The E85 and E85 Mix *Ignition Timing* Database

[phate]

Originally Posted by atvfreek Do you happen to have mazdafreaks dyno files. I like to see roughly what he made 2 degrees below that final curve, and the power at mbt itself. Even that curve is pretty aggressive. Just curious to see of its even worth pushing to within two degrees of mbt on a DD driven map. Haha Freekn tappin

I probably do somewhere, but they aren't labeled as to which run goes with which revision :/ I try to be quick about the dyno tuning to save everyone cash, so they don't get recorded as I go.

Those last 2° probably aren't worth much more than 5-7hp over the entire rev range. Once you get close to MBT, the gains become less and less. It's nice being on a decent load control dyno, because the same tune (if you let temps normalize) will give you readings within 1-2hp of each other.

Also of note: the more ethanol you run, the less temperature alters your MBT timing curve. I'm in the process of collecting my papers, but I have one showing MBT moving only ~1-2° for a 100°F temperature swing on straight E85 (or something crazy like that). Once I find a couple more of these papers, I'll post them up in the library.

[rfinkle2]

Can't thank you enough for posting those curves Phate. EXTREMELY handy, and imo, if you look @ them close enough, there is a definite trend that one can feel comfortable backing off a few degrees to use for k04 tunes.

Thanks again.

[Dano]

need moar BT data

my curve [NON DYNO VERIFIED] is similar to Driver's curve with mine being almost exactly .5* higher across the board...so with the smaller turbo I feel good where I am which is a full degree lower than my max power in controlled VD runs.

I think there's a brand new loaded DJ in town now which I will visit this fall. not gonna waste my time and get a plot in 100+* weather...lol I wanna see 400/390.

Thanks Phate!

[rfinkle2]

@phate...

If you want to delete this from this thread, considering it is not e85 related, I'll kill it immediately.

This seems relevant and interesting however...(very similar timing curve)

Taken from Ganque's thread when DJ tuned his car on mexican pump gas (must be good stuff, LOL) to mbt:

thread here: 315 whp / 359 tq on a Dynojet

3000    3500    4000    4500    5000    5500    6000    6500    7000 
0      3.5       7        10      14      16    17.5    19.5    20.5

[phate]

Originally Posted by Dano need moar BT data my curve [NON DYNO VERIFIED] is similar to Driver's curve with mine being almost exactly .5* higher across the board...so with the smaller turbo I feel good where I am which is a full degree lower than my max power in controlled VD runs. I think there's a brand new loaded DJ in town now which I will visit this fall. not gonna waste my time and get a plot in 100+* weather...lol I wanna see 400/390. Thanks Phate!

Agreed, I want to see what the timing curves look like for BT's and higher compression, and both together

Originally Posted by rfinkle2 phate... If you want to delete this from this thread, considering it is not e85 related, I'll kill it immediately. This seems relevant and interesting however...(very similar timing curve) Taken from Ganque's thread when DJ tuned his car on mexican pump gas (must be good stuff, LOL) to mbt: thread here: 315 whp / 359 tq on a Dynojet 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500 6000 6500 7000 0 3.5 7 10 14 16 17.5 19.5 20.5

I remember that, haha. "Pump Gas". I'll have to reread the thread, but I'll probably add it.

[BigjohnB20]

So for the curves posted on the first page, are these guys all riding the 2.0 load line across the whole pull? Or are these actual logged values?

I am on about E25-30 with a stage one car. Some of these newer posted curves are making me a little nervous about what I am running right now, especially in the 3-4.5 range. In this heat lately though, I am topping out about 1.9 load and then dropping from there to almost 1.5 at 6K. I will likely back off a degree down low, but just wondering how these curves relate to load values.

[phate]

Originally Posted by BigjohnB20 So for the curves posted on the first page, are these guys all riding the 2.0 load line across the whole pull? Or are these actual logged values? I am on about E25-30 with a stage one car. Some of these newer posted curves are making me a little nervous about what I am running right now, especially in the 3-4.5 range. In this heat lately though, I am topping out about 1.9 load and then dropping from there to almost 1.5 at 6K. I will likely back off a degree down low, but just wondering how these curves relate to load values.

The timing values are actual, achieved values over the rev range. They don't correspond to any specific load line. No, they aren't riding the 2.0 line for the entire rev range.

I don't think load is a good indicator between two different cars.

[silvapain]

mmm. Higher compression.

You, me, and Jay need to hit the Dyno together when our cars are done Clint.


Tapadatass

[phate]

Originally Posted by silvapain mmm. Higher compression. You, me, and Jay need to hit the Dyno together when our cars are done Clint. Tapadatass

A-spec is getting an awd LC dynojet <3

[BigjohnB20]

Originally Posted by phate The timing values are actual, achieved values over the rev range. They don't correspond to any specific load line. No, they aren't riding the 2.0 line for the entire rev range. I don't think load is a good indicator between two different cars.

I wasn't necessarily trying to compare load. I was under the impression that ign. timing is very dependent on load and rpm. So 6* at 3K at 2.1 load is not the same as 6* at 3K a 1.9 load.

[rfinkle2]

Originally Posted by BigjohnB20 I wasn't necessarily trying to compare load. I was under the impression that ign. timing is very dependent on load and rpm. So 6* at 3K at 2.1 load is not the same as 6* at 3K a 1.9 load.

Phate also posted the taper that he ran on the tunes in the OP in small print underneath of the curve. That might be of some help when trying to set up your tables.

[Dano]

Originally Posted by BigjohnB20 I wasn't necessarily trying to compare load. I was under the impression that ign. timing is very dependent on load and rpm. So 6* at 3K at 2.1 load is not the same as 6* at 3K a 1.9 load.

commanded advance is dependent on those prams but to my knowledge there is no correlation between running x load means run x amount of advance.

as Phate indicated, you can't compare load between cars, there are just too many variables, and so you can't equate a particular load value with a target advance value.

you have inadvertently touched on something related to load however, and perhaps this is what you were driving at.

Generally speaking the larger the turbo the less advance you will need to reach MBT all things being equal.

Smaller turbo = less load and more advance can be run...larger turbo = more load and less advance can be run. This statement is a great oversimplification but perhaps what you were getting at.

This is why I would like to see more BT data in here. You can see the K04 guys run way more advance than Driver [the sole BT example]. I run more advance than him as well but less than the K04s. See the pattern?

I am on a lesser concentration of E so my example is not exactly relevant but anecdotal evidence.

[mrmonk7663]

Assuming the load axis is not scaled, then i'm sure some of the logged values in this post follow the 2.0 load line for the majority of the run.

Originally Posted by BigjohnB20 I wasn't necessarily trying to compare load. I was under the impression that ign. timing is very dependent on load and rpm. So 6* at 3K at 2.1 load is not the same as 6* at 3K a 1.9 load.

[Lex]

Originally Posted by BigjohnB20 I wasn't necessarily trying to compare load. I was under the impression that ign. timing is very dependent on load and rpm. So 6* at 3K at 2.1 load is not the same as 6* at 3K a 1.9 load.

All things kept equal (including the turbo) in order to achieve higher loads at the same RPM you need to drive more flow. To do so (keeping temperature the same) you increase boost. Because of the increased pressure and resultant BATs you will see that as you increase load, you will move yourself closer to the knock threshold and will need to lower timing - especially at low RPMs where there is lots of time to heat up the mixture in the cylinder. Beyond a certain E85 mix ratio you may not even hit the knock threshold before you surpass MBT.

With a larger turbo you drive more air (oxygen) into the combustion chamber at the same boost level (and a higher resultant load). The denser, oxygen rich mixture will create a flame front that will propagate faster meaning you will need less timing to reach MBT ... or the knock threshold depending on your fuel mixture.

[superskaterxes]

assuming i can get an appt sat morning at moore automotive (where all the NATOR DC dyno days are) im going to hop on the dyno and find MBT.

im currently on a ~30% E85 mix and im gona bump it to 50/50 before i get on the dyno.

here's my current timing curve on the street.

[RichieRichness]

Originally Posted by superskaterxes assuming i can get an appt sat morning at moore automotive (where all the NATOR DC dyno days are) im going to hop on the dyno and find MBT. im currently on a ~30% E85 mix and im gona bump it to 50/50 before i get on the dyno. here's my current timing curve on the street.

IF YOU WANT TO FIND MBT ON MY 50/50 MIXED K04 YOU CAN HAZ MY CAR THIS WEEKEND. ONLY CATCH IS YOU NEED TO DROP IT OFF FOR AARON AT CHERNER COLLISION SATURDAY NIGHT.

[superskaterxes]

fail, chris@moore is on vacation so no dyno for me =(

[dead-zone]

Bump!

[cld12pk2go]

Originally Posted by superskaterxes assuming i can get an appt sat morning at moore automotive (where all the NATOR DC dyno days are) im going to hop on the dyno and find MBT. im currently on a ~30% E85 mix and im gona bump it to 50/50 before i get on the dyno. here's my current timing curve on the street.

I would be very interested in seeing either the 30% or 50% MBT results on your setup...

[RichieRichness]

Just found MBT for @EVIL3 on the Mustang Dyno at Cp-e

2009 MS3
50/50 mix ~e48
from 3k - 7k
3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500 6000 6500 7000
3.5 7 9.5 12.5 15 17.5 20 22 23

Johnsdynoall3.pdf

You can see on the final run, adding 1* above 4500 rpm lost power.

MAX power 302 hp / 364 tq (not bad considering a Nissan GT-R only makes 360 hp on this dyno.

[phate]

Thanks for posting. Good to see more verification falling in line with the others.

Compared to your street tune, how did it change? I remember talking about this in another thread, but don't remember the timing curve.

I'll add the curve to the op when I'm at a computer.

[RichieRichness]

Originally Posted by phate Thanks for posting. Good to see more verification falling in line with the others. Compared to your street tune, how did it change? I remember talking about this in another thread, but don't remember the timing curve. I'll add the curve to the op when I'm at a computer.

I was only 1.5* away from MBT with the e-tune.

[cld12pk2go]

Here are all 6 pulls from my last dyno session running an ~E20 Blend with about ~15% of my total fueling from Meth:



Here is my breakdown of the benefit I obtained from the extra timing:



Basically, I normalized the power gain based upon hp per g/s to try to remove the impact of changes in MAF flow per pull, which can influence the end result. Per this analysis, I continued to gain power per g/s of MAF flow all the way up to my final timing (never found MBT)…It would appear that the diff between pulls 2-3 were somewhat anomalous in the 6000-6500 RPM range...

[Familyguy427]

subbed

[ABSpeed3]

So I've read through this thread and the only person I saw that posted a 2.5gal mix timing curve was @Lex. His peak timing numbers are about in line with what I am running, but I was wondering where could I improve? Can I add more up top? I'm going to smooth the mid-range a bit to get my torque curve looking better. Here is my timing as it sits now. My number one goal is not to blow my motor so nothing too aggressive but a bit more power up top would be nice.

Thanks for any help

[warlord]

Let knock be your guide. Pretty sure you can't hit MBT on a 2.5 mix so find knock in each rpm column along your load curve and then back off a bit. Advancing timing in .5* increments is a safe way to do it. A knock decay rate of 150 will ensure that knock is localized to the area it's happening and doesn't perpetuate itself though out the run.

[phate]

Originally Posted by warlord Let knock be your guide. Pretty sure you can't hit MBT on a 2.5 mix so find knock in each rpm column along your load curve and then back off a bit. Advancing timing in .5* increments is a safe way to do it. A knock decay rate of 150 will ensure that knock is localized to the area it's happening and doesn't perpetuate itself though out the run.

DO NOT let knock be your guide when running e85. Be safe, get on a dyno if you want to dial things in further than what is seen in some of these timing curves. Every car is different.

[ABSpeed3]

I guess what I'm asking is I've seen other mixes as low as 3 gals with timing around 16-17 in the upper regions. As e85 tuners, would you say I have any room to hit 15 or 16 degrees? Or should I just stay put where I am until I can dyno verify? Thanks again

[phate]

Originally Posted by ABSpeed3 I guess what I'm asking is I've seen other mixes as low as 3 gals with timing around 16-17 in the upper regions. As e85 tuners, would you say I have any room to hit 15 or 16 degrees? Or should I just stay put where I am until I can dyno verify? Thanks again

I'd be comfortable going a little further if you think you were still gaining power. If you don't feel comfortable, a couple hundred bucks for dyno time could save you thousands on a new engine.

Edit: only on the top end. That mid range looks like a good bit of timing already.

[Familyguy427]

I'll share my timing numbers. I'm running 31% though. From 4500...
12.50 16.00 18.00 20.00 21.00 19.00

Listen to @phate; He's good peeps!

Sent while eating rice

[ABSpeed3]

Ill bump her up a little bit and bring it down a cunt hair in the middle regions. Phate and Silva are the reason I run e85 lol

[cld12pk2go]

Originally Posted by warlord Let knock be your guide. Pretty sure you can't hit MBT on a 2.5 mix so find knock in each rpm column along your load curve and then back off a bit. Advancing timing in .5* increments is a safe way to do it. A knock decay rate of 150 will ensure that knock is localized to the area it's happening and doesn't perpetuate itself though out the run.

I am pretty sure you can hit MBT with a 2.5 gallon mix, but YMMV.

One thing of note is that one of the guys I tuned (GT3076 at ~26 PSI) didn't gain any power at 6500RPM beyond 14° (dyno verified) so I would certainly urge caution when taking timing up too far without some detailed feedback on MBT.

I keep gaining power up to at least 20.5° at 6500RPMs (haven't clearly found MBT yet)...

[warlord]

Duly noted. I didn't see BT in his sig and his present timing looked like 93 timing so I figured he had a ways to go up top with timing. I was knock limited to 18* at 6k on a three gal mix. I don't want to see anyone vent their block so I'll refrain from posting in these types of threads where destruction may be lurking just around the corner.

[ABSpeed3]

Originally Posted by cld12pk2go I am pretty sure you can hit MBT with a 2.5 gallon mix, but YMMV. One thing of note is that one of the guys I tuned (GT3076 at ~26 PSI) didn't gain any power at 6500RPM beyond 14° (dyno verified) so I would certainly urge caution when taking timing up too far without some detailed feedback on MBT. I keep gaining power up to at least 20.5° at 6500RPMs (haven't clearly found MBT yet)...

Is that because he's on a bigger turbo that the timing doesn't net him any greater power? I'm pretty sure I could squeeze a few extra horses from timing considering I'm running stock ko4 still

[Ziggo]

A denser charge requires less timing to reach MBT. The flame front will move faster. Typically you can't run as much timing on a smaller turbo as you can with a large one though because the smaller turbo will generate higher BATs, but due to the magic of E85 BATs don't matter so much.

Zigatapatalka

[ABSpeed3]

oh how I love the magic of e85

[cld12pk2go]

Originally Posted by ABSpeed3 Is that because he's on a bigger turbo that the timing doesn't net him any greater power? I'm pretty sure I could squeeze a few extra horses from timing considering I'm running stock ko4 still

I am running a similarly sized turbo at similar boost/flow, yet I keep gaining power for at least another 6° compared to him...

The point is that every car is different and that assuming otherwise can be a very expensive mistake...

[silvapain]

The moral of the story is DON'T PUSH TIMING ON E85 WITHOUT A PROPER DYNO TUNE. Don't assume that your engine can use the same timing as others posted in this thread.


Tapadatass

[Dano]

Another thing to consider is the potential variance in each motors mechanical timing as well as the mounting of the Crank sensor. 1-2* variance is certainly possible and I have tuned a guy who's sensor was improperly aligned making his actual advance higher than commanded/logged.

This lead to KR with very minimal timing and some head scratching for a few map revs until I had him re-align his crank to sensor setup.


Tappin

[atvfreek]

I had a speed 6 on the dyno recently and we didn't gain hardly any power above 14* at 6k. It's very important to keep run conditions and road the same if street tuning an aggressive timing curve, and I would still stay a little conservative.

Sent from your couch