[White1SS]

Thanks for the info guys ! Everything points to E as the way to go, everything from NA to 8+psi boost. It's just going to be a real pain obtaining it in my area.


A couple more questions:


Does a stock Camaro LT1 read gasoline octane and adjust timing like it would with a Flex Fuel set-up ? Would a stock car have slightly more power with 94 over 91?


Would the same stock LT1 have slightly more power running an oxygenated fuel ? Would the ECU push more fuel to match the added oxygen content in the fuel, or would it likely just run lean ?

[White1SS]

Originally Posted by JANNETTYRACING

Yep, 11 is my go to on 93 octane pump gas.

Ballpark, what kind of whp could be safely achieved with 11*/93 , or maybe even 12*/ 94 with a M6 car ?

[JANNETTYRACING]

Originally Posted by White1SS

Thanks for the info guys ! Everything points to E as the way to go, everything from NA to 8+psi boost. It's just going to be a real pain obtaining it in my area.


A couple more questions:


Does a stock Camaro LT1 read gasoline octane and adjust timing like it would with a Flex Fuel set-up ? Would a stock car have slightly more power with 94 over 91?


Would the same stock LT1 have slightly more power running an oxygenated fuel ? Would the ECU push more fuel to match the added oxygen content in the fuel, or would it likely just run lean ?

Again, it is the way to go providing it is convenient, we don't want to limit your vehicle use due to lack of fuel availability.

The computer can not sense higher octane than it is tuned for nor can it sense oxygen content.

If you wanted to take advantage of race gas it should be tuned on that race gas then run on it all the time.

Ted.

[JANNETTYRACING]

Originally Posted by White1SS

Ballpark, what kind of whp could be safely achieved with 11*/93 , or maybe even 12*/ 94 with a M6 car ?

580-600 RWHP

[Eldi Z]

Originally Posted by JANNETTYRACING

580-600 RWHP

93 @ 7 PSI using the 1700 LT4 stock blower, LT4 fueling?

What about commanding LT4 injectors PW ? Max. 5.5 ms @~ 6K-RPM ? Or is more ms possible / desirable while still staying safe and keeping the mix burn efficient enough?

[JANNETTYRACING]

Originally Posted by Eldi Z

93 @ 7 PSI using the 1700 LT4 stock blower, LT4 fueling?

What about commanding LT4 injectors PW ? Max. 5.5 ms @~ 6K-RPM ? Or is more ms possible / desirable while still staying safe and keeping the mix burn efficient enough?

At 580 RWHP you won't be any where near max opening time.

We don't command the pulse width/Opening time.

The air flow determines the fuel calculation and the computer commands the fuel delivery.

When the air flow exceeds a certain power level on pump gas you exceed 6 ms.

LT4 injectors will support about 840 RWHP on gasoline at .82 Lambda.

[Eldi Z]

Originally Posted by JANNETTYRACING

At 580 RWHP you won't be any where near max opening time.

We don't command the pulse width/Opening time.

The air flow determines the fuel calculation and the computer commands the fuel delivery.

When the air flow exceeds a certain power level on pump gas you exceed 6 ms.

LT4 injectors will support about 840 RWHP on gasoline at .82 Lambda.

Thanks for explaining Ted.
So in order to safely achieve the ~ 580 WHP figure on 93, will 7 PSI of boost suffice? If the answer is yes, what should the Ign. timing look like? Which kind of Lambda A/F should be expected? I guess that anything over 12.0 means entering the danger zone?

[JANNETTYRACING]

Originally Posted by Eldi Z

Thanks for explaining Ted.
So in order to safely achieve the ~ 580 WHP figure on 93, will 7 PSI of boost suffice? If the answer is yes, what should the Ign. timing look like? Which kind of Lambda A/F should be expected? I guess that anything over 12.0 means entering the danger zone?

I am not sure if you are asking what I will provide, or what someone else is providing.

It will take at least 8 psi to make 580 in my experience.

We target .82 Lambda

Timing varies with load not a fixed number.

Ted.

[Eldi Z]

Thanks Ted. I was indeed referring to your experience.
OK, so 8 PSI should be the boost figure to aim for if the desired WHP on 93 should be around 580.
Regarding timing: Shouldn't it be at least set not to advance over a certain degree?

[JANNETTYRACING]

Originally Posted by Eldi Z

Thanks Ted. I was indeed referring to your experience.
OK, so 8 PSI should be the boost figure to aim for if the desired WHP on 93 should be around 580.
Regarding timing: Shouldn't it be at least set not to advance over a certain degree?

That is the professional tuners responsibility to determine that every car is different to some degree.

Ted.

[Eldi Z]

Originally Posted by JANNETTYRACING

That is the professional tuners responsibility to determine that every car is different to some degree.

Ted.

[cjperformance]

I would think roughly in the 10-13 degrees max area for 93 octane and 8 psi. But as noted, you cant really do a final dial in without some testing. And it is not a static number, varies by load. There a full map of ignition timing across different loads, and many modifier tables too.

[18.2SS.1LE]

I was in the same boat as you and shooting for 600 whp. Ultimately I decided to add a cam, which not only adds a ton of power but more headroom on the high side with the 38% fuel lobe. I have made a couple of changes and always run boostane for 98+ octane at 15 degrees of timing at 12 psi. I'm still on the stock bottom end and haven't shown this car any mercy with no issues so far. The original tune from CSP where it dyno'd 722 whp was completely out of fuel... Jannetty got me dialed in with the extra fueling and I tweaked a little at my own risk (+ 2 degrees and a little maf scaling) from there but the car runs much faster than when I originally got it back.

[Eldi Z]

Originally Posted by 18.2SS.1LE

I was in the same boat as you and shooting for 600 whp. Ultimately I decided to add a cam, which not only adds a ton of power but more headroom on the high side with the 38% fuel lobe. I have made a couple of changes and always run boostane for 98+ octane at 15 degrees of timing at 12 psi. I'm still on the stock bottom end and haven't shown this car any mercy with no issues so far. The original tune from CSP where it dyno'd 722 whp was completely out of fuel... Jannetty got me dialed in with the extra fueling and I tweaked a little at my own risk (+ 2 degrees and a little maf scaling) from there but the car runs much faster than when I originally got it back.

Very interesting. So if you had decided to remain with the 600 WHP target, do you think it could have been done (or maybe you validated this WHP figure on the dyno when it was still on CSP's tune?) without adding the cam at 93 and at lower boost levels of ~ 8 PSI ?