Came across the AFM adaptor for CAI if anyone is interested..KO Racing.

Been having some good results here with this, well after ditching a 50/50 mix, then also 40/60 and now tuning for 30E/70. I've come to the conclusion that is about the limit where a blend is concerned, as the combined benefits of the E compound knock tolerance beyond the actual calculated value, then start to dwindle as you get closer to the E as the dominant fuel, and get locked into the actual RON/MON rating of the E85. Also ditched a comparison ULP 98 tune on the second set of maps, and settled for a safe street tune, as there's simply no comparison.
(don't think of running a 30% blend on a stock ECU, it's well over the power limit of the stock injectors!)
No evidence of E problems, either RON consistency, contamination or fuel system damage, and the car sits all week with a full tank.
Anyone running 10-20%E on a JDM stock ECU - you can raise static advance to 12deg BTDC safely to gain more performance, provided your not at the limit of your stock injectors.
Anyone running a APFC 10%E will keep any knock issues in check and allow you to add in more advance for torque and power, provided your EFI/AFR's are in check.
 
 
 
 
 

Would there be more of a benefit in running E in a later model car not using an AFM? Are the modern fuel systems able to cope with the added ethanol?

Good question..
The primary load sensor, either AFM or MAP won't make any difference as there's no change to metered air flow, it's all happening in the combustion chamber.
Any engine that's knock limited will show some benefit, but more so forced induction or high compression engines. The reason it works so well on a 3SGTE is because of the stock ECU timing curve making the engine excessively knock limited on ULP98, and also the dual Ign/EFI adjustment strategy when low level knock is detected by the ECU.. ie adding fuel and reducing advance. Take away the knock, and it simply doesn't happen. On top of that the ECU also adds fuel to limit thermal efficiency (edit), and reduce combustion temps.
So you can see where the gains are, so any similarly designed management system would see a similar level of performance gains.
 
As for being E proof, things aren't quite so clear. There's been a systematic attemp to 'future proof' cars over a number of years with ethanol being an ever present certainty, but unknown implementation date, no doubt to make older cars backwards compatible with ethanol enhanced fuel, and newer ones compatible with higher levels of E, which is already on the table (E15/E25). What level is safe, and what level will cause problems? no idea.
You can only go on reliable results from actual users as most concerns seem to be unfounded. When you look at cars, including 2's, that have been converted to E85 and have been running without major issues for several years on basically stock fuel systems, you get some insight into what are real issues and what's not.
Your already running E in your ULP98 (5%), in the US 94 (10%), and soon you just won't have any option but 10% in anything. Trouble is with pump fuel the MON and O2 content is mandated and capped. Suppliers use the E content to raise the RON rating back to the advertised level, so basically 98 + 5%E is still 98, same as they've done with 91 E10. On top of that, blending by the suppliers instead of the oil refineries is a worry as who's to say the E content isn't likely to exceed 10% (there's money in E).
At this point in time, splash blending E85 into ULP98 avoids most of the issues, but down the track things don't look quite so straight forward..one thing is for sure, E is here to stay. 

Okay, I got 90% of that but I don't really understand how adding fuel limits boost - I thought that was done with the wastegate?
 
Re: E in ULP98  - I don't think here in SA, that is the case. Doesn't there have to be signage by law stating the amount of E on the pump? I'll be dammed if there is any in BP Ultimate too (which I prefer to use). But in NSW/QLD things are probably different. 
Also interesting note that in my manual for my Honda CBR600 it says you can use up to 10% ethanol...
 

 
Whats MTBE anyway??

Probably not the best term I could have used, obviously can't reduce exhaust flow, but the fuel dumping at higher boost/higher revs limits combustion efficiency, VE and impacts turbo efficiency, at that point with a ct26, manifold pressure is rising rapidly and generating excess heat.
MTBE is an ether based octane enhancer used widely as a lead replacement in fuel over many years. Now banned in the US due to ground water contamination, but used freely in Europe.
The gov gave the oil companies free licence to add 5% without disclosure at the pump some years ago. Maybe I'm a bit cynical, but i think a subsidy of ~45c per liter looks very attractive.
I think they refer to it as fuel extender in the industry.
 
 

A bit of an update on pumps.
I've now looked at 3 pump failures running %E. None of them MR2's, and it's a bit different replacing a pump in a nissan or subaru etc, than the pita it is with a 2.
In these cases all were stock pumps, all reasonably high mileage and all running 10%.
In each case the tanks were spotless internally (one a composite tank) and the hoses appeared to be fine.
 
When the filters were removed and reverse flushed, there was a considerable amount of black residue in them. This residue is soluble in both E and ULP. Now this isn't anything new, I've seen this in filters running straight ULP before. It doesn't appear to be dissolved varnish or gum residue, and is consistent in color and appearance. If it was in the tank, or in solution in the ULP, it obviously is fine enough in texture to pass through the pump filter screen but not the fuel filter. I think the pumps have simply died from pumping into excessively high line pressures pre filter...and if that's the case, there would be a drop in fuel delivery pressure at the rail some point prior to the pump failing..obviously meaning leaner AFR's.
 
I think it's more likely to be the stock hoses degrading internally causing this issue, and the E is accelerating the process. Next time I get the opportunity I'll section one of the hoses. Good reason, if your running E, to replace the filter now and do it more often..or fit a larger filter, until you can replace the hoses with E compatible ones, even on 10%. Simply not worth taking the chance of a pump failure, let alone running lean under boost due to a plugged filter.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Looking at running my evo 8 on straight E85, have some FIC 1050cc injectors, just gotta work out what pump I want to use with them.  When I get around to it I will update this thread with any details I find along the way.

James, on the evo you will find the walbro 255lph pump will support up to around 220wkw easily, and with a slight bump in base fuel pressure 240wkw. walbro 400lph pumps do not fit properly in the stock sender assembly, and the deatsch and aeromotive fuel pumps will support around the same as walbro, give or take 10kw.
 
The FIC injectors will make the car idle like a busted arse if you are doing a reflash (tephra mod etc) and have a fairly standard car.

Not too keen on the aeromotive or deatsh pumps.  I've just got a walbro 255 on the way, its a daily driver, I dont want to go hacking up the pump mount etc.  I'll only be using stock 8 turbo so won't be shooting for the moon.  
 
I've already got one car in parts in the garage, I don't need two :)