Yeah... all of that makes sense to me too. I'm pretty sure signal modifiers aren't viable anymore for modern ECUs and all of their sensors, if you're trying to do anything having to do with enriching closed loop settings or even fooling an ECU into advancing timing based on an alternate map or maps.

I went through some of that when I had my Hyundai Genesis Coupe V6. I foolishly paid over $450 for a "fuel controller" module from a place called Road Race Motorsports. It had plug and play harness connections to place itself in front of the MAF sensor and supposedly had a custom AFR map programmed into it, so it could lean out the overly rich defaults used in the factory maps -- gaining some power and saving gas at the same time.

Sounded good on paper, except in reality? The ECU was smart enough to learn around its changes over time. Basically, it had enough other sources of data input so it could see something had changed, and after 40-50 miles of driving, the improvements the box gave you initially were always negated (until you pulled the battery terminal and forced a reset, anyway).

I've become a big believer that with today's cars, you have to re-flash the ECU (and probably also the TCU) to make any worthwhile changes. This E85 box *may* also be this way, except I think it may actually work in this scenario because they're not attempting to trick anything to improve performance. They're basically keeping the ECU "content" that it's making its own adjustments within its usual tolerances, and getting back results that tell it the adjustments had the expected results.