I wonder if an 11 V6 would see any gains from running E85 then. Lots of timing can be had from that stuff.

 

Provided the fuel system can handle it, yes it would. At the very least the engine would benefit from the additional power gained when running alcohol in and of itself....but with all that compression and a bunch of timing, I'll bet it'd be 3.7L of beast on E85.

Dunno if the fuel system and injectors can handle it though, might not be able to get enough fuel.

 

I don't know what size injectors they run, but I'm 90% sure they aren't enough. If I had to take a stab at it, I'd say they would need injectors roughly twice the size of the stock injectors. As long as the rest of the fuel system suffices, the injectors and a tune should be all thats needed.

 

There is a big "don't use e85" sticker in my fuel door, so I would say no the 11 v6 probably doesn't like it

 

It can't run it on the stock injectors/tune, thats all. You could easily set it up to run E. My car doesn't accept it either until the timing is bumped up and the injectors are swapped (along with some fine tuning), and afterwards picks up +25whp on average.

I can operate with E85 as it sits, but I'm running 19 degrees of timing and have 60lb injectors. It starts to run out of fuel around 5k rpm. So lots of fuel is needed to run E85.

 

because the car is not tuned for it. nor is it built for it. you'd have to upgrade some parts IMHO to get E85 to run properly.

 

Yes and no. The question was really 2 parts....how much power would it gain on E85, and can the fuel system even handle it.

Gasoline stoichiometric AFR is 14.7:1 whereas E85 is ~9.7:1. On gasoline you typically see a 12.5:1 or 13:1 AFR at WOT for power, whereas E85 is ~7:1 or 8:1 AFR. So you basically need to be able to deliver ~70% more fuel at a minimum. Without large enough injectors and fuel system, it just leans out.

Will a stock 2011 6er gain power on E85? Absolutely, with an upgraded fuel system. Can a stock 2011 6er run E85 as is?....nope, prolly just melt the pistons. The engine itself would be great for E85....it just has an inadequate fuel system to handle it.

 

do you mean 30% more fuel maybe? from all my reading that's the consensus 30-35% more for E85

 

My bad for not being entirely clear, I'm talking in terms of mass of fuel, not volume.

But how many people actually put the engine on a dyno that measures fuel consumption in lbs/hr? Almost none. How often do you see a dyno reading that gives BSFC(or for that matter, who even knows what BSFC is)? I see very few, and they're usually dynos from professional race tuners.

AFR is a ratio of lbs of air to lbs of fuel. Just divide 13/8, you get ~1.62. Engine gets the same amount of air, but with an 8:1 instead of 13:1 AFR it's 62% more fuel with E85 than with gasoline, assuming you're comparing an engine running 13:1 on gas to the same engine running 8:1 on E85. So you'd want to bump fuel delivery in lbs up by ~70% to keep the injectors within a safe range and not be maxxing out their fuel delivery capability. Remember though that fuel injector rating in lbs/hr is based on lbs of gasoline delivered at it's standard density, but they don't meter lbs, they meter volumes.

Remember to keep in mind though, I'm talking about fuel in MASS(or weight which is mass measured in a 1 gravity environment). That's why injectors are rated in lbs/hr, and BSFC is a measurement of lbs of fuel consumed. Since E85 and gasoline have different specific gravities, the flow VOLUMES are different vs weight for the fuel. A 65% increase in fuel mass for E85(65% more lbs of fuel) comes out to around a 40-45% increase in volume or flow rate. So injector size only needs to increase by around 40-45% since the lb rating is based on the lbs of gasoline delivered for a given volume of fuel.

Another thing to keep in mind is that E85/E100 is a more efficient fuel source, so even with the differing AFR's aside, the engine will need less fuel to make more power, relatively speaking. In other words, it releases more thermal energy from the fuel more effectively. This is what BSFC is REALLY measuring, thermal efficiency in an engine. A gasoline engine that makes X horsepower and has a BSFC(lbs of fuel consumed per horsepower produced per hour) of 0.50 is doing ok.....a more efficient gasoline engine also making the same X horsepower but with a BSFC of 0.45 is more efficient....making the same amount of power but using less fuel to do it.

Ethanol fuels are more thermally efficient, combined with the higher density than gasoline, means that while the engine may consume a mass of fuel ranging from 40-70% more on E85 than gasoline(depending on tune), the volume needed may be as little as 35% more to as much as 45% more. That's also why even though E85 AFR's are 50% richer or more than gasoline....the vehicle doesn't consume 50% more fuel per mile traveled. The high density and thermal efficiency means that each gallon of E85 contains more potential energy than each gallon of gas, so you don't need as many gallons to make the same power. Same reason why eth cars make more power too.

Incidentally for anyone who has ever encountered it, that's the same reason why some brands of race fuels "run richer" than others. Slightly different specific gravities means that the same volume of one fuel will deliver slightly more lbs than the other, and you get a slightly richer mix and have to retune. It's especially noticeable on carb'd cars, since there's no ECM to compensate.

 

My car is different, but I would have to go from 60 lb injectors up to 80s (on my set-up), so yea about 30%. I've heard of guys trying 60s just to see, but their Injector duty cycle shot to 110% on one car. I tried running it as is, but it kept cutting out on me up top.


67, as cool as E85 burns, you think it would burn the pistons? I figured it would just spit and sputter under WOT due to fuel starvation.