air fuel ratios and meth
#76
Evolved Member
iTrader: (17)
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: NNJ
Posts: 2,544
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is so much theory to go back and forth on the issue so many different ways.
Some say leaner is better and others say richer is better. And there is theory to support both ideas.
Does anyone have real world experience? It would be great to hear from someone who has tried both and seen what works, other than the DLL graph already posted.
Some say leaner is better and others say richer is better. And there is theory to support both ideas.
Does anyone have real world experience? It would be great to hear from someone who has tried both and seen what works, other than the DLL graph already posted.
#78
Evolved Member
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
Posts: 3,456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
lamba = actual AFR/ideal AFR.
For instance, an 12.5 actual AFR/14.7 ideal AFR = a lamba of .85.
slowcar, yes meth is less viscous and has a lower surface tension than water. Good lord I didn't calculate it! I just looked it up in a reference book . I haven't had to do a calculation in quite some time! But the point is, meth flows BETTER than water. We all know how hard it is to get a meth leak to stop, the stuff flows that well!
For instance, an 12.5 actual AFR/14.7 ideal AFR = a lamba of .85.
slowcar, yes meth is less viscous and has a lower surface tension than water. Good lord I didn't calculate it! I just looked it up in a reference book . I haven't had to do a calculation in quite some time! But the point is, meth flows BETTER than water. We all know how hard it is to get a meth leak to stop, the stuff flows that well!
#79
Evolved Member
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
Posts: 3,456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is so much theory to go back and forth on the issue so many different ways.
Some say leaner is better and others say richer is better. And there is theory to support both ideas.
Does anyone have real world experience? It would be great to hear from someone who has tried both and seen what works, other than the DLL graph already posted.
Some say leaner is better and others say richer is better. And there is theory to support both ideas.
Does anyone have real world experience? It would be great to hear from someone who has tried both and seen what works, other than the DLL graph already posted.
leaning it out to >12.0, misfire stop and we gained ~30hp
KevinD tuning on a dynodynamics
#80
Evolved Member
iTrader: (37)
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Spec-Ops Motorsports, Fayetteville, NC
Posts: 3,146
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
actually... during my tune on my car i got to experiment a little bit with it. Using 11.5 AFR's i hit probably 480whp... i dropped her down to 11.1, added a bit of timing and that is when i hit 499. So, with my 50/50 heet/distilled mix... 11.0 to 11.1 seems to yield me better power up top. Torque was better though with the 11.5 AFR. I was rushed off of the dyno though so i have some more work to do with the car. Right now i just finally got to take off the measily 3" intake and get the 4" on so im sure im getting air in the car with a little more volume or at least with less work. We are in the process of fabbing a new intake box for the car to keep intake air temps down some. I understand the meth is cooling the charge, but i have a big hole in the bay over there so why not fill it .... im sure the cool air will help as well
#81
Evolved Member
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Georgia
Posts: 2,138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From what I have seen so far on my car and others....
If your ignition cannot handle the meth/water and starts to breakup at "rich" afr's then you would want to lean it out. If however the ignition can handle the "rich" afr's then you can pickup power by going 11:1 or richer.
This does however assume you are spraying a lot of meth, like at least 25% meth to fuel. AND you are not using a lot of water in the mix. The more fuel you replace with meth the richer you want to run.
At lower injection quantities, you are mainly using the meth as a cooling agent and not a fuel so keeping the afr's on the lean side should result in more power.
With 50/50 or 100% H20 at low quantities (10% WAI to fuel) you would want to take advantage of the water and tune for a lean afr (12.0:1 to 12.5:1).
When I did my 100% water tune (single .8mm jet at 80% duty cycle) I got best results by tuning at 12.1:1.
When I did 50/50 I got best results with a single 1.0mm jet at about 11.8:1.
When I did 75% meth 25%water I used a .8mm and a 1.0mm and tuned to 11.5:1
100% I will use the same jets (.8 and 1.0) and drop the afr to 11 or 10.5.
We just did a 2.3 hta 35r car this past weekend. It made 420whp (our dynodynamics reads lowwwwwwwwww) on 93 at 21psi. I tuned it at 10:1 with 1000cc/min meth and it put down 520 whp at 30psi. There was still more room for boost, could have gone up another pound or two, but the owner is going to be beating on it a lot so I left it conservative.
Next time out I will try keeping it lean at peak torque and letting the afr tapper rich as the revs climb to see if we can get the best of both worlds.
If your ignition cannot handle the meth/water and starts to breakup at "rich" afr's then you would want to lean it out. If however the ignition can handle the "rich" afr's then you can pickup power by going 11:1 or richer.
This does however assume you are spraying a lot of meth, like at least 25% meth to fuel. AND you are not using a lot of water in the mix. The more fuel you replace with meth the richer you want to run.
At lower injection quantities, you are mainly using the meth as a cooling agent and not a fuel so keeping the afr's on the lean side should result in more power.
With 50/50 or 100% H20 at low quantities (10% WAI to fuel) you would want to take advantage of the water and tune for a lean afr (12.0:1 to 12.5:1).
When I did my 100% water tune (single .8mm jet at 80% duty cycle) I got best results by tuning at 12.1:1.
When I did 50/50 I got best results with a single 1.0mm jet at about 11.8:1.
When I did 75% meth 25%water I used a .8mm and a 1.0mm and tuned to 11.5:1
100% I will use the same jets (.8 and 1.0) and drop the afr to 11 or 10.5.
We just did a 2.3 hta 35r car this past weekend. It made 420whp (our dynodynamics reads lowwwwwwwwww) on 93 at 21psi. I tuned it at 10:1 with 1000cc/min meth and it put down 520 whp at 30psi. There was still more room for boost, could have gone up another pound or two, but the owner is going to be beating on it a lot so I left it conservative.
Next time out I will try keeping it lean at peak torque and letting the afr tapper rich as the revs climb to see if we can get the best of both worlds.
Last edited by Mad_SB; Jan 16, 2008 at 08:20 AM.
#87
Evolved Member
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Hurlburt Field, FL
Posts: 688
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is so much theory to go back and forth on the issue so many different ways.
Some say leaner is better and others say richer is better. And there is theory to support both ideas.
Does anyone have real world experience? It would be great to hear from someone who has tried both and seen what works, other than the DLL graph already posted.
Some say leaner is better and others say richer is better. And there is theory to support both ideas.
Does anyone have real world experience? It would be great to hear from someone who has tried both and seen what works, other than the DLL graph already posted.
I couldnt agree more LOL, wow the past few days with all these formulas seems kinda useless because both do make great power. Its all in what the person wants.
x2 on what big ric said I can say from first hand experience when tuning a friends car the leaner mixture peak tq hit pretty hard but good topend. the richer mixture with more timing pull like a mad man uptop but a little soft with the initial punch.
#88
mad_vii
thanks very much for helping us out. will be tuning for meth for the first soon with my buddy and we have been having fun discussing this stuff but more than anything hearing from people doing it is huge... so thanks.
it was asserted as a fact earlier in this thread that meth wants a lower lambda technically than gasoline for max power. so wanting to run a lower lambda the more you use meth as a fuel makes sense.
Just doing some googling... the below link asserts best power for methanol is 5:1 while gasoline is 12.5:1...
http://www.drivingethanol.org/motors...teristics.aspx
Stoich for methanol is 6.4:1... which equals .78 lambda...
I think it was mentioned earlier best power for meth is .69 lambda? Maybe it's like best power for gasoline is 12.5:1 but we never go that lean generally in our tunes. So if we assumed you drop a half point AFR from best power for meth....
4.5:1 AFR meth = .70
That lines up with the .69 mentioned earlier better.
Anyway nothing new here
This was an interesting link though on some guys who seem to tune some serious cars using methanol.
http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.c...=174777&page=1
thanks very much for helping us out. will be tuning for meth for the first soon with my buddy and we have been having fun discussing this stuff but more than anything hearing from people doing it is huge... so thanks.
it was asserted as a fact earlier in this thread that meth wants a lower lambda technically than gasoline for max power. so wanting to run a lower lambda the more you use meth as a fuel makes sense.
Just doing some googling... the below link asserts best power for methanol is 5:1 while gasoline is 12.5:1...
http://www.drivingethanol.org/motors...teristics.aspx
Stoich for methanol is 6.4:1... which equals .78 lambda...
I think it was mentioned earlier best power for meth is .69 lambda? Maybe it's like best power for gasoline is 12.5:1 but we never go that lean generally in our tunes. So if we assumed you drop a half point AFR from best power for meth....
4.5:1 AFR meth = .70
That lines up with the .69 mentioned earlier better.
Anyway nothing new here
This was an interesting link though on some guys who seem to tune some serious cars using methanol.
http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.c...=174777&page=1
#90
Evolved Member
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Hurlburt Field, FL
Posts: 688
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well after a month of field testing this theory, came up short and didnt happen the way I planned. I been thru 3 sets of spark plugs, gallons of meth & phatoem knock (I do a pull it would be 0 the next one it would be 8, 7, 6 8 etc). Granted according to DLL I made some power and felt faster. I lower the timing in certain cells, leaned it out to 12.3-11.9, and it feels faster. Plugs dont blow or foul easily not to mention no matter how I get it on it doesnt knock. I look it this way by pulling out more gas, there is more meth in the cylinder. And which one has the better octane rating
I fouled out a set of plugs so bad while driving back from AL I had to find a exit with a auto parts store. because the car buck/sputter so bad going above 60mph.
DLL is saying I am making about the same power, but I dont beleive it. A qoute from my wife "Damn baby this car is a beast what did you do". She thought I bought another car part without telling here LOL.
But this is the way I learn best is by experience trial and error. Field testing FTW
I fouled out a set of plugs so bad while driving back from AL I had to find a exit with a auto parts store. because the car buck/sputter so bad going above 60mph.
DLL is saying I am making about the same power, but I dont beleive it. A qoute from my wife "Damn baby this car is a beast what did you do". She thought I bought another car part without telling here LOL.
But this is the way I learn best is by experience trial and error. Field testing FTW