I'm sure you saw this at some point in my thread, but what Padlock was demonstrating is exactly what I did on my car. For me this meant welding a nut for the Fab9 stage2 IC to mount a bit further back, cutting the bumper bar and replacing it with a smaller bolt in one that sits further forward.

https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...8dda41bf25.jpg
https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...1a212ec581.jpg
https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...2103632465.jpg

The results from this revision, along with an oil cooler I added stacked behind the rad, have been excellent.

I've actually picked through your thread a time or two lately since we've been discussing cooling. I remember when you first posted about that ducting and I was really impressed. I'm curious now looking back at it, if the air will separate from the bumper inlet and cause turbulence. I was watching one of the HPA videos on ducting and they were talking about that. I should really take some time to understand aerodynamics.

Obviously it's doesn't matter much since your car is running cool.

When I got the bumper off this is what I was greeted by.

My weather stripping which was supposed to seal up the coroplast and intercooler had become almost completely undone. I do have some 1/4" stick on weather stripping foam that I might go back and apply to the coroplast that sits against the underside of the IC, but for now I just removed the old stuff.
https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...6cd60c94bb.jpg

Hard to get a good photo of, but there is some gap between the top sheet of coroplast and the intercooler. I'd say there's about 1" of clearance, but the angle is probably too steep to make any positive difference.
https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...ec7920c29e.jpg


We'll see what happens. A bash bar would make ducting way easier and I have considered it in the past. I did grab an IR temp gun as well, so I'm starting to try to get a ballpark of what my oil temps are looking like to determine if an oil cooler is appropriate. Not as scientific as I'd like, but I don't want to add an oil temp sensor somewhere just to end up redoing the setup if I get an oil cooler.

I'm not sure about the air separation, I'm definitely no expert and just read a thousand threads and copied the advice from others who know more than me. And furthermore, my setup is not ideal. Everything is a compromise, and without completely re-engineering the stack and using the IC I had already purchased that's what I came up with. I think it works well for "stock location" IC and rad.

That said, as I understand it this is more about pressure differentials and path of least resistance than airflow separation. I.E. the further back you mount the IC from the mouth the more space there is for air to build up a high pressure "bubble" there. Then the pressure differential will pull the air thru and out the extractors. Even with air separation this high/low pressure differential exists, so as long as you give it an easy path for air through the rad (and not forced through the IC as well) it can do its thing. I made it so the path of least resistance was thru the rad (and it could bypass the intercooler) which I believe helps with this.

Padlock, the actual engineer, probably has more/better input on this though!

Definitely not knocking your setup at all, just thinking out loud. Good point on the "path of least resistance" being the radiator. I guess I hadn't thought about it from that perspective.

I don't love how steep the top sheet of coroplast is on my setup, but with that crash support in the way I don't have a ton of options. Unfortunately the orientation of the coroplast also doesn't allow me to bend/curve it very well. I will not be surprised if I end up getting another sheet before the years up and trying again or at least making some modifications.

Nothing was going on tonight and I got the OBDII port/pins in the mail today so I figured it was best to finish up that install. I'm going to go over to the Link subforum and do a writeup over there, but as of now the car CAN transmit data over the factory OBDII port.
https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...732eec1a34.jpg
https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...974acbcc31.jpg


I could've done a better job trimming up this panel but I didn't want to get the dremel out. For now this is going to work. I did throw some tape over the bluetooth dongle so there aren't LEDs shining at night.


https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...b4065896f8.jpg

Don't forget to check on your airbag light delete while you're down there. Professional quality right here.

https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...fe48c98fa7.jpg


Aside from cooling, next on the list is the flex fuel sensor. I'm still trying to figure out how to mount it and run power/ground. You can see the wires I ran recently for flex fuel and oil temp up against the firewall. If anyone has suggestions, mainly for a power source, let me know. For now I'm considering the plug at the front of the engine that I'm pretty sure is the stock oil pressure plug, or the EGR plug. Evap solenoid plug is being used for, well, evap solenoid purposes.

I assume the sensor will go here with some sort of bracket made of bent aluminum bar. I'll probably just go with barb adapters and hose clamps, although I've thought about delving into the world of AN fittings for this one.

https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...d436408fe2.jpg


OBDII is working with both RealDash and Car Scanner which is pretty cool. RealDash seems like it could be a whole project arc of it's own, but I don't have plans to incorporate that in any significant way for now. Mainly I'm just happy to be able to check IAT and CLT temps without the laptop. Honestly I don't know why Link doesn't have bluetooth capability directly on the board. With how common small bluetooth IC's are these days it seems like a lot of functionality for little cost.

Cat given for the triple resistor lol. It's weird seeing pics in your thread of a part that was sitting in my garage for almost a year lol. Stoked to see how you wire the sensor up!

Thanks man! I need to start a list in my signature of all the people who's old parts are on my car. Probably more than I remember at this point.

I did play around with the sensor mounting a bit yesterday and ordered some hose and connectors to get everything attached. Keep in mind that even when I do get this setup I won't be able to really tune for E85 yet since I'm still on a DW100 which should only flow enough for ~250 WHP on E85. I'll still play around with it before upgrading the pump since I probably won't have pure E85 (likely E60 or something like that). I still need to decide if I'm going to rewire the pump as well. I know it's been recommended by at least a few people on here. Deatschwerks doesn't list it as being needed/recommended for the 200, but I might still do for best practices.

I took the aluminum bracket I had cut up for the evap solenoid and bent that into a 90 to clear up some space.
https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...c79b4bbb7d.jpg


I'm thinking I can use that same bolt hole that the evap solenoid is using and create another little bracket to mount the flex sensor to. For wiring I think I'm going to pull 12 V from the EGR plug and ground it to the intake manifold where some of the other sensors ground out.

Just a rough mockup with an old piece of my seat adapter bracket.

https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...07c79667a7.jpg


I have some insulated hose guide clamp things on their way as well, so I'm thinking I can secure the fuel lines to the shock mounting bolts, which should keep them secure and out of the way for shock adjustments.

Also, if anyone has a rough idea of how much timing to add going from 91 to E85 I'd be interested to get a ballpark number. I want to say I heard 4 degrees at one point, but haven't done a ton of research yet.

Advancing 3 or 4 degrees on the power areas is a safe bet. You don't need to advance on cruise/idle unless you're noticing an issue, but it wouldn't hurt to advance the cruise a couple of degrees. Advancing the idle will cause your idle valve base to be off.

Cool, I'll start with that then. Actually, what I'll probably do is start with the 91 map and see how the knock sensor data looks, and then advance it. The rest of the map will likely remain unchanged.

Yes, that's the best approach. I'm sure you've looked at the dual maps in Link, but if not, enable the dual maps for spark, and copy table 1 to table 2, set them to interpolate based on ethanol content, and then you can advance table 2 where you need.

I played around with the dual maps at one point and was using a switch to flip between the two. IIRC when I first got the base tune up and running I did select the multifuel fueling model because I figured this would happen at some point. Also partially why I switched from AFR to Lambda.

That flex fuel mount is exactly where I put mine. Also, I forget what 12V constant I tied into there, but there was something already there in the engine bay, near that spot IIRC. Maybe my PS after I deleted it? Really can't remember now but I started probing existing wires in the bay and found a switched 12v and sent it with that. Then of course the very important 0-5v from the ECU, and the flex input to my MS.

I definitely didn't pick through your build thread and decide to copy your mounting \s. I actually picked through a handful of threads on here to try and figure out who was running flex fuel and where they put it. Z's old NA post was another one I was peeking at as well, funny enough because the sensor he's mounting in those posts is the same one that's in my hands now.

Got that aluminum bracket cut and tapped some threads into it. Didn't get the deepest cuts on the threads but they snugged up fine and I threw some blue thread locker on there to fill in the gaps. The plan is to pull off the bendy U turn fuel line and instead pipe that through the flex sensor.
https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...2eb6fa8896.jpg
https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...c2e442ec3d.jpg
One of the wires in the upper corner of this photo is the digital input wire that will take the signal to the ECU.

Looking at this now, the electrical connector for the flex sensor might be a bit tight, but we'll see. If another bracket needs to be built so be it.

Wiring in the flex fuel sensor wasn't as big of a process as I thought it would be. I went to plug in the EGR plug pigtail I bought a while back only to realize I had a female pigtail to mate up with the female plug on the harness. Couldn't really do much other than laugh about that one.

https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...29426908ce.jpg



I ended up finding another source for 12 V tucked back behind the fuse box. I don't know what this plug is actually for, because it wasn't plugged in when I got the car, but I'm guessing it's either the horn plug or something to do with the wipers maybe? Not sure, but it has 12 V on it and just needed a spade connector, so I opted to use that. I had considered splicing into the evap solenoid wiring as well, but this is less permanent. I may move over to that in the future once this setup is more proven.

Not pretty, but it'll work. I added a bit of electrical tape to help secure it into the plug. Seemed secure enough without it, but I figured it wouldn't hurt.

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...5258dfe94f.jpg



I also took this opportunity to try out these open barrel crimp connectors. HPA's wiring course shows these a lot and I've had a couple people on here mention them, so I threw some in when I made my last order to Digikey. Pretty sure 50 of these were about $5. They're a bit more fiddly to work with than butt connectors, but they are way lower profile to the point that they're barely noticeable under heat shrink. I'll definitely be using these for 18-22 gauge wires going forward.


https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...3ddbd55564.jpg


Amazon was taking too long so I walked over to O'Reilly's and grabbed the 90* connectors and hose clamps that I was waiting on. For anyone who's cares, the connectors are all Dorman, the hose clamps are MasterPro and the fuel line is SAE30R9 from Evil Energy. I'm always a bit wary of fuel lines, but so far everything has been working fine. No leaks at all.


https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...b10e274a02.jpg
https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...2a810f46bb.jpg


I was conveniently very low on gas when I finished this up so went and filled the tank up at the closer, but arguably lower quality, E85 pump that's about 10 minutes from my place. It took a couple miles to register but after a couple minutes I saw the laptop reporting about 65% ethanol. Right after I filled up I had an "oh shit" moment because I hadn't even considered that my AFR gauge only went down to 10, which is higher than stoich for E85. Thankfully, as I later learned, the AFR gauge is measuring lambda and scaling it assuming that you're on pump gas (or at least that's what it seems). So now my AFR gauge is a bit misleading for E85, but at least the computer is able to read lambda properly and I still have some idea of how rich/lean the car is running.

The tuning aspect was pretty straightforward. I had to change a couple settings regarding fueling, but once the Link knows what kind of fuels you're using it does a pretty good job of handling everything. Didn't have to change the VE table at all or create a second one. Really it was just copying a couple tables (lambda targets and ignition) and that was pretty much it. Fuel temp is working as well, which I guess Link factors into their modeled fuel equation, so hopefully that helps with hot restarts on both E85 and 91.

Did a bit of tuning yesterday but had an event that took up the afternoon and evening. This morning I went out to do some pulls and get some logs to analyze.
https://i.imgflip.com/9yvdtb.jpg


I knew that was going to happen, but did a couple quick calculations online and thought I'd be able to run low boost (~170 KPA) with some headroom. Looking back now I think I was looking at the wrong PSI on the tech sheet, so the pump should be maxing out around 225 Crank HP, which is probably right about where I'm at. Looking back at the logs I was around 6-7% off my target. Some of the other pulls were closer to the target, but even with closed loop adding 5% it was still lean. It's also possible that I need to add fuel to the VE table, but my lambda at this boost level is withing 1-2% generally on 91 and Link's fueling in other parts of the table has been pretty spot on.

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...53395fa9d8.png


Just did a couple pulls to see what virtual dyno would say. If I'm understanding how all the blending is setup currently, I should be running about 3* more timing now compared to 91. I haven't done any fine tuning, just doing some smaller changes to see how everything's working.

https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...6c4a70267f.jpg
Red and Green are e85 with ~3 degrees more timing than usual. Blue is an old, higher boost pull.


Now I'm running some numbers and trying to figure out which fuel pump to go with. I'm leaning towards the DW200, but am considering the 300 as well.

Based on Deatschwerks website and datasheets, I'm seeing that the DW200 should top out right around 428 Crank HP.
https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...7d2d7c28d1.png

https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...800a532b15.png
Fuel pump calculator is found here for anyone who's interested - Fuel Pump Calculator

I'm planning to put a GTX2860 in the car sometime in the future and hoping to run that around 350 WHP, which seems like it'll be pushing it for the DW200. Most estimates I'm getting are putting 350 WHP around 410 CHP which leaves a whopping 9 LPH of headroom. That's assuming the turbo can make that power among other things. I don't have any plans for now to swap to a beefier transmission, so I don't think I'll be aiming for anything over 350 even if the turbo is able to support it.

I'm thinking I will rewire the pump. I double checked yesterday and I already have a fuse holder and a relay in the garage that should work, so I think I just need some 12 gauge wire to make that happen.

Overall though I'm pretty stoked about E85. The car seems to be happy with it and the additional safety and power from it seems like a no brainer. I wish we had more pumps around but the one that we do have isn't exactly inconvenient. I'll probably be getting a pump ordered later today or tomorrow and hopefully have that installed later this week. I'm pretty eager to see what kind of power the car will make at lower boost levels so I can hopefully run the turbo a bit more efficiently without losing any power (IE Low boost + E85 = High Boost + 91).

Fuel Pump Rec's (DW200 vs DW300)
 

Been reading, calculating, etc... and am struggling to figure out which fuel pump to go with, so I figured I'd ask for feedback. Also, might've jumped the gun on saying my fuel pump was maxed out yesterday. After reading a bit more it sounds like it's not uncommon to need a second VE table for E85 and/or to adjust some injector settings, but that's another topic.

To start, I'm currently on a DW100 so I'm going to be upgrading either way. If I already had a 200 I'd just stick with that for the time being.

I'll try to keep it to the basics. The plan is to go to a GTX2860 eventually (likely within the next year) and target ~350 WHP but likely stay closer to ~300 day to day.
350 WHP is about 410 crank which would require about 96% of the output from the DW200 on E85 or about 70% of the output from the 300. Is there any downside to going to the 300? At this time I don't have plans to change out anything else in the fuel system (pressure regulator, rail, etc...).

Based on the fuel I got this weekend I'm seeing E65 which is probably what I'll run most of the time (IE, not requiring quite as much flow as full E85). Otherwise I'm stuck to 91 octane.

The DW200 seems like it would pair well with the turbo and would likely max out around the same point as the turbo on E85. The DW300 would give more headroom and should easily max out the turbo, I'm mostly wondering if it's too much pump for the stock NB1 fuel system.

I am thinking I will rewire the pump either way.

too big a pump can overpower a regulator, as well as add excessive heat to the fuel.

But that said, I'm usually a fan of overdoing fuel capacities. better to have the headroom than to go lean.

Anything larger than a DW200 you likely want to consider wiring upgrades to meet the additional power draw, so keep that in mind as well.

I'm thinking I'll rewire with either pump. I've already got a relay+holder and a fuse holder on hand, so it'll just cost me $15 in wire to do 10 gauge which should be plenty for either pump.

I was under the impression that the rewire was recommended on the DW200 even. I rewired and added a separate relay before I tossed a DW200 in my car. And I was glad I did because eventually the car ended up getting a DW300 later on anyhow. For your future goals and the sub-$100 price difference it seems like the DW300 would be a no brainer, right?

Only point of contention I could see is if the 300 is able to overpower the stock NB FPR. I remember the DW200 was able to overpower the stock NA8 FPR on my car resulting in 55psi of pressure at idle instead of the factory spec 43psi. I was able to tune around it since it was consistent behavior, though, as suggested by Curly in one of my posts about said issue. Worked for over a year and a half until I installed an adjustable FPR.

A rail pressure sensor might not be bad add either. Compensates for fuel pressure and a good thing to check on in logs and your display while running.