Jump to content


Full Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About MoonshineCuda

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Interests
    Always Messing Around With Something Fast!
  1. Yup, mine too. Here's a little something I wrote a couple of years ago... Prius vs. Muscle Car (Mostly Fiction Based on Actual Experience, by Mike Tritle) A nose in the air, I'm better than you, holier than thou tree hugging pig blood slinging PITA supporting Birkenstock shod pony-tailed Prius driver stopped to give me a ration last night about driving that "obsolete inefficient gas guzzling hot rod" and towing it to a waste of time "motor race" behind my outdated fossil fuel sucking oil reserve depleting pickup truck. Now, I have nothing against Priusses, really, thank God for them, they don't have to visit the gas station often enough to get in my way on the frequent occasions when I need to slide up to the pump. I even rode in one once and was quite impressed with its ability to accelerate into traffic. It was the complete idiot sitting smugly tall in the saddle between the seat back and steering wheel in this particular specimen that raised my hackles. The Sales Manager in me took over... I countered his objection. I replied, "You are obviously ignorant to the fact that the car on that trailer you refer to as obsolete gets better gasoline mileage than your Prius." His jaw dropped in total disbelief (Probably was offended at being called ignorant. Likely a mislead University of Colorado alumni who held Ward Churchill in high esteem while on the way to his Masters in Protest Management and Big Lie Creation) to which I continued, "Yes, it gets on average over 60 miles per gallon of gas and often as much as 67 MPG." He called me a (expletive deleted) liar! I replied, "Oh really?" "Well, I have the math to prove it!" "Since the engine has been retuned for and now the fuel in the tank of that classic 70's valuable recycled muscle car is 85% renewable domestically produced US agricultural economy supporting ethanol and it runs between 9 and 10 miles from a gallon of E85 so the Gasoline Mileage is between 60 and 67 MPG." He must have been late for a demonstration because he waved goodbye (but with only one finger) and called me a couple of additional expletives I couldn't hear (But I think he might have insulted my parents) over the whine and whoosh of the hybrid as he drove off. Sure wish he would have stuck around long enough so I could have told him about the 30-40 mpg of gasoline the truck gets when I top off 50% of the tank with moonshine... The guy with the Yukon on the other side of the pump island was rolling on the ground laughing hysterically!
  2. 100 mpg (Gasoline) mileage and 400 Horsepower! http://video.streetlegaltv.com/video_detail.php?mId=7561
  3. I finally read the paper in its entirety. First off, does anybody have any of the other SAE papers referenced? I'd be interested in reading some of them. Secondly, you have to understand what this engine is. It is a diesel engine converted to spark ignition and port fuel injection. It also runs an enourmous amount of cooled EGR. As much as 45% of the intake charge is recirculated, cooled exhaust gas! EGR is the key. If you are running a stoichiametric engine, by using EGR, you lessen the amount of oxygen in the cylinder, and thus can inject less fuel. This can easily allow you to eliminate the throttle, and thus, pumping losses. EGR also lessens knock. That's how you can run a TURBOCHARGED engine with a 19.5:1 compression ratio on E30, which only has about 91 octane or so. So... we shouldn't compare our experiences running E30 in non-FFVs with this paper. It's pretty damn interesting, but this engine is so specialized and so different from what we run in our vehicles (even those of us running 4 cylinder turbos!) that you can't make any inferences. With that said... E30 is a great fuel, expecially for non-FFVs. I've had great success with it (see my blog www.drunkenswede.blogspot.com). I wish that it were commercially available (I do splash blending from an E85 pump). I dissagree on not comparing for a couple of reasons. First, real world experience with current and widely available technology demonstrates the potential of specific tuning for ethanol based fuels when compared to this specialized application. The key is optomization for the specific fuel. This applies to any specific fuel. A few years back there was a synthetic fuel made available to NHRA/IHRA Stock and Super Stock racers that made these cars run much quicker and faster...BUT...required some very specific tuning adjustments. E based fuels are very much the same except that the parameters for "every day" use are much narrrower. Super Stock tractor pullers have been doing this with methanol for years now. Taking a diesel engine, dropping a purpose built cylinder head with ignition capabilities has resulted in the stomping the oil burning competition to the point of NTPA seperating out the two classes. I would like to see the results from running this engine naturally aspirated and see how much of the boost is wasted by introducing poluted air into the mix. I did learn something from the report about burn characteristics of ethanol that further explains some of the results I've seen with my 9.8-1 naturally aspirated hot rod. I've been rebutting the naysayers for a couple of years that if supply ever gets universal that the engineers would have the engines running comparable mileage very quickly. I think the engine in this study is over the top but in the right direction compared to current products.
  4. I found the same results in my 07 Ford Taurus non flex fuel model. Fuel economy difference inconsequential and the car just plain ran better. More than 30% did cause mileage to drop a bit but cost per mile was still less with the blend. It would tolerate up to 40% before lean code hit the MIL lamp. Am performing some nonscientific testing on a 02 non FFV Taurus currently. Results coming soon.
  5. Just can't seem to put down the pen! Enjoy, make comments and let me know if there's anything you would like me to debunk in the next article(s)! http://www.dekalbcountyonline.com/news.php?extend.9
  6. You might already be, but if not, you should be hanging out around these parts, too! http://www.cuda-challenger.com/cc/index.php
  7. Woa, guys! 40 degrees TOTAL advance! I think this puts the initial at 10 or 12 degrees. Haven't checked it for two years. Guess I'll do that tomorrow just for grins and giggles. .454 lift cam by no means radical. It will love that 3.55 gear. Unless you have 30" tires on the back that 4.56 way overkill! Swapping my 4.10 for a 3.55 chopped a tenth and a half off my 1/4 mile ET. 26-10x15 slick. My cam is .486 lift. First gets me off the line, second starts to pull. Really comes alive in third gear. Ethanol lights slower (requires higher temp to ignite), evaporates slower (sucks up 3 times the heat as gas) so cylinder pressure and/or hot ignition is a must. Gotta light it a bit sooner until the engine is running up to temp. It's hard to get the water temp up to 195-200 but that's where it runs the best. Hot cylinder heads are essential for peak performance. Run at least a 180 T-stat and if you have an efficient radiator try a 195. Don't leave home without one! Total mechanical advance is attained in mine at 1200 rpm. Vacuum advance is disconnected. Could never make it run right with vacuum. Used a Mr. Gasket kit with lightest springs and stock advance weights. Ran the rpm up past the point of total advance and set to 40 degree mark on the ATI Damper. Try measuring ten degrees then multiply the length by 4 and measure out a mark on your stock damper to the answer. That will get you in the ballpark. Time to line up that mark on the zero line on the timing tab. Turning distributor counter clockwise w/viewd from above advances timing. I also have an adjustable timing control on the Crane HI-6 box and can dial retard back to 36 degrees for highway cruising and drag strip performance. 40 total best for around town, 36 for continuous high speed and top end acceleration. Low end torque is killer with all that advance. With all that initial advance and the holes already drilled in the throttle plates I had a problem getting the idle speed down. Quite by accident I discovered setting the idle mix very fat brought the idle down to realistic speed. Ironically the bog went away. Keep at it, Arch!
  8. Have you played with the timing at all? The ethanol is burning slower, hence you might be getting some burn in the pipe past the exhaust valve. I can run 40 degrees as long as I'm not concerned with maxing out the top end. Cools the EGT 20 degrees or so. As for the bog, have you looked at the accelerator pump adjustment? Make sure you're actually getting a little squirt on tip in. Also, turn the idle screws out 1/4 to 1/2 turn more (unless your carb is one of those reverse idle adjustment types, then turn em in) I idle mine very fat and it makes for really great launches!
  9. Yes, too lean + load = holey pistons (not to be misconstrued as "heavenly") Not quite. Remember E85 is 15% 14.7-1 and 85% 9-1 which calculates to 10-1. Did you get a chance to read my conversion article in the other thread? http://e85vehicles.com/e85/index.php/topic,1822.0.html It's all in there. You're learning, grasshopper!
  10. FALSE! Based on Stoichiometric ratios of Gasoline (14.7-1) vs. E85 (10-1) you will have no success even starting your engine with a gas tune up. You are somewhat correct as to the amount of fuel used to create yeild in MPG but it is based on Brake Specific Fuel Consumption NOT Air Fuel Ratio. Even if it started with the gas tune up you would have ventilated pistons in short order! It is not how much fuel you burn but how you burn it that makes HP and MPG. MPG is a direct result of throttle opening required to convert to motion, not total HP output. It's Physics and can sound complicated but once you grasp the concepts it's pretty simple and basic Physics. Go down a few more posts in the article thread and you'll find a link I posted for the Properties of Fuels chart. All the critical info is there on gas vs. ethanol.
  11. You will not be able to switch fuels with out swapping jets or carburetor. You will need jets with area at least 147% higher flow plus compensation for the power valve circuit if equipped. Important to know if you think there will ever be gas in this engine's future! You might even want to consider a Quick Fuel E85 Carb. http://www.quickfueltechnology.com/home_2.htm Have you considered a FAST Or Hilborn electronic Fuel Injection? FAST has a system that can be set w/multiple programs you can switch between for various fuels. Hilborn is programmed with dip switches so you can log them in a book for reference when you switch fuels. Current street technology leans toward flat tops but that's for gas apps as well. Don't sweat the domes, you're not looking for best ET but a good performing efficient puller. Check out my post here: http://e85vehicles.com/e85/index.php/topic,1822.0.html I copied an article I wrote on converting my hot rod and it has all the info you need for the fuel system.
  12. I'm sure there's some effect but the slippage is less than 5% at highway speeds. When Greg built the converter that was a specific concern of mine. I was really surprized at how little it slips at part throttle. However, whack it on launch with a pair of slicks out back and whammo! 4 Grand in a couple tenths and hang on baby. Also eliminates the need to downshift at low speed right turn intersections. Lefts too, unless I have to stop. Below is a copy of a graph downloaded from the Data Logger on board. Top line is engine rpm, second down is driveshaft. The fourth line down is the intake manifold pressure (vaccum) which is the indicator of part throttle mode. Conveter (Third down) indicates 1.05-1 engine to drive rpm ratio which calculates to 4.76% slip. Not a lock up but not bad for a race ready converter. The bottom line is the accelerometer which I included to show the steady state at highway speed. Note the reaction of all the lines when I slow down then drop the hammer momentarily. Mileage is same with 3.23 rear ratio. Haven't tried the original 2.73 with this engine. RPM @ 60 per hovers around 3000 with the 3.55. Here's the Photobucket link to get a readable graph: http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e122/PLYM474/HwyTestRun.jpg Save to file as a jpeg then open and you can expand to make it readable. What was an eye opener was the egt of cyls 6,7 and 8 running on the primaries vs secondaries. They drop 300 degrees at WOT. The temps are all within 100 degrees of each other with the hottest one (#6) at 1087.
  13. A little late here, but would like to add my $.02 anyway. My 360 shows every indication of a slower rate of burn with E85 compared to the premium unleaded it was originally built for. Street mileage drop is almost negligible and ET/speed is lower/higher on the drag strip. Have advanced to 40 deg total at 1500 rpm but found 36 still optimum for best 1/4 mile speed. EGT is about 20 deg lower on average at he end of the track as well. Engine is muffled so I can hear when gas detonated. Have never been able to detonate E85 rich or lean. The only thing lean does is create silence when I whack the throttle. It also robs top end power as demonstrated when I forget to turn on the electric fuel pump and the mechanical fuel pressure drops below 1 psi! Still, no detonation, just really clean plugs. Over rich? Exhaust stinks, makes smoke and rumpity rumps down the track. A lot of race fuels are anything but gasoline. All are blended for specific burn and octane characteristics. Jetting and plate changes are required to optimize the tune just as it is with E85. Remember that nasty smelling stuff the Stock guys were running back in 2000/01 that NHRA finally outlawed? Made cars fast but found out the exhaust was a serious carcinogen! Not a drop of petroleum as we know it was in the formula...
  14. A little tardy getting here but... Just the other day I got curious as I had an expense check waiting for me at the office a bit more than 25 miles away. It was a great day to get out the hot rod so I fired it up, topped off the tank and headed out. There is another E85 station at the destination point so on the way back I topped off there too. Mileage for the combined Highway/City of 80%/20% was 10.33 mpg. Car: 74 Cuda Engine: 360 cid bore +.030 w/ Edelbrock Performer Air Gap manifold, Cam Dynamics .460 lift/280 adv. duration (High Low End Torque), Hedman 1 5/8 headers, full dual exhaust, 9.8-1 compression flat top pistons with Total Seal Gapless top rings and very mildly massaged lean burn heads w/ 1.880" intake/1.500" exhaust valves. Timing: 36 deg. total advance @1500 rpm Ignition: Crane HI-6 w/adjustable timing control. (40 Degrees for cold start, no choke) Carb: Owner modified Holley HP 650 cfm mechanical secondary. Jetted 86 square w/37 squirters Fuel Pump(s) Carter HP Mechanical, Aeromotive Street/Strip electric Fuel Filter: Ramco filter/water speparator Transmission: 904 Torque Flite Auto with manual shift valve body and a 4000 rpm stall Greg Slack Converter. Rear: 3.55 Ring and pinion w/Detroit Tru Trac Differential. Tires: P245-60Rx14 (25" Diameter) Best 1/4 mile elapsed time: 12.684 (Corrected for altitude) Best actual elapsed time on E85: 12.874@102.57 Ironically my 01 Dodge Ram 1500 5.9 Flex gets the same mileage! Admittedly the truck is far less aerodynamic... I know an increase in compression would go very far to improve the mileage numbers. I built this engine originally for unleaded premium, hence the cam choice to compliment the compression. However, it is the cam that makes this one run on E85 like it does due to the cylinder fill characteristics. Using a similar grind in yours would allow for 11.5 to 12.5 with benefits. However, you will be restricted to racing gas with the pressures you will build in addition to the cam performance. Hope you find this helpful!
  15. 3.6 Gallons of E85 with 6.4 Gallons Regular Unleaded will make 10 gallons of E30. If RU contains 10% Ethanol the formula will change proportionatley.
  • Create New...