SubarCharged Posted July 20, 2013 Share Posted July 20, 2013 To make it easy, I'll just post a link to the complete mod list. The only thing missing at this point in time from the list is the single bulb Legacy headlights with projectors I worked up. I haven't had time to swap out the 410cc for the DeatschWerks 650cc either. I already have a ROM ready based on the latency and flow report. http://sl-i.net/FORUM/viewtopic.php?p=329804#p329804 Here's the build: http://www.subaruoutback.org/forums/110-gen-2-2000-2004/47896-sleeper-vdc.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AKghandi Posted July 20, 2013 Share Posted July 20, 2013 sweet! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SubarCharged Posted July 20, 2013 Author Share Posted July 20, 2013 Thanks. Its a nice, smooth, comfortable and fast ride. The only downside is it sucks down E85 like a camel at an oasis after a 100 mile trek. But it burns cleaner than newer cars. As low as 3 ppm HC, 0 CO, 0 O2 and 14.5 CO2 out the tailpipe. The 300+ HP off the crank ain't too bad either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Idasho Posted July 20, 2013 Share Posted July 20, 2013 Do you have a dyno graph showing A/F ratio? Even boosted I do not see a reason for it to be super fuel hungry. Power delivery and economy can be had at the same time if tuned well enough! Sweet build BTW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SubarCharged Posted July 20, 2013 Author Share Posted July 20, 2013 It runs on E85 all the time. The volume of fuel needed is 45% higher over using gasoline. The fuel map on this car is programmed a little different over your normal map. We never found the MAP sensor definitions in the ROM and worked around it. The fuel trims are consistent at 14:1 cruising and go as low as 10:1 full throttle. I have data logs we used for tuning on my laptop and could upload a file from it later. It has not been on a dyno yet. All the numbers were calculated from the data logs. On the dyno, MZM Performance in Austin won't put my car on their 4 wheel; they keep making excuses. He was one of the tuning shops that said tuning this car was impossible and it would never run boosted. I've talked with Pro Tech performance but am waiting until I get the 650cc installed and the ROM loaded for a date to run it. He hasn't gotten back to me concerning the MAP defs though. AWD Tuning in Flower Mound is another dyno possibility. A couple of their guys that have seen the car and like it seem to think the MAP can be found and altered. If we ever find the definitions and get them altered to match upto 15 psi, fuel management would be more precise. As it is I don't get knock and power output is 30% more than I calculated prior to the build. The 4 gas analyzer showed the engine running a very high efficiency rate without the CATs and that's how I know I have room for more fuel. I have 3 videos up on YouTube, cardocm channel, that show the results of the car running without CATs on E85 and then gasoline with a third showing E85 with the CATs in. Look for "E85" in the title. The engine is burning just about everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Idasho Posted July 20, 2013 Share Posted July 20, 2013 Ah yes, I keep forgetting about E85 And assuming you have real time data-logging with a real wide band, you should be nearly covered. 10.1 is very much on the rich side for WOT at full load, 14.1 cruising is a bit rich too. I tend to shoot for 12.1 under full load, and 14.7 to 15. cruising. Anytime you drop below 11.5 or so you are really loosing out. Power and fuel economy suffers bad. Do you have an EGT on it? Id lean it up to at least 11.5 or so, and watch the EGTs. If the EGTs stay in check, lean it up some more, and shoot for 12.1 You will most likely find more power and better economy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SubarCharged Posted July 20, 2013 Author Share Posted July 20, 2013 l have 2 extra VW widebands and an EGT sensor. You forget, alcohol burn ration is prime at 9:1. Gasoline burns better at 12:1, but since we have emission statutes, 14.7:1 is the standard used to control HC emission and not damage an engine. Since the alcohol needs to be richer, thus more volume, I also have a DW300 pump in the tank to insure enough supply is at the engine. I will be adding more fuel to the combustion with the same amount of air as I get now which will put it more to the rich side, get a better alcohol burn ratio and supply more power output. With that, I will also need to change the emission values setting in the ECM for the AF sensors so when the ECM sees its low value of 11:1, the MIL will not come on. If I put gasoline in the tank, I will see 8.5:1 and lose power when I floor it. Ratios. Its all in the mix. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Idasho Posted July 20, 2013 Share Posted July 20, 2013 I know you are burning e85. It is common though for people to forget how the gauges operate, based upon fuel used. I guess my next question is are you are using a wideband )2 and gauge that is specific to E85? If not, you should still be tuning as if it were regular gas, and doing the math to verify. If you are, carry on! And forget about all my ramblings about A/F ratios! Also, what kind of MPGs are you seeing at low boost (cruising)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KootenayJK Posted July 21, 2013 Share Posted July 21, 2013 Doesn't the 0-60 seem a little slow for the estimated crank HP? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Idasho Posted July 21, 2013 Share Posted July 21, 2013 Not slow for roughly 300 crank hp. The VDC isnt exactly light.... nearly 4k lbs 300hp is nothing these days, especially in a heavy car. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SubarCharged Posted July 21, 2013 Author Share Posted July 21, 2013 (edited) The cars weighs in at just light of 4k with a full tank and me in the seat. All the original trims are still in the car and the addition of the SC with brackets and added coolers, fluids and minor parts added a few more pounds. The graph from Log Works was an early on run about 3/4 in to programming. The 0-60 is now under 7. If you do the conversion from the graphs, the WHP is 280 and the torque is 260. Since its AWD all the time with the VTD, crank should be close to 330/300 given HP loss through the drivetrain. But these calculations are on the roadway, not a dyno. When it gets on a dyno, the numbers should be higher. There's a shop here in Austin, I hear, that has E100 and I've been contemplating a run with it to see how the engine reacts. At this point, I am inclined to think it will love it. And 7k rpm is nothing. It just purrs. When it hits repeated fuel shut off 7200, it scares people. One of these times I'll get a video of the reactions. Videos of the 4 gas analyzer: Edited July 21, 2013 by SubarCharged Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SubarCharged Posted July 21, 2013 Author Share Posted July 21, 2013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KootenayJK Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 7 ish sounds more like it. My AWD Mini is 3200 or so, and has a little under 200 hp - it's just over 7 secs., so 8 sounded high. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now