And it begins...

[rwh11385]

If he's building a 8.5:1 CR 2.7i, I fail to see the huge benefit for that over a 2.5i, besides torque around town. B25's sing fine on track.

Any easy options for infinite flexibility, not just on/off? Hmmmm. :p

[DEV0 E30]

It's like reading an Encyclopedia Britannica, only problem is, this one only cares about flex fuel. So you feel like it's shoving not just the info, but the physical book down your throat even if it doesn't interest you. The information, is all fine and dandy, but you're going to get pretty tired of yogurt. Yogurt you ask? Well, your throat is damaged you see. Solid foods aren't what the used to be. You'll never really want to go to the Encyclopedia section in the library again, you'll stick to the periodicals because of that one bad book that forced itself to be read. You will burn it, along with the rest of civilization because of it's over dramatic voice.



zzzzzzzzzz

[Dave]

Do NOT Feed the Bear!

[James Crivellone]

Yes, because super ETA pistons with an I head results in 8.5:1 compression - exactly the same as a super eta, because the combustion chamber is the same (same head casting, same piston shape, same quench area). 8:1 would be what you'd get with eta pistons and an I head (different chamber/piston shapes, not a great idea). Secondly, if he does any milling to the head or the deck of the block, it's going to increase compression, not that 8.5:1 is significantly lower than a stock I motor. If he really wants power - it's a good envelope to be in for a decent turbo setup in the future. And of course it will be fresh.

The other good option is the 323 head you mentioned, but those are pretty damn hard to find without cracks, and the 885 head is still (slightly) superior. If he happened to have one lying around? sure, that'd be a good way to go. He wouldn't have to do anything, other than refresh the head and port match the intake. But it doesn't sound like that's what he's doing to me.

The alternative setup I was thinking of is the 84mm B28 crank, 130mm E rods, and stock i pistons - this results in good C/R (~9:1 or so) and gobs of torque (because of the low RR). I didn't mention it because josh's plan is just fine, it requires slightly more machine work and costs more.

There are lots of people using E85 with aftermarket ECUs - GM doesn't have a corner on this market at all. Other than flex fuel sensors (which you don't really need), all it really takes is a recalibration of the WBO2 sensor output for the different fuels. It's also easier to switch between them if you're using lambda output instead of AFR, since the WB controller takes care of the hard work (lambda is relative to the stoich ratio of your particular fuel). And finally if VE changes at all between different fuels, table switching is pretty easy - just flick a switch, and BAM! perfect tune. ;)

nando, please give heeter some slack, he would rather buy some POS E85 car then give 2 shits about how they are put together..

[rwh11385]

I didn't mention it much, Nando did. I simply began by saying I didn't care to find ways to teach an old dog new tricks and wanted a newer dog.

Ted, why sit idly by while someone spends more time thinking about headers than compression on an engine they are sinking money and time into?

[nando]

If he's building a 8.5:1 CR 2.7i, I fail to see the huge benefit for that over a 2.5i, besides torque around town. B25's sing fine on track.

Any easy options for infinite flexibility, not just on/off? Hmmmm. :p

I don't know, there are a lot of variations of hardware/firmware. I know the B&G MS2 code supports flex fuel, but to what extent? Setting your WB to lambda is a good start, as it will read stoich no matter what fuel you throw at it. I'm not interested in it though, otherwise I'd find somebody who's already done it with a flex fuel sensor for you (I'm sure there's at least one).

[rwh11385]

I just want to establish a plug and play application and show E85 mpg can be nearly as good as gas, and more fun. The more research and steps needed, the slower it can spread. ;)

Back to the subject of the thread...

[backtrail69]

PS I have NEVER seen an E85 filing stations within several hundred miles of my house... so me = no care.

[Jand3rson]

If he's building a 8.5:1 CR 2.7i, I fail to see the huge benefit for that over a 2.5i, besides torque around town. B25's sing fine on track.

The huge benefit here (at least on my end), is that I already have half of the engine, and it was 100% free. With 20k miles on the crank, block and rods. This is the cornerstone of why I'm doing a 2.7i build. I can always change things later. I see nothing wrong with starting out simple, and doing things in stages later.

So... could we take all this E85 bullshit to another thread, and possibly try to take this thread in a serious direction? I'm getting just as much if not more conflicting information in this thread than all the rest of the stroker build threads. I don't know if it was my fault or not, but I don't know how this thread got so unbelievably fuckered.

Please keep anything regarding M/S50's, E85, or whatever else to another forum/thread/intarweb. I'm not interested. I'm interested in gaining info on my build from those knowledgeable, and nothing more. I"m taking Heeter's advice and staying open to suggestions and advice on the build, and how to do it right. Please keep things on topic, or I'm just going to delete them.

[rwh11385]

Where'd z31 post go? More cc's and lower CR doesn't = badass engine.

This shows quite well why you should worry about compression ratio... and how a 2.5i could be better than a 8.5 C/R 2.7i:

http://www.r3vlimited.com/board/showpost.php?p=101967&postcount=22

The red is 2.8l 8.5:1 pistons with 19lb/hr injectors, stock engine management (8.0 C/R after larger head gasket I believe though)

those at equal to or below 2.5i numbers. the torque curve is flatter and better down low, but the top looks pretty much the same where you'd be using it. take it to a track and you might very well be behind in performance than a stocker b25 like i ran, especially if combined with a 4.10 to keep it in the sweet spot. you're not focused on putting around town and pulling from 2000 rpm, so the torque won't really help your use.

[rwh11385]

lowering CR with longer duration cam is the opposite of what you want. bump CR, and fix the cam timing with an offset pin if you need, and then you can make good use of a 284/272 or whatever cam. otherwise, don't waste your time with an aftermarket cam

you can get compression up to 9.5:1 if you shave the block & head, without causing timing issues. go stock minimums on the head, and ~.05" on the block. Seems like a small amount, but the combo will work. I'll look for the exact numbers tonight...

Sean ended up pussing out for only .015" decked

http://www.r3vlimited.com/board/showpost.php?p=222582&postcount=13

As you know, Jordan's 2.8 did well on the dyno, and he used 9.5:1 CR pistons, but those cost $900+.

http://www.r3vlimited.com/board/showpost.php?p=250184&postcount=17

Strokers made with super eta pistons are the way to go on a budget

Metric Mechanics sell the cam offset pin.

You don't need an adjustable cam gear. Just a offset cam gear pin. The pin locates the cam gear to a fixed spot on the cam end. Their website sucks, just call them.

Edit: I think what you want is the "dowel pin, offset" not sure tho.

that dyno graph should have helped to make my point about the concern of CR, if not... then just go with 8.5:1 and mediocre performance, and no matter how much you dump on bolt-ons, it won't make up for the small bit of $ to get the block decked...

[bimmer_E30]

would a 85 eta bottom end , fit with a 89+ head???

[backtrail69]

would a 85 eta bottom end , fit with a 89+ head???

Yea, but rather pointless unless you were boosted.

[bimmer_E30]

Yea, but rather pointless unless you were boosted.

how manny HP and tq would this combo make??? becuase i have a 89 e30 for parts and it has an engine in good conition.

[nando]

the same or less as an I engine really - torque probably comes sooner, but if the I motor is in good shape I would just put it in as it stands.