Patchy's Fawlty Towers risk management. Enter at own risk

[StanTheMan]

The bucking.....
Somehow I think it was there at -2 I just didn't pick up on it. I somehow recollect that it was there in a parking lot at the local shopping centre.
I've exposed the timing cams today I can just play around a bit now & check without too much trouble.

The ECU will come. Just not for some time.

Not sure of the air fuel ratio on the AFM Spring will be enough but I'll give it a shot though.
If it doesn't fix it. I'll probably begrudgingly put up with it for some time. Apart from the bucking ,I quite like the way it's behaving.

As far as the crank angle is concerned. I know 1 deg on the cam gear is 2 deg on crank. I would say that because I have up to 12 deg marked on the cam gears it is not compensated. As 1 tooth = to 14 deg .
I'm talking about cam degrees as opposed to crank degrees. Hope that makes sense

[StanTheMan]

So I managed to hit the limitations on the ECU with the cams.
The cams are 272/264 10/9 mm lift 106/108 lobe 52 deg overlap all advertised specs

To say that these cams can just bolt in is pehaps misleading. The head on my NA6 has had the lifter guides shaved to make room for aggressive lifts in a previous build. So it's not entirely just a bolt in.
I don't intend on going very far over 7500 rpm. I've left the springs untouched for now. Previous build had the engine reving at around 8000 rpm but I'm unable to say the springs are OEM or replacements.

The cams installed on centre are fine. Decent midrange torque & generally more perky all round.more free reving at top too.

I introduced extra 7 deg of overlap with adjustable cams gears . Sprited driving put a massive smile on my dial.on that set up.
But I've hit the limitations on the OEM ECU. It is bucking when coasting at 1500 rpm in peak hr traffic. Even playing around with the AFM Spring would move that rpm around a bit but not sort it out the bucking altogether.

Standard compression doesn't seem to want to cope with any more advance on the intake. It is on zero. This is nothing to do with the ECU though. It's more to do with standard compression currently. I think.

This is where I'll leave it for the moment until I get the compression ratio upped. Then I will look at the stand alone ECU.
The ECU scares the sh*t out of me. Yes I want it a little more hectic at the top. I want drivability with more go. Will consider having 2 maps, one for 98 another for E85. If that's possible at all.
Wouldn't it be great to press a button & just have the right map? Rather than uploading a map via laptop. When the time comes ?. I'll go & see the man up north when it comes to the ECU.

So now it's back to the more mundane stuff like crinkle paint on the cam cover & getting that crappy paint job a bit better.
I'm loving this journey. Bit by bit , learning in the process . My previous journey was like. Bolt it all in...... Then realise ....fark what have I done..... In over my head.

[StanTheMan]

Starting to think about a head shave & increase compression.

Ive read in the past that you can get thinner head gasket.

I recall it is 0.8mm instead of the standard 1.3 mm thick to increase the compression just a little more.
for the life of me, I cant find it.
can someone point me in the right direction for the thinner head gasket? please accept my appreciation in advance

[smy0003]

The great thing about modern ecus is that they can adjust automatically for any ethanol content. No switches necessary at all.
I'd be going down the standalone ecu path before making anymore changes. Its far easier to tune a stock engine as the basemaps are generally pretty good for stock set ups. Easier to get your head around now rather than later.
You'll be able to get extra power by tuning specifically for those cams as well. Not to mention being able to keep track of your air fuel mixture.

Sent from my LG-H815 using Tapatalk

[93_Clubman]

Think this was what you were looking for Stan:
http://www.mx5cartalk.com/forum/viewtop ... 29&t=48924

[speed]

x2 for saving for an ecu. You won't regret the increase in power and fuel efficiency

Sent from my GT-I9506 using Tapatalk

[sailaholic]

E85 doesn't do alot unless you're boosted. Bit of help if you go really high comp (think pistons and head shave) but still probably not worth the effort.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[StanTheMan]

Really?

ive been reading otherwise.On Miata.net they are saying those things youre saying.

[hks_kansei]

Isn't the benefit of e85 greater knock resistance and reduced emissions?

The emissions part so you can actually pass engineering (if you're doing it)
And the knock so you can run more compression, timing, leaner mixes as needed.


I'm with sailaholic here, it probably would be helpful on a really high compression build, but for most road cars it wouldn't really be worth the effort.

Also remember, I think the regular fuel in the US is lower octane than here, so for them running e85 may be more sensible than tuning for whatever octane fuel they normally have.
Where here you can get 98 pretty much everywhere.

[hks_kansei]

Yep, Dr Google seems to say in the USA 95ron is about the best you'll get other than areas near tracks where they specifically stock 98 or better.


Worth noting the US use a different measurement of octane than well..... Everywhere else.. for some reason.
So their pumps are marked with 87aki and 91aki or something.

[sailaholic]

Some one I know asked Garry Stewart about it and he didn't think it was worth the effort. Magpie picked up a bit going to e85 but it wasn't huge and his build is more towards the high compression end.

Sent from my SM-P605 using Tapatalk

[datfreak]

I ran my na6 on e85 for awhile.(megasquirt/cops/inlet/wideband o2)
Pros:
I never had it dynoed- but it did have slightly more go on my test road.
I was able to run more rampup ignition advance in the under 3000rpm making it feel more snappy.
e85 is 'nice' to work with - changing fuel pump/filters etc and clothes smell like alcohol not petrol.
Unable to make the engine ping - advancing too much lost power however.

Cons: problems I had with e85-
it blocked the fuel strainer in the tank with crap from the tank.(i ran 2 filters inline)
Tuning was very different to 98 - esp startup crank pulse
To get X amount of HP you need approx 130-140% more e85 then petrol. The standard na6 injectors would max out on me at 6500rpm.
The above also meant I only got 300km per tank.

And the show stopper for me was that e85 killed 1 or more of my na6 injectors.
I've since bought ev14 injectors(which are e85 compatible) but havn't gone back to e85.

I would go back if I had a high compression engine, a boosted engine or a combo of both.


Madjak's dyno sheet. Top line is e85 the one below it is 98. (His engine is high compression and filled with awesome)

[StanTheMan]

The great thing about modern ecus is that they can adjust automatically for any ethanol content. No switches necessary at all.
I'd be going down the standalone ecu path before making anymore changes. Its far easier to tune a stock engine as the basemaps are generally pretty good for stock set ups. Easier to get your head around now rather than later.
You'll be able to get extra power by tuning specifically for those cams as well. Not to mention being able to keep track of your air fuel mixture.

Sent from my LG-H815 using Tapatalk

Are you suggesting I put the ECU in before I increase the compression?
I don't intend to tune it myself.
That went pair shape last time.
Leaving it to a pro this time.

[StanTheMan]

I ran my na6 on e85 for awhile.(megasquirt/cops/inlet/wideband o2)
Pros:
I never had it dynoed- but it did have slightly more go on my test road.
I was able to run more rampup ignition advance in the under 3000rpm making it feel more snappy.
e85 is 'nice' to work with - changing fuel pump/filters etc and clothes smell like alcohol not petrol.
Unable to make the engine ping - advancing too much lost power however.

Cons: problems I had with e85-
it blocked the fuel strainer in the tank with crap from the tank.(i ran 2 filters inline)
Tuning was very different to 98 - esp startup crank pulse
To get X amount of HP you need approx 130-140% more e85 then petrol. The standard na6 injectors would max out on me at 6500rpm.
The above also meant I only got 300km per tank.

And the show stopper for me was that e85 killed 1 or more of my na6 injectors.
I've since bought ev14 injectors(which are e85 compatible) but havn't gone back to e85.

I would go back if I had a high compression engine, a boosted engine or a combo of both.


Madjak's dyno sheet. Top line is e85 the one below it is 98. (His engine is high compression and filled with awesome)

Mmmmm I keep hearing conflicting info.
Ok so on an N/A car I shouldn't expect a bigger increase of 5-7 % max? With E85?
A Flex fuel sensor should be installed which hopefully will the attach to a mega squirt via a cable or plug.
But you are then also talking about ruining injectors

Why would E85 cause more dirt to fly around the tank?
Was it the dirt that actually killed your injector?

[datfreak]

The alcohol 'cleans' nearly 30years of partially dissolved rubber hose, bad fuel and other old crud loose into the liquid.
I installed 2 inline filters so I doubt if any of this tank crud killed the injectors. Maybe crud from inside the lines or maybe the fuel stuffed the injectors internally. Injector sales do list certain injs to be 'e85 compatible' (like the ev14) so unless its just marketing I'd there are non compatible injs.

5-7% sounds about right from what ive read also - this is a very good gain of about 10hp on a mildly updated engine. This is more then what $1000 worth of exhaust- or other expensive mod gives normally.

I didn't use a flex sensor, just a laptop at the servo while filling up a empty tank