Thanks for info I saved it in my sticky.

 

Thank you for the well researched write up, I have often wondered about e85 given its increased availability over the last few years and the possibility of increased performance, but have always been concerned and this answers many of my questions.

I know that your research is mostly focused on the twin spark application, but for those with the 3.0 V6 I Have some additional questions regarding a few things that hopefully you or someone else can answer:


1) Is a larger fuel pump required to handle the 33% additional volume or would current spec fuel pump be sufficient? I guess one thing that may indicate is whether the Brazil spec 164 or twin spark vehicles use same as 3.0 v6

2) many sources for converting gas engines to e85 note that a new sensor is needed to monitor the ratio of ethanol to gas as the ratio varies in the US due to cold/warm climates and season change. Again maybe the brazil 164s have something that accounts for this? Not sure how it is in EU/South America, but US ratios vary from 70-88% (class 1,2,3), maybe it's set strictly at 85% elsewhere that this is not a factor?

3) is a different spark plug required? Some sources state that e85 burns cooler...

4) you mention that the Brazil ECU has the mapping for e85 in the emergency program. What effect would you expect/think there would be for cars with ECUs without this mapping?

5) many sources state that e85 has a limited shelf life (but no one seems to state what that threshold is), did you come across anything in your research indicating whether e85 could be left in a car that is put away for the winter without detrimental effect? Would normal winterization methods apply in this case or is there additional precautions?

Just to add a caveat to those in colder climates, some of the sources I've read indicate the use of a block heater is required where temps go below 5 Fahrenheit when a car is not equipped with special starting controls (special pre-injectors and/or separate tank of gas specifically for starting)

Again thank you for the posting, it's always great to see options that can improve our much loved vehicles!

 

Well, it's mostly 156 2.0 TwinSpark because that's my daily driver, but also 2.5L V6 on the 155, which has the same injection system as the 3.0L V6 non-S, just with a smaller bore, stroke and injectors.

1) Fuel pump is fine, and the V6 fuel rail is also fine (same as on the 3.2 V6).

2) The lambda probe adapts to the correct mixture, on aftermarket conversion kits the detection is also realized via the lambda probe. The fuel sensor is just a nice-to-have thing. In Europe the winter mixture is E65, but with larger injectors, it will adapt to anything from gasoline to E85.

3) It burns cooler, yes, because the mixture gets cooled down if you atomize 33% more fuel into the airstream (to condense fuel, you need energy, and it takes it out of the heat). You can install the cooler plugs from the TwinSpark 8V into the 12V V6 if you want, on the 24V the platinum plugs from the later 24V V6 will be fine. In warm climates, it shouldn't make much of a difference though, as the plugs are fine for the cold winter air, too.

4) The Brazilian ECUs have an emergency mapping so that the engine runs on gasoline if the lambda probe breaks. The regular cars have them, too, but if you increase the injector flow rate those values are off by 33% - so the emergency program expects E85 instead of gasoline. That's all, but is something to consider.

5) Everything is safe for Brazil (and made of plastics), so that shouldn't be a problem. If in doubt, do it old school: In the manual for the Fiat Panda (which has a steel gas tank), it states that you have to add some motor oil to the fuel, then let the engine run for five minutes before you store it. It has a mechanical pump, though.

Once you find one of these at your gas station of choice, you can consider the larger valves. Otherwise there's the chance that you have to drive too far to even find one of those.

E10 and E20 are safe for the 164, as the materials, injectors (Bosch says E22 is fine) and ECU can cope with that (the old Bosch Motronics regulate up to about +15% depending on the injectors, because if you keep the injectors open more than 80% of the time (aka duty cycle), they will deteriorate quickly). They subtract what ever amount of fuel is necessary to archive a stochiometric mixture according to the lambda probe, though. Too big of injectors wouldn't be too good either, because the longer you inject into the airstream, the more homogen the mixture. That could be another reason for the 126% figure on the 156. I don't know the exact reason as I'm not an engineer at Fiat Powertrain Technologies do Brazil, though.

E50 and E85 require larger injectors.

 

hi
in israel we dont have this e85
we have 95 octan unleaded or 98 octan unleaded which is not comon and very expensive.
i have a 1994 164 super 3.0 v6 24v
is this relevant for me ?
thanks

 

Somewhat, yes.
The new EV6 injectors give you a bit less fuel consumption and a bit more (and also more consistent) power, and when you're rebuilding the engine or replacing defective fuel injectors, you should use new-style ones.

Whether you want to replace them without any defects depends on the availability of the newer injectors.

 

ok, thanks and
when i look at ebay on 0280155759 i get only 320 cc and not 300 as you write.
do i need also to replace the plugs? i use the ngk pfr6b
thanks

 

Those are the injectors with an increased flow rate for E85, try 0 280 155 832 from Volvo instead. They're readily available.

I also found a guy who replaced the sand-tops (same as 164S) on his BMW 535 with the Volvos:

He said that the car "Pulls harder on the top end (5-6k)", but on a 3.5L with injectors that Alfa uses on a 3.0, that's predictable.
So it's safe to announce that this replacement is confirmed to fit and work fine, at least on a BMW which uses the same stock injectors as the 164S.

 

are you positive about the 0 280 155 832 ?
i get other thing then yours.
what about the 0 280 155 752 or 759 that you write in the start of this post are they wrong ?
thanks

 

155 752 and 155 759 are for the E85 conversion, if you don't have those kinds of fuel at your local gas station, you'll be fine with the 155 832.

This might sound silly, but where can I find these EV6 injectors to buy?

Google up a (local) shop that sells reconditioned injectors, there should be one for every region.

For your 164L, I'd suggest a set of 0 280 155 712 from the Saab 9-5, they're quite easily available. Or as far as the E85-upgrade goes, 0 280 155 832, which are on lots of Volvos.

 

This might sound silly, but where can I find these EV6 injectors to buy?

 

Not due to any specific plan, but I am going to be installing the 4 hole injectors in my 164 soon. I pulled the old injectors out to do o-rings, and remembered that I had a set of newer injectors in a box "somewhere." Against all odds, I found them, so in they will go. I'll report how they work.

 

hi
please report and allso what 164 do you have and what serial nem are the new injectors

 

I didn't take the time to read through all of this but I hope no one is considering putting in an injector that flows 33% more at all pulse widths with out re-mapping the control unit to compensate on regular fuel. That would be BAAAAAD.

 

i just thinking to do so?
what will be wrong ?

 

So, here's my report.
My consumption while driving mostly 85mph and a little inner-city on stock injectors was little less than half a tank on 185mi, or about 23.5MPG. I've seen worse on gasoline, but those people were driving >100mph on the highway.

The car had less power >4000RPM, 0-60mph was about 10.5s (stock on gasoline according to the manual is 8.5s, but that figure is probably with a completely empty tank). If you drive the car economically and never go above 85mph, stock injectors are fine for E85 (on the 156 at least).

Well, I like performance, so I wanted the larger injectors though.

So, I received the right injectors in the mail today.

Bosch# 0 280 155 832.

"director plate quad-orifice" (so are the stock one's on this car).

Here's a little rundown of the installation, most guys around here won't need it anyways and it's for the TwinSpark 16V, not the V6. It takes about 15 minutes, do yourself a favor and do it on a cold engine. Tools needed:

• Torx T40 for the plastic cover
• Torx T30 with a long tip or extension for the fuel rail
• Dremel tool with a cutting wheel or a flat file (I'll explain later)
• (While you're at it and have the Torx handy, eight spark plugs in case they need replacement. Interval 100.000km/60.000mi)

(I know, the engine needs a cleaning, but I couldn't find a washing box that permits engine washing, yet.)
Loosen the four T40 screws holding the plastics cover, then remove it. The screws don't come out because there's a clip-on washer that holds them to the cover.

The rail is fixed from behind with two T30 screws (yellow), which need to be removed.

The connectors are secured with little clips. Don't try to remove them (I remembered that the ones on the 155 need to be removed and lost one here), they're of the push-type. Just push them and pull the connector off the injectors. Also remove the connector from the cam timing adjustment mechanism (the one next to the first injector, looks like the others but doesn't have an orange protector).

Start with the right-most injector and pull the rail upwards, it should come out. Then work your way to the left, one at a time.

Now just remove the clamps at the top and pull the injectors out.

The notches didn't fit, but that's just a minor drawback. I took a Dremel tool and made a notch in the center between the old notch and the edge of the bezel (yellow line). I forgot to check the V6 assembly for whether it uses the upper or lower notch, so it might fit there without modifications.

The Volvo injectors also lack the tab on the back, so take care to align them properly with the connector in the center.

Then just repeat the steps backwards and you're done.

Here's the first start:
Idles a little rough, but revs OK. I let it run for a bit and drove a little, then the idle was smooth and it revved like it's supposed to.

Here's the 0-60mph (-125mhp/shifting point into fifth gear with the new injectors) comparison, it was just 1.5s slower, but the problem was that the car "hung" at 6800RPM in forth gear for about two minutes until it reached the shifting point of ~7000RPM. With the larger injectors, the engine has it's high-RPM power back. The acceleration was also slowing down at 85kmh, while it doesn't with the larger injectors.

The engine sound is a little deeper with the larger injectors and automatic double-clutching of the Selespeed works properly again, too (it was a little slow with the stock injectors).

I do recommend that you use reconditioned injectors on any swap you do, as all injectors are matched to flow the same rate. These here are just for testing purposes.

 

FYI for anyone looking to upgrade the 24V V-6 cars with the Volvo injectors like I am doing right now. 155Dude mentioned having to cut notches in the injector to fit his TwinSpark.

The notches didn't fit, but that's just a minor drawback. I took a Dremel tool and made a notch in the center between the old notch and the edge of the bezel (yellow line). I forgot to check the V6 assembly for whether it uses the upper or lower notch, so it might fit there without modifications. The Volvo injectors also lack the tab on the back, so take care to align them properly with the connector in the center.

For the 24V, the upper notch is used on the original EV1 injector for the retaining clip. The Volvo injector has that notch in the same place, but it does not go all the way around the injector body like the EV1, so the retaining clip will not fit on all the way. You will need to extend that notch on the Volvo injector to make the clip fit correctly. Here's a couple of photos of the injectors side-by-side so you can see what I mean.

There is also no positioning tab on either injector. The connector on all six injectors is aligned to the 7-8 o'clock position (where 12 o'clock is pointed toward the windshield).

 

The lambda probe only has so much authority. It depends on the ECU but a typical factory ECU will give the lambda probe something like 15% authority. Why? What if you lambda probe (o2 sensor here) if faulty and it keeps telling the ECU that the car is too rich, when it's not? You will be running around too lean. It works the other way too.

At full throttle, the lamda probe is turned completely off. 33% more fuel would be terrible in terms of performance.

So sorry you mentioned it 3 times, like I said I didn't read the post just wanted to point out a BEWARE to others that are considering doing this without a re-map.

But yes, if an injector was selected that has roughly the same flow, this would be nice.

 

At full throttle, the lamda probe is turned completely off. 33% more fuel would be terrible in terms of performance.

Zeroly, for the "full-throttle enrichment without lambda regulation" to become a problem, you'll have to travel long distances >95mph. 75mph in fifth gear is nowhere near the full-throttle range of the ECU, and most countries around the world have such a speed limitation - or even less.

Firstly, if you save $1.80 per gallon with E85, why would you put gasoline (E5) into your tank? You obviously want to maximize the miles that you're traveling on E85. If you're in the US, you can't save those $1.80 per gallon as gasoline is already $3 less expensive per gallon than in Europe, so you want to install the stock-flow injectors with better fuel atomization, if the need or wish arrises. Those prices are not bound to be forever, but, at least for me, it's fun to experiment with E85. I still have the stock injectors if I want to reverse this mod, after all, and in the mean time, I can have them reconditioned while I'm still able to drive the car.

To give you a concrete example: The price spread of E85 vs. gasoline in San Jose is 19% but you need 33% more of it, so for you personally, to drive a car with E85 would currently cost you more than gasoline. In the US, it's just not feasible. Gasoline is still the way to go.

But:

The question is for how long until it becomes feasible to replace them for the Corvette/Volvo Turbo injectors. Those numbers are for regular gas, while E85 has a higher AKI than premium gas. If you do the math for premium gas and E85+33%, they cost the same already. But the higher availability of gasoline is still something to consider.

Secondly, E85 is a fuel whose calorific energy is 33% less than those of pure gasoline, so you want those exact 33% more fuel on full-throttle. That's why you replace the injectors in the first place even if the car runs fine on the lambda regulation <4500RPM.

The range of the lambda probe on Bosch Motronic ECUs should be +-25%, and on the modern ones (1995-), 0% is E10.

E10 is well within -25% of the lambda regulation with ~30% larger injectors. Again, E85 is still too expensive to put it into your tank in the US. In Europe, every gas station has E5 "Super" and "Euro-Super E10" as well.

Just wait until I have results for the larger injectors on gasoline, I'll let you know if the ECU throws an error about the lambda regulation on E5 or E10.

You do have a point with the remap, though, but it's mainly not the fuel, it's the ignition. On the V6 12V engines without a knocking sensor, the maps are intended for a min. AKI of 85, while E85's AKI is 94-96. The timings need to be advanced to increase the efficiency (read: power) of the engine. The 24V (and modern 16V) with knocking sensors have maps that are good for an AKI of 94 resp. 100 RON (Premium gas). While you're at it, it's best to remap both though, to adjust the car perfectly to a different kind of fuel.

 

No problem.

Actually for people in the US, if these injectors do produce a finer spray pattern that would be a nice upgrade leaving all else alone. Lower emissions, lower fuel consumption, more power...

 

Exactly.

I've tested it with E10 gasoline, because it's the de-facto standard now and ubiquitous. The consumption goes down to about the same level as normal and the car still runs great to the extend that it's not worth the effort and miles to search for E85 when you're not in your native area where you have a proper source for it.

Other than that, the car also runs great on E85, so however the future of fuels may present itself, the car is able to handle it, which was also something I was interested in to examine. After all, we want to keep our Alfas for a long time and if we can adapt to future changes without something like bottled additives like you'd need to cope for absence of lead or in this case an adjacent ECU with a nasty harness to make our Alfas run on different fuels, our lives get easier and we can have a hassle-free operation of the cars for a longer time.

I just picked the wrong car to test these things, because it's too new already. Something with an M1.7 setup would've been better.

so after enjoing reading all this nice trad what do i need to install if any at all :
i have an1994 164 super 3.0 v6 24v manual.
kn in box filter
big intake but not the biggest (was 39 mm and now from 156 2.5 v6 it is 42 mm but not 45 as the Q has)
no qatlizator, removed it.
ngk pfr6b platinum as the original one
10w60 syntetic agip race oil.

1. dont thuch
2. replace ingector with ??

thanks very much

0 280 156 038 is the modern replacement for the 150 701 which you can find new and even order at Fiat (60665644), as some of the EV1 injectors are out of production already or availability is limited.

If you don't need to, then you don't have to, though, that's up to you.

 

so after enjoing reading all this nice trad what do i need to install if any at all :
i have an1994 164 super 3.0 v6 24v manual.
kn in box filter
big intake but not the biggest (was 39 mm and now from 156 2.5 v6 it is 42 mm but not 45 as the Q has)
no qatlizator, removed it.
ngk pfr6b platinum as the original one
10w60 syntetic agip race oil.

1. dont thuch
2. replace ingector with ??

thanks very much

 

So here it is for Grant:

1) The power is generally the same, but the trottle response is quicker.
Gasoline (E5 actually):

E85 with Volvo injectors:

Do note that these readings are probably imprecise, though. Spark advance is -5.75-6°, which seems to be the hard limit. The engine also feels like it wants to develop more power, but is throttled. If you floor the gas, the car takes off great but quickly recovers to default. What I see also here is that on gasoline, it fluctuates around the limiter (aka it has barely enough fuel to reach it), while on E85, it sticks to the torque limiter, and that's probably what feels like more power.

At all times the engine management ECU of the ME-Motronic models the engine's instantaneous torque development, adjusting the throttle opening according to the relationship between the requested and developed torque.

= You can do whatever the heck you want, the power won't change as the ECU closes the throttle on you. On a older Alfas with the pedal linked via a cable to the throttle, it'll just unleash any additional power like it's supposed to.

The readings are at the lower end of the ±5% that are legally allowed, and I'm technically free to touch the torque map to produce 162.75HP at 6500RPM (178Nm) with a max. torque of 196Nm at 3500RPM as long as I don't change the emissions (by touching the actual fuel maps). That is exactly what the two remaps I'm aware of state to offer, so I might have the torque map rewritten if I find someone who'd like to do it.

Then there was the concern about the prolonged driving at higher speeds:

I can only speak for the 156 here, but the lambda correction even works when driving constantly at 6000RPM.

At your average 2000-2500RPM, the lambda correction works perfectly:

The "self-adjusting FRA parameter" and the "FRA factors" for high and low load (the ones I was referring to before) were 1.06 and 1.03, whatever that means. Most other people have like .9999998, so at least it works.

Consumption in Maniac-Mode is about 15-16 litres on 100km, or 15-16MPG. I drove about 800 miles mostly highway last week and I kept two receipts where I wrote down the distance, one mixed highway and city prior to the trip and one highway only, both state 42 liters on 355km or 20MPG. On gasoline, I did about 25MPG under the same conditions.

As stated earlier, I did put about 20 liters of E10 into the completely empty tank to report that it works fine (which it does), but it took me about 5 minutes to plan the trip with E85 gas stations in mind.

 

I have a 164 with the 3.0 24V.
Of course I am required to buy premium gas.

Here in Oregon, we don't have a lot of E-85 available. But, I do see that changing in the future.

My question, and the reason I'm considering this:
If I change out my single injectors to the 4 hole, can I use a cheaper grade of gas (regular) ? This would pay for itself over a quick time since I drive a hell of a lot.

 

i havesame car and in israel we have to options 95 octan which is like normal here and 98 octan which is like premuime.
i drive 19 years on normal no problem at all. you dont need primume.

 

If you indeed need Premium (which is what Alfa says), it means that E85 is already economically viable in some states (Illinois [some places here have a price spread of 41%, so you're more than even and the whole state is full of E85 gas stations], Ohio, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Nebraska, New York, Michigan - in that order).

The problem with the gas quality is ignition related and can't be corrected via modifications in the fuel supply (at least not in the scope of what I'm blathering about), so it's either Premium or something with Ethanol. The 24V have a knocking sensor and may or may not work on medium or regular.

E85 Prices Oregon

There's some gas stations mostly in Portland, but there's just one price reported which may or may not be representative. Look up the E85 price of local gas stations when you're their area and see whether it's less expensive.

 

Whoa. Not one public gas station in Portland sells E-85. Not for me.

 

Oregon doesn't grow corn, so no one gives a rip about ethanol fuel. No demand = no supply.

[soapbox]
The existing infrastructure for distribution of petroleum fuels currently does not have the capacity to easily take on ethanol fuels -- most gas stations have only 3 tanks, 4 if they sell diesel. Likewise on number of pumps. Where does the ethanol blend go? And of course, ethanol can cause some hoses and seals to deteriorate, so equipment must be surveyed and certified.

All of this is why congress has "authorized" distribution of ethanol fuels, not mandated it. On the other hand, they have mandated the production of ethanol, and the production of ethanol blend fuel. This is because they were lobbied mercilessly by corporate agribusiness, and because they don't bother to ask the right people the right questions.
[/soapbox]

 

[soapbox]
The existing infrastructure for distribution of petroleum fuels currently does not have the capacity to easily take on ethanol fuels -- most gas stations have only 3 tanks, 4 if they sell diesel. Likewise on number of pumps. Where does the ethanol blend go? And of course, ethanol can cause some hoses and seals to deteriorate, so equipment must be surveyed and certified.
[/soapbox]

My local gas station replaced the Supreme pump (AKI 93) with E85, as nobody would buy that stuff anyways.

Whoa. Not one public gas station in Portland sells E-85. Not for me.

Have a road trip to Jay's Garage on SE 7th & Morrison, it appears to be the most popular. The price per gallon is unknown to the internets, though. Another one is Olson Brothers in Milwaukie at 14115 SE McLoughlin Blvd.

Isn't it also true that ethanol based gas does not travel as well? Must be used relatively quickly? Seems I recall reading that somewhere.

The shelf life of both gasoline and ethanol is about three month, after that the octane rating is so low that the engine could start knocking. If you store it in airtight gasoline canisters, it'll be even longer than that. If your fuel vapor recovery system is working properly (which it likely is), then the gas tank on an Alfa with a catalytic converter is also airtight. Just fill the tank completely if you intend to store the car for several month to get the air out.

 

robvolz...If your desire is to save money on fuel, install a propane conversion kit...it's bi fuel...propane or gasoline

 

Isn't it also true that ethanol based gas does not travel as well? Must be used relatively quickly? Seems I recall reading that somewhere.

 

Euro GTA Injector flows...

I don't think I saw this covered.

155Dude, I have a GTV6 which I'm not only planning on doing a 24v engine swap, but the 24V engine in question will be a big bore 3.45L. I wonder if the euro 3.2GTA injectors will be sufficient flow wise or whether I need to start looking at other options. Cams and compression will not be overly agressive...the engine is being built for street use with a 'moderate' target of ~300hp/300 lb-ft.

Do you have the flow rates for the 3.2GTA injectors...?

Thanks for any info!

 

I don't think I saw this covered.

155Dude, I have a GTV6 which I'm not only planning on doing a 24v engine swap, but the 24V engine in question will be a big bore 3.45L. I wonder if the euro 3.2GTA injectors will be sufficient flow wise or whether I need to start looking at other options. Cams and compression will not be overly agressive...the engine is being built for street use with a 'moderate' target of ~300hp/300 lb-ft.

Do you have the flow rates for the 3.2GTA injectors...?

Thanks for any info!

3.2GTA uses the same injectors as the regular 3.2 and 3.0 24V engines, 229cc/min at 43.5psi.

However, the GTA has an elevated fuel pressure of 4.5 bars/65.25psi (compared to 3.5bars of the TwinSpark and 2.5 24V 156s, 3 bars of the early 90ies Alfas and 2.5bar of a stock GTV6). This technically rates them at 280cc/min when installed in the 3.2GTA.

Assuming that you take the fuel pressure regulator and ECU from the a 24V 164 and run the fuel system at 3bar, the perfect injectors would be be somewhere beyond 265cc/min.

If you want to do it right though, maybe do what Alfa did there and increase the fuel pressure for an improved spray pattern, along with 250cc/min (0 280 155 832) injectors. That will require an uprated pump and a different pressure regulator, i.e. this one (FP165-984). And a Megasquirt.

 

And if anybody is in Portland, just head over to Atomic Auto, the NW's top SAAB shop with stacks of old parts, new and used

 

I'm seriously thinking of picking up some of the Volvo S80 injectors after reading this thread. E85 is not available in New England, but I like the idea of improved fuel spray patterns and all that implies. S80s are cheap and plentiful in the local scrapyards. I don't think the extra ~10cc of flow per injector is going to seriously harm the tuning and I'm certain the fuel pump can handle it.

Not sure if everyone here knows this (and I'm sorry if I am repeating old info, I'm an Alfa n00b), but the 164 V6s use the same Bosch fuel pump as several V12 Ferraris, like the 456, 550 Maranello, and F50. Those use 2 pumps (one per bank) and 240cc-250cc range injectors. I also got an introduction to Ferrari pricing - holy markup, Batman!