Just joined? Please introduce yourself.
Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: A/F ratio for E-10

  1. #1
    Registered Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2015

    Member #:2764
    Posts
    649

    A/F ratio for E-10

    Thought this may be handy for those not running pure gasoline.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Tony

    1955 Bel Air Sport Coupe

  2. #2
    Registered Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012

    Member #:571
    Posts
    4,671
    Good stuff. E15 should be on list, it's coming soon, may be here already in some locations. But its numbers aren't hard to figure out knowing E10 and E20.

  3. #3
    Registered Member chevynut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011

    Member #:115
    Location
    Fort Collins, CO
    Posts
    10,835
    Something is obviously wrong with that chart. E20 and E30 are the same.
    56 Nomad, Ramjet 502, Viper 6-speed T56, C4 Corvette front and rear suspension


    Other vehicles:

    56 Chevy 2-door BelAir sedan
    56 Chevy 210 4-door sedan
    57 Chevy 210 4-door sedan
    1962 327/340HP Corvette
    1961 Willys CJ3B Jeep
    2001 Porsche Boxster S
    2003 Chevy Silverado 2500 HD Duramax
    2019 GMC Sierra Denali Duramax

  4. #4
    Registered Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012

    Member #:571
    Posts
    4,671
    Whoops.

    The other thing is that the WOT AFR ratios are just an estimate, recommendation, or guideline. That will vary with the combination. And you may make more power leaner than that, question is how long can you run that lean at WOT.

    In another 10-20 years, we'll discuss all this in terms of lamba, instead of the actual AFR. Flipping it around, because it will be much more common to use a wideband, and lambda is what it actually measures.
    Last edited by Rick_L; 08-03-2018 at 06:50 PM.

  5. #5
    Registered Member chevynut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011

    Member #:115
    Location
    Fort Collins, CO
    Posts
    10,835
    I really wonder how accurate or applicable that chart is. Seeing errors like that really makes one question the whole thing imo.

    Going back to a prior debate, stoichiometric combustion produces the most power, period. Once all the oxygen is consumed you can't burn any more fuel.....that's a physical fact. The reason you enrichen the mixture under power is to help ensure that you get a full stoichiometric burn and to provide some cooling under high power operation to decrease the occurrence of detonation. The additional fuel used for cooling produces ZERO power. At an ideal 14.7 to 1 A/F ratio the probability that every gas molecule finds an oxygen molecule (or vice versa) in a couple of milliseconds is not 100%, therefore you don't get a stoichiometric burn. By adding some more fuel you increase the probability of every oxygen molecule "finding" a fuel molecule and being consumed in combustion.

    That IMO explains why you add more fuel under power. But a theoretical stoichiometric BURN ratio determines the maximum power (heat energy) you can get for a given mass or volume of air.
    56 Nomad, Ramjet 502, Viper 6-speed T56, C4 Corvette front and rear suspension


    Other vehicles:

    56 Chevy 2-door BelAir sedan
    56 Chevy 210 4-door sedan
    57 Chevy 210 4-door sedan
    1962 327/340HP Corvette
    1961 Willys CJ3B Jeep
    2001 Porsche Boxster S
    2003 Chevy Silverado 2500 HD Duramax
    2019 GMC Sierra Denali Duramax

  6. #6
    Registered Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2015

    Member #:2764
    Posts
    649
    Here is another one from Hot Rod magazine. I'll bet he's pouring water and not fuel! I just noticed it's missing a few divider lines, something with my screen capture program since the original has the lines there. Of course by now it's common knowledge that a lambda of 1 is not maximum power, as racers have known for some time now.
    Last edited by 55 Tony; 08-04-2018 at 07:36 AM.
    Tony

    1955 Bel Air Sport Coupe

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •