SPRAYED 01

iTrader: (22)

I'm using lambda since I'm mixing so many fuels. Running an alky control kit with 2 15gph nozzles. I'm thinking when I'm done tuning ve that about 22-25% of fuel will be replaced with methanol.

93 pump around here is e10 verified by a test kit I bought.

So what do ya think? .78? .80?

I'm still trying to train my brain in lambda but damn is it hard to forget afr. I keep thinking I need to target 11.0 like I was on a gas scale. But 11.0 really means nothing when mixing 3 different fuels.

Must get afr out of head,haha.

Realcanuk

Every combo is different......My previous setup loved right around .80 but my current one seems happier a bit richer. I would target .78 to .80 like you said, and then fine tune on the dyno or track from there.

SPRAYED 01

iTrader: (22)

Realcanuk, thanks a lot for the response. Any chance you could post your tune? I like seeing others meth tunes for comparison. At the moment Im working on getting the transition from no meth to meth correct so that Im not either really rich or really lean right before it kicks in. I feel its important to be consistent on weather you purge the meth before a run or not.

Realcanuk

I don't have my current tune on this computer. I will try and get to it later. It probably wont be relative. I run my meth off the maf... most run it off the map. What system do you use. Is it progressive ?

SPRAYED 01

iTrader: (22)

Gotcha, mines progressive. It's Julio s kit from alky control.

Realcanuk

Same kit I use......There are enough controls to get it pretty much where you want.. between .. turn on..... initial..... and the main dial.

SPRAYED 01

iTrader: (22)

Ya it's a neat setup for sure. I have my initial at 6-7psi right now on the single 15 nozzle. As soon as it's dialed in up to 15psi il add the 2nd 15 nozzle and go for 20psi.

Would you say 22-25 fuel replacement on the 15s makes sense?

Guard dog

I target 0.78 lambda, I spray a similar amount of meth and my car doesn't mind running even richer.

Realcanuk

2 x 15 nozzles is a lot. I am not sure the percent of fuel replaced, but I run a 15 and a 10 and it seems like plenty to me.

93camaro_zzz

iTrader: (13)

I agree that 30gph of meth is a lot. With that much meth, you have plenty of safe octane and detonation resistance. With that being said, no way I would go to a 0.78 lambda. As long as the tune is spot on where you know it won't go lean, I would target 0.81-0.82. The 0.81 being "on the safe side". You don't have to do like a lot of tuners I see that target something ridiculous like 0.75 just so they can feel all warm and fuzzy and call it a "conservative tune".

Realcanuk

You honestly shouldn't think according to what others do or have done. Every setup will have a sweet spot. Whether it is .78 or .83, give the car what it wants. One of the best quotes every written regarding this, by one of the best tuners in the world.....article is below..

‘give the engine what it wants and invent a theory as to why later’.”

http://www.enginelabs.com/engine-tec...e-tecklenburg/

Guard dog

^^^^This. But I would start on the rich side and lean out to what she likes rather than the other way around. One of the benefits of meth is it widens the tuning window and tolerates being a little rich, at least that's what I've seen on my car. It just makes the car more consistent.

Forcefed86

iTrader: (4)

I don’t see why you’d tune it any different than any other fuel? Also don’t see any harm in using AFR values. You shoot for the same AFR you would shoot for on pump gas, the sensor doesn’t know the difference, it bases all its calculations off lambda anyway.

As for the AFR window, I’d shoot for lowest octane fuel used (which is also usually the majority fuel). Pump gas’s peak power window is generally accepted as 12:1-13:1 or 0.82-0.88. According to the article below you want to target these AFR’s as they will give you the fastest most complete burn. So for a “good tune”, you should dial timing way back to something like 9-10* that you know is overly low. Dial in your boost and .82 lambda AFR. Then take baby steps with timing

“Optimum mix with “later” ignition can produce more power because more energy is released from the combustion of gasoline.”

So if you believe this article, you’d target .82 around peak torq. Then lean it out to .88 by redline and run as little timing as necessary.

That’s how I understood the articles anyway.

http://www.innovatemotorsports.com/resources/rich.php
http://www.innovatemotorsports.com/resources/myths.php

Guard dog

I guess my car never read the article since she makes the same power on the rich side. The key is testing what your car wants.

Forcefed86

iTrader: (4)

I think the “Key” is having the proper equipment to test what the car wants. I’m doubting you have the equipment to test small percentage gains in each cylinder, or individual cylinder AFR’s for that matter. If you take a look at the engine masters competitions you see they target the “window” every time and monitor every cylinder. The article suggests rich AFR’s are a crutch to slow the burn. Meaning you either have too much lead in the tune or not enough octane for the cylinder press/temp. To try and argue a “rich” fuel mixture will extract the same amount of power as a 12.0-13.0ish mixture is just plain wrong.

IMO the lack of individual cylinder monitoring is the reason “rich” tunes are favorable. People like me using a single WB02 only have a collective reading of all 8 cylinders. While my WB02 gauge may read 11.5, the #8 hole could be 12.6 and the #7 might be 10.8. So if you targeted 12.5 collectively, chances are your #8 would be lean and power could drop off, detonation could happen etc… For this reason I don’t target 12.5-13.0 either. If I had the correct equipment to monitor each cylinder, I’m sure there is a lot of power left on the table with "leaner" AFR's.

SPRAYED 01

iTrader: (22)

I wonder if I could convince the wife to let me put a dyno in the back yard,haha

93camaro_zzz

iTrader: (13)

Just tell her it is for safety. That sometimes works for me.

Guard dog

Agreed, I wish I had the capability to monitor and tune each cylider individually but I have the stock GM ECM. I'll have to wait until my next car.