E85

[pimp mobile]

i'm now burning 85% corn and 15% gasoline. pulls a little harder and saves $ at the pump. $2.60 for 105 (yes 105) octane. and it better for the environment.

[Timeless]

What did you do to achieve this...and is there a link?

[AlexDestructive]

only problem is ethanol has less energy than gasoline so you're probably noticing lower fuel efficiency.

[Timeless]

From what I've read so far it seems E85 also eats through your fuel system...anyone want to chime in on this?

[SpeedyV6]

Originally Posted by pimp mobile

i'm now burning 85% corn and 15% gasoline. pulls a little harder and saves $ at the pump. $2.60 for 105 (yes 105) octane. and it better for the environment.

I think the butt dino may be lying to you about the car pulling harder on e85. Also, did you reprogram the ecm?

[barkingspud]

Originally Posted by AlexDestructive

only problem is ethanol has less energy than gasoline so you're probably noticing lower fuel efficiency.

this is absololutly true...your fuel economy will go down so, you don't really save anything from a miles per gallon perspective. If your looking for performance, it won't help unless you can change the VE and timing tables.....

[fionn]

I want to do the same thing but am not done doing research.
here is some information for anyone interested:

Rollout Edition - E85 Conversion kit (Powered by CubeCart)

there is a video of someone pulling apart a Chevy Tahoe motor after 100,000 miles of mostly e85, when they compared it to other identical parts from other cars with similar millage etc. fuel lines were softer and cleaner, motor was cleaner and in good shape, it was interesting. Anyone know if the materials used in an older Chevy Tahoe would be similar to those used in an srt8 and would react to e85 in a similar way?

congrats,
Fionn

[stevesrt8]

the whole E85 thing is a mix of BS and harsh reality.

Some cars make more power, but only if they are properly tuned. Not likely for SRT8 because the car cannot recognize what's in it other than by knock sensing. If you own a car with E85 capability, some small improvements in HP, but always LESS fuel economy due to lower energy levels. No real bad effects on cars made in the last few years, but can really screw up older cars!

No benefit to the environment. That's right, none. New emissions of organics may be worse than gasoline, takes more energy to make than it produces, heavy governmental subsidies mean it costs taxpayer's money! Checked the price on foodstuffs lately? Costs you at the grocery store, too. Then there's the plant emissions. It goes on and on.

There are more points discussed ad infinitum, but the bottom line is E85 is a political football.

[NeverToFast]

I was under the impression the hole point of the E85 was not to use up the earth fossil fuels? Instead to use a renewable source, like corn.

Is there any truth in that?

[stevesrt8]

here's a nice compilation from more objective sources.

Tech Stuff: Ethanol Promises - Features - Car and Driver July 2006

Promise: Ethanol will reduce our dependence on fossil fuel.
Not in our lifetimes. In 2004, the U.S. consumed 100 “quads” (quadrillion BTUs) of energy. Of that, 86 quads were from fossil fuels. And of that, 40 quads were petroleum. About 18 of those petroleum quads were refined into gasoline. If we continue to use gasoline at no more than the 2004 rate — a fair assumption if prices stay high — the ethanol mandate by 2012 will stretch those 18 quads of gasoline with five percent by volume of ethanol, or 0.6 quad, give or take due to rounding. Remembering that we use 86 quads of fossil fuels, ethanol would displace a mere 0.7 percent of that.


Actually, the picture is not this bright, because fossil fuels are used in the production of ethanol. In fact, some studies have concluded that making ethanol from agricultural crops requires more energy than is contained in the finished product. There is no academic agreement on this point, and small differences in assumptions can profoundly alter the conclusions. For example, will the corn yield be 125 bushels per acre, or 127, or 140? Will you get 2.5 gallons of ethanol per bushel, or 2.68, or 2.80?
A recent study published by the University of California Berkeley looks at six different ethanol studies, brings the assumptions up to date, and makes other adjustments the authors think are appropriate. It concludes that only 5 to 26 percent of the energy in today’s corn-based ethanol is “new.” The other 74-to-95 percent represents the recycling of fossil-fuel energy to produce ethanol. Compared with historical assessments, this study represents a relatively optimistic outlook for ethanol.
Even if we accept the most favorable assumption, that 26 percent of its energy is new, that represents only about 0.16 quad. Of the 18 original petroleum quads that went into gasoline, that means ethanol would comprise less than one percent. And compared with the total of 86 quads of fossil-fuel energy used in America, ethanol would replace less than two-tenths of one percent.
On the other hand, if the true energy gain of ethanol is at the low side of the confidence limits — only five percent — all those results are divided by five and ethanol looks like a make-work program that only a politician could love.



<<< Tech Stuff: Ethanol Promises - FeaturesTech Stuff: Ethanol Promises - Ethanol and the Air >>> lot's more at Tech Stuff: Ethanol Promises - Features - Car and Driver July 2006