Performance Post anything performance related to your Mustang |
Sponsored Ads |
|
Welcome to DFW50s.com
|
Register to remove these ads.
07-02-2013, 04:16 PM
|
#76
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 5,594
|
Originally Posted by BLK2012GT
Yes I had two tuners tune my car and it still continue to run crappy. I called different shops they done somewhat similar builds and TS did the same and none of them had luck on e85. So no I didn't just throw in the towel cause I wanted my car to be on e85 from the get go but it didn't work out.
|
I was asking that as a serious question, because I wasn't aware what other options your had looked into. So I will believe you on that.
|
|
|
07-02-2013, 04:19 PM
|
#77
|
Scared to race Steve
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Hiding from Steve
Age: 43
Posts: 2,646
|
Originally Posted by DirtyD
I was asking that as a serious question, because I wasn't aware what other options your had looked into. So I will believe you on that.
|
I had one of the best tuners in the world (at least thats what everyone says) in Mike Wilson to look at it and it still didn't run right.
__________________
Originally Posted by SlowGreyGT
I agree. A stick car shocks the tires MUCH harder and does it several times going down the track. With a big power stick car, the car is much more unsettled going down the track making it more of a challenge to ET well. A well running auto car is nothing more than just point and shoot. Which is great for a track car taking a lot of driver error out of the equation.
|
|
|
|
07-02-2013, 04:34 PM
|
#78
|
I have a small penis
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Making Steve my bitch since 2003
Age: 44
Posts: 1,465
|
Originally Posted by BLK2012GT
I had one of the best tuners in the world (at least thats what everyone says) in Mike Wilson to look at it and it still didn't run right.
|
I will say that I've known Mike for years and he fixes what most others in town can't get right, so if Mike couldn't get it, it was most likely not in the tune. Now that doesn't mean it couldn't have been mechanical in nature
|
|
|
07-02-2013, 04:40 PM
|
#79
|
Scared to race Steve
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Hiding from Steve
Age: 43
Posts: 2,646
|
Originally Posted by blownaltered
I will say that I've known Mike for years and he fixes what most others in town can't get right, so if Mike couldn't get it, it was most likely not in the tune. Now that doesn't mean it couldn't have been mechanical in nature
|
Thank you. That is all I've been saying.
__________________
Originally Posted by SlowGreyGT
I agree. A stick car shocks the tires MUCH harder and does it several times going down the track. With a big power stick car, the car is much more unsettled going down the track making it more of a challenge to ET well. A well running auto car is nothing more than just point and shoot. Which is great for a track car taking a lot of driver error out of the equation.
|
|
|
|
07-02-2013, 05:43 PM
|
#80
|
El Presidente
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Always ahead of Steve
Age: 34
Posts: 3,367
|
e85 info only. this will stay clean
__________________
2013 Ford Mustang 5.0 6M Brembo 3.73s
HPP TUNED HP-enough 4-0 vs Steve
|
|
|
07-02-2013, 05:48 PM
|
#81
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: DFW
Posts: 638
|
E85 is liquid gold.
|
|
|
07-02-2013, 05:52 PM
|
#82
|
I have a small penis
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Making Steve my bitch since 2003
Age: 44
Posts: 1,465
|
Originally Posted by BLK2012GT
Thank you. That is all I've been saying.
|
I think the point others were trying to make is it might have been a mechanical issue or a tune issue. I will stand behind Mike Wilson's tuning any day of the week. But you could have had a mechanical issue, the only reason I would think that is you said it got worse the lower the gas tank got. That wouldn't be in the tune that would be mechanical.
|
|
|
07-02-2013, 07:11 PM
|
#83
|
DFW5.0s Preferred Vendor
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: McKinney
Posts: 676
|
Originally Posted by blownaltered
I think the point others were trying to make is it might have been a mechanical issue or a tune issue. I will stand behind Mike Wilson's tuning any day of the week. But you could have had a mechanical issue, the only reason I would think that is you said it got worse the lower the gas tank got. That wouldn't be in the tune that would be mechanical.
|
The car did suffer from a faulty O2 that was loading the car up with fuel. But around that time, Jeff was not on board with the planning it would take for commuting, attending events, and the spontaneous trips from one location to the other that E85 requires. Therefore; we moved on to the nitrous part of the build which is where we are now. And for the record; we wanted to see what the car was capable of at the time and switched to the stock wheels. Why.....because other builds reporting 500wp were also on stock wheels.
To the OP:
You pretty much know the answer to your question by now as far as what is required. As for expectations be it yourself or others, E85 on a stock/bolt-on Coyote is as feasible as you want to make it. If you can run it without commuting worries, or frustrate you in any way, great! But a rough 33% loss in an already tiny tank poses problems for many. As for power; It is percentage based but with no real mathematical certainty. In our experience, the stock heads are well designed and their flow rate is near maxed during the tuning process....which limits the amount of timing the car can see. E85 alone can't change that fact. So IMO, if your staying bolt-on and want to squeeze every HP out that you can, or you simply want a safety modifier, then E85 is for you. For straight power gains I'd seek something else.
|
|
|
07-02-2013, 07:31 PM
|
#84
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 5,594
|
Originally Posted by TrueStreetTim
The car did suffer from a faulty O2 that was loading the car up with fuel. But around that time, Jeff was not on board with the planning it would take for commuting, attending events, and the spontaneous trips from one location to the other that E85 requires. Therefore; we moved on to the nitrous part of the build which is where we are now. And for the record; we wanted to see what the car was capable of at the time and switched to the stock wheels. Why.....because other builds reporting 500wp were also on stock wheels.
To the OP:
You pretty much know the answer to your question by now as far as what is required. As for expectations be it yourself or others, E85 on a stock/bolt-on Coyote is as feasible as you want to make it. If you can run it without commuting worries, or frustrate you in any way, great! But a rough 33% loss in an already tiny tank poses problems for many. As for power; It is percentage based but with no real mathematical certainty. In our experience, the stock heads are well designed and their flow rate is near maxed during the tuning process....which limits the amount of timing the car can see. E85 alone can't change that fact. So IMO, if your staying bolt-on and want to squeeze every HP out that you can, or you simply want a safety modifier, then E85 is for you. For straight power gains I'd seek something else.
|
:bowdown:
|
|
|
07-03-2013, 10:52 AM
|
#85
|
I> /\/\
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: A fender ahead of BlownAltered
Posts: 7,562
|
Originally Posted by TrueStreetTim
The car did suffer from a faulty O2 that was loading the car up with fuel. But around that time, Jeff was not on board with the planning it would take for commuting, attending events, and the spontaneous trips from one location to the other that E85 requires. Therefore; we moved on to the nitrous part of the build which is where we are now. And for the record; we wanted to see what the car was capable of at the time and switched to the stock wheels. Why.....because other builds reporting 500wp were also on stock wheels.
To the OP:
You pretty much know the answer to your question by now as far as what is required. As for expectations be it yourself or others, E85 on a stock/bolt-on Coyote is as feasible as you want to make it. If you can run it without commuting worries, or frustrate you in any way, great! But a rough 33% loss in an already tiny tank poses problems for many. As for power; It is percentage based but with no real mathematical certainty. In our experience, the stock heads are well designed and their flow rate is near maxed during the tuning process....which limits the amount of timing the car can see. E85 alone can't change that fact. So IMO, if your staying bolt-on and want to squeeze every HP out that you can, or you simply want a safety modifier, then E85 is for you. For straight power gains I'd seek something else.
|
Solid post.
Big builds require a solid plan. They are also rarely fun to do. I hope it works out for you Jeff and you are satisfied with it at the end of it all.
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|