Useless Information

[HiHoeSilver]

From October 2017 through March 2018, with a BlackBear tune and bad catalytic converters, these are the numbers:

E85 = 162.318 Gallons - $345.73 - 1612.9 Miles Driven = $.214 Cents a Mile and 9.937 MPG
Gas 93 = 188.891 Gallons - $598.03 - 2399.16 Miles Driven = $.251 Cents a Mile and 12.637 MPG

Running Gasoline delivers 2.70 MPG higher fuel economy and costs $.036 Cents a Mile more to operate.

From March 2018 through August 2018, with a BlackBear tune and Magnaflow catalytic converters, these are the numbers:

E85 = 222.18 Gallons - $504.72 - 2452.60 Miles Driven = $.202 Cents a Mile and 11.131 MPG
Gas 93 = 212.148 Gallons - $731.08 - 2908.5 Miles Driven = $.250 Cents a Mile and 13.752 MPG

Running Gasoline delivers 2.621 MPG higher fuel economy and costs $.048 Cents a Mile more to operate.

Replacement of the bad cats has resulted in an increase of 1.194 MPG on E85, from 9.937 MPG to 11.131 MPG.
Replacement of the bad cats has resulted in an increase of 1.114 MPG on 93, from 12.637 MPG to 13.752 MPG.

In September an updated tune was loaded from BlackBear and we'll crunch some numbers on how well Bonnie Blue is performing on that soon enough.

Anyone do this and also keep track of GPH (Gallons Per Hour) and their Average Speed? I keep track of that stuff too.

Love how nuts you are, James!

 

[Tonyrodz]

Love how nuts you are, James!

 

[Tonyrodz]

From October 2017 through March 2018, with a BlackBear tune and bad catalytic converters, these are the numbers:

E85 = 162.318 Gallons - $345.73 - 1612.9 Miles Driven = $.214 Cents a Mile and 9.937 MPG
Gas 93 = 188.891 Gallons - $598.03 - 2399.16 Miles Driven = $.251 Cents a Mile and 12.637 MPG

Running Gasoline delivers 2.70 MPG higher fuel economy and costs $.036 Cents a Mile more to operate.

From March 2018 through August 2018, with a BlackBear tune and Magnaflow catalytic converters, these are the numbers:

E85 = 222.18 Gallons - $504.72 - 2452.60 Miles Driven = $.202 Cents a Mile and 11.131 MPG
Gas 93 = 212.148 Gallons - $731.08 - 2908.5 Miles Driven = $.250 Cents a Mile and 13.752 MPG

Running Gasoline delivers 2.621 MPG higher fuel economy and costs $.048 Cents a Mile more to operate.

Replacement of the bad cats has resulted in an increase of 1.194 MPG on E85, from 9.937 MPG to 11.131 MPG.
Replacement of the bad cats has resulted in an increase of 1.114 MPG on 93, from 12.637 MPG to 13.752 MPG.

In September an updated tune was loaded from BlackBear and we'll crunch some numbers on how well Bonnie Blue is performing on that soon enough.

Anyone do this and also keep track of GPH (Gallons Per Hour) and their Average Speed? I keep track of that stuff too.

Now that's dedication. Great job James. I used to do something similar when I drove 200 miles a day just going back and forth to work.

 

[HiHoeSilver]

View attachment 207636

Them be acorns.


Edit: just looked it up. Acorns are nuts.

 

[swathdiver]

From October 2017 through March 2018, with a BlackBear tune and bad catalytic converters, these are the numbers:

E85 = 162.318 Gallons - $345.73 - 1612.9 Miles Driven = $.214 Cents a Mile and 9.937 MPG
Gas 93 = 188.891 Gallons - $598.03 - 2399.16 Miles Driven = $.251 Cents a Mile and 12.637 MPG

Running Gasoline delivers 2.70 MPG higher fuel economy and costs $.036 Cents a Mile more to operate.

From March 2018 through August 2018, with a BlackBear tune and Magnaflow catalytic converters, these are the numbers:

E85 = 222.18 Gallons - $504.72 - 2452.60 Miles Driven = $.202 Cents a Mile and 11.131 MPG
Gas 93 = 212.148 Gallons - $731.08 - 2908.5 Miles Driven = $.250 Cents a Mile and 13.752 MPG

Running Gasoline delivers 2.621 MPG higher fuel economy and costs $.048 Cents a Mile more to operate.

Replacement of the bad cats has resulted in an increase of 1.194 MPG on E85, from 9.937 MPG to 11.131 MPG.
Replacement of the bad cats has resulted in an increase of 1.114 MPG on 93, from 12.637 MPG to 13.752 MPG.

In September an updated tune was loaded from BlackBear and we'll crunch some numbers on how well Bonnie Blue is performing on that soon enough.

Anyone do this and also keep track of GPH (Gallons Per Hour) and their Average Speed? I keep track of that stuff too.

Well, those stats weren't all that accurate. They were an average of fuel pumped and not used. Or not even a an average of both. A few excel spreadsheets later and I have an average of averages and an average of those to even things out!

The computer system in our trucks allows us to calculate Distance, Time and Fuel Used two ways each.

Without further ado:

Bad Cats:

E85 = 10.34 MPG
93 = 13.39 MPG

Good Cats:

E85 = 11.67 MPG
93 = 14.71 MPG

The MPG on E85 has improved by 1.34 MPG.

The MPG on 93 has improved by 1.32 MPG.

This truck gets just over 3 MPG better on 93 compared with E85. But it costs $.045 cents per mile more to burn 93. That's four and a half cents a mile for those of you in Rio Linda!

Justin @ BlackBear wrote back and asked for another log.

I'm looking forward to seeing how much the updated tune has improved the efficiency of the truck. But also getting impatient and wanting to run E85 again!

 

[kbuskill]

Well, those stats weren't all that accurate. They were an average of fuel pumped and not used. Or not even a an average of both. A few excel spreadsheets later and I have an average of averages and an average of those to even things out!

The computer system in our trucks allows us to calculate Distance, Time and Fuel Used two ways each.

Without further ado:

Bad Cats:

E85 = 10.34 MPG
93 = 13.39 MPG

Good Cats:

E85 = 11.67 MPG
93 = 14.71 MPG

The MPG on E85 has improved by 1.34 MPG.

The MPG on 93 has improved by 1.32 MPG.

This truck gets just over 3 MPG better on 93 compared with E85. But it costs $.045 cents per mile more to burn 93. That's four and a half cents a mile for those of you in Rio Linda!

Justin @ BlackBear wrote back and asked for another log.

I'm looking forward to seeing how much the updated tune has improved the efficiency of the truck. But also getting impatient and wanting to run E85 again!

Is your BB tune specifically for 93 octane???

I chose to tune for 89 because it controls the pre detonation better than 87 but doesn't cost as much as 93... kind of a happy medium.

I just wonder what your cost per mile comparison would look like on 89 vs E85.

If we really want to be honest about it... running E85 kinda defeats the purpose of having a custom tune because it reverts back to the stock E85 fuel tables. So the only thing "custom tune" that we are running is the TCM portion of the tune... which is still good... I wonder how much just the TCM tune affects the MPG???

 

[swathdiver]

Is your BB tune specifically for 93 octane???

I chose to tune for 89 because it controls the pre detonation better than 87 but doesn't cost as much as 93... kind of a happy medium.

I just wonder what your cost per mile comparison would look like on 89 vs E85.

If we really want to be honest about it... running E85 kinda defeats the purpose of having a custom tune because it reverts back to the stock E85 fuel tables. So the only thing "custom tune" that we are running is the TCM portion of the tune... which is still good... I wonder how much just the TCM tune affects the MPG???

Hi Ken, it's a 91+ tune. I'll run a tank of 89 and just not go full throttle and try it out someday. He can tweak the E85 tables but mine are stock, feels great on it anyway. In my opinion, the best part of the tune are the adjustments made to the TCM. My sole purpose for the tune initially was to simply turn off AFM. The tune was made mild per my request and now a year later we're tweaking it. As for the TCM tune and gas mileage, probably not much at all, don't know exactly.

 

[swathdiver]

Used the AutoCal tonight for a datalog while running two 2-way averages for mileage. The mileage wasn't so good, down about 1 mpg both at 65 and 70 from before. 19 @ 65 and 18 @ 70. Reviewing the log file with EFI Live I noticed that there was a lot of knock retard even while cruising, more at 65 mph than at 70 mph. There shouldn't be any. Reviewed previous logs and the only knock was pretty much at WOT and not all the time. I prefer to be conservative and have none! I like the ability to go fast but don't want to blow the engine!

@BlackBearPerf

That's all folks...

 

[gpracer1]

Used the AutoCal tonight for a datalog while running two 2-way averages for mileage. The mileage wasn't so good, down about 1 mpg both at 65 and 70 from before. 19 @ 65 and 18 @ 70. Reviewing the log file with EFI Live I noticed that there was a lot of knock retard even while cruising, more at 65 mph than at 70 mph. There shouldn't be any. Reviewed previous logs and the only knock was pretty much at WOT and not all the time. I prefer to be conservative and have none! I like the ability to go fast but don't want to blow the engine!

That's all folks...

Strange , shouldnt have ANY KR at cruise unless either the gas is bad, lots of carbon buildup, tune timing is too aggressive, dirty MAF , running lean,etc.

 

[swathdiver]

Strange , shouldnt have ANY KR at cruise unless either the gas is bad, lots of carbon buildup, tune timing is too aggressive, dirty MAF , running lean,etc.

I think the timing was too aggressive. It was in the high 30s low 40s at cruise. We put ten gallons of Mobil's 93 from a station we do not normally use and later that day went back to our regular high volume station and added another 14 or so of the same. Alcohol content running at 4%.

The motor is clean, the LTFTs are near zero now, the MAF was cleaned twice this year though the TPS at idle is between 7-8%.

Do you have EFI Live?