E-85
#2
What car are you putting it in? Unless it has an emblem like this on the back:
don't even think about it. You'll just harm, if not destroy, your engine. Certainly no engine made back in the '60s and '70s (or '80s or '90s, for that matter) is able to handle this fuel. The engine and fuel system components need to be specifically designed to handle it.
Even if you're talking about a modern car equipped to handle this fuel, I wonder about the cost savings. Around where I live, E-85 fuel is about 30 or 40 cents per gallon cheaper than regular unleaded (maybe $3.20 or $3.30 a gallon versus $3.50 or $3.60, depending on the station).
But mileage suffers with E-85 fuel because alcohol is less efficient a fuel than gasoline. Your mileage with E-85 fuel had better be no worse, percentage-wise, than the percentage savings you get by buying that fuel. A 40-cent savings on $3.60 a gallon is about 11%. If your mileage decreases by more than that percentage, you're losing money with E-85. If your mileage loss is less, you're ok using it. You need to do the math.
don't even think about it. You'll just harm, if not destroy, your engine. Certainly no engine made back in the '60s and '70s (or '80s or '90s, for that matter) is able to handle this fuel. The engine and fuel system components need to be specifically designed to handle it.
Even if you're talking about a modern car equipped to handle this fuel, I wonder about the cost savings. Around where I live, E-85 fuel is about 30 or 40 cents per gallon cheaper than regular unleaded (maybe $3.20 or $3.30 a gallon versus $3.50 or $3.60, depending on the station).
But mileage suffers with E-85 fuel because alcohol is less efficient a fuel than gasoline. Your mileage with E-85 fuel had better be no worse, percentage-wise, than the percentage savings you get by buying that fuel. A 40-cent savings on $3.60 a gallon is about 11%. If your mileage decreases by more than that percentage, you're losing money with E-85. If your mileage loss is less, you're ok using it. You need to do the math.
#3
Given that this is in the Racing and High Performance section I'm guessing that the reason you are going to try E-85 is because it is adequate for higher compression engines but is a lot less than the $10 / gal racing fuels. If I am right, I know of one guy in Houston running it in a '72 Nova. He says he likes it, but he also has to drive around with 3 -5 gallon cans in his trunk because he never knows if he will find a station that sells it.
He does not speak to it's fuel efficiency, but given the section we're in...I don't think you're worried about that. I have heard it is good for running high compression but I have not heard anything regarding long term use and its effect on valves, guides, etc. I do know that it is a different weight than regular gas so you have to have your carburetor set up for it. You also need to change your rubber fuel hoses to some that are compatible with ethanol based fuels.
Good luck! And let us know what you find out...maybe more of us will give it a shot
He does not speak to it's fuel efficiency, but given the section we're in...I don't think you're worried about that. I have heard it is good for running high compression but I have not heard anything regarding long term use and its effect on valves, guides, etc. I do know that it is a different weight than regular gas so you have to have your carburetor set up for it. You also need to change your rubber fuel hoses to some that are compatible with ethanol based fuels.
Good luck! And let us know what you find out...maybe more of us will give it a shot
#4
Random uneducated theorizing: it seems to me that it's relatively easy to switch parts or the whole carb to one that has an alcohol setup, versus trying to tune a new engine to run alcohol with all the little sensors and crap like that. Given how much of a beating our old engines can take (pour water into a running engine, etc), they should really handle a bit o' alcamaholz without a sweat if the delivery system is adjusted. Given the higher compressibility of alcohol, there'll be no pinging no matter the timing, and since it burns colder than gas, overheating won't be an issue.
Wonder what a pure alcohol blend smells like.
Wonder what a pure alcohol blend smells like.
#5
Yes the motor and fuel system has to be built to use the E85. If you have an E85(Flex Fuel) you can run either E85 or regular gas(though anything without ethanol is hard to find). But you can not do it the other way around. The rubber parts will fail and the lines are different because the E85 will corrode them. Guessing E85 lines are aluminum. Plus there is the effect it will have on the engine parts in our older engines. Stick to regular gas or the crap with up to 15% ethanol (think thats the highest they dilute it now)
#6
There are pluses, but also negatives. As Steve eluded to, finding a station with it can get tricky. Up here in the middle of Iowa, the closest station with E85 is 15 miles away. I have also heard they do seasonal mixings out of the pump. Unless you buy it from a race fuel supplier, you need to buy a test kit and check it. Also on the race forums there are guys who tune carbs for E85. They claim it is that much different than alcohol. Good luck, there will be no easy fix.
#7
E-85 is a tricky fuel to deal with. It has a high tendency to absorb water, so if you don't use a full tank in less than 2 weeks, you will most likely have water in it. Most of your fuel lines and other hardware will have to be stainless, since it attacks rubber an aluminum. Carburetors made for this fuel have a special coating on them to keep from being eaten up. Gasoline has a roughly 14.7:1 stoichiometric ratio of air to fuel while E-85 is about 9.7:1. When properly mixed, though, E-85 will produce more power and run cooler, and you can run higher compression since it is about 108 octane. If you want to run it, you can make it happen, but you have to play by its rules or you will ruin your motor, rust out your gas tank, and cause all sorts of problems. And no, E-85 will not save you money unless it is less than 3/4 the cost of regular gas.
#8
When I bought my 9 sec. car, the owner had it running on E 85. I tried to keep it for awhile, even bought a test kit to check the fuel with. I found too many differences in the mix from one tank to another. I also did not like the corrosion as mentioned above, and this car was set to use E85. I went back to race fuel and spend more time enjoying the car and less time as a junior Chemist.
I have the E-85 carb that I took off...1050 Dommie..prob more than you need for your car. I did notice that the jetting to run the E85 was 112 square!!! I only run 94 square with Race gas. Car went through a ton of fuel on each pass.
Just my experience
Danny
I have the E-85 carb that I took off...1050 Dommie..prob more than you need for your car. I did notice that the jetting to run the E85 was 112 square!!! I only run 94 square with Race gas. Car went through a ton of fuel on each pass.
Just my experience
Danny
#9
I'd run E85 in mine, but it is not available here. Basically as mentioned above its a fuel line, pump, and carb change. According to everything I've read, like stated above there are many plus's with a few of minus's, extremely poor economy, corrosion, lack of consistency, and it's inherent attraction of moisture. There are a few carb shops performing the conversion.
#10
I'd run E85 in mine, but it is not available here. Basically as mentioned above its a fuel line, pump, and carb change. According to everything I've read, like stated above there are many plus's with a few of minus's, extremely poor economy, corrosion, lack of consistency, and it's inherent attraction of moisture. There are a few carb shops performing the conversion.
#11
What heads are you running, I can't remember? If your compression is 11:1 with aluminum heads you should be able to run a 10-15% blend of C-12 (108 leaded) with every tank of 91 (93). Max total timing should be 35 degrees and you shouldn't have any detonation problems.
If you have iron heads you might have to run a higher mix and it may not be worth it. In any case, good luck whichever route you go! I'm interested to see how it goes for you.
If you have iron heads you might have to run a higher mix and it may not be worth it. In any case, good luck whichever route you go! I'm interested to see how it goes for you.
#13
I agree, there have been Ethenol plants around here go ****-up, even with the government's help.
#14
What heads are you running, I can't remember? If your compression is 11:1 with aluminum heads you should be able to run a 10-15% blend of C-12 (108 leaded) with every tank of 91 (93). Max total timing should be 35 degrees and you shouldn't have any detonation problems.
If you have iron heads you might have to run a higher mix and it may not be worth it. In any case, good luck whichever route you go! I'm interested to see how it goes for you.
If you have iron heads you might have to run a higher mix and it may not be worth it. In any case, good luck whichever route you go! I'm interested to see how it goes for you.
on #48 heads 65 cc and dished icon pistons running 30-32 deg timing 575 lift solid cam 308 dur this is a fresh motor and the heads are done very nice I hate to have to change them without trying something else first and if the plants close I guess I will deal with it then. I have this winter to ponder on it. Im just trying to get some feed back from people who have used it. Thanks for all your input Im all ears
#16
#17
Thanks. That is what I thought. I can't imagine how that would help our cars designed to run on gasoline, without extensive modifications, or being designed from the get go to run on it. I noticed about a 10% drop in fuel mileage from my 05 300C to my 07 Charger R/T. About the time I traded cars, the pumps went from "up to 5% ethanol" to "up to 10% ethanol".
#18
But there are trade-offs:
1. Ethanol is less energy-dense than gasoline, so mileage on a per gallon basis is poorer.
2. Corn that goes into making fuel for vehicles is not used to make food.
3. As we all know, ethanol, even in the up-to-15% content amounts found in most gasolines now, damages fuel-system components not designed to use it.
#20
I think the concern is not the energy cost in producing ethanol-containing gasoline, it's the energy cost in simply producing the ethanol itself. But you are right. Quite a bit of energy goes into growing and processing the corn necessary to produce ethanol.
#21
What heads are you running, I can't remember? If your compression is 11:1 with aluminum heads you should be able to run a 10-15% blend of C-12 (108 leaded) with every tank of 91 (93). Max total timing should be 35 degrees and you shouldn't have any detonation problems.
If you have iron heads you might have to run a higher mix and it may not be worth it. In any case, good luck whichever route you go! I'm interested to see how it goes for you.
If you have iron heads you might have to run a higher mix and it may not be worth it. In any case, good luck whichever route you go! I'm interested to see how it goes for you.
#22
I have a friend that is a retired scientist for an oil co that spent his life working with fuel......He has ran E-85 for the past 2 years in a 406 small block that runs 6.00 in the 1/8. I was helping him this weekend and I know that thing had a plastic tank and alum fuel lines......he has done real good with the E-85 set up but for some reason is going back to gas.
#23
I think the corrosion thing with E85 gets overblown on the internet. My experience was with several friends who ran this in their turbocharged Mitsubishis. These were cars built in the early 90s with fuel systems not designed for E85. Sure it is inherently harder on things than gasoline but you don't have near the problems you would running methanol injection or straight alcohol as a fuel. It is a blend after all. None of their engines or fuel systems experienced any notable negative side effects, and the applications were similar to yours, drag car/weekend toy.
On something with forced induction the benefits of E85 really start to show, just as you can run more compression you can also run more boost. In most modded turbo cars turning up the boost is a quick adjustment that will yield good results, provided of course you have the fuel and timing to support that. On their applications it was a function of taking some timing out of the map, adding fue,l and increasing the boost.
On a naturally aspirated application I don't know if you would be able to get enough power by adding timing to make it worth your hassle. What I mean in case it's unclear is that assuming you have the same motor and only adjust the carb and timing I cannot see you picking up enough power to make it worth the switch, as opposed to forced induction where cramming the extra air into the motor to gain power with the less efficient fuel is much easier.
On something with forced induction the benefits of E85 really start to show, just as you can run more compression you can also run more boost. In most modded turbo cars turning up the boost is a quick adjustment that will yield good results, provided of course you have the fuel and timing to support that. On their applications it was a function of taking some timing out of the map, adding fue,l and increasing the boost.
On a naturally aspirated application I don't know if you would be able to get enough power by adding timing to make it worth your hassle. What I mean in case it's unclear is that assuming you have the same motor and only adjust the carb and timing I cannot see you picking up enough power to make it worth the switch, as opposed to forced induction where cramming the extra air into the motor to gain power with the less efficient fuel is much easier.
#24
It would be interesting if you could find out why. Where I live, E-85 is only about 20 or 30 cents per gallon less than unleaded regular. Maybe $3.30 for the former and $3.50 for the latter. Because E-85 is less efficient, mileage is poorer, so it needs to be cheaper by a certain percentage, or you'd do better economically-speaking by staying with regular gasoline.
I've read that the factor is about 1.4 to 1, or it takes 1.4 gallons of E-85 to move a vehicle the same distance it would take 1.0 gallon of regular gas.
http://alternativefuels.about.com/od...rces/a/gge.htm
This is a HUGE difference.
Another way to look at it is, say, if your vehicle gets 25 miles per gallon on unleaded regular, it will get only about 18 mpg (25/1.4) on E-85. In gasoline cost, that means that, if unleaded regular is selling for $3.50 per gallon, E-85 has to cost no more than $2.50 per gallon ($3.50/1.4) in order that the cost per mile traveled is the same for each fuel.
Around here at least, that $3.30 per gallon price for E-85 is way too high.
I've read that the factor is about 1.4 to 1, or it takes 1.4 gallons of E-85 to move a vehicle the same distance it would take 1.0 gallon of regular gas.
http://alternativefuels.about.com/od...rces/a/gge.htm
This is a HUGE difference.
Another way to look at it is, say, if your vehicle gets 25 miles per gallon on unleaded regular, it will get only about 18 mpg (25/1.4) on E-85. In gasoline cost, that means that, if unleaded regular is selling for $3.50 per gallon, E-85 has to cost no more than $2.50 per gallon ($3.50/1.4) in order that the cost per mile traveled is the same for each fuel.
Around here at least, that $3.30 per gallon price for E-85 is way too high.
Last edited by jaunty75; October 16th, 2012 at 07:23 AM.
#25
#26
Like I said earlier thats why Im doing it race fuel is hard to find and your looking at $8 per gallon here if you do so if I mix it with 91 oc its also pretty pricey too! I can look on line if we are going on a cruze and find the e 85 stations around our state easier than race fuel. By the time its said and done they are close to the same price to run
Last edited by archeryshooter; October 16th, 2012 at 11:18 AM.
#27
It would be interesting if you could find out why. Where I live, E-85 is only about 20 or 30 cents per gallon less than unleaded regular. Maybe $3.30 for the former and $3.50 for the latter. Because E-85 is less efficient, mileage is poorer, so it needs to be cheaper by a certain percentage, or you'd do better economically-speaking by staying with regular gasoline.
I've read that the factor is about 1.4 to 1, or it takes 1.4 gallons of E-85 to move a vehicle the same distance it would take 1.0 gallon of regular gas.
http://alternativefuels.about.com/od...rces/a/gge.htm
This is a HUGE difference.
Another way to look at it is, say, if your vehicle gets 25 miles per gallon on unleaded regular, it will get only about 18 mpg (25/1.4) on E-85. In gasoline cost, that means that, if unleaded regular is selling for $3.50 per gallon, E-85 has to cost no more than $2.50 per gallon ($3.50/1.4) in order that the cost per mile traveled is the same for each fuel.
Around here at least, that $3.30 per gallon price for E-85 is way too
high.
I've read that the factor is about 1.4 to 1, or it takes 1.4 gallons of E-85 to move a vehicle the same distance it would take 1.0 gallon of regular gas.
http://alternativefuels.about.com/od...rces/a/gge.htm
This is a HUGE difference.
Another way to look at it is, say, if your vehicle gets 25 miles per gallon on unleaded regular, it will get only about 18 mpg (25/1.4) on E-85. In gasoline cost, that means that, if unleaded regular is selling for $3.50 per gallon, E-85 has to cost no more than $2.50 per gallon ($3.50/1.4) in order that the cost per mile traveled is the same for each fuel.
Around here at least, that $3.30 per gallon price for E-85 is way too
high.