Author Topic: Husky 94  (Read 5770 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline silent

  • WSC Supporter
  • rivaling ZZ-TOP
  • *****
  • Posts: 4144
  • Location: Calgary
  • Ride: A3
Husky 94
« on: February 02, 2008, 06:20:27 PM »
I have been looking at a swap option that has been using the 96RON gas over in Japan.  Apparently Japanese ECUs are much more aggressive than the ECUs we see here and are used to running on higher octane.  Would Husky 94 be sufficient to run these cars?  I have heard so many conflicting opinions from people that it's making me sick.  Some are saying not to use ethanol blended gasoline unless I have been tuned for it and others are saying it will be fine.

How does the Husky 94 compare to 93 octane gas in other areas?  Is it better?  worse?  the same?  Is there any way to make this work with the car, or am I looking at a whole new engine management setup?

What about you JDM guys?  Tawheed, WRX_RA?  How have you guys found your cars and what kind of fuels are you using?

Online WRX_RA

  • rivaling ZZ-TOP
  • ****
  • Posts: 1812
  • RA Motorsports - Element
    • RA Motorsports
  • Location: Edmonton
  • Ride: 1987 Corolla GT-S, 2003 T4R V8, 2018 FXT
Re: Husky 94
« Reply #1 on: February 03, 2008, 03:35:08 PM »
I'm interested to know this as well.
But I got my powerFC that I will be tuning for 91, I prefer to stay away from the ethanol stuff.

Every JDM car that I have driven I just used 91 octane and A octane booster since they were rarely driven price didn't matter.

_Matt
@a_yeg_86

Need powder coating? PM me!

Kavy

  • Guest
Re: Husky 94
« Reply #2 on: February 04, 2008, 07:05:42 PM »
I agree to stay away from the ethanol gas as well.

Offline silent

  • WSC Supporter
  • rivaling ZZ-TOP
  • *****
  • Posts: 4144
  • Location: Calgary
  • Ride: A3
Re: Husky 94
« Reply #3 on: February 04, 2008, 07:35:42 PM »
Yeah, I'm thinking of buying a J&S Safeguard to retard timing and just running 91 octane.

Offline neverLift

  • rivaling ZZ-TOP
  • ****
  • Posts: 1052
  • Location: Vancouver
Re: Husky 94
« Reply #4 on: February 04, 2008, 08:36:16 PM »
yeah i was warned by the service guys to not use ethanol blends either
don't we have 92 here?

Offline silent

  • WSC Supporter
  • rivaling ZZ-TOP
  • *****
  • Posts: 4144
  • Location: Calgary
  • Ride: A3
Re: Husky 94
« Reply #5 on: February 04, 2008, 08:53:01 PM »
Quote from: "neverLift"
yeah i was warned by the service guys to not use ethanol blends either
don't we have 92 here?
Ethanol blended

Offline Airboy

  • Vendor
  • rivaling ZZ-TOP
  • *
  • Posts: 2156
    • Airboy Tuning
  • Location: Calgary
  • Ride: 06 WRX
Re: Husky 94
« Reply #6 on: February 04, 2008, 08:54:30 PM »
I don't have any data for the relative performance of Husky94 and other "real" 93 octane gas.  What I do have is data for Husky 94 vs Shell V-Power 91.  The Husky 94 allowed more ignition timing advance in the area of ~2*.  This translated to ~15WHP when I compared data logs from similar conditions (~-2C).


I would like to know why people object to the use of Ethanol blended gasoline.

Gain 50 ft-lbs, ask me how! :-)

Offline Ambystom01

  • WSC Pot Stick Posse
  • rivaling ZZ-TOP
  • ****
  • Posts: 12128
  • Not contributing to WSC since 2008
  • Location: Deadmonton
  • Ride: 2015 VW tree-killer, 1990 Mazda hairdresser
Re: Husky 94
« Reply #7 on: February 04, 2008, 08:54:49 PM »
Is there any conclusive proof that ethanol blended gases are unsafe?
Quote from: mudferret
Ambystom01 shows the funny picture whom is thine boss.


Offline silent

  • WSC Supporter
  • rivaling ZZ-TOP
  • *****
  • Posts: 4144
  • Location: Calgary
  • Ride: A3
Re: Husky 94
« Reply #8 on: February 04, 2008, 09:07:57 PM »
Quote from: "Ambystom01"
Is there any conclusive proof that ethanol blended gases are unsafe?
All I know is that I have been told by a reputable tuner that you need to be tuned for ethanol blends as they make you run slightly leaner.  I don't have any first hand results so I guess it would be best to ask the tuning gurus on this board.

Quote from: "Airboy"
I don't have any data for the relative performance of Husky94 and other "real" 93 octane gas.  What I do have is data for Husky 94 vs Shell V-Power 91.  The Husky 94 allowed more ignition timing advance in the area of ~2*.  This translated to ~15WHP when I compared data logs from similar conditions (~-2C).


I would like to know why people object to the use of Ethanol blended gasoline.
Thanks Sunny, you have just dismissed everything I have heard about the Husky blend.  Do you happen to have any logs showing AFR on the stock ECU with Husky 94?

Offline Airboy

  • Vendor
  • rivaling ZZ-TOP
  • *
  • Posts: 2156
    • Airboy Tuning
  • Location: Calgary
  • Ride: 06 WRX
Re: Husky 94
« Reply #9 on: February 04, 2008, 09:58:24 PM »
Quote from: "silent"
Do you happen to have any logs showing AFR on the stock ECU with Husky 94?

The most recent logs that I have for Husky94 didn't show noticeable difference in the AFR reading.  In the Summer the difference was ~0.2 to 0.3 (higher).  Husky will use more or less Ethanol in the blends depending on the cost (hence the "up to" label on the pump).

As for running leaner, I think that is somewhat mis-understood.  For the same fuel mass sprayed into the cylinder, the exhaust AFR reading will be higher for Ethanol blended vs straight gasoline but the air-to-fuel ratio, in terms of air mass and fuel mass, hasn't changed so it is not really running leaner.  Only the apparent AFR has increased.

Over time, the fuel trim would trend positive by a couple of % to add more fuel because the ECU thinks it is running lean from the slightly higher AFR reading.

Gain 50 ft-lbs, ask me how! :-)

Offline wingless

  • WSC Supporter
  • rivaling ZZ-TOP
  • *****
  • Posts: 6081
  • testing, testing, 1,2,3...!
    • Shane
  • Location: Tuscan Hills, Calgary
  • Ride: 2018 WRB STi and 2000 JDM Forester STi
Re: Husky 94
« Reply #10 on: February 05, 2008, 11:48:21 AM »
I've been running the Husky 94 since Sept when I bought the car. Did the stg2 flash in November and haven't had any issues... if anything I believe I'm running a bit rich...

As for the question of Husky 94 on the stock ECU here is a log I pulled in Oct (can someone put this into one of those fancy curves or???)
Time   Engine Speed (RPM)   Manifold Absolute Pressure (PSI)   Throttle Opening Angle (%)   Mass Air Flow (g/s)   Intake Air Temperature (°C)   Ignition Timing (°BTDC)   Atmospheric Pressure (PSI)   Knock Correction (°BTDC)   Manifold Relative Pressure (PSI)   Primary Wastegate Duty Cycle (%)   Rear Defogger Switch Signal (On/Off)
0   2499   5.514   7.45   13.79   23   36   12.624   0   -6.965   0   1
172   2503   5.659   7.45   13.79   23   36   12.624   0   -6.965   0   1
344   2525   5.659   7.45   14.02   23   36   12.624   0   -6.965   0   1
500   2522   11.318   86.67   42.6   23   39   12.624   0   -1.306   3.14   1
672   2581   13.349   100   37.44   23   35   12.624   0   0.725   12.55   1
844   2561   13.929   100   38.98   23   34   12.624   1   1.306   18.82   1
1016   2559   14.945   100   41.98   23   31   12.624   3   2.322   28.24   1
1187   2579   15.525   100   43.62   23   30   12.624   5   3.192   37.65   1
1359   2619   16.541   100   47.28   23   27   12.624   6   3.918   43.92   1
1516   2621   17.122   100   49.83   23   26   12.624   6   4.933   53.33   1
1687   2657   18.137   100   52.46   23   25   12.624   6   5.514   59.61   1
1859   2692   19.153   100   56.67   23   23   12.624   7   6.529   69.02   1
2031   2709   20.024   100   59.65   23   21   12.624   7   7.4   75.29   1
2203   2739   21.184   100   63.64   23   20   12.624   7   8.561   84.71   1
2359   2767   21.91   100   66.62   23   18   12.624   7   9.722   92.55   1
2531   2803   23.216   100   73.11   22   16   12.624   5   10.592   92.16   1
2703   2827   24.667   100   78.7   22   16   12.624   6   12.043   92.16   1
2875   2851   25.682   100   84.22   22   16   12.624   6   13.059   92.16   1
3047   2887   27.569   100   93.12   22   13   12.624   7   14.945   92.16   1
3203   2930   28.875   100   96.76   22   12   12.624   7   16.976   82.75   1
3375   2990   30.761   100   102.43   22   11   12.624   6   18.137   73.33   1
3547   3000   31.631   100   109.07   22   10   12.624   5   18.427   58.43   1
3719   3046   32.212   100   107.07   22   10   12.624   5   18.427   48.24   1
3891   3071   31.196   100   100.03   22   11   12.624   6   18.427   33.33   1
4062   3137   29.165   100   93.58   22   14   12.624   7   16.541   25.1   1
4219   3171   25.247   100   79.93   22   18   12.624   6   12.624   29.41   1
4391   3190   23.216   100   73.86   21   21   12.624   8   10.012   38.82   1
4562   3247   22.345   100   79.34   21   21   12.624   8   9.722   45.1   1
4734   3274   23.361   100   91.12   21   18   12.624   7   11.608   54.51   1
4906   3314   26.118   100   99.79   21   17   12.624   7   13.494   58.04   1
5062   3350   28.875   100   112.86   21   13   12.624   7   16.251   53.73   1
5234   3377   30.471   100   117.56   21   11   12.624   6   17.847   44.71   1
5406   3390   30.325   100   110.09   21   14   12.624   8   17.702   29.8   1
5578   3450   28.584   100   96.79   21   19   12.624   9   14.8   22.75   1
5750   3492   24.957   100   86.8   21   21   12.624   9   12.333   28.24   1
5922   3519   22.2   100   82.17   21   24   12.624   9   9.576   37.65   1
6078   3538   22.055   100   85.05   21   24   12.624   9   9.431   43.92   1
6250   3592   23.941   100   100.99   21   20   12.624   9   11.318   53.33   1
6422   3613   26.408   100   111.82   21   16   12.624   7   14.8   56.47   1
6594   3630   29.745   100   126.75   21   12   12.624   6   17.122   48.63   1
6766   3667   31.196   100   129.82   21   11   12.624   5   18.427   33.73   1
6922   3726   30.035   100   123.16   21   12   12.624   8   17.412   24.31   1
7094   3771   26.698   100   104.86   21   19   12.624   9   14.075   21.96   1
7266   3771   24.086   100   96.07   21   21   12.624   9   11.463   27.45   1
7437   3824   22.055   100   91.79   21   25   12.624   9   9.431   36.86   1
7609   3850   22.2   100   96.72   21   24   12.624   9   10.157   46.27   1
7766   3878   24.667   100   113.13   21   20   12.624   9   12.043   52.55   1
7937   3902   26.698   100   127.31   21   16   12.624   8   15.235   54.51   1
8109   3947   29.745   100   136.06   21   15   12.624   8   17.122   45.88   1
8281   3991   30.471   100   134.02   21   14   12.624   8   17.847   31.76   1
8453   4023   29.455   100   127.87   21   16   12.624   8   16.831   23.14   1
8625   4050   26.553   100   113.65   20   19   12.624   8   13.929   21.96   1
8781   4076   24.522   100   105.34   20   22   12.624   8   10.882   30.2   1
8953   4074   22.345   100   98.62   20   25   12.624   9   9.722   36.47   1
9125   4094   22.2   100   105.34   20   24   12.624   8   9.867   45.88   1
9297   4160   23.796   100   112.86   20   21   12.624   8   11.173   52.16   1
9469   4160   26.408   100   127.87   20   18   12.624   8   13.784   58.04   1

sorry if it's tough to read... I can't attach CSV files?
__________________________
Signature

FS: 2014 BMW 320i x-drive 2.0 turbo awd. PM for details

Offline jonny

  • rivaling ZZ-TOP
  • ****
  • Posts: 1294
  • full of awesomeness
    • http://www.westernsubaruclub.com
  • Location: Edmonton
  • Ride: Ow-dee
Re: Husky 94
« Reply #11 on: February 05, 2008, 02:11:55 PM »
so those of you running husky 94... which stage 2 map are you using?
Current stage of evolution:

Honda -> Acura -> Subaru -> Subaru -> Audi

Offline kold911

  • Patchy Faced
  • **
  • Posts: 323
  • Ride: 2014 forester XT, 1/2 of a 2003 wrx
Re: Husky 94
« Reply #12 on: February 05, 2008, 02:17:24 PM »
I've been using the husky 94 and just last month I switched from the Stg.2 OTS to the Stage 2 ACN Map and using the butt dyno my car pulls a lot stronger on the ACN.
Jeff

Offline Hurricane

  • WSC Supporter
  • rivaling ZZ-TOP
  • *****
  • Posts: 2259
  • Bazinga!
  • Location: Calgary
  • Ride: '14 Fiesta ST
Re: Husky 94
« Reply #13 on: February 05, 2008, 02:19:49 PM »
Quote from: "jonny"
so those of you running husky 94... which stage 2 map are you using?

My own  :twisted:

Jeff
Genius has its limits, but stupidity is boundless
"If in doubt, flat out" - Colin McRae (RIP)

Offline wingless

  • WSC Supporter
  • rivaling ZZ-TOP
  • *****
  • Posts: 6081
  • testing, testing, 1,2,3...!
    • Shane
  • Location: Tuscan Hills, Calgary
  • Ride: 2018 WRB STi and 2000 JDM Forester STi
Re: Husky 94
« Reply #14 on: February 05, 2008, 02:48:40 PM »
Quote from: "kold911"
I've been using the husky 94 and just last month I switched from the Stg.2 OTS to the Stage 2 ACN Map and using the butt dyno my car pulls a lot stronger on the ACN.

me too... switched to the ACN map about a month ago.... much better.
__________________________
Signature

FS: 2014 BMW 320i x-drive 2.0 turbo awd. PM for details

Offline 99 rs

  • rivaling ZZ-TOP
  • ****
  • Posts: 1156
  • Location: Edmonton
  • Ride: 2002 Lexus IS300 Wagon
Re: Husky 94
« Reply #15 on: February 05, 2008, 04:27:27 PM »
So will a stage 2 AccessPORT such as I have now be safe to use with the Husky gas?  Husky is so much closer to my house.  Also is it safe to mix Shell and Husky.  Suppose I have a 1/4 tank of shell and then top it up with Husky.  Or vise versa?

Offline xrayvsn

  • WSC Member
  • rivaling ZZ-TOP
  • ****
  • Posts: 1442
  • In the dark
  • Location: Calgary
Re: Husky 94
« Reply #16 on: February 05, 2008, 04:42:11 PM »
Your ECU will learn to adjust the AFR such that it is running stoichiometric during closed loop fuelling.  It uses the rear O2 sensor to adjust the fuelling to always try to maintain a lambda of 1, and it will store the value of any increase or decrease from the fuelling table in the RAM.  When you go into open loop (like at WOT, or under boost), it will apply that same amount of correction to the fuelling table.

For example, you fill up with Esso 91 and your ECU learns that you need a certain amount of fuelling when you cruise around.  At 1/2 a tank, you fill with Husky 94 with 10% EtOH and now your car needs 3% more fuel to reach stoich when you cruise.  It stores this in the RAM, so that when you enter open loop, it automatically adds 3% more fuel than what is called for by the basemap.

To top this off, your ECU has some leeway with the timing, and it will try to run as much timing as it can before it decides there is knock.  The Husky 94 is the most knock resistant pump fuel we have available to us in Alberta, and should allow your car to run as much timing as is called for, providing your basemap has reasonable timing, boost and AFRs.

The short answer is, you can run Husky 94 or mix it up if you want.  It may take a little while before the ECU learns the new long term fuel trims.

Offline silent

  • WSC Supporter
  • rivaling ZZ-TOP
  • *****
  • Posts: 4144
  • Location: Calgary
  • Ride: A3
Re: Husky 94
« Reply #17 on: February 05, 2008, 05:04:52 PM »
I thought it was the Front O2 that caused fueling adjustments since it was a wideband sensor, whereas the rear O2 was just for emissions?

Offline xrayvsn

  • WSC Member
  • rivaling ZZ-TOP
  • ****
  • Posts: 1442
  • In the dark
  • Location: Calgary
Re: Husky 94
« Reply #18 on: February 05, 2008, 05:22:16 PM »
Quote from: "silent"
I thought it was the Front O2 that caused fueling adjustments since it was a wideband sensor, whereas the rear O2 was just for emissions?

Oops my bad - you're right.

Trying to type quickly between cases at work = fail.

Offline wingless

  • WSC Supporter
  • rivaling ZZ-TOP
  • *****
  • Posts: 6081
  • testing, testing, 1,2,3...!
    • Shane
  • Location: Tuscan Hills, Calgary
  • Ride: 2018 WRB STi and 2000 JDM Forester STi
Re: Husky 94
« Reply #19 on: February 05, 2008, 06:18:08 PM »
some good reading here. It makes sense that the ECU will take time to learn the new 'mix'.. what I'm not 100% I understand is this open/closed loop thing?
__________________________
Signature

FS: 2014 BMW 320i x-drive 2.0 turbo awd. PM for details

Online WRX_RA

  • rivaling ZZ-TOP
  • ****
  • Posts: 1812
  • RA Motorsports - Element
    • RA Motorsports
  • Location: Edmonton
  • Ride: 1987 Corolla GT-S, 2003 T4R V8, 2018 FXT
Re: Husky 94
« Reply #20 on: February 05, 2008, 07:08:00 PM »
hmmm..
Well thats interesting I was always told not to use ethanol blended gases...
From what I have seen here looks like when I get a tune in summer, I'll be tuning it for 94

_Matt
@a_yeg_86

Need powder coating? PM me!

Offline 99 rs

  • rivaling ZZ-TOP
  • ****
  • Posts: 1156
  • Location: Edmonton
  • Ride: 2002 Lexus IS300 Wagon
Re: Husky 94
« Reply #21 on: February 05, 2008, 09:28:24 PM »
I think I may have a problem then.  The AP stage 2 map disables the front and rear oxygen sensors.  Or at least it turns off the check engine lights from them with a catless downpipe/up-pipe.

Offline silent

  • WSC Supporter
  • rivaling ZZ-TOP
  • *****
  • Posts: 4144
  • Location: Calgary
  • Ride: A3
Re: Husky 94
« Reply #22 on: February 05, 2008, 09:35:08 PM »
Quote from: "99 rs"
I think I may have a problem then.  The AP stage 2 map disables the front and rear oxygen sensors.  Or at least it turns off the check engine lights from them with a catless downpipe/up-pipe.
Not your front O2 sensor, that is before any cats in your system.  The O2 sensor controls everything closed loop, so it'll be left untouched by the AP.  The stage2 map just eliminates the emissions CELs so people that went catless aren't harassed by the orange light in the cluster.

Offline 99 rs

  • rivaling ZZ-TOP
  • ****
  • Posts: 1156
  • Location: Edmonton
  • Ride: 2002 Lexus IS300 Wagon
Re: Husky 94
« Reply #23 on: February 05, 2008, 09:55:21 PM »
I have a sti up-pipe though that doesn't have a hole for the front O2 sensor.  The rear one is still in.  I didn't install the up-pipe yet.

Offline silent

  • WSC Supporter
  • rivaling ZZ-TOP
  • *****
  • Posts: 4144
  • Location: Calgary
  • Ride: A3
Re: Husky 94
« Reply #24 on: February 05, 2008, 09:56:31 PM »
Quote from: "99 rs"
I have a sti up-pipe though that doesn't have a hole for the front O2 sensor.  The rear one is still in.  I didn't install the up-pipe yet.
That's an EGT sensor.  Your front O2 should be in the exhaust manifold.