Would You Use E85?

[LowBuckX]

You have to jet the carb up to get a richer fuel to air mix. Same carb more jet

[ProTouring442]

A quick reply on my post from way earlier in this discussion, clarified based on the discussion I have seen here.

I am all for ethanol made from waste products. This only makes sense! Any time we can use garbage to benefit us, it's a good thing.

Also, has anyone seen any info on the algea process I saw on the discovery channel? Seems a great way to make a lot of good products.

Shiny Side Up!
Bill
'72 442 "Inamorata"
www.FQuick.com/ProTouring442

[Damn True]

A quick reply on my post from way earlier in this discussion, clarified based on the discussion I have seen here.

I am all for ethanol made from waste products. This only makes sense! Any time we can use garbage to benefit us, it's a good thing.

Also, has anyone seen any info on the algea process I saw on the discovery channel? Seems a great way to make a lot of good products.

Shiny Side Up!
Bill
'72 442 "Inamorata"
www.FQuick.com/ProTouring442

The algea into biodiesel thing has promise but the technology and moreso the infrastructure to make it happen is in its infancy. It's estimated though that there could be a yield as high as 10,000 gallons of diesel per acre. Question is, where are you going to put enough bubbling cesspools of algea to make it viable?

[Damn True]

You have to jet the carb up to get a richer fuel to air mix. Same carb more jet

Which means you are using more fuel to achieve the same output because gallon to gallon there is less energy available in the alky. Therefore you use more fuel per mile.

[novanutcase]

Which means you are using more fuel to achieve the same output because gallon to gallon there is less energy available in the alky. Therefore you use more fuel per mile.

So that being what it is, how are you going to be able to fit MORE fuel into the same space to achieve the same power level? It would seem that to get more fuel to make the same power you would need to pull more air through the carb and heads. How would this be possible as we are already trying to pull as much air as we can? EFI?

[LocomotiveBreath]

I would use E85 if the price per gallon made it cost effective. The prices I have seen would not justify using it due to the substaincially higher consumption rate as compaired to gasoline.

[Damn True]

So that being what it is, how are you going to be able to fit MORE fuel into the same space to achieve the same power level? It would seem that to get more fuel to make the same power you would need to pull more air through the carb and heads. How would this be possible as we are already trying to pull as much air as we can? EFI?

Hypothetical numbers:

If a well tuned gas engine runs @ 14.7:1 you would need to run an alky burner roughly 27% richer. Roughly 11:1.

Less air in the mix and more fuel.

[StRacerDuke]

Guys, please use paragraph breaks! This is becoming a pain in the butt to read.

Thanks!

[LowBuckX]

Guys, please use paragraph breaks! This is becoming a pain in the butt to read.

Thanks!

Idontknowwhatyoumean.Ihavenoproblemreadinganyofthe posts.Theyareforethemostpartwellworded-OfcourseImjustpullingyourlegandtryingtouncrossmyey es .

[Beige]

So that being what it is, how are you going to be able to fit MORE fuel into the same space to achieve the same power level? It would seem that to get more fuel to make the same power you would need to pull more air through the carb and heads. How would this be possible as we are already trying to pull as much air as we can? EFI?

You seem to be misunderstanding how a carb works.

[MonzaRacer]

Actually E85 run in a perfect stoichiolmetric ratio of 9.6 to 1 (E100 is 9.0 to 1) roughly.
As I figured it with a higher price locally we had approximatley a 5 dollar increase in cost for 10 doallrs gas vs similar amount to make the same mileage (assuming using 130 percent and not a more realistic 20 to 25 percent).
Here we go :
Say we use 10 gallons of gasoline:
$2.199 x 10 gallons = $21.99
So if we use a miserable increase of 30 percent in use to go the same distance:
E85
$2.099 x 13 gallons = $27.29
So to go the same difference ON 105 OCTANE FUEL costs of $5.39.
Now lets check race fuel
CAM 2 110 Octane
$5.399 x 10 gallons = $53.99
HMM its leagal I dont have to put it in a can and then my car ,its cleaner burning, and its made from a renewable source.
I think Ill take E85. I can even handle taking the time to retune for regualr fuel if I cant find E85.
Another thing it doesnt have to be 27 percent more it says it uses roughly 30 percent more by volume. BUT in a late model Tahoe (heavy a$$ truck ) it gets 27 percent less fuel mileage.
I wonder what the difference would be in a new Impalla or Malibu with flex fuel on it.
I can pretty much bet it doesnt loose as much in mileage.
I know one fell with a 3600 lb car and a turboed 3,0 v6 that only sees a 2 mpg difference.
good luck

[Fuelie Fan]

I personally have no further interest in continuing this conversation if you're going to refer to my or other people's arguments as "pitiful attempts." Especially after you prove my own point concerning mileage by quoting the stoichiometric A/F of E85 (10:1, or approximately 50%(!!!!!!!) more fuel required for a set amount of consumed air). Think about this, hard, and then question whether Consumer Reports tests showing 27% reduction in economy or your buddy's anectdotal 5% reduction in economy seems more plausible and representative of typical performance.

[Damn True]

Dude, it's got NOTHING to do with the weight of the vehicle. There is less energy to expend in the FUEL. It matters not a whit if the vehicle is a 4000lb chevy tahoe or a 2500lb 325i because the fuel provides 27% less potential energy.

The Tahoe will use more fuel than the bimmer either way, but the difference between the amount of the two fuels used will be largely the same.

[LowBuckX]

Stale mate. The pole is all I need to see anymore

[MonzaRacer]

Lets see, your telling me that an almost 7000lb vehicle wont get worse mileage. Your nuts dude.
The economy loss for the Tahoe and an economy loss for a car with a lot less weight is going to be diifferent.
Now your telling me that the stoichiometric air fuel ratio isnt halv tahts the ratio of AIR to FUEL.
The economy of a vehicle has to do with the use of the energy released from the fuel, not the energy potential of the fuel.
Now i know for a fact that swaping an engine into a lighter car will result in less fuel consumption.
Now as for the Mustang you gotta figure that it is using the full potential of 105 octane to produce power.And it goes to prove that small engines properly tuned can make big power and do it clean and economicly.
Heck someone on here had a 1000hp car that they had to drive and put a different car in a trailer to come home and the car got 24mpg This means its in the driving some to me.
Now your trying to tell me that the A/F ratio makes the mileage rating of the car, now I know you have no clue.
Some people have said it was super expensive and of no use to try to use it but it does work it is becoming available and the differences that some are trying to dream up just wont hold water.
Remeber that soichiometric A/F ratio is the theoretical setting, some can go as lean as 10.5 to 1 according to one fella pming me and this was on a turbo race car.
you can get mad or call me names or do what ever but I have put out a lot info and links to where others can read on it. Several people have PM/emailed me and we have discussed it and I have several guys wanting to figure out how to link up enough fuel to run the Hot Rod Power Tour on E85.
Anyway, i know it works , Marathon and several other oil companies are not going to invest millions in putting in extra tanks and pumps and spend time on shipping and storage facilities for a lark
People can try to blast me for pushing E85 but I have seen it work. It should have a place in out list of tools and I guess I dont have enough cash to prove it.
Ethanol was a viable fuel source before gasoline was ever in the fore front. Heck even Henry Ford built dual fuel cars way back when as a lot of rural areas still didnt have gasoline.
Are there hurddles that need to be worked on ,sure, but you know with big car companies and big fuel distributors around selling it it will come to the attention of people.
I know for a fact that one of the 5 top corporate car lease companies are buying flex fuel cars for fleet use.
Now if these companies are going to spend the cash and get the companies using those vehicles to burn E85 when possible, then there has to be a reason to spend time doing such work.
Mileage is not energy potential. Using one vehicles mileage does not prove the energy btu difference nor the differences in mileage for a different vehicle.
Mileage is more dependant on driving habits and conditions, not the energy content of the fuel used.
Yes you will use roughly 25 percent more with E85 but the fact that the engine can possibly (if tuned properly ) make more power from and run cleaner too and be running on a renewable fuel source. Then you have to take the good with the bad. We use NOS and we take the risk of destroying an engine if improperly tuned.
Stay tuned folks E85 is definately going to play a part in my next car as fuel source. On top of that I know that maybe my families farm will have somewhere to sell corn.
Good luck to all the nay sayers.
Sign me,
Lee Abel
E85 advocate!
http://www.ethanol.org/

[71dusterdan]

i'm still in, build the engine to use the available octane increase and let 'er rip. alot of you are still arguing over moot points, it is not for the masses. the farmers are growing the corn anyways and we pay them subsidies. the more fuel options available, the more middle fingers we can throw at the middle east. it is available here in no.il. with plants going up all over. my vehicles will be rebuilt strictly for e85 as needed, meaning compression in the 12-1 area, and at a price within pennies of 87 octane gas, i will not lose any sleep, that is 20 to 30 cents cheaper than 91-93 octane. and at 12-1 91-93 will not come close to meeting my needs, priced racegas anywhere, e85 looks great. the first one will be the 400 in my f250, 12-1 will make what is already a stumppuller on pump piss into a real monster.

[MonzaRacer]

Hey dan all you need is around 10 to one in the 400 and use the new Edelbrock E85 carb coming out. As for your toys keep in touch Ill add you to the list as I am developing a bolt on FlexFI for use on hot rods.
The big stick in the mud is the flex fuel sensor that bumps the price up.
I agree its a lot of little bickering points on something that does work.
Keep in touch.
Oh and for me I would actually make my street cars in the high 11 to 1 range. This does allow a person to use 93 plus some good octane booster if need be. While it would be super rich it would be passable if you pull a large vacuum hose even as a patch till you get to an E85 pump.
Now for track cars you would have no problem with it cause if they are FI then you could even use locally available Ethanol from race gas seller.
Around here local fuel distributors have got everyone off Methanol as when Indy switched it made Methanol shipping to high except maybe on Laborday as thet will have a lot in stock for Nationals.
Dan,Low buck, and anyone who actually listens to the benefits keep in touch.
Lee Abel
E85 advocate!
http://www.ethanol.org/

[CSI:QUINCY]

You have to jet the carb up to get a richer fuel to air mix. Same carb more jet

i don't know who told you that this would work but it will not work. due to the specific gravity of the fuel. the whole carb needs to flow more fuel. you can make run like that but never work right at idle you will flood the engine and if you jet at idle it will be to lean top end. all the metering blocks needs to be changed and much much more. just like building a methonal carb but not quite that much the specific gravity of methonal is even less than ethonal.

[Damn True]

On top of that I know that maybe my families farm will have somewhere to sell corn.

Kinda what I figgured.

Sounds like you have your mind made up. Rock on. Honestly, I wish you luck but think you are putting your eggs into a basket that wont be well supported in the future.

[LowBuckX]

i don't know who told you that this would work but it will not work. due to the specific gravity of the fuel. the whole carb needs to flow more fuel. you can make run like that but never work right at idle you will flood the engine and if you jet at idle it will be to lean top end. all the metering blocks needs to be changed and much much more. just like building a methonal carb but not quite that much the specific gravity of methonal is even less than ethonal.

Over simplification on my part I was trying to make it easyer to understand.

Same amount of air more fuel .