# Toluene, so far, so good



## kismetcapitan (Nov 25, 2005)

ah finally, ran some toluene today. It smells, well, good  Clear as water and smells like model airplane glue from my youth. Put in enough to make about a 15% blend, and...

-car runs very smoothly, better than before at idle and all around
-throttle response improved
-PFC knock down from peaks of 30 to peaks of 19

due to economics, I will keep raising the percentage until it won't fire. I have only been able to run 1.25 bar boost, as I still have boost control issues, so I won't test it at full boost quite yet.

Keep in mind that Korean gas is crap - cars mapped for Japanese 100RON run poorly on Korean 100RON. The toluene here, I got from a chemical feedstock supply company (not from paint supply), and they rate it at 99.8% purity.

For octane boost, a few ounces of NF booster would probably do just as well, but a large bucket of toluene has the added benefit of taking up 1/3 of the fuel tank at the same price as a bottle of NF


----------



## Andyswad (Jan 5, 2005)

Its going to go bang again you know, be carefull


----------



## Nocturnal (Nov 5, 2004)

People say I was brave modifing my car the way I wanted.....

I am nowhere near you!!! :bowdown1: 

Good stuff, hope it all goes well.


----------



## kismetcapitan (Nov 25, 2005)

Andyswad said:


> Its going to go bang again you know, be carefull


I've looked at this from many angles, and frankly, I can't see how it could make things go bang - toluene is less explosive, burns more slowly in the combustion chamber. Stoich is lower, around 11:1, and I need to add a pinch of lubricant for safety's sake to lube the upper cylinder walls.

The problems with toluene are:
-depending on the country, expense
-misfiring at high concentrations, unless the fuel is preheated
-in some countries, purchasers are monitored (in the US, on suspicion of if you're cooking methamphetamines, and in Australia, if you're trying to avoid fuel taxes by buying petrol bulked out with tax-free toluene.

Testing, EGT and knock monitoring, some ignition tweaking maybe. I want to make this work but only if it really doesn't throw things off. Knock traces are ten points lower and generally smoother in character. Next batch will run 20% toluene, then 25%. In theory at least, at that point I'll have 105RON fuel, that, by aromatic hydrocarbon content, still meets the definition of "gasoline", is unleaded, and will have reduced fuel sensitivity (the differential between RON and MON). I've settled on Redline fuel injector cleaner and lubricant as my additive.

The car runs smoother, no other word to describe it. The missus noticed it immediately without it being pointed out to her. We took the long way home as that 3000rpm drone in 5th gear is significantly attenuated, and we had a great chat.

Plus, Buddhist beads hang from the rearview mirror. Touching them before a hard pull ensures good results and long life


----------



## kismetcapitan (Nov 25, 2005)

toluene isn't a new idea by any stretch of the imagination. Is it really so daring to spike my fuel with a homebrew recipe?? I just want good race gas all the time so that I can push the car without worries.

But no one around here runs it. Everyone says the same thing - "toluene...ah, you mean, like in tri-nitro-toluene. TNT. You're nuts."


----------



## Hugh Keir (Jul 25, 2001)

kismetcaptain,

From memory Toluene is 116 RON, so you are unlikely to need any additional octane boost.

Stoichiometric is 14.7 to 1 not 11 :1.

Good power on Toluene will be in the 11 : 1 / 12 : 1 air / fuel ratio range.

Cheers

Hugh


----------



## ExScoobyT (Jan 6, 2004)

Whats going to make it go bang are the fact your driving with a non-functional FPR and boost control (Unless you`ve fixed it??????)


----------



## kingsley (Aug 26, 2002)

Hugh, he meant that stoich with toluene is approx 11:1, not petrol. Is toluene's stoich in fact 14.7:1 like petrol? I'm not a chemist ...


----------



## kismetcapitan (Nov 25, 2005)

ExScoobyT said:


> Whats going to make it go bang are the fact your driving with a non-functional FPR and boost control (Unless you`ve fixed it??????)


I'm not driving on boost, and it's slowly getting closer to being sorted. Like, fuel pressure doesn't fall anymore. It just...stays at where it's set. So I set it to 4 bar and the car's in the shop all weekend with orders to "figure the damned thing out".


----------



## GT-R Glenn (Nov 9, 2002)

Toulene
R+M/2...114
Cost...$2.50/gal
Mixtures with 92 Octane Premium
10%...94.2 Octane
20%...96.4 Octane
30%...98.6 Octane
Notes: Common ingredient in Octane Boosters in a can. 12-16 ounces will only raise octane 2-3 *points*, I.e. from 92 to 92.3. Often costs $3-5 for 12-16 ounces, when it can be purchased for less than $3/gal at chemical supply houses or paint stores.


Rocket fuel FAQ
Copyright ã 1999,2000 by Eliot Lim This paper may be freely distributed, provided it is distributed in its entirety
Last revised by Eliot Lim: February 8, 2000
Last augmented by Charles Smith: January 6, 2003


Background

In late 1997 I became the lucky owner of 1 out of 150 1998 Porsche 993 Targas, the very last of the air cooled classics. As I drove it through the winter of 1997 and into the spring of 1998 I noticed that the engine lost some of its sweetness. Since this behavior was strongly related to ambient and engine temperature I suspected that the engine electronics were retarding its ignition timing due to insufficient fuel octane.

I started experimenting with octane boosting by first adding small doses of over the counter octane boosters and noticed immediate improvement. The engine ran smoother and quieter, was more willing to rev and had noticeably sharper throttle response. The octane shortage was confirmed by the sticker on the filler cap that stated that 93 octane fuel was needed. Since the highest octane rated fuel that was commonly available in Washington state is 92, I decided to investigate long term cost effective octane boosting so that I could fully enjoy the performance that this car offered.

My other car at the time, a 1990 Audi V8 quattro had an even more dramatic response to octane boosting. I managed to convince a few good friends to try it and the reaction was overwhelmingly positive. When I attempted a broader based dissemination of this exciting find, I was greeted largely by broad unyielding skepticism and plenty of FUD (fear, uncertainty, doubt) regarding toxicity, safety and engine damage. There arose a need to more clearly explain the details of octane boosting, hence giving rise to this article.


Q: Will my car benefit from octane boosting?

A: Consumer organizations have effectively emphasized the larger markups that oil companies charge for high octane gasoline, implying that for most vehicles higher octane fuel is a complete waste of money. It has been quite a long time since the consumer alert was issued. Since then engine technology has evolved greatly, while people's perceptions generally have not.

Modern vehicles now use computerized engine management systems that can react to engine knock and retard ignition timing if low octane fuel is being used. Consequently cars are now being manufactured with very high compression ratios that appear to give good fuel economy and at the same time good performance. This combination does assume that fuel of adequate octane is being used.


Q: Why bother to boost octane at all since my engine can run just fine on lower octane fuel?

A: For a high compression engine to run on low octane fuel, the engine management system will need to retard the ignition timing to prevent preignition or pinging. Retarding the ignition timing means that the firing of the spark plug is delayed until a later moment in the compression stroke. It does not take much to see that a later onset of combustion means that the combustion is less complete, which in turn mean less power and poorer fuel economy. It is possible that the casual driver will still come out ahead in terms of saving money by using low octane fuel, but the retarded ignition advance also means a rougher running engine and a much duller throttle response. Thus octane boosting is not necessarily of interest to all motorists but rather the enthusiasts.

For turbocharged or supercharged engines, insufficient octane will also lead the engine management system to curtail the amount of boost which in turn defeats the purpose of these engines.


Q: How did you discover using toluene?

A: Someone came across a web page that described various DIY home brew octane booster formulas. One of which used toluene as its main ingredient. As a Formula 1 racing fan of many years, I recalled that toluene was used extensively in the turbo era in the 1980s by all the Formula 1 teams. The 1.5 liter turbocharged engines ran as much as 5 bars of boost (73 psi) in qualifying and 4 bars (59 psi) in the actual race. Power output exceeded 1500bhp, which translates into 1000bhp/liter, an astronomical figure.

A motorsports journalist, Ian Bamsey, was able to obtain Honda's cooperation for his book "McLaren Honda Turbo, a Technical Appraisal". The book documents the key role that the toluene fuel played in allowing these tiny engines to run so much turbo boost without detonation. The term "rocket fuel" originated from the Formula 1 fraternity as an affectionate nickname to describe its devastating potency. Thus I concluded that I should focus my research on using toluene for my octane boosting project.

Individuals with good long term memory will recall that when unleaded gasoline was first introduced, only low octane grades were available. While it is not entirely clear that high octane super unleaded gas came about as a result of the advances in fuel technology in Formula 1, there is every reason to suspect that this is indeed the case, since many of the major oil companies were involved in the escalating race to develop increasingly potent racing fuel during this era.


Q: Why do you think toluene is better than other types of octane boosters?

A: Several reasons:

Mindful of the evil reputation of octane boosters in general, toluene is a very safe choice because it is one of the main octane boosters used by oil companies in producing ordinary gasoline of all grades. Thus if toluene is indeed harmful to your engine as feared, your engine would have disintegrated long, long ago since ordinary pump gasoline can contain as much as 50% aromatic hydrocarbons.

Toluene is a pure hydrocarbon (C7H8). i.e. it contains only hydrogen and carbon atoms. It belongs to a particular category of hydrocarbons called aromatic hydrocarbons. Complete combustion of toluene yields CO2 and H2O. This fact ensures that the entire emission control system such as the catalyst and oxygen sensor of your car is unaffected. There are no metallic compounds (lead, magnesium etc), no nitro compounds and no oxygen atoms in toluene. It is made up of exactly the same ingredients as ordinary gasoline. In fact it is one of the main ingredients of gasoline.

Toluene has a RON octane rating of 121 and a MON rating of 107, leading to a (R+M)/2 rating of 114. (R+M)/2 is how ordinary fuels are rated in the US. Note that toluene has a sensitivity rating of 121-107=14. This compares favorably with alcohols which have sensitivities in the 20-30 range. The more sensitive a fuel is the more its performance degrades under load. Toluene's low sensitivity means that it is an excellent fuel for a heavily loaded engine.

Toluene is denser than ordinary gasoline (0.87 g/mL vs. 0.72-0.74) and contains more energy per unit volume. Thus combustion of toluene leads to more energy being liberated and thus more power generated. This is in contrast to oxygenated octane boosters like ethanol or MTBE which contain less energy per unit volume compared to gasoline. The higher heating value of toluene also means that the exhaust gases contain more kinetic energy, which in turn means that there is more energy to drive turbocharger vanes. In practical terms this is experienced as a faster onset of turbo boost.

Chevron's published composition of 100 octane aviation fuel shows that toluene comprises up to 14% alone and is the predominant aromatic hydrocarbon. Unfortunately composition specifications for automotive gasoline is harder to pin down due to constantly changing requirements.

Chevron's web site also describes the problems of ethanol being used in gasoline.

MTBE was heavily touted as a clean additive several years ago, and became a key ingredient in reformulated gasoline that is sold in California. But recently new studies arose that showed that MTBE was far more toxic than previously imagined. Organizations such as oxybusters have formed around the country to eliminate the use of MTBE in gasoline and several states, including California have passed new laws to eventually outlaw MTBE.


Q: How much toluene should I use per tank of gas?

A: Octane ratings can be very easily calculated by simple averaging. For example, the tank of an Audi A4 1.8TQ is 15.6 gallons. Filling it with 14.6 gallons of 92 octane and 1 gallon of toluene (114 octane) will yield a fuel mix of:

(14.6 * 92) + (1 * 114) / 15.6 = 93.4

The Audi A4 1.8T is a good example of a car that has very high octane needs if it has been modified to produce more turbo boost. The base compression ratio of this car is a very high 9.5:1 and when an additional 1 bar (14.7 psi) of turbo boost is applied on top of it, the resulting effective compression ratio is way beyond what 92 or 93 octane fuel can ever hope to cope with. Most modified 1.8Ts running without octane enhancement are running with severely retarded ignition timing and boost.


Q: Will toluene damage my engine or other parts of my car?

A: A 5 or 10% increase in the aromatic content of gas will most likely be well within the refining specifications of gasoline defined by ASTM D4814, which specify an aromatic content of between 20% and 45%. What this means is that if the 92 octane gas that you started off with had an aromatic content of say 30% and you increased it by 10% to 40% you would still be left with a mix that meets the industry definition of gasoline. So the above question would amount to: "Will gasoline damage my engine or other parts of my car?"

Even in the unlikely event that the 92 octane gas has a aromatic content of 45% the resulting mix would still be within the bounds of gasoline sold in other countries.


Q: Isn't toluene an extremely toxic substance?

A: The common perception of toluene's toxicity far exceeds reality. Fortunately there is an ample body of information available that specifically addresses this question. Toluene is more toxic than gasoline but it is certainly not agent orange or cyanide. See the Agency for Toxic Substances link below in the reference section.

US Environmental Protection Agency Chemical Summary

US Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR)

National priority list of toxic substances
Note that the ATSDR also rates gasoline as a hazardous substance.

Mobil's spec sheet for toluene even goes as far as saying that "Based on available toxicological information, it has been determined that this product poses no significant health risk when used and handled properly."


Q: Isn't toluene an active ingredient of TNT (trinitrotoluene) and is thus deadly?

A: In the same way that cotton wool is the base ingredient of nitrocellulose (guncotton) which in turn is the main ingredient in modern smokeless gunpowder. Using this reasoning one could conclude that cotton wool is a deadly substance. This question reflects a poor understanding of basic chemistry but unfortunately it has been asked often enough.


Q: How much does toluene cost, and where can I buy some?

A: $10/gallon in a one gallon can at a hardware store, about $6/gallon in a 5 gallon can from a chemical supply or paint store, or $3/gallon in a 55 gallon drum from a chemical supply warehouse.

A2: Experience of Charlie Smith in 2002. Sherwin Williams paint stores have it for $5.00 in a gallon can. They can order it in a 5 gallon can at $4.00 / gallon. They can order 55 gallon drums for about the same cost per gallon, but you have to have a dock unloading facility to get the drum(s) off of the delivery truck.


Q: Can I just dump in 100% toluene into the tank like the F1 racers? vroom vroom vroom

A: First of all, the F1 racers did not use 100% toluene, but 84%. The other 16% in their brew is n-heptane, which has an octane rating of zero. The reason for this strange combination is because the F1 rocket fuel was limited to the rules to being of 102 RON octane. The n-heptane is "filler" to make the fuel comply with the rules.

Because toluene is such an effective anti knock fuel it also means that it is more difficult to ignite at low temperatures. The Formula 1 cars that ran on 84% toluene needed to have hot radiator air diverted to heat its fuel tank to 70C to assist its vaporization. Thus too strong a concentration of toluene will lead to poor cold start and running characteristics. I recommend that the concentration of toluene used to not exceed what the engine is capable of utilizing. i.e. Experiment with small increases in concentration until you can no longer detect an improvement.


Q: Why not simply use racing gasoline or aviation fuel?

A1: Most types of aviation fuel have very high lead content, which would rule out cars equipped with catalytic converters. Most piston engined aircraft burn leaded fuel. Also aviation fuel has a very different hydrocarbon mix to optimize volatility properties at high altitude.

A2: Racing gasoline could be a much more convenient way to run high octane fuel compared to having to constantly mix in toluene with each fill up. There are, however a few caveats:


You don't know for sure if you are really getting what is being advertised. You should find out if the fuel inspectors verify the actual octane of the racing gasoline in addition to ordinary gasoline. If you paid $3/gallon and only got 94 or 95 octane instead of 100 octane you may conclude erroneously that your car does not benefit from octane boosting.

You don't know what octane boosters are used in the racing gasoline. The worst case scenario is buying leaded racing gasoline without knowing it. Unleaded racing gasoline may still contain damaging octane boosters like MMT or methanol. A very high alcohol content will lead to fuel line erosion, accelerated fuel pump wear, very poor fuel economy and possibly lower performance, as alcohols have a less impressive MON rating than aromatics.

It takes smaller quantities of toluene to achieve the same octane boost compared to 100 octane racing gas. I have not seen unleaded racing gas for sale that exceeds the octane rating of toluene.

Since toluene is not officially sold as a fuel, gas taxes do not apply. Also racing gasoline tend to have higher markups being of interest to the performance minded enthusiast and thus is very likely to be more expensive to buy and use long term than toluene, which is typically used in more mundane applications like paint thinner.

Q: Ok, what is the catch?

A: It should be mentioned that in the US, efforts are underway to reduce the aromatic content of gasolines in general as a higher aromatic content leads to higher benzene emissions. Benzene is an extremely toxic substance. However it should also be noted that the proportions that is being discussed in this FAQ is relatively small and in the grand scheme of things is probably insignificant. Moreover, the industrial standard for defining gasoline composition allows plenty of leeway in aromatic content and the proportions present in US gas is already lower than most other countries. I therefore feel that the information provided here is useful to a performance minded car enthusiast while not being significantly detrimental to the environment.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


----------



## GT-R Glenn (Nov 9, 2002)

Since I didn't have any reference point for how much to use, I dumped about a half gallon of this mix into a mostly empty tank (the GT has a 16 gallon tank) and then filled up with Chevron 92 octane.
I didn't get to drive the car until PIR the next morning, (my GF doesn't like the 200; it's too big) but the report was that there was no change for a mile or so, and then all of a sudden, the engine seemed to smooth out and became quite eager to rev and run.
Well, by that calculation, I only managed to bump the octane to just shy of 93, but it seemed to make a big difference. I ran the car hard all day, (for reference, it's got an '87 MC turbo motor, K26, 12psi boost, and currently no intercooler) and even at 12 pounds of boost, I never once felt the ECU backing the timing off. Granted, the ambient temps never got above 50, and my water and oil temps were rock solid. (Oil just pushing above 100C)

The only cars that I had to get out of the way for was an Integra Type R and a couple of race-prepped P-cars. I even managed to lap the NSX once! It was a really good day!


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Okay, kids, gather round. This is important: we spend lots of money for our car, lot of money modifying and taking care of it, lots of effort and pride in owning it. So if someone comes along and proposes to give you something that would increase your enjoyment in driving by exponential measures and it would only cost you two or three bucks per tank of gas, would you be suspicious like the 100MPG carburetors? Would you listen long enough to real-life testimonies to consider this improvement for yourself?
Well, this is the case for Toluene and what it can do for your V8Q if you been using anything less than 92+ octane. Get some.Try it. No harm, no risk. Use about 24-32 ounces per 1/2 to full tank. You will not look debonair. You will have to suspend your "cool" look. You may want to try this alone. YOU WILL HAVE THE SHITTEST, MOST PLASTER, GRIN ON YOUR FACE YOU HAVE EVER HAD! It won't come off. You'll tell the kids, daddy has his own "transformer". It will be like a new car...no, better than new!
I took my family out to dinner tonight and could hardly keep from dropping it into manual and showing off like some teenager (I don't think my 17 year old daughter was inpressed). I wanna see some posts here with personal experiences by you guys using this stuff - I wanna know that my car is normal and hasn't been deprived ever since I've owned it.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I did the Rocket Fuel thing tonight on my Extremely Modified 5KCSTQ that runs 24 PSI of boost... And I can tell you not only does my ears and my butt say that the Rocket fuel is doing it's job but My ECU Data logger that gives me the timing value for all 5 cyls says it's working too.
Before Rocket Fuel I was running full retard (14 Deg of timing) on boost and would still on occasion get some knock, now I'm getting timing numbers around 22 Deg's with ZERO knock ever. I'm running 2 Gallons of Toluene 7oz of ATF and 17.5 gals of 93 oct gas for a net octane of 95.15. I'm next going to try 3 Gallons of Toluene (96.23 Octane) to see what timing numbers I get.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

After being convinced that my car was running below it potential - Owners manual recommends octane rating between 95 and 99, although it_will_run on octane as low as 91 - I stopped by Sherwin Williams and picked up a gallon. It was on sale for $5.85! Anyway, head to the chevron and pour a half gallon into the tank before pumping in the premium. The car took 16 gallons so there was still 4 gallons in the tank. I take off....nothing (obviously burning the fuel still in the lines). About 10 miles later, HOLY SH*****T!!!!!!!!!! It really does everything advertised by the list. It is so much more responsive from a stop and low speed, it really is impressive. I would agree with the sentiment that it feels like a totally different car.
For the non believers, you really should try to get some higher octane fuel in your tank, whether through the use of Toluene or not. The owners manual recommends 95 to 99 octane** for optimal performance. With the half gallon of Toluene I added to the 92 octane, I was only running at approximately 92.6 octane and the difference was simply amazing!

If you haven't tried it, do yourself a favor and give it a whirl - I swear you'll be impressed.

(**note: this person confused RON octane mentioned in the owners manual with R+M/2 octane that is sold in the pump. 95-99 RON is roughly equivalent to 91-94 R+M/2)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

After trying rocket fuel for two weeks, I can only say I love it.
The first tank, however, was a disappointment. I think I did not add enough of rocket fuel for the first tank. So I added a little more for my second tank, it ran better but not too much improvement. Then on my 3rd tank, what a difference, the car feels like a "Rocket" now, even though it is an "Auto". I always feel there is more power available for me.

I think for my 1st and 2nd tank, I did not have enough rocket fuel in it, even though I added one gallon per tank. Then, on my 3rd tank, I had enough because of the left overs from my 1st and 2nd tank. (I fill up my tank at about the 1/4 mark). Now I only have about 2 gallons of rocket fuel left, I better get more now!!! 


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reference materials:


1. Gasoline FAQ

2. McLaren Honda Turbo - a technical appraisal
Ian Bamsey
ISBN 0-85429-840-1, published 1990

3. Chevron's excellent Motor Gasolines Technical Review

4. Agency for Toxic Substances FAQ on Toluene
In summary:
Use in a well ventilated area, don't drink even a little of it, and
report spills of more than 1000 pounds to the National Response Center

5. Toxic Chemicals in your Environment (Australia) FAQ on Toluene
In summary:
this "Total Environment Center" likes a totally chemical free environment,
and even at that they can't find fault about much more than acute exposure
cases, and they also say not to drink any of it.

6. Exxon Chemical Americas - Toluene, Technical Material Safety Data Sheet

7. Recicladora Temarry de Mexico - Recycling Processor
Recycling information and Material Safety Data Sheets on numerous chemicals including Toluene.


----------



## Hugh Keir (Jul 25, 2001)

kingsley said:


> Hugh, he meant that stoich with toluene is approx 11:1, not petrol. Is toluene's stoich in fact 14.7:1 like petrol? I'm not a chemist ...


kingsey,

Pump fuel in most countries already contains a fir percentage of Toluene - again from memory something between 25% and 45% in the UK.

Stoichiometric for Toluene is 14.7 . 1 

Any change in fuel composition will require a change in mapping to optimise the ignition timing.

Any change in boost will require a change in mapping to optimise the fuel volume.

I may have missed it on this thread, but some means of judging the improvement in performance needs to be implemented.

Toluene has a good octane rating, but it is also slow burning which means that for a high revving engine, more is not necessarily better.

Toluene will stand high cylinder pressures so will be good on a big power engine, but it is not a magic potion, if it is ultimate power you are after there may be some racing fuels available to you that will be much better – something like VP Racing MS109 would be a great place to start - good oxygen % good burn speed and good detonation resistance.

Good luck

Hugh


----------



## Nocturnal (Nov 5, 2004)

Since we are here, can someone please recommand a good octane booster that will be good for everyday usage to combat detnoation...

I use some Nitrox I got from motorworld and added it to V-Power to help out. The car is map for Optimax, but I just want to be safe then sorry.


----------



## T.F.S. (Feb 5, 2004)

Nocturnal said:


> Since we are here, can someone please recommand a good octane booster that will be good for everyday usage to combat detnoation...
> 
> I use some Nitrox I got from motorworld and added it to V-Power to help out. The car is map for Optimax, but I just want to be safe then sorry.


none of the off the shelf ones..

they say up to 2 points so thats from 97 to 97.2

use alcohol injection


----------



## Nocturnal (Nov 5, 2004)

Those NitroX say up to 20 point.... so thats like 79 to 81 really.  

(yes, its a joke as I know there isn't 79 RON for sale) :nervous:


----------



## ATCO (Feb 2, 2003)

Hugh, perhaps you could clarify for me. I have seen reports that Stoic for Toluene is 11:1 but have always had my doubts it was true. I've always believed it was below (i.e. richer) than for Benzene but never bothered to work it out.

Assuming I have got this right:

To calculate O2 requirement for fuel and hence stoic;

CxHy + (x+(y/4))O2 -> xCO2+(y/2)H2O

OK, Toluene is C7H8. Atomic masses are:- Hydrogen = 1.00794, Carbon = 12.011, Oxygen = 15.994

So mass value for C7H8 is 92.14 and for 9O2 is 143.95

So using relative mass molecular weight;

0.9214Kg of Toluene requires 2.88Kg of O2 based on O2 have a mole weight of 31.9988Kg/mole and relative mass of 6.702981.

So, stick with me on this, the ratio for Toluene is 1/0.9214 to get the "1Kg" value. Or effectively factor 1.0853, which means O2 value of 2.88*1.0853 equates to 1Kg of Toluene, i.e. 3.125Kg of 02.

Relative mass of air is 28.964, so assuming that its primarily Nitrogen and Oxygen, we get (3.125/6.702981)*28.964 = (about) 13.5kg of air for 1Kg of Toluene. Or in other words Stoic is 13.5:1, or have I missed something!

DaveG


----------



## kismetcapitan (Nov 25, 2005)

the math checks out with me - not too much I remember from chemistry, but stoichiometry and moles and all that, I can still do 

As air contains CO2 and Argon and other goodies, that'll actually push your calculated figure leaner, somewhere between 13.5:1 ~ 14:1. So anyways, just doing some guesstimating on the spot, running heavy mixes of toluene will depress stoich, but not by much. Technically speaking then, without changing your fuel map, you should be running a touch leaner, but with the 5 RON or more gain, it can only mean a bit more power, or maybe that's why I feel a "better throttle response".


----------



## ATCO (Feb 2, 2003)

Toby,
Air has a number of constituents, however the levels of Nitrogen and Oxygen dwarf the values so it is not unreasonable to ignore them for general calculations. So the variance on 13.5033 is probably down at about the 10th decimal place! 

Also be careful about your assumptions. Not many maps actually run to Stoic, they generally are set richer anyway, so in some respects the Toluene actually probably takes you nearer the "Stoic". Also remember you don't run on 100% Toluene either, its a mix, so the effective value is probably between Benzene and Toluene depending what your mix is.

The higher RON/MON and "smoother" flame front will certainly improve the engine characteristics plus depending what your set up is you may even find that the EMS will keep you at the better end of the ignition range rather than pulling timing out. The chemistry of combustion inside the chamber is very complex, OK the basics are air/fuel, squeeze and light it up gives you a bang, however when trying to extract the maximum power/optimise throttle response etc. etc. it needs a lot more thinking about and analysis of all the variables, plus detailed understanding of the flame front progression, energy conversion and so on.


----------



## Hugh Keir (Jul 25, 2001)

Dave,

Scratches head – my daughter is doing standard grade chemistry just now and is doing similar stuff – I should maybe ask her to check.

I agree Toluene is C7H8 which will require 9 O2 to give 7CO2 + 4H2O

This can also be expressed as 1 mole of toluene will react with 9 moles of oxygen

Not certain I agree with your statement that 9 02 is 143.95, 9 oxygen molecules are 143.95, but oxygen exists as O2 in air which means that 9O2 is 287.9 kg/kmol.

I agree the molecular weight of Toluene is 92.14

From this we can say that Toluene has an oxygen fuel ratio of 287.9/92.14 = 3.125 to 1

Oxygen is approximately 21% by volume in air and approximately 23.14% by mass in air.

3.125 * 0.2314 = 13.5 : 1 air fuel ratio so although I agree with your answer, I am not sure where you corrected the molecular weight multiplier, but assume you were tracking it through.

In conclusion I agree that the air fuel ratio for Toluene is 13.5 to 1 

Very interesting point and well done for taking the time to research it.

Cheers

Hugh


----------



## kismetcapitan (Nov 25, 2005)

my next batch will test 50/50 and see if I have any stumbling problems.

A point a debate, which has everything to do with ignition timing adjustment. I've read both - that toluene burns faster, giving more of the ideal "instant combustion" and allowing more ignition retard without sacrificing power.

Or if toluene reduces knock by burning slower and more evenly, timing advances will be called for.

But without changing anything, getting Power FC knock no higher than 25, and pushing 1.7 bar boost, I'm impressed.


----------



## kismetcapitan (Nov 25, 2005)

I added 34 liters of toluene and topped off with 99RON pump gas. I mixed the toluene with 0.25 liter ATF - that was enough to stain the whole toluene supply evenly. With such perfect miscibility I figure that's enough lube to keep my fuel pump happy.

Knock is lower, but car is boosting a bit less on the top end. I couldn't push it too hard as it's daytime and there's traffic, but general running seems to be fine. I'll have to fiddle with ignition timing to make the most of the fuel blend. One thing's for sure though, the car runs better (smoother/stronger) when hot. Makes it nice to not have to worry so much about intake temps.


----------



## ATCO (Feb 2, 2003)

Toby, you mention lower boosting at top end, you don't say how much and I presume you mean relatively at the same revs. At a guess, check your EGT values, if the figures are lower than before this means the gas temperature is lower and the cooler the gas the "slower" its speed/energy which could impact on the boost being developed. 

As you've got a decent set of pistons in there you could push the timing out say to 28deg which will give you a safety margin, *BUT WATCH THE EGT!!!!! *

Also what AFR readings have you got? 

DaveG


----------



## kismetcapitan (Nov 25, 2005)

Boost peak is lower, from 1.6 and I only got 1.44 on the new tank of fuel.

Will experiment with slight ignition changes. But my main reason for using toluene is, ironically, to get more life out of my engine. With my octane now somewhere between 105-110, I could make more power. Or I could give up that extra power for hopefully some extra longevity with my expensive as hell motor 

AFRs are similar, yet different. Real specific yeah I know  I didn't log my wideband yet, but in general, my readings seem to be leaner by a bit (my AFR is a digital output that replaced the clock. Much more useful to know instantaneous wideband lambda than the time!). With toluene having a lower stoich, I'm not sure if this is to be expected or not. Plus, who knows how the ATF I added will affect both stoich as well as actual octane. 250ml for the whole tank, but it was enough to give the toluene a "greasy" feel between my fingers. I figure, if it's greasy there, my fuel pump will also find it greasy, and it'll be good enough.

Anyways, the blend physically works (does not misfire un any conditions) so now it's just a question of running this fuel blend for the long term. Winter is obviously a consideration


----------



## Sayajin (May 30, 2006)

Wow..... gotta commend you on this one Toby..... 

Hope all continues to go well!

-Sayajin


----------



## ATCO (Feb 2, 2003)

kismetcapitan said:


> Boost peak is lower, from 1.6 and I only got 1.44 on the new tank of fuel.


0.15Bar boost loss is roughly 45BHP at the wheels, you should easily get that back with safe adjustments to ignition and AFR and with better torque.



kismetcapitan said:


> Will experiment with slight ignition changes. But my main reason for using toluene is, ironically, to get more life out of my engine. With my octane now somewhere between 105-110, I could make more power. Or I could give up that extra power for hopefully some extra longevity with my expensive as hell motor.


Longevity is related not only to how much but how often and for how long! If the map is correct and the engine build good it will take all you can dish out day in day out until it wears out. 



kismetcapitan said:


> AFRs are similar, yet different. Real specific yeah I know  I didn't log my wideband yet, but in general, my readings seem to be leaner by a bit (my AFR is a digital output that replaced the clock. Much more useful to know instantaneous wideband lambda than the time!). With toluene having a lower stoich, I'm not sure if this is to be expected or not.


Come on Toby, think about it. What is the Lamda reading! Its an Oxygen Sensor, so with better burn you should have less "waste" oxygen in the exhaust. When you say leaner, I presume you mean higher. The critical numbers are when you are up on the high boost levels at high revs, when you should aim for around 11.5, if its down below 10, its way too rich. You can run nearer 13.5 on steady cruise (that's NOT flat out!)



kismetcapitan said:


> Plus, who knows how the ATF I added will affect both stoich as well as actual octane. 250ml for the whole tank, but it was enough to give the toluene a "greasy" feel between my fingers. I figure, if it's greasy there, my fuel pump will also find it greasy, and it'll be good enough.


I think off the top of my head the ATF in reducing your octane will effectively increase (nearer 14.5:1) the Stoic value of your fuel, but I haven't worked out the precise Chemistry so could be wrong! 



kismetcapitan said:


> Anyways, the blend physically works (does not misfire un any conditions) so now it's just a question of running this fuel blend for the long term. Winter is obviously a consideration


The only knock you should get is the Excise Officer at your door enquiring about unpaid tax on road fuel! :chuckle:


----------



## kismetcapitan (Nov 25, 2005)

commend me on what, my utter madness? 

I logged several hard pulls (1st through 4th, to 8000rpm in every gear) on unspiked 99RON gas last night, and the results were quite good, with exceptionally smooth and low knock traces. The toluene may be overkill? It's cheaper than gasoline though - a big incentive to use it.


----------



## ATCO (Feb 2, 2003)

Ah, you are heading into the depths now Toby. 

Whilst you might put 99RON in, you've got a reservoir of "107" left in there, plus what is in the fuel lines, rail etc. It would probably take at least two or three tankfuls of 99 to clear it out enough to have no impact. So don't delude yourself that Korean fuel has suddenly discovered quality control!


----------



## kismetcapitan (Nov 25, 2005)

you are a naughty influence! Ran two logged runs, very smooth, very quick. Hit 240kph before I ran out of road. Then, I thought about your comments on timing, and bumped up ignition +2 degrees. All hell broke loose then - 1st gear is at 8000rpm and in need of a fast shift in what can't be more than an elapsed second. Now, the car explosively runs to over 8000rpm and I gotta shift quick to keep from overreving.

PFC knock is back up to 27 peak but the knock trace isn't as spikey as on pump fuel. I'm sticking with the advanced map so long as I'm running this fuel blend. Christ almighty, it is FAST. ignition advance did more than turning up the boost would have. Car's much less laggy, much less. ****, it's 3:20am I gotta sleep but the adrenaline from tonight's wangan testing has got me wound up and breathless.

speed camera flashed me when I was at 240kph. I hope the picture is unreadable at that speed~!


----------



## kismetcapitan (Nov 25, 2005)

oh I forgot, the wideband is reading slightly leaner - WOT is reading low 12's instead of high 11's without ignition or fueling changes. My dyno runs bottomed out at 12.5:1, so with the added octane of toluene I hope I'm ok there.


----------



## kingsley (Aug 26, 2002)

kismetcapitan said:


> 250ml for the whole tank, but it was enough to give the toluene a "greasy" feel between my fingers. I figure, if it's greasy there, my fuel pump will also find it greasy, and it'll be good enough.


You could be right but it doesn't necessarily follow that something that feels greasy in your fingers really is.

Chemistry was never my strong point (hated it actually) but I do remember back in my O level days that some liquid we got to dip our fingers in felt greasy. However, the teacher pointed out that the reason it felt greasy was because it was reacting to the oils in our skin and it was a small layer of our skin that'd been broken down that made it feel greasy.

Not sure whether the same applies to toluene. Like I say, I never really got on with Chemistry.


----------



## kismetcapitan (Nov 25, 2005)

true, and I recall "greasiness" being a characteristic of bases (versus acids), or the other way around.

but ATF is some really oily stuff!

I revised my map this morning and pulled back timing (after advancing 2 degrees) on the high load/rpm portions of the map (but kept timing aggressive on the 6x6 "basic" corner of the map. I did up a 25% tankful, as running 50% will require careful remapping of the upper regions of the map to really take advantage of it, and that'll have to wait until I've really got time to do that.

The car likes to be hot. It runs better and the knock trace is lower. And, interestingly, the exhaust is less noxious. Normal Korean gas makes idling fumes truly eye watering. That's much reduced with this high toluene blend. It could very well be that the toxic byproducts of toluene are simply odorless 

But I've got plenty - I've got twenty 17 liter cans of the stuff  Way better than running leaded racing gas, and I'm paying less for fuel (about $10-15 a tankful). I like it!


----------



## AZR-33 (Apr 4, 2007)

Wow, I had heard of this before, but then someone told me about the effects of toluene on the brain. I looked it up on wikipedia (not the greatest source, I know) and found this.



> Chronic or frequent inhalation of toluene over long time periods leads to irreversible brain damage.


Be carefull with that stuff, and no more sniffing


----------



## SIHethers (Feb 1, 2006)

And it is carcinogenic (cancer-causing).

Toby, add 10% methanol to your blend and you will have race fuel that will more than likely allow you to close in on MBT.


----------



## kismetcapitan (Nov 25, 2005)

SIHethers said:


> And it is carcinogenic (cancer-causing).


so are the cigarettes I smoke daily :runaway: 

what's MBT? is that theoretical ideal timing for a given piston velocity?


----------



## GTR--J (Oct 12, 2005)

I considered this but never saw anyone do this on a Skyline.Here are a couple links I found interesting.Looks like you're on the right path though,good work:smokin: .

Octane
Homebrew Octane Boosters


----------



## Hugh Keir (Jul 25, 2001)

kismetcapitan said:


> so are the cigarettes I smoke daily :runaway:
> 
> what's MBT? is that theoretical ideal timing for a given piston velocity?


MBT is Minimum timing for Best Torque



SIHethers said:


> And it is carcinogenic (cancer-causing).
> 
> Toby, add 10% methanol to your blend and you will have race fuel that will more than likely allow you to close in on MBT.


You need to cautions with Methanol as it will separate out from other fuels in the presence of moisture.

Methannol is also corrosive to some fuel system components.


----------



## kismetcapitan (Nov 25, 2005)

I'm going to have to get on a dyno and a seriously pro mapper to dial in a MBT ignition map for 50% toluene. For now, I'm finding that 30% really suits the map made for just petrol.

However, it seems to evaporate or otherwise lose potency? Toluene, btw, is not a more explosive fuel. It's smoother and seems to knock a couple decibels off the exhaust drone. After a couple days though it seems to be a bt different, more "back to normal", although knock is still reduced.

What happens if you plug off the fuel tank breather?


----------



## Adam Kindness (Jun 22, 2002)

where will air go/come from when you use fuel....


----------



## kismetcapitan (Nov 25, 2005)

Adam Kindness said:


> where will air go/come from when you use fuel....


I was thinking, cap off the breather after driving, then uncap before taking her out again :chuckle:


----------



## WIT BLITZ (Apr 1, 2007)

What about pressure build up because of the liquid(what ever you want to call what is in your tank) vaporising!
BTW how did you over come the heating the tolune problem?


----------



## kismetcapitan (Nov 25, 2005)

I didn't, I just dumped it in, and haven't had any problems, although the car is definitely happier when air intake temps go up. If I were running 100% toluene I'd need a fuel heater for sure - there's a unit designed to heat biodiesel that'd also work a treat for toluene - if I had the balls to do it.

Even I've got limits apparently - I know how I'd build a fuel system for straight toluene, but I'm not brave enough to do it.


----------



## Sayajin (May 30, 2006)

Probably for the best Toby...

lol personally I would be scared out of my mind running what you are now! Im a little worried with just my dual fuel type fuel system! 

-Sayajin


----------



## kismetcapitan (Nov 25, 2005)

come on man, all the cool kids do it, you know you wanna try some. Just a can, hit up your fuel man, bring you up, make you feel smooth, feel good 

anyways, what would you rather put in your tank - high purity toluene, or 85 octane pump gas from some dusty ancient gas station in the boondocks? I rest my case


----------



## SIHethers (Feb 1, 2006)

Add 500ml (1%) isopropanol per tank to prevent separation of methanol with water contamination. The advantage of water contamination is that it renders methanol safe with respect to metal corrosion (only a problem with anhydrous methanol).


----------



## kismetcapitan (Nov 25, 2005)

no kidding, rubbing alcohol is all that's needed? The methanol I can get is 99% (1% water) - I might try a tank with 10% meth, see what happens.

the problem with all this, as I'm discovering, is that by running what could be effectively up to 110 octane, is that knock goes down. With the car fully warmed up, at 1.6bar boost I get PFC peaks consistently of 22, and the trace doesn't spike. Which is good, but if anything the car is slower (feels about the same though). I'd have to really redo the ignition map per fuel blend to fully take advantage of it, and I really need some dyno time to do that.

But in the meantime, toluene's just higher octane and cheaper than petrol. So long as it runs and my EGT, knock, and AFRs are normal (they are), I'd call that a success.


----------



## SIHethers (Feb 1, 2006)

Methanol 10% will gain some power even without ignition adjustment as it increases cylinder cooling resulting in denser charge, and also AFR will lean out as it is ~50% oxygen by mass. If your fuelling is already ~12:1 it might need to be a little richer to keep EGT in check.


----------



## Hugh Keir (Jul 25, 2001)

SIHethers said:


> Add 500ml (1%) isopropanol per tank to prevent separation of methanol with water contamination. The advantage of water contamination is that it renders methanol safe with respect to metal corrosion (only a problem with anhydrous methanol).



Simon,

Where did you get this information from?

How certain are you that it will work up to xx% water?

Is there a limit to the amount of methanol that can be added with this setup?

Methanol is a great fuel but is as far as I have read extremely hard to mix with petrol.

Thanks

Hugh


----------



## SIHethers (Feb 1, 2006)

Hugh

I got it from a technical document from the australian government, when they were looking at oxygenated fuels as a replacement for MTBE, I think. I'll see if I still have the document on my laptop. Isopropanol is well known for its ability to act as a carrier for water in contaminated petrol, and this was confirmed in the paper as a suitable agent to prevent separation with low concentrations of methanol in petrol. 

Converse to what you might think, a methanol petrol blend becomes more resistant to separation with increasing concentrations of methanol. The accepted ideal mix for methanol and petrol is 10%/90%. This is seen to be safe in terms of perishing fuel system components etc, and can be tolerated without usually having to remap fuelling to account for the much richer stoich ratio of methanol.


----------



## SIHethers (Feb 1, 2006)

Hugh

This link from a few years back has some useful info. The cosolvent and separation issue was actually from and American petroleum industry paper.

22B Bulletin Board: Methanol octane booster?


----------



## SIHethers (Feb 1, 2006)

I've found the document. It is a section from - American Petroleum Institute, “Alcohols: A Technical Assessment of Their Application as Fuels.” API Publication No. 4261, Second Edition, July 1988.

This also makes interesting reading (if you've got a few spare hours) 

Non leaded fuel composition - Patent 6039772

I can email you the API document, it's about 2MB PDF

It's also worth remembering that the blending octanes of alcohols are much higher than their octanes when used as fuel in their pure form: e.g. anhydrous methanol's RON/MON is 106/92 whilst its blending octane is 133/105.


----------



## kismetcapitan (Nov 25, 2005)

dang. ok, next tankful, I'll toss in 7 liters of methanol, that bit of isopropanol, 17 liters of toluene, and the balance 99RON. And then see what happens. What about a bit of 100% pure acetone to reduce surface tension and improve atomization?

My fuel lines are lined with an inner lining that's supposedly resistance to pretty much any alternative fuel (made by Goodyear), so I'm not horribly worried.


----------



## kismetcapitan (Nov 25, 2005)

would you happen to remember the blending RON/MON of toluene? If I remember correctly, it's lower than the 120 RON by itself, I think?


----------



## SIHethers (Feb 1, 2006)

I'll have to look up toluene's blending octane later, I can't access the document from work. From memory it's RON is lower than methanol but MON is higher (ie better sensitivity). Xylene outperforms both though. I would worry about acetone as it's solvent properties are much more likely to perish rubbers/seals etc.

Remember you should use lambda rather than AFR to check fuelling once you're into alcohol blends due to the effects on the stoich ratio. Your wideband measures lambda then converts it to AFR assuming a stoich ratio of 14.7:1, which will give misleading results when you're adding a decent amount of meth.


----------



## kismetcapitan (Nov 25, 2005)

will the displayed AFR go up or down with 10% meth? currently, my idle is 15.8:1, WOT is down around 11.5:1. If I just know what to look for, I'll know not to panic 

Because stoic for meth is 6:1 (if I remember correctly), would that make my wideband read leaner, as less oxygen is being consumed per unit of methanol?


----------



## SIHethers (Feb 1, 2006)

*Fuel calculations with methanol...*

AFR will read leaner, and actually is leaner. If you have o2 feedback control switched on then your idle AFR will be the same, as lambda 1 is targetted. As the stoich ratio of your blended fuel is pushed richer towards that of methanol, it will take more fuel to achieve lambda=1 therefore fuel consumption reduces.

As open loop/WOT fuelling is determined by mapping/injector opening, which will remain the same with the blended fuel (you may see a small increase in load due to charge cooling effects), then actual fuelling will be leaner than when mapped for standard petrol.

For example, 11.5:1 is ~ lambda 0.78 for base fuel. If after adding 10% methanol the wideband now reads 12:1, lambda is now 0.816 (leaner due to oxygen content of methanol and different stoich ratio). If your blended fuel stoich ratio is 0.1*6.45 + 0.9*14.7 = 13.875:1, then your actual AFR on blended fuel will be 11.3:1.

So although your actual AFR on the blend is richer in absolute AFR terms than on standard fuel, lambda is actually leaner (compared with stoich ratio). Hence why you need to be careful.

Make sense now 


Good


----------



## ExScoobyT (Jan 6, 2004)

SI - `therefore fuel consumption reduces` That should be fuel economy reduces / fuel consumption increases?


----------



## SIHethers (Feb 1, 2006)

Well spotted 

Yes, I was thinking one thing and writing the opposite, fuel consumption increases.


----------



## kismetcapitan (Nov 25, 2005)

basically I just need to keep a sharp eye in the EGT then - they run pretty cool relatively speaking, or actually, I don't push for extended periods.


----------



## SIHethers (Feb 1, 2006)

Toby

Yes EGT monitoring is best for ensuring you aren't running too lean with the blend. Methanol allows you to run leaner than you would with base fuel but with similar EGT, due to it's cylinder cooling effects. Add in extra ignition advance and EGTs will be lower still.

10% methanol should allow you to advance the ignition a couple of degrees at least, even without richening your fuelling to compensate for the oxygenate-induced enleanment. If fuelling is sensible on the base fuel map, then you don't necessarily need to change fuelling for safety reasons, but you may gain more with adjustment.


----------



## SIHethers (Feb 1, 2006)

Toluene - blending RON 124, MON 112


----------



## SIHethers (Feb 1, 2006)

*Blending octanes of hydrocarbons*

15% n-paraffins RON MON BP d AIT 
n-butane 113 : 114 : -0.5: gas : 370
n-pentane 62 : 66 : 35 : 0.626 : 260
n-hexane 19 : 22 : 69 : 0.659 : 225
n-heptane (0:0 by definition) 0 : 0 : 98 : 0.684 : 225
n-octane -18 : -16 : 126 : 0.703 : 220
( you would not want to have the following alkanes in gasoline, 
so you would never blend kerosine with gasoline )
n-decane -41 : -38 : 174 : 0.730 : 210
n-dodecane -88 : -90 : 216 : 0.750 : 204
n-tetradecane -90 : -99 : 253 : 0.763 : 200
30% iso-paraffins 
2-methylpropane 122 : 120 : -12 : gas : 460
2-methylbutane 100 : 104 : 28 : 0.620 : 420
2-methylpentane 82 : 78 : 62 : 0.653 : 306
3-methylpentane 86 : 80 : 64 : 0.664 : -
2-methylhexane 40 : 42 : 90 : 0.679 : 
3-methylhexane 56 : 57 : 91 : 0.687 :
2,2-dimethylpentane 89 : 93 : 79 : 0.674 :
2,2,3-trimethylbutane 112 : 112 : 81 : 0.690 : 420
2,2,4-trimethylpentane 100 : 100 : 98 : 0.692 : 415
( 100:100 by definition )
12% cycloparaffins 
cyclopentane 141 : 141 : 50 : 0.751 : 380
methylcyclopentane 107 : 99 : 72 : 0.749 : 
cyclohexane 110 : 97 : 81 : 0.779 : 245
methylcyclohexane 104 : 84 : 101 : 0.770 : 250
35% aromatics 
benzene 98 : 91 : 80 : 0.874 : 560
toluene 124 : 112 : 111 : 0.867 : 480
ethyl benzene 124 : 107 : 136 : 0.867 : 430
meta-xylene 162 : 124 : 138 : 0.868 : 463
para-xylene 155 : 126 : 138 : 0.866 : 530
ortho-xylene 126 : 102 : 144 : 0.870 : 530
3-ethyltoluene 162 : 138 : 158 : 0.865 : 
1,3,5-trimethylbenzene 170 : 136 : 163 : 0.864 : 
1,2,4-trimethylbenzene 148 : 124 : 168 : 0.889 :
8% olefins 
2-pentene 154 : 138 : 37 : 0.649 :
2-methylbutene-2 176 : 140 : 36 : 0.662 :
2-methylpentene-2 159 : 148 : 67 : 0.690 :
cyclopentene 171 : 126 : 44 : 0.774 :
( the following olefins are not present in significant amounts
in gasoline, but have some of the highest blending octanes ) 
1-methylcyclopentene 184 : 146 : 75 : 0.780 :
1,3 cyclopentadiene 218 : 149 : 42 : 0.805 :
dicyclopentadiene 229 : 167 : 170 : 1.071 :


----------



## kismetcapitan (Nov 25, 2005)

what lubricants (upper cylinder oils) are used in pump gasolines? I'm trying to figure out a better additive than ATF to mix in with toluene - one that hopefully also adds a bit of octane, or at least doesn't subtract too much.


----------



## kismetcapitan (Nov 25, 2005)

well, I'm using the stuff in every tank and am learning more and more.

- the car doesn't reek as badly. straight petrol makes my exhaust as toxic as mustard gas.
- sometimes, it smells like I'm burning LPG.
- warmup is critical. The car is not happy getting on boostwhen cold, and warmup was taking an absurd 30-40 minutes. I found the problem though...

- I've found that just dumping in toluene isn't the best. remapping ignition is critical. I actually found my knock curves smooth out even more and drop a bit when I advanced ignition up to 4 degrees in the under 4000rpm range. My car warms up normally now, more or less (my 0W-40 oil still takes longer to hit 80 degrees than conventional wisdom would imply). WOT full boost at redline still requires retarded ignition (my most retarded ignition timing cells are at 14 degrees). I am installing my water injection this weekend to help out when boost goes over 1 bar. no question about it though - toluene burns SLOW. Burn a few drops of petrol and a few drops of toluene side by side - there's a significant difference.

- I've actually registered as a company so I can legally buy toluene in bulk. I'm buying 200 liters at a time. Each liter of toluene represents a 30 cent savings over petrol at the station.

- I've saved my petrol map of course, in case I need to go back.


----------



## kingsley (Aug 26, 2002)

Nice post. Would be interesting to see dyno plots petrol vs toluene mix (with their retrospective ignition maps) if you get it on a dyno.

Though you say you still need retarted ignition on boost, how retarded is this compared to your petrol map?


----------



## kismetcapitan (Nov 25, 2005)

kingsley said:


> Though you say you still need retarted ignition on boost, how retarded is this compared to your petrol map?


don't quite know for sure yet, I'm still ironing out some lumpy parts - 35-40 PFC knock but on the graph they are clear, sharp peaks, so I want to dial them out. Problem is, it only shows up in 4th and 5th gear around 5000-ish rpm full boost (sometimes 3rd), and it's hard to repeat - as in, it'll do it, then I'll start from the end of the road again and do the same 4th gear pull, and it won't do it. But it does it always once, and Datalogit isn't picking up which cell - I've got to disconnect the Commander so they don't compete for data.

Also, obviously, testing in that range is extremely hard to do on public roads! Full boost is madness on these turbos. The 4 degree timing advance in the first quadrant has gotten rid of a lot of lag.


----------



## kismetcapitan (Nov 25, 2005)

I got brave and bumped up timing all over the map. 18 degrees BTDC at WOT at 6000-ish is as low as it gets. No increase in knock and that annoying knock peak on 4th and 5th is gone - I'll have to double check with det cans when I can make an appointment, but 25 knock seems to be engine noise at full boost to redline - that's the consistent peak I'm getting (my knock sensors are just a few months old). The graph is pretty smooth - no spikes or extreme jaggedness. Increasing timing though in the upper ranges turned the car into a monster. Jeebus. I'll have to time some runs again but the car is nerve-wrackingly quick at WOT again - just when I had gotten used to it :runaway: 

Is there an "ideal" ignition map somewhere? What I mean is, in theory, with the burn speed of gasoline, and assuming perfect non-detonating burn, there is an ideal timing - more advance required at higher rpm (piston velocity). Of course, such a map can't be used in the real world, but I'd always wondered what such timing figures looked like, and if anyone ever sat down and calculated it out. Such a map would only have one row of cells, as load would not be a consideration. Furthermore, wouldn't such a timing map be the MBT (mean best torque) ignition settings?


----------



## SIHethers (Feb 1, 2006)

The minimum timing for best torque (MBT) setting IS the ideal timing for any particular setup (AFR, boost, fuel quality etc). It is the timing at which either advancing or retarding the ignition from will lose torque, and by definition is not detonation limited. Very difficult to achieve on forced induction engine at high load, but with good fuel I'm sure its achievable at lower boost/load settings. You won't know if you're there unless you have it on an engine dyno ideally. This is the ignition timing that results in peak cylinder pressure at ~10-15 degrees ATDC, which provides the optimum force on the piston.

Chances are, even with your witches brew fuel, you'll still be det limited, at high boost anyhow. So you should keep advancing the ignition timing until you start to get the first few sparkles of det, then back off a degree or 2. Ignition advance will have a bigger impact on torque towards peak power than at peak torque, but the consequences of det at peak rpm will also be worse relatively speaking, so care must be taken 

I'm running around 24-25 degrees advance at peak power and 1.4ish bar on GT-SS if that's any help (on a octane enhanced 99RON). 18 degrees certainly sounds a little better than low teens. Did EGT drop with the extra advance? I expect will have done.


----------



## kismetcapitan (Nov 25, 2005)

I haven't had any EGT problems - I've never gotten higher than 750 degrees (measured in the rear turbo elbow), under any driving conditions.

I've been finding that oil temperature, and not timing, is the determining factor in the car's knock levels. Basically, the engine becomes quiet and settled when oil temps are above 80, the more the better (although I've never exceeded 100).

I dropped my boost level to 1.4 bar, and got a high rpm misfire. After a couple days, on a lark I bumped it to 1.8 bar, and the misfire completely disappeared. Cool, huh?  I still need to finish mapping my high boost part of the map to make the car run better on toluene (at higher concentrations, the car runs worse unless you advance timing). AFR at WOT has been dropped to 10.5~10.8:1 until I figure out what blend I'm going to inject with my water injection system.


----------



## M SKinner (Feb 19, 2007)

SIHethers said:


> The minimum timing for best torque (MBT) setting IS the ideal timing for any particular setup (AFR, boost, fuel quality etc). It is the timing at which either advancing or retarding the ignition from will lose torque, and by definition is not detonation limited. Very difficult to achieve on forced induction engine at high load, but with good fuel I'm sure its achievable at lower boost/load settings. You won't know if you're there unless you have it on an engine dyno ideally. This is the ignition timing that results in peak cylinder pressure at ~10-15 degrees ATDC, which provides the optimum force on the piston.


Ion sensing closed loop ignition timing isnt that far away though... Autronic I believe are developing it along with VEMS (DIY ecu) Should be able to get your timing PERFECT as there is a specific point at which you want maximum pressure in the cylinder for max torque. Closed loop should be able to hit that reliably and back the timing off if it detects any det (again through the ion sensing gubbins, not traditional knock sensors) Theoretically you wont need to map the ignition ever again once this technology goes mainstream!


----------



## ExScoobyT (Jan 6, 2004)

Ionizing spark plug sensors are next gen knock control. Nothing to do with MBT timing, other than you would run closer to it.....

Allready used in F1 and M5 V10.


----------



## kismetcapitan (Nov 25, 2005)

I want a system. I imagine in the not too distant future we'll have ECUs that can handle tuned cars. Tuning algorithms aren't rocket science - ign vs knock, ign vs power, ign vs egt, fueling vs egt, fueling vs power, fueling vs knock - with reliable sensors (and I wasn't aware of a better knock detection technology), an ECU could pretty much self learn to the driving and fuel conditions of a tuned car. Hell, ten years ago could you have imagined the crap that's on our cell phones? 95% of the technology to really put together an integrated management system is there, maybe all of it. It just needs to be put together into something usable - such an ECU would easily be worth a couple grand.


----------



## kingsley (Aug 26, 2002)

My previous car (a Calibra) had an ECU that kept the ignition timing as optimal as possible by constantly adjusting the timing and listening for knock. It self adjusted if I put different octane fuel into the tank.

Clearly, a Calibra isn't the latest and greatest technology by today's standards but still seems to do at least some of the things you're talking about. When I had the heads flowed, cams changed, injectors changed etc, it adjusted the timing itself. Saved a lot of bother.


----------



## kismetcapitan (Nov 25, 2005)

yep, if I could add features to the Power FC, it'd be - self-adjusting timing vs knock (there are ignition adjustment curves based on water and air temp, but nothing for knock). I'd also love to plug my wideband into the thing and let the damned thing figure out fueling corrections on its own. matching AFRs by hand is extremely tedious!


----------



## kingsley (Aug 26, 2002)

There's a closed loop thingy you can add to the F-Con Pro. Don't know anything about it other than that. Self adjust timing vs knock would be a nice one as long as it did it in both directions.

A friend of mine with a Supra tells me that his car self adjusts in this way by retarding if it detects knock but says it has no mechanism for re-advancing again so after a while you end up with a timing map that suits the worst conditions you ever had since you last reset the ECU. To that end he's experimented with pre-compressor water injection (only a small nozzle) with very good results.


----------



## M SKinner (Feb 19, 2007)

ExScoobyT said:


> Ionizing spark plug sensors are next gen knock control. Nothing to do with MBT timing, other than you would run closer to it.....
> 
> Allready used in F1 and M5 V10.




You can use it for timing though... As it can measure cylinder pressure. Thats how it detects knock after all. Find out where your peak pressure is (apart from any knock etc) and then adjust the timing so peak pressure coincides with the optimum crank angle for max torque Thats whats in the pipeline!

have a read about it here : Ion Sense - VEMS wiki www.vems.hu

Hardware side is all done and dusted just they seem to be having trouble with the software side. But theres other people working on it too... With a lot more money behind them! So its just a matter of time!


----------



## ExScoobyT (Jan 6, 2004)

It does not work by measuring pressure, it measures the change in resistance in the airgap in the sensing element as knock is about to occur. MBT timing will be established at the mapping phase and this calibrated into the spark timing tables. The more accurate knock sensing will typically run the timing closer to ideal but it is not a predictive system.


----------



## M SKinner (Feb 19, 2007)

ExScoobyT said:


> It does not work by measuring pressure, it measures the change in resistance in the airgap in the sensing element as knock is about to occur.


And why does the resistance go up?

PRESSURE. Higher pressure, denser air means more air between the electrodes of the plug meaning a higher resistance!

If you dont believe that have you ever wondered why you have to close up your plug gaps when running more boost?


----------



## ExScoobyT (Jan 6, 2004)

errm - whats your point? The sensor does not directly measure pressure, it measures resistance (which of course is a function of pressure). It can`t `predict` spark timing, this is calibrated in a base timing map. It should be able to run closer to the knock limit of the engine and retard less when knock is detected.


----------



## M SKinner (Feb 19, 2007)

If you can plot cylinder pressure you can overlay that against crank angle.

There is a specific crank angle that will give peak torque due to the geometry of crank, rod, and piston. If you can get the peak pressure to occur at this point it will create maximum torque.


----------



## ExScoobyT (Jan 6, 2004)

...errm yes that will be MBT timing established on the test bed. You are not simply looking for maximum cyclinder pressure, you are looking for the optimum work output .e.g torque.


----------



## M SKinner (Feb 19, 2007)

Gonna take this to PM now to avoild clogging up this thread any more!


----------



## kismetcapitan (Nov 25, 2005)

latest report - now trying a 70/30 tank. More toluene than petrol. it doesn't misfire, so long as I keep the boost way up. I'm beginning to realize, if Honda F1 was boosting 4-5 bars on 86% toluene, their cars must have run like crap on 2 bars.

With this much toluene, the car feels like timing has been pulled back about 3 degrees across the board. It's slower. Meaning I've got to remap the ignition again. Global advance of 2 degrees got the car happening again. Boost is up to 2 bars, which may be too much, but I wonder if the charge cooling of meth/water injection will help. Or if the inefficiency/heat generation occurs at the turbine itself and therefore water injection won't help a damn.

I love the stuff though - you can tell when you're running it. The engine purrs - there's no other word to describe it. I managed to get a PFC knock of 35 at 8000rpm, 2 bars. The exhaust stinks much, much less and fuel efficiency seems to be a bit up.

I'm concerned about the fuel pumps though - how much do they depend on the gasoline itself for lubrication? Toluene isn't slippery at all, "gritty water" is the best way to describe its consistency. I'm not so worried about bore wash anymore - I don't think I was getting it as compression is tight as a nun's, ah nevermind. And thin oil plus a JUN pump that runs 6-7 bars of pressure when hot means I think oil is getting everywhere it's supposed to.

I think I'll get some dyno time, set the map permanently for this mix, and call my experiment finished. I'll be saving at least $20 a tank, and basically be running race fuel all the time. Come winter, if the car starts to run poorly, there's a company in the UK that makes thermostatically controlled fuel line heaters (designed for biodiesel but being able to heat two distinct fuel lines, it's perfect for my setup. I'll set the thing to 70 degrees and run happy warm toluene all year round


----------



## kismetcapitan (Nov 25, 2005)

interesting - I just found a 5 year old thread on octane boosters, and some Mycroft dude who seems to know a lot about chemistry has done a lot of this toluene legwork before.

If he is correct, the massive amounts of toluene I've been running has been cleaning out carbon deposits, which is why my oil seems a bit prematurely aged. It's also true that my car seems to be settling into it's new fueling regimen, and the two times I ran straight petrol, the car didn't seem to like it much.

The Ferrari guy who is championing thin oils also mentions gasoline blow-by as a part of life in his Ferraris. In any event, that means I'll be changing my oil, after a mere 1500km. As my car is street based, I may go even thinner, 0W-30, if it is true that thinner oils heat up faster. I'm still having problems reaching operating temp in a timely manner (20 minutes seems too long). It may be my grandmotherly driving while I'm waiting for the oil to reach its temp, but it still seems slow. btw, my oil temp sensor is at the bottom of my oil pan (integrated with the oil pan plug). is this a normal location?


----------



## WIT BLITZ (Apr 1, 2007)

I dont know about the oil temp sensor location but it seems like you are comming along quite nicely with your madcapped adventures Best of luck for future endevors :thumbsup:


----------



## ATCO (Feb 2, 2003)

"Toby's a Mycroft fan, Toby's a Mycroft fan" :bowdown1: 

Toby, Mycroft has been known to pass on one or two useful titbits in his time......  

Unfortunately he is currently banned :banned: as he also successfully manages to frequently enter into conflict with one or two people who do not always share his view on certain subjects...... :flame: 

Oil temp. You haven't got your oil cooler plumbed in wrong have you? That is permanently connected rather than sensor controlled? In your ambients I would expect the oil should be up to working temp within around 10Km, or say 10-15minutes. Have you got two oil temp sensors? One by the sandwich plate for the oil cooler would be useful as you can check at what point it opens. 

The Toluene will "clean" the internals, plus the by-products will contaminate the oil. Oil changes every 1500Km seems a bit on the steep side, depending how often you keep utilising that 2Bar and 8000RPM (what happened to that "I'm being cautious as I don't want another engine blow up" approach? )

I also hope you are keeping a frequent eye on the EGT too.

Honda F1 pre-heated the fuel, otherwise it would not run.

DaveG


----------



## SIHethers (Feb 1, 2006)

Mycroft was a pretender, make no mistake.

He's been banned from most forums, and a lot of what he posted was utter c**p.

IMO


----------



## kismetcapitan (Nov 25, 2005)

I have 70% toluene in my tank and I don't get any misfiring even when cold.

Cleaning out carbon deposits is definitely a good thing.

I am a bit concerned about the lubrication issue. What effect does WD-40 have on octane? I have previously used a liter of ATF but it still didn't take away the "grittiness" of toluene (put a couple drops between your fingers and rub - it's gritty, unlike gasoline, which is pretty slippery).

I've just started to run a 2 bar self-learning regimen for my Power FC, but I think I will drop down to 1.8 bar and 50% toluene. But then again, I've yet to experiment with my now installed meth injector


----------



## roadie (Feb 6, 2006)

Does anybody know what effect a toluene blended fuel will have on emisions?? Toby, you mention your car stinks less, but is there a reduction in hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide ?? I am curious what's coming out of the tailpipe.....


----------



## kismetcapitan (Nov 25, 2005)

for all I know, it could be emitting carcinogenic poisons that'll kill me in a year...but I don't smell 'em.

I've been thinking - this doesn't apply to me because I don't get emissions testing, but it may not be so hard to cook up a special fuel blend for testing day. In addition, car clubs could build special exhausts, crammed with catalytic platinum mesh, actual physical filters (like a cigarette butt), different sections to try to catch NOx and SOx, and so on. Add a lean burn map and turn down the boost, and the dirtiest car could pass easily. Pass the exhaust along to the next guy, restore your map, and away you go


----------



## SIHethers (Feb 1, 2006)

Toby 

1.8 bar is too much for those turbos IMHO


----------



## G-tuned (Aug 24, 2006)

Any updates guys?opcorn: 

Looking to use xylene, got a 205l drum in the workshop:smokin:

I actually can get toluene too, I read in the chemical data and xylene drum seems to be mad of 75% of xylene and 25% of ethyl benzene.

The toluene is 99.8% pure.
Xylene seems to have a higher octane rating, should I go with it or stick to toluene?


----------



## kismetcapitan (Nov 25, 2005)

xylene has a short tank life. You need to use it straight away, like within a day or two.

99.8% pure toluene is pretty standard for industrial feedstock. I actually have my engine apart now, and no ill effects on the pistons. Neither are there any signs of bore wash and the associated scratching.

neither chemical will run well until their are heated up, around 70 degrees or so. I did not run toluene during the winter for this reason, although I had used up to 100% toluene during last summer.

beware - not that many fuel hoses like toluene. expect to blow leaks in a few until you find one that works...in my case, Aeroquip did the trick.

also, toluene is not an invincible fuel. It will still knock if not mapped correctly. but it sure does burn smooth - my normal knock traces are wiggly and slightly jagged in normal street driving, but on the toluene, the knock traces are dead flat.


----------



## G-tuned (Aug 24, 2006)

Does xylene lose its octane when mixed with fuel? I would assume when not mixed should be ok?

Whats the reason that this fuel needs heat to operate properly? Do you mean 70 degrees celcius? thats preety hot. Wouldnt fuel heat up anyway when runing the car for a period of time? recurculation back into the tank from hot engine bay?

So normal fuel hoses are not good then? What about the fuel tank? I have a plastic fuel tank.

I wont be running more than 20-30% mix at maximum so im hoping I can get away without having to heat the thing. 

Have you worked out how to heat the fuel?


----------



## kismetcapitan (Nov 25, 2005)

at 30% you won't have to worry, it's just when you run 80~100% that you run into problems. Toluene is a component of gasoline anyways, you're just raising the concentration of it.

Most toluene users run up to 30% and don't need to make any modifications whatsoever. I just experimented with using much higher concentrations, and then mapped my car for it.

both xylene and toluene have different octane values when mixed, called "blending octanes". You'll still get a nice bump in your octane though.


----------



## G-tuned (Aug 24, 2006)

what was the best mix you ever found without it needing to warm up the fuel ect?


----------

