Would You Use E85?

[Damn True]

Two words:



Fast Diesel

[KsKustoms]

i can only really debunk the one point in monza's link that I know for sure: fuel economy IS affected. I can't believe they'd suggest that it isn't a serious effect when going from gas to E85. Even using their data and extrapolating it (which is DANGEROUS), that going from gas to E10 (about 4% less energy) resulted in only 1.5% less economy, going to E85 (about 45% less energy) is going to cut your economy by 17%. That's pretty substantial. It is also overly optimistic! Yes, driving habit can ALSO affect economy, but that's a total red herring. If you changed habits AND stuck with gas, you'd be saving even more fuel.

I can only wonder, therefore, how much twisting and misdirection is present in the rest of that text, being uninformed enough not to be sure for myself.

This is a big issue. Even though it is 110 octain, it produces less power. It cost more to buy per gallon and the cars burn more of it per mile therefore the cost of running it is exponentially higher

[LowBuckX]

This is a big issue. Even though it is 110 octain, it produces less power. It cost more to buy per gallon and the cars burn more of it per mile therefore the cost of running it is exponentially higher

Your missing a point here. E85 is 105 octane abd cost the same as regular unleaded. 105 octane race gas cost $5.00 a gallon.

If you bump up your compression to make full use of the 105 octane then you gain back a little of the lost milage. I think it would be great to convert our rods to run a "MORE" eco friendly fuel.

Maybe if everyone did it then the EPA would get off our arses and stop trying to kill our classics.

[MonzaRacer]

No it doesnt produce less power it just takes more fuel to produce the SAME power.
E85 is now regulated to an average of 105 octanes but this depends on the mix ratio according to the amount of gasoline.
See the reason it takes more to run per mile (average anywhere from 20 percent to 30 percent all engine parameters the same) that is because it roughly 30 percent more to make same power.
The biggest problem is everyone thinks it higher priced but it isnt around here.
Now if you dont have a local distributor voluntarily shippin it in and having the pump in the area(some areas are now regulating that certain size chains HAVE to have a pump selling E85 so if they have to bring it in from farther away, maintain the storage, and they do have to keep track of the ambient contamination which (to see if it has absorbed too much water) can be tedious and time consuming.
As for being expotentially higher no,,, just the fact that say you get 35 mpg with your ride and the T56 then you might get as bad as 24.5 (assuming a 30 percent loss in mileage but this is doubtful for a percentage loss) but for the most part I have seen the worst of 27 percent(as reported in a FlexFuel Tahoe by Consumer Reports) but in a car I helped tune last year we had a 396 cu in SBC with AFR 195 heads and 11.9 to 1 and we tuned it to run with E85 from a 950 HP, and he ran a TKO600 and 373 gears in a 3670 lb car and he lost approx, 18 percent, it made 523 hp on gas and on E85 it turned 520 hp.
basicly the same carb but we had to change the metering blocks and the needle seats. will EVERY car make a good conversion, no but if you watch your Ps and Qs then you can tune this to run great and not loose too much AND it allows you to keep the higher compression, tune for max power and still run good and be environmetally friendly.
Around here we had E85 as the local station just built a new building and put in E85. Premium gasoline is around $2.399 and the E85 $2.149.
So to go the same distance (using an abysmal 30 percent increase in fuel to go same) for 10 gallons of 93 octane premium fuel $23.99 and for 13 gallons of 105 octane E85 is $27.94, so we are talking less than $5.00 difference and this is a small price to pay for being cleaner and besides if you had to try to run all the time with nearly 12 to 1 compression then you would be buying $3.95 a gallon racing unleaded pluss you have 2 taxes added in of $0.18 and $0.18 (at least in Indiana) and this is already added into regular pump gas but not on barreled fuel, so you are paying $4.13 plus having to ship, store and even pay a $25.00 a barrel deposit. And then you have to carry it.
So you get to pay 16 percent more, BUT be cleaner, be more economicly friendly(more money in US farmers pockets) and gee whiz I still live by the dare to be different credo.
You dont like it so be it but when it does get more prevailent and i drive up in my FlexFI ran car I can say to anyone lets see if you can do what I do, you wont be able too.
But I will. and I know that the year my family plants corn on the family farm the local grain prcessing plant will buy it and we will have more local money in the economy.
Till I get a chance to finish and tune my FlexFI I will have 2 carbs and run both super and E85 and heck I may just use E85 and straight gas mixed and just live with a slightly rich car but I wont, Ill just build 2 carbs.
As a person selling parts for custom parts i would have figure you would try to embrasse it as a usefull tool.
Now I dont know what it cost in your area or if it is in your area but premium is high too.
It isnt expontetially higher but any one using it should expect to pay a little more to go the same distance, but it will be cleaner and it will clean your engine of carbon build up too.
My truck has increased in mileage since the change from gas with MTBE to E10.
Another point that I made is that even burning more its a renewable fuel source, its cleaner burning and I think it gives me a little edge over others.
Lee

[LowBuckX]

in a car I helped tune last year we had a 396 cu in SBC with AFR 195 heads and 11.9 to 1 and we tuned it to run with E85 from a 950 HP, and he ran a TKO600 and 373 gears in a 3670 lb car and he lost approx, 18 percent, it made 523 hp on gas and on E85 it turned 520 hp.
basicly the same carb but
Lee

523 on pump gas ($2.39gallon) or racing fuel($5.00 gallon)? Just to beclear.

[Fuelie Fan]

"E85 is far and above a better energy source." No it is not. It is less energy dense than gasoline, diesel, CNG, or LPG. In fact, from a pure energy standpoint, it's one of the worst.

The main by-products of gasoline combustion are ALSO CO2 and water vapor. In fact, the main combustion byproducts of ANY hydrocarbon combustion are CO2 and water. We are just as likely to "recapture CO2" for refrigeration from current vehicles as we are by going to Ethanol. However, i haven't heard of anyone doing this.

Even including the reabsorbtion by plant life in the ethanol cycle, well-to-wheel reduction of CO2 is only 6 to 7 percent. By comparison, LPG lowers CO2 production by 24%. So, your suggestion that propane is dirtier is also at least partially flawed. I don't know whether propane has it's own specific emissions challenges, I'd have to do more research.

I can't say that I'm on board with your suggestion that a little NOx production can be a good thing. Also, NOx is NOT N2O. NOx stands for two different compounds, NO2 and NO3. The x signifies the different subscripts of those compounds.

[harshman]

My .02 again.


Here's the thing... nobody wants it. It hasn't proven itself to be the fuel of choice. There isn't any desire to switch from regular fuel. No demand on a poor product. Again, until a product comes out and blows the shorts off of the current fuels, nobody will be interested. If there was a shortage of oil then the demand would be there to invent something. There isn't an oil shortage and thus no demand. I'd suggest to stop trying to reinvent the classics and the lame attempt to shun the environmentalists away from our sport and genuinely expose them for who they are – intolerable of other people.


If you want to drive a hybrid car because it makes you sleep better at night, have at it. I'm all for keeping the environment clean – I pick up trash and what not, however do not push the global warming junk on us without scientific proof. You will have a fight on your hands.

[LowBuckX]

(political portions of the post removed)

And What the hell happened The Pro-Touring niche used to be underground forward thinkers. Now It seems to be a bunch of stuck in the past pro-streeters trying to follow a fad. Its ashame.

[Damn True]

There is a tremendous difference between forward thinking innovation and throwing large sums of money to "early adopt" a technology that has no real future. E85 is the Betamax of alternative fuels.

[LowBuckX]

BetaMAx was superior to VHS .But VHS was cheaper and had exstended playing time.

[Damn True]

How's that "better" Betamax working out?

Netscape was supposed to better too.

I'm not dumping money into either of them.

[MonzaRacer]

HMM
So E85 is the betamax of fuels.
Then why would domestic and forien manufacturers spend BILLIONS researching the fuel as a source AND Ford and GM have stepped up to the bar and sell such fueled cars.
Oxides of Nitrogen are less harmful than most think I would be more worried over CO and HC.
Now if you live in a big city with polution yes they do have NOX problems BUT that isnt strictly from an auto point of view.
As for E85 being a better or worse fuel source, I feel and so do many proponenets of E85 that for the fact the amount of unuseable byproduct from production.
The production of propane is by it self a a dirtier process. Dont get me wrong I have helped tune CNG/LPG setups but it is a major pain in the A$$. It isnt as convienent as pulling into a gas station and filling my tank.
Is E85 a workable fuel, does it give back more than it takes to produce and is it cleaner than gasoline? Yes on all counts.
The byproducts of the fermentation process is Distillers Dried Grains, the crust that gets pulled off that can be used to start a new batch of mash, CO2 production from the vats CAN be collected and used and because of the current technology the heat used for distillation is collected for less heat loss.
I believe ( I am looking for the actual number) that somewhere between 83 and 92 percent of the leftovers from making Ethanol is recovered and used.
To try and down play E85 is simply short sided. Is it in the delivery system and it will take time to spread nation wide.
Will it cure all our ills but you nit pick and forgetthat it had mutiple benefits and can be used by us, performance enthusiasts, easy as swaping a a carb and plugs, and maybe a few rubber lines and such.
Several companies are developing over the counter carbs for E85 and I would guess that at least 95 percent of the fuel system aprts out there can handle Ethanol with little or no degradiation in life or performance.
I proved that just the running part (provided you have it set up) didnt cost large amounts to run.
I called a friend today and he has a 01 Mustang with a transplanted 3.0 V6 from a Ranger that was flex fuel, he used a small turbo and the appropriate tuning software and he has to date gotten a very nice 32 mpg and so far it has made a real world 328 hp at the rear wheels and so far he has ate 2 sets of rear gears (spiders exploding) and is waiting on a new round of parts to beef the diff up. Now 328 hp from a flex fueled vehicle is pretty sweet . Now you have to figure if you take the same power production and use the same power per liter it would be over 620 hp for a 5.7 liter engine.
So try to bash it but you cant.Its merits will stand on themselves.
It does work , it has benefits and thye cannot be swept away.
The emissions issues are slight and the fact that these can be addressed with tuning and such (for regulated cars) make it even more viable.
I remember a scant, what 10 or so years ago that air ride was looked upon as a fad for show cars and now we have cars burning up the tracks with ,oh wait, air ride.
Lets give it a chance instead of nit pick it to death. In 10 years I feel we will have a lot of flex fueled hot rods.
Lee

[harshman]

"In 10 years I feel we will have a lot of flex fueled hot rods."

Why? What's the point?

[Damn True]

If they can begin to use materials other than corn to create the stuff it has a chance (though slim). It (E-85) is a bandaid solution for gas burners. The whole thing is a lot more about making people feel good about what they do, than it is changing any real effect of what they do.

It isn't cheaper (until they use something other than corn), it isn't very stable, it dosen't ship well, it dosen't provide mileage improvements (27% worse in fact), it provides a negligible difference in CO2 output and in order to take advantage of the potential ability to make more power you have to have compression ratios in the 15:1 range which renders the engine useless for straight commercial grades of gasoline. Not to mention the process is using one of the least efficient fermentables in terms of its yield per acre.

Wow sounds great.

The real long term solution, IMO, for the majority of the US auto/truck fleet is diesel. The yield per acre of the crops that can be used for biodiesel is far higher than crops used for alky (Thank you George Washington Carver in honor of black history month). It can be mixed in any proportion with dino-diesel which can be produced in far higher yield per barrel than gasoline.

Let's define the conversation a bit. If we are talking about converting an enthusiast vehicle to E85 I suppose it might be feasible. Provided you live in an area where it is readilly available, provided you are willing to absorb the increased operating costs, and if you are willing to make a full conversion (the 15:1 compression thing) permanently eschew straight dino-fuel.

If we are talking about having a large percentage of the US auto/truck fleet running on the stuff.....I don't see it. Diesel IMO is the way to go here. The engines are already in existance as the majority of European vehicles are running diesel. We simply need to convert existing refineries to produce a majority of diesel rather than gasoline as demand requires, and facilitate the production of bio-diesel which again, can be done in much greater quantities given current production technolgies than alky.

[LowBuckX]

[quote=Damn True]If they can begin to use materials other than corn to create the stuff it has a chance (though slim). It (E-85) is a bandaid solution for gas burners. The whole thing is a lot more about making people feel good about what they do, than it is changing any real effect of what they do.

[\quote]

This shows how uninformed you are on ethanol. Ethanol can be produced from any starch sugar or cellulose producing plants products. People are using grass clippings to make the stuff.
GMs Go yellow campaign is to blame for the corn only thoughts.


We have a plant being built about 50 miles from me that will take exspired soda pop beer milk ice cream base and other garbage and make ethanol and then recycle the plastic and aluminum to curtail the costs of production.

[MonzaRacer]

[quote=Damn True]If they can begin to use materials other than corn to create the stuff it has a chance (though slim). It (E-85) is a bandaid solution for gas burners. The whole thing is a lot more about making people feel good about what they do, than it is changing any real effect of what they do.

It isn't cheaper (until they use something other than corn), it isn't very stable, it dosen't ship well, it dosen't provide mileage improvements (27% worse in fact), it provides a negligible difference in CO2 output and in order to take advantage of the potential ability to make more power you have to have compression ratios in the 15:1 range which renders the engine useless for straight commercial grades of gasoline. Not to mention the process is using one of the least efficient fermentables in terms of its yield per acre. quote]

OK so corn is the only product that can make Ethanol.
UM no. It can be from ANY starch bearing OR sugar bearing component. There is one small company down near Florida that collects old fruit and vegetables and they also get other stuff from local grocers. They produce over 100000 gallons of fuel grade Ethanol. The small scale distillery has been profitable since the the 7 th month of operation and they have never had to shut down for lack of materiael.
The residue from sugar beet processing, sorgum processing, leftovers from alcoholic beverage production, and there are others.
according to one report 3 companies have processes that are very favorable in cellulosic Ethanol production.
There have not been any Ethanol production facilities shut down due to inability to sell production and from what I read only 3 closed and that was due to bad management, in the last 5 years. 17 distilleries have RE-OPENED under new management to produce Ethanol grade fuel.
As for increasing compression to release the energy in Ethanol ,well that is bunk. According to all the manuals I have read the compression was not changed in E85 fueled engines, at least not to a super high degree such as you suggest.
A compression rise will help in power production and efficiency but is not required.
The reduction in fuel mileage will be depedant on the vehicle, driving habits and state of tune.
Consumer Reports used one of the heaviest vehicles on the market for its test and recorded 27percent decrease in back to back test drives. The vehicle was not allowed to build a very good long term fuel strategy in my opinion. They also bashed it as they tested in anrea that had no E85 infrastructer so they added in the BS about finding it.
So we have a 6k to 7k lb vehicle that got 14 mpg on gas, and 10.2 on E85.
What if we redid that test with an E85 powered Ranger or Impalla/Malibu. I think the mileage loss would be slighly different.
I intend to build a car that will get good mileage and I intend to build use E85.
The fuel is viable, made from a renewable source. It does represent an exceptable fuel source and is going to be readiliy available for the most part.
It has a 105 octane rating which makes it more usefull and it can make considerable power.
The technology is here to adapt this to our vehicles. IS it as bad as you say to use and all that,,,welll.
Lets see if you store gasoline in an underground tank it can still off gas and collect moisture too. This is going to get more prevailent as they phase in E10 nationwide as MTBE is being removed from fuel.
If the product is handled properly in transportation and delivery and storage it has no more problems to implement than any other fuel. Diesel has a higher rate of destruction in transit/storage and if it is spilled it will cause more environmental problems. And it can cause a lot more problems if dispensed.
For the short term ,yes it has a long road to follow to become more widespread, but it is here and there are some very large companies behind the building of the production and distribution of Ethanol/E85.
I ask my friend what he did to his 3.0 to turbo it and he said replace the manifolds, Added larger E85 compliant injectors and made sure the engine was fresh (leakdown test) enough to run a turbo.
The car makes great power he told me that he has so far driven it on E85 exclusivly except for 2 tanks of gasoline out of town and he told me that the 3600lb car lost 2 mile per gallon which put his car running 34 mpg on gas and making some very impressive power.
He thinks the compression is around 8.9 to one but hasnt looked yet ,he is digging up the vin of the truck it came out of and we are going to check it out.
CO2 isnt what we need to worry about as much as CO.
Carbon Monoxide will destroy ozone by stripping the 3rd oxygen molecule from ozone(O3) when exposed to sunlight in the upper atmosphere. HC, unburned hydrocarbons add to smog.
And one other thing that does come more from gas over E85 is particulate production.
Also diesel will make some dent but not in the respect of deceasing our dependance on forien oil. will it help produce more bio diesel ,and I am directly behind that too.
One big hurddle of biodiesel is the waste that is produced is a very bad chemical brew that will contaminate the environment. So far nothing in distilation is environmentaly dangerous.
I have a far distant vision of E85 AND biodiesel pumps side by side as well as regualr gasoline.
Honda has one Hydrogen Cell Technology unit that produces clean burning hydrogen for burning in current technology engines.
also does anyone remember the big truck that was trifuel that Ford built for SEMA, it was gas/E85/Hydrogen fueld and I really like to see the companies test and build these platforms to test.
Everyone wants to see electric cars but the power plant still has to produce electricity and in most cases that burns coal.
You can bash E85 but it is here and we will see a more diversly fuel auto fleet in the next 10 yrs.
With the amount of cash being pushed into alcohol production nationwide means it has a very promising future.
Will it cure all our ills? No. But it is a good idea as it comes from a renewable base product and using regualr plant life even some of the larger cities are looking into reducing the temperate problems in the cities.
All you can do is try to tear it down but ,sorry your pitiful attemps dont stop progress.
If I remember my figures( I will try to find the actual figure) that there was 18 new Ethanol production plant starting or being built and that was as of sometime in 06 and there were 3 or 4 cellulosic distilleries being set up in the small scale , with plans to upscale after the process gets streamlined. The big product would be switchgrass, it will do many things, it can clean up contaminated lands as it will leach the bad thing leftover from older production facilities, more green growing things can help the Earths surface, possibly slowing any rise in global temps, and it produces oxygen.
The by product is supposed to be able to be used to make papers, building products(like they use wood shavings and clipings ansdtuff to make "green" construction materiel instead of dumping it into a land fill)
E85 is usefull, it is made from a renewable source which will bring more local (re American) dollars to our farmers and that inturn will help the American economy.
Will it be a big deal maker in the ,well it can fill a certain niche AND we as another niche of American society ,the performance enthusiasts, can either embrass it or shout at the people saying, look, here is where we can use something as it becomes more mainstream and it will make us look better in the EPA eyes.
Face it it has a lot of benefits and not a lot of down falls. It can be produced and one of the resultant byproducts CAN BE REUSED FOR CATTLE FEED. And I am sure other starch bearing crops can be used also, as well as sugar bearing crops, which drop one step out of the process.
E85, made from renewable sources, clean burning, high octane, and its going to be locally available rather than having to shipp in barrels of race fuel (be it Ethanol E100, unleaded 100 octane, or leaded race fuel)another thing that a friend of mine just imed me is that the steam developed from burning it wil help lubricate the valves in older engines much as lead used too.
OH and they have been burning Ethanol in South America for the last 30 yrs in cars.
Give it a go or not but I intend to. 105 octane woohoo, cheaper than race fuel, check. My 2 big reasons to work with it.
Lee

[LowBuckX]

Did anyone mention that Ethanol is also safer to produce?

To seperate crude oil it has to be heated to the point it vaporizes then is sent to distillerie towers to be seperated into its veriouse forms. If memory serves me well I think 1000*. Its a big pressure cooker literaly
even though we will still need crude oil to produce other products like plastics and chemicals it is still very dangerous

As for electric. My father works for the premeire producer of Coal feeders/scales for power plants. They are stable in production for at least the next 15 years. 26 new Power plants just in this country are schedualed to bebuilt in this time period. They have found ways to burn the crap coal (read high sulpher content) with special air scrubbers to not let the added pollution into the air but it will find its way into other places like ground water. If we went to running full electric vehicles the power plants will be over loaded and then we will have to buld more plant creating more pollution. And it snowballs.


Do a google seach on home stills and see what exsperiances poeple are having producing there own fuels for their own use. It may not change your mind but will open your eyes a bit.
I also dont understand a few of you all for BioDiesal but against ethanol. I for one dont want a Grease burner in my hot rod.

[LowBuckX]

I also have to say since this seams heated a bit. These discusions are healthy and I hope the heated tempers dont spill out to the rest of the forum. Keeep the heat in this thread.

[Damn True]

[quote=LowBuckX]

If they can begin to use materials other than corn to create the stuff it has a chance (though slim). It (E-85) is a bandaid solution for gas burners. The whole thing is a lot more about making people feel good about what they do, than it is changing any real effect of what they do.

[\quote]

This shows how uninformed you are on ethanol. Ethanol can be produced from any starch sugar or cellulose producing plants products. People are using grass clippings to make the stuff.
GMs Go yellow campaign is to blame for the corn only thoughts.


We have a plant being built about 50 miles from me that will take exspired soda pop beer milk ice cream base and other garbage and make ethanol and then recycle the plastic and aluminum to curtail the costs of production.

Uh yeah, thanks. I knew that you two which is why I (with specificity) pointed out that the primary deterant to the technology IS the corn. However the largest percentage of the stuff IS being made from corn. The rest of the stuff is feel-good co-genaration. Great for political soundbytes and propping up Con-Agra (who by the way donates tons of money to both sides of the aisle depending on which state you are in, remember that bit, it's important). They "yippee for the American farmer" stuff works well on the nightly news too.

Corn however yields 370 galons of alky per acre. Miscanthus and switchgrass yield 1500 and 1100 gallons per acre respectively. So, one might ask why then are we using so much corn when cellulosic materials yield so much more? Hmmmmmm

Think on that for a while and get back to me.

Hint: Think farm subsidies & large farm corporations.

Interesting tidbit: Corn used to be a plant that would have worked really well for this, but hybridizing to make the perfect feed-corn and super sweet corn on the cob has changed the plant such that it's once protein/cellulose rich stalks are pertty much wood which doesn't ferment well at all.

Yields of common crops associated with ethanol production
Crop litres ethanol/ha US gal/acre
Miscanthus 14031 1500
Switchgrass 10757 1150
Sweet Potatoes 10000 1069
Poplar Wood (hybrid) 9354 1000
Sweet Sorghum 8419 900
Sugar Beet 6679 714
Sugar Cane 6192 662
Cassava 3835 410
Corn (maize) 3461 370
Wheat 2591 277


Monza,
Your posts are really tough to read. Consider the occasional carriage return and perhaps an outline before you start.

Unless your "friends" have uncovered some miracle of thermodynamics there is simply no way they are getting similar power and milage from the same car running E85 and gas. There is less potential energy (BTUs) in the alcohol. 34% less to be exact.

"Brazil is using it blah, blah, blah"
a) Yeah at 23% not 85%
b) Yeah by using cellulosic materials not crap-ass corn
c) The day we start following Brazil in terms of economic/ecological policy will be the begining of the end of this country. Dig their GNP, the quality of their water and the roughly 30% deforrestation in the last 20 years.

If you guys want to build E85 powered cars go right ahead.

I'm going to work on my hydrogen fuel cell hovercraft.

[novanutcase]

No it doesnt produce less power it just takes more fuel to produce the SAME power.

Probably a completely stupid question but if it takes more fuel to produce the same power and we are constantly trying to stuff as much gasoline into the cylinder wouldn't this mean a decrease in power overall given we use the same carb/head setup?