Fuel Performance Facts

I posted this on another board earlier. I find the numbers interesting.

A few weeks back I was given a copy of Grassroots Motorsports, December 2012. It contains an article titled, The Fuel Truth. They used an SCCA 1990 Miata with a 2001 long block, built by Kevin Boswell. A C Street Prepared Autocross Class car.

They tuned and dyno tested these fuels. With the following HP/Torque numbers.

Quick Trip 87 E10
135/117

Hyperfuels 93 EO No Alcohol
134/122

Quick Trip 93 E10
136/124

Shell URT 100 Racing Fuel
137/123

Shell URT 105 Racing Fuel
137/124

Hyperfuels E85 85% Ethanol Alcohol
143/128

VP M1 Racing Methanol
160/140

There were very small increases in any primary gasoline based fuels. Methanol scored the highest while E85 finished second. Which I think shows performance wise, run the lowest price fuel that works efficiently in your motor. Unless you desire to run alcohol. Higher octane fuels do increase fuel mileage.

Ralphy

That's cool. I assume tuning refers only to computer work right? I wonder what would happen if they bumped the CR up with the higher octane stuff.

I'll have to reread the article. However they surely had to change fuel quantity settings with the E85 and methanol. Since methanol is almost a 2 to one ratio compared to gasoline.

Ralphy

Ralphy said:

I'll have to reread the article. However they surely had to change fuel quantity settings with the E85 and methanol. Since methanol is almost a 2 to one ratio compared to gasoline.

Ralphy

Click to expand...

Which totally reinforces my observations that ethanol is a piss poor idea for typical domestic automobiles.....so it seems that every time we buy gasoline with high ethanol like sold by SHELL , we get worse MPG, but some off brands here will get much better mileage.....

Ralphy said:

I'll have to reread the article. However they surely had to change fuel quantity settings with the E85 and methanol. Since methanol is almost a 2 to one ratio compared to gasoline.

Ralphy

Click to expand...

They most definitely adjusted the fuel curves. e85 conversions are popular in the Subaru world and they have to change injectors to a much larger size in order to handle the higher fuel flows. I wonder what they used for injectors here.

mrvette said:

Ralphy said:

I'll have to reread the article. However they surely had to change fuel quantity settings with the E85 and methanol. Since methanol is almost a 2 to one ratio compared to gasoline.

Ralphy

Click to expand...

Which totally reinforces my observations that ethanol is a piss poor idea for typical domestic automobiles.....so it seems that every time we buy gasoline with high ethanol like sold by SHELL , we get worse MPG, but some off brands here will get much better mileage.....

Click to expand...

Yes, your mileage will drop off as you use any kind of alcohol. It just doesn't have the energy density of gasoline. And if the engine isn't optimized for the fuel, you get little benefit.

But one has wonder, if you took an engine specifically designed to run alcohol-- higher CR, some sort of forced induction would work well too--could you downsize the engine in order to offset the economy penalty and keep the same power?

Here's your puzzle for today. Meth burns at 2x gasoline.... so yes, you get 30 more hp; but you have to stop twice as often for fuel; or have a larger tank - which makes you weigh more.... and don't get me started on keeping water out of methanol.

That said, it is an interesting comparison.... but it make sense. Alcohol is really good for making hp, especially on race motors because it cools intake charges.

Oh yeah, and functionally, methanol and alcohol are the same thing, they just start with different materials in the brewing process. (I'm already cringing at the one(s) who are going to take issue with that GENERAL statement)

I don't even get along with a can of PAINT, it's a paint in the ass......

so when talking chemistry, I cringe and hide under the desk......

all I know is my observations, and I wish they'd put a given % of 'pollutants' on the pumps, so I"d know what gas to buy.....

I do remember being surprised in '97 when coming to Florida to visit and with 336 and muncie and OEM 350 engine with TPI on it, getting an ASStounding 24 mpg rolling 80 mph up and down I 95 engine about 4 grand.....indicated, closer to 3500 is my best guess....

but now with automatic lockup overdrive, I can't seem to equal that, get close, but not equal it....not just ME, but friends notice it also, and I have several cars to compare this shit, but the vette is easiest to use because I can plumb the tank directly with a stick.....

:friends:

SuperBuickGuy said:

Here's your puzzle for today. Meth burns at 2x gasoline.... so yes, you get 30 more hp; but you have to stop twice as often for fuel; or have a larger tank - which makes you weigh more.... and don't get me started on keeping water out of methanol.

That said, it is an interesting comparison.... but it make sense. Alcohol is really good for making hp, especially on race motors because it cools intake charges.

Oh yeah, and functionally, methanol and alcohol are the same thing, they just start with different materials in the brewing process. (I'm already cringing at the one(s) who are going to take issue with that GENERAL statement)

Click to expand...

Plus it's corrosive, so steel tanks plus rubber lines have to be replaced by some other. Something mentioned at the other board is the evil additives in pump gas, leaving deposits.

Ralphy

Ralphy said:

SuperBuickGuy said:

Here's your puzzle for today. Meth burns at 2x gasoline.... so yes, you get 30 more hp; but you have to stop twice as often for fuel; or have a larger tank - which makes you weigh more.... and don't get me started on keeping water out of methanol.

That said, it is an interesting comparison.... but it make sense. Alcohol is really good for making hp, especially on race motors because it cools intake charges.

Oh yeah, and functionally, methanol and alcohol are the same thing, they just start with different materials in the brewing process. (I'm already cringing at the one(s) who are going to take issue with that GENERAL statement)

Click to expand...

Plus it's corrosive, so steel tanks plus rubber lines have to be replaced by some other. Something mentioned at the other board is the evil additives in pump gas, leaving deposits.

Ralphy

Click to expand...

Methanol certainly is, with alcohol it's that it sucks up the water than rusts everything.

Still, some of my absolutely best memories are of my dad firing his 390 Buick (364 bored/stroked) with Hillborn injection on meth at the racetrack in California (I was 5 when he sold it) - need a waxing nostalgic gif.

And cars do get worse mileage today with what they do to the gas to reduce its pollution...

SuperBuickGuy said:

Ralphy said:

SuperBuickGuy said:

Here's your puzzle for today. Meth burns at 2x gasoline.... so yes, you get 30 more hp; but you have to stop twice as often for fuel; or have a larger tank - which makes you weigh more.... and don't get me started on keeping water out of methanol.

That said, it is an interesting comparison.... but it make sense. Alcohol is really good for making hp, especially on race motors because it cools intake charges.

Oh yeah, and functionally, methanol and alcohol are the same thing, they just start with different materials in the brewing process. (I'm already cringing at the one(s) who are going to take issue with that GENERAL statement)

Click to expand...

Plus it's corrosive, so steel tanks plus rubber lines have to be replaced by some other. Something mentioned at the other board is the evil additives in pump gas, leaving deposits.

Ralphy

Click to expand...

Methanol certainly is, with alcohol it's that it sucks up the water than rusts everything.

Still, some of my absolutely best memories are of my dad firing his 390 Buick (364 bored/stroked) with Hillborn injection on meth at the racetrack in California (I was 5 when he sold it) - need a waxing nostalgic gif.

And cars do get worse mileage today with what they do to the gas to reduce its pollution...

Click to expand...

:hissyfit: As a result the NET 'pollution' remains the same, especially considering the 'pollution' created in the growing, harvesting, transporting, distilling, and shipping to the refineries that whole cycle means it actually creates MORE 'pollution', especially with the less MPG, and for THAT we pay more at the pump....lotta .gov sense on THAT one....