in 9 months of using bio none of my rubber hoses are leaking, these are checked regularly, one piece of rubber hose was left in a can of bio at rcm for matt to check i think it swelled to 0.005 (or something like that) so, as far as my car is concerned i wont be having the remaining rubber hoses replaced.

 

Good luck !

 

I have been running 10% methanol in my car for about 2 and a half years and not had a single issue with any of the rubber hoses.

Also there is a little bit of leeway with the mixture, it does not have to be exact unless it is mapped right to the edge.

The mapper should always leave a little room for the mixture either way and that is exactly what I found with my car each time Simon has mapped it.

Banny

 

evo's are what 10k more out the box than scoobs? have better brakes, better spec etc etc.

To change from a top mount to a front mount they will have to redesign the intake system.

so its not financialy viable to do so

 

no luck involved, only whats "proven" goes on my car

 

Bio needs to be seperated from methanol as the latter is much less user friendly and is in fact poisenous and can be absorbed by the skin. This doesn't stop me using the stuff but I take great care useing gloves and a well ventelated area when metreing it out.
The missus isn't fully informed but then thats about par on all scooby related subjects
Trev

 

Stealthy55,
It has been known to cause issues.... I am sure that is all David is highlighting. My injector o-rings ballooned and also part of the fuel lines did, when I used E85 at the **** end of 2008. I got shot down in flames when I announced this. It happened on mine, but has not happened on others.... the fact remains it still happened.

 

shaun, seems strange that some do and some dont? i assume all rubber is the same? i asked dynamix at "sso" if he had any problems running 100% his answer was no and he had done similar tests, how long did it take for your o-rings to balloon and what % did you use? i have no problems on 100% so i can only go on that, though if anything does rot or balloon i will let you know

 

E85 had been run for about a week iirc. I can't remember if it was 20 or 40%.... I am pretty sure it was 20%. I know it all sounds strange that some do and some don't, but even Richard Bulmer said he has known it to do it before, even before he witnessed it on mine. Apparantly when he took the injectors out, the o-ring virtually fell off them.

Now... I have no idea what the compound was for the o-rings or specifically which bit of fuel line had ballooned (whether this was OE or had been already swapped previously).

 

all fuel lines in my engine bay are braided, its only around the fuel tank area which is normal tube, that is supposed to be a major job to replace, but im hoping it would of gone by now if it was going to.

 

Between the tank and the metal fuel lines at the back it is all Aeroquip on mine. I never had any issues at the rear. In the engine bay, it is a mix of Aeroquip and rubber lines, but which ones of the rubber lines are OE or aftermarket I don't know (some may of been changed when the new engine was originally put in, during 2007).

Anyway regardless of what happened with me, yours and others seem to be fine.

 

lol at your ballooning o-rings again Shaun. Are you going to mention how your fuel rails disintegrated again - or would that be some iffy brazed fittings

No problems running E85 at mixtures of ranging from 20% right through to 100% for around 18 months now. O-rings are just beautiful, all hoses are just perfect ... in fact everything is sweet in the fuel hose system on my car. I am running 100% OE pipe work from tank through to engine. Prior to swapping to parallel rails I was running 100% standard fuel lines in the engine bay too. Now they are braided but not even the teflon lined ones.

Are you sure they were shot when they went in Shaun ? were they checked prior to the temporary switch to E85 mix? I would be looking down that route first.

Anyway - thought this thread was about intercoolers ??

 

Duncan,
What I have said are the facts of what happened or was found. I have nothing against E85.... but I think it is quite strange that as soon as E85 went in, rails failed and lines ballooned. The injector o-rings could of been mullered before perhaps. One thing being found OK... but surely not three and all to do with fueling. Whether or not any of this was to actually do with the E85 is not 100% conclusive. Rails could of been a weak point and E85 finally gave them the push to bin. Who knows.

Anyway... plenty of people have and are using E85 and all sorts of additives, without issues. Perhaps mine was an isolated case and perhaps it has nothing to do with E85 and was all about the wind blowing north and the sun at 3 o'clock.

I only commented off the back of what David @ API said to stealthy.

 

I thought we had 100% established that the rails that were at fault - hence why they were replaced FOC. Something to do with them being brazed by an outside engineer to a substandard basis.

Yours is the only case I have heard of in the UK - you are obviously 'special'

 

You mentioned the rails first this time around, not me. I never mentioned them for the exact reason that you have stated. Yes... the rails were faulty, but again, had run 100% fine for nearly 2yrs on VPower, but the substandard brazing showed it's head within days of E85. Coincidance..... probably. Proven..... no. Something that Richard Bulmer mentioned was that E85 could disolve any flux that VPower may not, iirc. Obviously if flux is the only thing stopping the fuel from pissing out, then yes, you would state they were substandard. If that was the case (which appears to of been and again the reason why I never said anything THIS time round), then you would logically suggest that this is not the norm and was due to other factors, i.e. nothing to do with E85. Again, the reason why I didn't mention it.

So are you clear now why I didn't mention the fuel rails?

 

Thanks David. I'm in the process of getting some now so will double check with them.
Is there some sort of rating they should be for a liquid like meth?
Thanks again for the input mate.

stealthy55, I see where your coming from and I too would keep the standard pipes on mine but I ma taking the manifold off anyway so doing the changes at the same time etc.
Even if I put braided on , the first sign or weakness I see in the pipe work the car will be taken off the road and the pipe work removed and meth drained out the tank as my kids will be going in my car a few times a week. It's food for thought for me personally thats all.


Steve

 

Well,

After just over a month I am now going FMIC & Simtek.

My current STi7 TMIC is pretty much maxed out at 411bhp . So may aswell get the FMIC out of my system.
Where and how much for a good version?

Anyone on a MD321T on a 2.0ltr (AVCS) can give me honest feedback on what it feels like with a FMIC over a TMIC?

Car is for everyday use with dual carridgeways and then the odd Motorway some days.

Steve

 

Ok,

Now the change has taken place and the car has been used on a few tanks worth since the FMIC has been added.

I can confirm the difference between TMIC - FMIC even on the MD321T for a 2.0ltr there is no difference what so ever in terms of lag. Some of that maybe the Simtek ECU as it holds boost a lot better etc.

Still looking at fitting the ACT gague I got from Harvey some time ago. Also the HDi kit from Harvey is a great bit of kit. May I suggest reading up on the instructions before hand though as the ones that the kit comes with are not very good at all.

Steve

 

i think it would of been better to fit the act gauge while had tmic then switch to fmic. mistke i done to see the diferences

 

Seddomyster. Yes that is the way to do it so you can compare before and after results which are very interesting.
Thanks for the feedback Steve. Assistance here with fitting the FMIC always available and by phone if needs be.
Great feedback. Thanks. I think lag being caused by fitting an FMIC is either a particularly crap designed FMIC kit, crap mapping or some other cause like an uppipe the size of the Birkenhead tunnel. Unfortunately this is another myth that some people perpetuate.

 

Seddomyster : Did you do before and after results and what where they and what are your observations ?

 

Thought I'd put up my results with the ACT gauge I bought from Harvey a

couple of weeks ago, I am running and STI top mount version 3/4 and the

sensor is has been drilled and tapped into the TMIC underneath, I assume to

get the best reading, the temperatures I have been getting can be quite

shocking, turning it on about 7am the last few days, the lowest

temperature has been 12 degrees, rising to 16 before I get to work, all off

boost, on a fairly warm day the average temperature ranges from 21 to25

degrees. Turning it on again shortly after stopping and the highest

temp I have was 50- something, dropping down gradually while moving.

Taking it for a blast up to 6k revs and the temp's ride to 40+ degrees

 

thought I'd add, I bought the gauge to keep an eye on the car over the summer, instead of going striaght out and getting a fmic, the things stopping me getting a fmic is, the cost of a fmic, fitting and mapping, the cost of the extra insurance, which is bad enough as it is, and the fact the engine is on approx 127,000 and needs a leaking gasket replacing!

 

still going strong, no problems what so ever

 

This is very interesting Stealthy.

Sabas : We normally refer to air charge temperatures as "X" degrees over the ambient. My experience on an STi 3 at 335 bhp was that you could easily get 50 degrees over ambient with the OE top mount on a WOT sprint from rest to over 100 mph.

 

Harvey I will post my results when I get my map tweaked tomorrow to accomadate the fmic, as you know I was getting 20+ deg above ambient on a short blast and 30+ deg above ambient with prolonged boost with the Sti8 tmic. This is on a 2006 hawkeye wrx, vf43 turbo and running 340 bhp / 380 lbft.
Will let you know the temps with the fmic soon.

 

Hi Stu, this is the hard core owner feedback that other Subaru enthusaists need so we are dealing with facts and actual observations and not "I read it somewhere"

 

Agree - will be interesting to see what the actual differences are.

 

Here is a little test i have done recently.

Sti 4 type R.

Classic Hyperflow TMIC

Left is air before it goes into the airbox. Right is just before the throttle body.

Picture taken just before a 3rd gear run to 7500 rpm.



Just after run. 11.5 C over ambient.



As you can see on the avcr below peak of 1.7bar.

MD321 turbo running approx 450hp



Also been running 9% methanol mix in the tank for 2.5 years. All hoses appear unaffected

 

so in one run it gone up 50%, mmm so much for efficient top mounts lol