 better than 94??? Explain in simple terms please.
I have a moded Saab Viggen Turbo 300hp 320ft torque 20psi boost... been running 94 for 5 years now.
No problems but gas milage not as good as before the ECU was tuned.
So are you saying teh 91 oct is better. what about for teh 996?
I have a moded Saab Viggen Turbo 300hp 320ft torque 20psi boost... been running 94 for 5 years now.
No problems but gas milage not as good as before the ECU was tuned.
So are you saying teh 91 oct is better. what about for teh 996?
03-31-2007, 06:36 PM
#25
Drifting
Originally Posted by 99three
569rwhp @ 19 pounds on a strict diet of 94 pump gas. Albeit a very humid day I still needed to be conservative. Race gas would have yielded a larger number likely 600+whp @ 27psi. Here is a dyno run chart.
03-31-2007, 06:39 PM
#26
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Originally Posted by 99three
Why yes it is. It's very difficult to get 'good' pump gas Toronto. Because of this there are a lot of variables you need to consider when you have a high HP car and I like to lean toward the side of caution.
Last year I was only able to squeeze around 569rwhp @ 19 pounds on a strict diet of 94 pump gas. Albeit a very humid day I still needed to be conservative. Race gas would have yielded a larger number likely 600+whp @ 27psi. Here is a dyno run chart.
Last year I was only able to squeeze around 569rwhp @ 19 pounds on a strict diet of 94 pump gas. Albeit a very humid day I still needed to be conservative. Race gas would have yielded a larger number likely 600+whp @ 27psi. Here is a dyno run chart.
A friend of mine is modifying a 1988 300ZXT. It's quite a different animal than yours, but it will be interesting to see what he can squeeze out of that engine.
03-31-2007, 06:53 PM
#28
Drifting
Originally Posted by Jake Ok
So is 91 better than 94??? Explain in simple terms please.
I have a moded Saab Viggen Turbo 300hp 320ft torque 20psi boost... been running 94 for 5 years now.
No problems but gas milage not as good as before the ECU was tuned.
So are you saying teh 91 oct is better. what about for teh 996?
I have a moded Saab Viggen Turbo 300hp 320ft torque 20psi boost... been running 94 for 5 years now.
No problems but gas milage not as good as before the ECU was tuned.
So are you saying teh 91 oct is better. what about for teh 996?
03-31-2007, 07:16 PM
#29
Burning Brakes
I have several times used 91 when I get low and can't seem to find a Sunoco.
The engine feels smoother and livelier with 94?? Is it true for the 996 as well I wonder?
The engine feels smoother and livelier with 94?? Is it true for the 996 as well I wonder?
03-31-2007, 07:32 PM
#30
Rennlist Member
Originally Posted by Jake Ok
I have several times used 91 when I get low and can't seem to find a Sunoco.
The engine feels smoother and livelier with 94?? Is it true for the 996 as well I wonder?
The engine feels smoother and livelier with 94?? Is it true for the 996 as well I wonder?
