Max performance tuning a 3.5 EB between E-85 and 93 differences

I just found out I can get E85 pretty easily for my 2020 F-150 3.5 EB. I know there are strong gains from timing and cooling effects from the E85 but due to volume required, I may max out my fuel system earlier. The 93 is doing a decent job for knock retarding and I got decent gains with it currently. Has anyone fully tuned both options and knows what the difference is in max performances? I would love the less expensive gas and better timing but not if it will create limits that can be passed with 93. Anyone got some advice or insight?

I'm just interested in someone running E-85 with your exact vehicle. Does it work well? From looking at things it looks like all the info is there its just turned off for some reason. I have E-85 really close to me and would prefer running it honestly. With a 36 gallon tank I'm not really concerned with the lower mileage. I've read other threads where people have gotten it to work but I'm specifically interested in the 2020 F150 3.5.

Thx for reading and any insight you can give.

In our area, e85 isn't cheaper... You're running roughly 30% more fuel, so unless it costs 30% cheaper than 93, you're not saving anything... You're loosing more time because you have to fill up more frequently though! lol
Performance wise, the extra octane is nice for adding more timing, so even if you don't have any pump headroom for extra boost, you might be able to at least bump cylinder pressure limits a ton and let the timing system go nuts.

Could always drop on a HPFP from a flex fuel 3.5 and add more boost and timing though. :)

That?s the only downside. This engine isn?t a flex fuel so we?d have to at least get a high pressure in-tank pump. I?m afraid there would be a decent amount of upgrades needed due to stock fuel system being close to limited without the 30% additional requirement. I?ve been seeing people claim 15% performance increase after tuned but needed injectors and in-line pulp also. I also heard you can be running MBT for their spark table. I?m just trying to see comparisons for a full tuned 93 vs e85 with the incorporated costs, performance, and long-term effects.

You would need to install a 17-20 raptor fuel pump. Raptor pump can supply enough E85 to break your stock pistons and bend rods. You will also run out of fuel injectors. Option 1 is to limit total boost until injector limit is reached. Another is to install larger port injectors. Skip the HPFP and injectors, they are $$$. Significant HP gains with E85.

Don't need to touch the in-tank pump, just the HPFP.
Though the DI injectors are different, but the flow rate differences isn't drastic (160Lb/h vs 172Lb/h).

So one option is just swapping the in-tank raptor pump and limit fuel injectors. Any ideas on performance improvements with fueling limits?

Another option is to upgrade port injectors with raptor pump. Any idea if any fueling limits occur that way and does the port injector taking more load limit timing advancing? Anyone run this with performance numbers?

Yet another is that the HPFP could be upgraded but would the stock injectors limit?

Any ideas one pros and cons to each? It?s hard to find references since data is so limited on the subject.

Raptor pump low pressure pump will get you to 650 RWHP on E85. My truck is using the Raptor pump, E50 and I am at 42% duty cycle on a WOT run. Stock low pressure pump runs out on E30. Upgrade the low pressure pump and you can get to E50 and you will run out of fuel injectors. If you want to get more out of it, a set of ID850 or 1050X port injectors for $800 can well exceed what a stock engine can take. I like the larger port injectors because it is cleaning the carbon off the back side of the valves while you drive. Ethanol is a great cleaner. One thing to note. Port injection vs direct injection, DI will always make more power. In the case of the ecoboost, the fuel is not the limiting factor.

Thanks for the info. So just upgrading to the 400 GPH Raptor in-tank can handle E50 (1:1 E85 & 91-3) until you max out injectors. What performance do you think that gets (ballpark)? I’m assuming that’s what you are currently running and the options for the injectors are your next step of you decide to move upgrade again…?

If I had to guess it adds 50-75 HP over a 91 tune. I mix with E85 that tests at 70%. Its closer to 2.5 gallons of E to 1 gallon of pump gas. If it tests at 80% 1.5 gallons of E to pump gas.

I'm seriously considering switching to an E50 setup/tune. It seems like a nice gain could be made and with limited modifications with future upgrades possible. I was reading that you have to change Raptor pump voltage to run it as a direct swap and the rest would just be in the actual tuning. I'm assuming most of the changes are going to be in Lambda for the conversion to be stable and the rest would be regular performance tuning upgrades just like tuning a standard conventional gasoline tune...? I'm trying to prepare for everything I'll need and reference before getting the pump. And thanks for the info!

While I?m waiting for some input, I got a few other questions about it. If I enable the flex mode under fueling, does that automatically enable the computer to analyze the fuel for ethanol content and adjust stoich? Seems like HP might have made this a pretty easy crossover if so. I read that there isn?t much advantage over E-50?can anyone confirm?? Lastly, can you run any ethanol mix on the stock fuel system without running out of pressure due to the increased needed volume?

can we use a raptor hpfp on say a gen 1 3.5 eb?

Since yours is a gen one, I believe you need the high pressure pump and injectors in order to convert over since the injector angle is limited more than the pressure is. You don’t have the port injectors to take the overflow.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Perna00

While I?m waiting for some input, I got a few other questions about it. If I enable the flex mode under fueling, does that automatically enable the computer to analyze the fuel for ethanol content and adjust stoich? Seems like HP might have made this a pretty easy crossover if so. I read that there isn?t much advantage over E-50?can anyone confirm?? Lastly, can you run any ethanol mix on the stock fuel system without running out of pressure due to the increased needed volume?

---

I have tried enabling the stock flex tables and inputing 5.0 f150 values. Yes it does work. There is no way to add timing based off of ethanol content. None of the tuners will use it. Probably for good reason. I have heard that they do not trust it because it is using the fuel trims to determine ethanol content. On a 2017+ E30 max on stock fuel system. E50 and E85 can be done on stock pump, the boost must be reduced to keep the low pressure from dropping.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Davem3261

I have tried enabling the stock flex tables and inputing 5.0 f150 values. Yes it does work. There is no way to add timing based off of ethanol content. None of the tuners will use it. Probably for good reason. I have heard that they do not trust it because it is using the fuel trims to determine ethanol content. On a 2017+ E30 max on stock fuel system. E50 and E85 can be done on stock pump, the boost must be reduced to keep the low pressure from dropping.

---

Thanks for the response. So the ethanol logic only adjusts lambda based on the fuel trim…? Seems a bit non-precision for adjusting the main fuel air ratio. So that also means that the only way to get timing advantages is to change the main spark maps since it still reads from them and results wouldn’t be safeguarded if someone couldn’t get the E-30…? I assuming you would probably want to completely calibrate the VE tables for airflow and try to zero out fuel trims before enabling the “logic”? I’m currently running about 20 PSI so the max I could run is E-30 or lower the boost/swap out the LPFP if I wanted the higher E-ratings. Is there significant advantages to E-50/E-85 vs E3-30

I looked into the flex fuel info and see that enabled, it can change min/max AFR from 10.26-14.08 which is E10-E85. I’m assuming that will allow the truck to automatically adjust the AFR based on the alcohol % to stabilize the mix. I also saw that some say to increase the cold start fuel mass about 25% higher to ease starting. Lastly, is it possible to make timing gains based on flex fuel %? I seen you can adjust timing advance based on lambda but I’m not sure if the flex fuel simply adjusts the ratio for lambda conversion or changes the entire lambda number. If there isn’t a way to adjust timing, I’m assuming that gains will be significantly better making a dedicated tune for Ethanol versus using flex fuel logic…? Thanks for the info. I hope to start converting over soon.

I started the conversion and switched all the data over to be able to mix/fill up and test it out. The only info that was arguable between a few members was the O2 sensor bias tables for flex fuel vs standard gas. I compared a 5.0 flex and seen the two separate tables for the bias for flex va reg. Because of that, I adjusted my regular to flex fuel bias number to reflect the same changes. One member said to keep the regular and flex the same but unless my logic is wrong, they should be different proportionally since the 5.0 flex is…anyone have an input? Not much info on the matter online.

I just copied from the normal to the flex map...
In theory, the ethanol will cause a slightly different O2 reading than E0 (added O2, cooler EGT, other chemicals, etc), but it's likely such a minor difference that it's not worth tuning.
Could also be that Ford used higher values in the FFV tables for added richness for more combustion stability in colder weather (worst case type of deal) and let ST/LT fuel trim work out the fine tuning.

I actually ended up changing the values towards the deviation in the other 5.0 tables. Most were very minor such as +/- .001 through .009 so very minimal but still scaling the effects from the alcohol versus regular fuel. I ended getting 12 gallons of E85 and mixed with the remaining 24 gallons of 93. I instantly gained about 50 torque without any other changes from my 93 tune I had. I am running dangerously close (or what I believe is) to running out of fuel. I am low on my lift pump pressure and fuel rail pressure. I did change to a 90% warm blend prior to this so maybe I'll need to run it lower and increase the pump to the raptor pump before running heavy again. I couldn't get an AFR ratio to show on my channels. I was hoping to see what it read as stoic so that I could see what E mix it was calculating. Check out my file and see what you guys think. It's just a basic WOT run on an open road so nothing really technical.
Attachment 130480