Oxygenated fuel 20+ Horse power?

[andyf]

While we are on the subject are there any reports as to horsepower gain using MS109?

I've run A-B dyno tests with MS109 vs. VP110 with my 514 Mopar dyno engine. We didn't see any power gain when switching to the MS109. I'm sure it makes more power in some engines, but it didn't show any change for my engine. It worked just fine, but we never saw any significant power increase.

If your engine needs VP110 then for an oxygenated fuel you might look at VP113 it's much closer in specs to the 110.
http://www.vpracingfuels.com/vp-drag-racing.html

VP113 might have worked. I tried the two fuels that the VP tech line told me to try. I rented some dyno time and tried the two fuels and didn't find any gains. Like I said before, it cost me about $1000 to try the fuels on the dyno. If I had an unlimited budget I'm sure I could have eventually found a fuel that made more power. But my budget is quite a bit smaller than unlimited so I have to try and make educated guesses before I start testing. I don't know why we didn't find any power with either fuel. It could have been some sort of testing error, or maybe the engine I was working with just couldn't effectively use the oxygenated fuel for some reason. I have another higher compression engine going on the dyno in the near future and we'll give the Q16 another try.

[David Redszus]

In fact , most oxygenated race fuels have that very suggestion in their spec sheets .

Actually, there are several reasons to change jetting, the presence of oxygen not being one of them. The enrichment index of a fuel is determined by the Specific Gravity and Stoichiometric Value of a fuel. While the SpG is commonly available, the Stoich Value is almost never available.

It is completely wrong to suggest that an oxygenated fuel must be run richer; that may or may not be the case. depending on the total characteristics of the blend.

One , it seems odd that the very oil company fuel chemists ( from every race fuel manufacturer in fact ) you refer to keep coming up with oxygenated fuels to make more power.

I am referring to oil companies that support Formula One, not US race fuel marketers. There is a very large difference. The trend toward oxygenated race fuels has nothing to do with making more power. It has everything to do with meeting EPA regulations that allow the product to be sold from a gas station pump. And you can blame the fruits and nuts in Kalifornia for that.

If an oxygenated fuel improves early vaporization, improving mixture distribution and/or an engines ability to burn the fuel more completely, it is likely to see an improvement.

There is no evidence to support the premise of an oxygenated fuel improving early vaporization. In fact, if you look at the boiling points and heat of vaporization of many oxygenates, they are even harder to vaporize. To compensate, it is often necessary to add other, more volatile components in order to compensate for the oxygenate.

At the risk of repeating myself, I will repeat: it is important to know the fuel distillation curve and the stoich value of a given fuel. Perhaps resources would be better allocated by running some fuel blends through fuel analysis lab testing to determine fact from fiction.

[rookie]

Stan, I wonder if you could post this as once again I seem to be part of, and at odds with some ST posters. This time on the subject of the VP
oxygenated fuels test/discussion.



First let me say that guys like ‘dieselgeek, David Redszus, and a few others have raised important issues about the success or otherwise of using
oxygenated fuels. There is, as with most automotive endeavors, far more to it than meets the eye. Obviously VP and all the other pro fuel blenders
appreciate the complexities involved. A representative of VP called me (not any of the others) and asked if it would be possible to test the effect of
one or more grades of oxygenated fuels and how much it would likely cost to do this and make a short video of the test engine producing the results as
my tests would be more acceptable to end users than any VP did.


As VP’s luck would have it we were already doing some dyno testing on my 496 big block to finish the tune ready for it to be sold. In so many words I
told VP’s vice pres. Steve Scheidker that he had called at a very opportune moment. Because a suitable engine was already on the dyno I would, as a
favor, run a test against the best street fuels Terry Walters (TWPE in Roanoke) and I had so far found. So VP sent out about 10 gals of the
appropriate fuel (101 octane MS109).



This test was very convenient for me as I am currently doing a new version of the Cartec book ‘Super Tuning Holley Carbs’. So I needed to do tests
like this anyway. The video was a bonus for VP. However VP’s tech guys had voiced the concern that it is important that end users are sufficiently
well informed about the correct use of oxygenated fuels. Well that’s a subject I have to cover complete with the photo’s of what to do etc for my book.
So how much more work would it be to video this for VP and youtube – about 2 days work. I made it clear to VP that I would only do this if the
demand, as indicated by the hits on the actual dyno test, showed that the interest was there.



And to the comment made by some less than generous soul – no, the addition to the dyno test video won’t happen regardless. I cannot afford (nor my
videographer Nigel Thurlow or engine builder Terry Walters) to waste 2 days, endure expenses for such (about $300) and on top of that loose the
income from such just to see myself on youtube. If you personally are not interested in information on how to get the best from the use of oxygenated
fuels then fine – as an ST poster it is your choice - don’t visit the Youtube dyno test. On the other hand if you do want to know than register your vote
by visiting the dyno test – it is as simple as that. I am looking for votes one way or the other so my time is used constructively. There is no underlying
plot here to take over the world or anything like that.



Oh and by the way after this is all done, whether or not I go the next step with the instructional part of the video, VP does owe me a favor or two. In
my business it’s the dishing out and repaying of favors that makes what I do a viable business. Usually most of the companies I deal with are aware
that I have, during my 45 year career, made literally dozens of millionaires so things may not be such a drain on a companies resources as might at
first be supposed.

DV

This is the thread DV is referring to viewtopic.php?f=14&t=29322

[Mike Croley]

David , the suggestion that the mixture be richened when using oxygenated fuels comes in the spec sheets from virtually every race fuel manufacturer . So that being said , i would hope that any racer using oxygenated race fuels would follow the manufacturers recommendations .
Oxygenated race fuels were never developed for sale at the pump , many are leaded and/or have MTBE as an integral part . So they would never be street legal . Not to mention the fact that no station on earth wants to invest the money that thousands of gallons of expensive , limited use oxygenated race fuel would require .

[David Redszus]

David , the suggestion that the mixture be richened when using oxygenated fuels comes in the spec sheets from virtually every race fuel manufacturer .

That I know not to be true. Those that state such a thing should be then capable of supplying the Stoich value for that fuel. If not, it is nothing more than racing folk lore, to which many fuel marketers are subject as well as racers.

So that being said , i would hope that any racer using oxygenated race fuels would follow the manufacturers recommendations.

And I would hope NOT. Unless proper technical substantiation can be provided, which is almost never the case. Fuel marketers have very little knowledge regarding a specific engine and specific state of tune.

Oxygenated race fuels were never developed for sale at the pump , many are leaded and/or have MTBE as an integral part . So they would never be street legal .

Get your facts straight. Read ASTM 4815 which clearly sets out the requirements. Early oxygenated fuels were not leaded nor did they contain alcohols. They were MTBE based until the Peoples Republic of Kalifornia banned the best fuel additive ever invented.

Not to mention the fact that no station on earth wants to invest the money that thousands of gallons of expensive , limited use oxygenated race fuel would require.

Once again, get your facts straight. There are hundreds of gas stations that currently sell race fuel. Since leaded fuels cannot be sold at the gas station pump, it must be oxygenated in order to achieved the required octane levels.

[TMSJoe]

I am guessing there is a miscommunication here. The AFR and bigger jets are both being taken as absolute values. But I don't want to spoil a good debate.

[bigjoe1]

I do NOT understand what this topic has turned into/ When I have tested the Q-16 race gas. I went up on the jetting, just like VP said you need to do with their Q-16 fuel.. The HP increase was very good ( over 30 HP ) in my case, so why would I question the fact that they told me to go up with the jetting ? When something works the way it is supposed to, why would anyone question it ?? I think some of you are over questioning what is going on here.



JOE SHERMAN RACING ENGINES

[Lem Evans]

I do NOT understand what this topic has turned into/ When I have tested the Q-16 race gas. I went up on the jetting, just like VP said you need to do with their Q-16 fuel.. The HP increase was very good ( over 30 HP ) in my case, so why would I question the fact that they told me to go up with the jetting ? When something works the way it is supposed to, why would anyone question it ?? I think some of you are over questioning what is going on here.



JOE SHERMAN RACING ENGINES

That's the way it works here...if one has an engine that is qualified for something like 116 fuel it [Q] will make more HP with the Q16.
And, if one does not jet up it will make the same or less hp or burn pistons. Fact not opinion.

[jmarkaudio]

I was told by VP tech that stoich for VP 113 (oxygenated) is at 14.2-14.3, on the dyno 12.9-13.1 appeared to make best power. Don't know on Q16.

SPECIFICATION SHEET FOR VP 113

(Typical Values) Specific Gravity: .719 @ 60°F
Lead: Yes
Oxygenated: Yes
Color: Green
Motor Octane: 108.5
Research Octane: 117.5
R+M/2: 113
Reid Vapor Pressure: 7.96
Oxidation Stability (min.) 1440+
Distillation:
10% evap @ 135.7°F
50% evap @ 188.8°F
90% evap @ 225.7°F
E.P. @ 246.9°F

[Lem Evans]

No matter what the 'stoich' is....any given engine combo wants what it wants. It's a case of obersation being greater than math. I suspect Copernicus used both.

[rookie]

I do NOT understand what this topic has turned into/ When I have tested the Q-16 race gas. I went up on the jetting, just like VP said you need to do with their Q-16 fuel.. The HP increase was very good ( over 30 HP ) in my case, so why would I question the fact that they told me to go up with the jetting ? When something works the way it is supposed to, why would anyone question it ?? I think some of you are over questioning what is going on here.



JOE SHERMAN RACING ENGINES

When you say you went up on jet size, up compared to what?

[TMSJoe]

I suspect that jetting up when using oxygenated fuel is merely correcting the AFR, not changing it. If you dilute the fuel with "oxygen" molecules you should go lean if you do nothing else. Somebody is getting displaced in the fuel by something.

[David Redszus]

I was told by VP tech that stoich for VP 113 (oxygenated) is at 14.2-14.3, on the dyno 12.9-13.1 appeared to make best power. Don't know on Q16.

SPECIFICATION SHEET FOR VP 113 Bold face is for Q16
stoich for VP 113= 14.2, Q16 = 13.2
(Typical Values) Specific Gravity: .719 @ 60°F .716
Lead: Yes Yes
Oxygenated: Yes 3% Yes 10% (uses MTBE)
Color: Green Yellow
Motor Octane: 108.5 116
Research Octane: 117.5
R+M/2: 113
Reid Vapor Pressure: 7.96 6.76 psi
Oxidation Stability (min.) 1440+
Distillation:
10% evap @ 135.7°F 141F
50% evap @ 188.8°F 174F
90% evap @ 225.7°F 215F
E.P. @ 246.9°F

Shown above is a comparision between VP113 and Q16. As can be seen, the major difference is the increased amount of oxygenate (MTBE) used in Q16. The stoich difference, 14.2 vs 13.4, indicates that Q16 must be run approx 10% richer than VP113 (which is also an oxygenated fuel).

[jmarkaudio]

Power – Q16 has 10% oxygen content by weight, requiring a 4-6% increase in fuel flow, which contributes to making 3-5% more power than competitors’ 116 octane fuels. With its rapid vaporization rate, Q16 has superior burning speed and makes more pressure in the cylinders, both of which also make more power. Q16 still has relatively low vapor pressure, unusual in a fuel with an oxygen content and vaporization rate this high

Rapid vaporization in bold from VP's tech papers is what I made mention on, IF the fuel improves vaporization in the induction, it will improve mixture distribution. No, it's not a given for all oxygenated fuels, but it appears this has been designed into Q16. I think this may be at least part of the gains seen by Q16.

[dieselgeek]

I bet there are people reading this thread wondering "what's the CHANCE that my engine combo will see a power gain on oxygenated fuel?"

As a tuner, my answer is "probably 50-75% of N/A engines will see power gains so long as the engine is properly tuned and timed for the new fuel."


Does that seem fair?