OT, Totally - Gasoline question

[J Miller]

I've been curious about that e85 fuel they've been advertising lately. What I want to know, is what effect this stuff would have if used in an older, 95 vintage vehicle?

I try to use 100% gasoline when I fill up, but I'd like to know about this stuff.

Joe

[arjunky]

Vehicle pretty much has to be newer and made to run on it.
Also MPG is less than normal pump gas.

Byron

[Rusty]

Years ago I had a 1979 Datsun 210. It was the original econobox, ugly as home made sin but very practical. Several years after we got it a station near us started selling "ethanol enriched" gas. We used it when ever we were in that area because it seemed to make the car run better. I do have to say though that in all the vehicles I've owned that's the only one I've ever had that had the gas tank rust out in it. It had to be replaced.

[J Miller]

Years ago I had a 1979 Datsun 210. It was the original econobox, ugly as home made sin but very practical. Several years after we got it a station near us started selling "ethanol enriched" gas. We used it when ever we were in that area because it seemed to make the car run better. I do have to say though that in all the vehicles I've owned that's the only one I've ever had that had the gas tank rust out in it. It had to be replaced.

My 95 Nissan Pathfinder has a new gas tank. I had to replace it last year. What a PITA!

Joe

[CJM]

Ethanol fuel to air mix needs to be about 11.5 to 1, gasoline fuel to air mix is 14.7 to 1. You really can't run ethanol (or E85) without a lot of modifications to enlarge the capability of the fuel system. Need a larger gas tank, fuel lines, fuel pump, fuel injectors etc. The engine should also have the pistons/heads changed to raise the compression ratio up to around 12 to 1 for better efficiency, the octane level of ethanol is above 100. You can't get as good as mileage running ethanol because it simply doesn't have as much energy per gallon as gasoline; just as gasoline doesn't have as much energy per gallon as diesel. The other problem with ethanol is that it will absorb humidity from the air, leading to water in the fuel tank & lines and consequent rusting.

[Andrew]

E85 is an 85/15 blend of alchol/gasoline. You should not put it in the tank of a car that is not set up to burn alchol, like any flex-fuel vehicles or other aftermarket alchol set ups.

Alchol is hell on fuel lines, anything rubber and fuel tanks and needs specific standards for useage. Not to mention it needs a different air/fuel ratio to burn properly.

Please, use the pump that says 10-15% ethonal, not E85.

[JReed]

As others posted dont do it.
Now here is the funny thing about E85 it takes 1.3gal of petro fuel to make 1 gal of E85 this includes the the fuel used by the desiel Combines to harvest the corn in the first place.

Dont buy into the myth of E85. Bio-desiel is clean burning gets high milage and the raw oil can be had from any fast food restraunt. A small pick up using bio-desiel gets about 55 mpg couple that to a hybred system and you have a vehicle that can get over 70 mph and you dont have to wear chaps and a helmet.

[Jay Bird]

It takes 2 1/2 gallons of diesel to make 1 gallon of e-85. Pretty funny. This comes from a conco employee.
DON"T use it in any car that is not rated. E 85 will eat up your seals.

[Peter M. Eick]

If you look at the full cycle fuel requirements, the statement above is about right.

E85 and ethanol are basically government subsidies to the farm block. While some would think the oil industry would complain about this, we don't care because it takes more fuel to make fuel.

So be it. That is why politicians make the decisions and I search for oil. We each have our roles to play.

By the way, talking to the midstream guys (pipelines etc.) they said the ethanol cannot be run through the pipelines because it causes rust. The alcohol collects it and then ponds at low spots causing rust.

[J Miller]

I had no intension of trying this stuff in my vehicles. As I said in my first post: "I try to use 100% gasoline when I fill up, but I'd like to know about this stuff."

I was simply curious about it.
I'm not naive, I didn't and don't buy into this corn gas scam. I didn't buy into it in the early to mid 90s in Phoenix when they forced "oxygenated" gas down our throats. It didn't matter, the ethanol or MTBE mix caused vehicle performance and gas mileage to drop. Gas prices of course were raised to compensate for this scam and since it took more fuel to do the same job, and we had to pay more for it, we got screwed then.

I was just curious.

We have a choice here, gasoline or ethanol / gas mix, and that is the only two fuels I'll buy. And when possible I buy the straight gas. And it costs 10 cents more than the mix. Go figure.

Joe

[Peter M. Eick]

One comment as an aside.

Both of my Highlander's have mpg indicator's and have provent to be reasonably accurate. I found that for highway miles both the hybrid and the conventional both get better gas mileage on high octane stuff. If you run the mileage numbers, I do better if speeds are over 55, and super is less then a dime more then regular.

I also found out that Shell gives better gas mileage then Valero, Chevron and Texaco are the same, Conoco is better then Fina. Exxon is run of the mill.

This is all for highway mileage. City miles are too hit or miss to really know. Basically when I travel I go for Shell supreme now and in general it pays off.

I have yet to try E85 since I cannot find it here in Houston.

Last comment. Buying non-botique gas (we have to get it here in Houston) is good for about 2 MPG more then Houston gas.

Science is such a fun game!

[J Miller]

Using the 87 octane straight gas on the freeway I get somewhere around 28 mpg or so. In town if lucky and I hold my mouth right, I might get 18. And that's with the computer controlled automatic tranny with it's overdrive.

I've tried the 89 octane mixed gas and sometimes it runs better, and sometimes it's worse. This from the same station. The station we buy from the most is an Ayerco station. Not sure who owns them or what gas they sell.
Here the premium or 91 octane stuff is about 20 cents higher than the 87 octane stuff. So I've never bought any.

Joe

[Rusty]

I hauled gas for two years and I'll tell you that there is a difference in the brands. The gas it's self is the same but the detergents or additives are different. After hauling the gas for about 6 months I got to the point where I couldn't smell the gas any more but I could smell the additives in the gas. The detergents in Texaco gas always did the best for my old Ford Crown Victoria. The vehicles I have now don't seem to have a preference.
I will say that there is one national company who sells gas as a sideline. As I understand it they also have a contract with a national distributor which is not a gas brand. The local terminal for this distributor where I used to load from time to time is just plain nasty and the gas that comes from that facility is nasty too. I have had sediment in the bottom of my valves on my tanker after hauling a load of that stuff.
AS a precaution I'd suggest no one buy gas from a station where a truck is making a drop. It would be best if you could wait an hour or so after the truck is done before making your purchase there.

[Old Ironsights]

Even your "straight gas" is likely not straight. Most mixes contain around 10% ethanol or MBTE to "reduce emmissions".

Of course, those additives both reduce milage, so there is a net INCREASE of emmissions on the street (the only "decrease" is in the lab) but it makes the Greens & Corn Subsidy happy.

Meh. If this country were honest and intent on using ethanol as a fuel (rather than a vote subsidy) we'd be using sugar beets. Grows in more places, uses less water/pestacide/fertalizer, is not a feed stock AND converts to ethanol more effeciently (not as good as Sugar Cane, but waay better than corn) with less silage ta boot.

Governmentarian Morons.

[Old Ironsights]

... AS a precaution I'd suggest no one buy gas from a station where a truck is making a drop. It would be best if you could wait an hour or so after the truck is done before making your purchase there.

True that.

[GANJIRO]

Just a couple comments that may not have applications outside my home range but here in the islands we can only get E10 gasoline and of course our fuel milage has suffered thus supplying fuel companies more revenue. Being an island state with a sea based culture many locals here myself included have boats mainly used for fishing both recreational and commercial. Many of these boats are locally made and come with built-in fuel tanks made from composite fiberglass/polyester resin. This was never a problem with undiluted gasoline but now with only E10 being available this has created allot of problems for local boaters because the alcohol in the fuel will over time dissolve the polyester resin of the composite fuel tanks as well as rubber fuel lines thus causing fuel lines to clog or worse yet gumming up the valve train of the motors. It also causes fuel leaks into the bilge which is a great fire hazzard. Also since alcohol absorbs water from the atmosphere if you don't use your boat for long periods of time you have to drain the fuel tanks to prevent miosture from accumulating in the tank.

Bio- diesel sounds good but not as great as it sounds in many modern diesels. A friend who owns a Ford F-250 with 6.0 Turbo Diesel engine was very excited about trying bio-diesel it being one dollar a gallon LESS than real diesel. It smelled like french fries from the exhaust BUt after a week his motor stopped running, the bio-diesel had totally gummed and clogged up his injectors as well as his fuel filter which fortunately for him the dealer covered under the warranty BUT with a warning; Don't burn straight bio-diesel again, either mix it with real diesel or switch between fill-ups. The older diesels with mechanical fuel injection (VWs, Mercedes, etc.) can run on 3rd world low quality diesels but the US made electronic injection computer controlled diesels (Ford, Chevy, not sure about Cummins/Dodge) have tighter tolerances so are more sensitive to fuel quality. If you own a newer American diesel and are running bio-diesel be cautious.

[J Miller]

Even your "straight gas" is likely not straight. Most mixes contain around 10% ethanol or MBTE to "reduce emmissions".

Of course, those additives both reduce milage, so there is a net INCREASE of emmissions on the street (the only "decrease" is in the lab) but it makes the Greens & Corn Subsidy happy.

Meh. If this country were honest and intent on using ethanol as a fuel (rather than a vote subsidy) we'd be using sugar beets. Grows in more places, uses less water/pestacide/fertalizer, is not a feed stock AND converts to ethanol more effeciently (not as good as Sugar Cane, but waay better than corn) with less silage ta boot.

Governmentarian Morons.

Probably true. All I can go on is the labels on the pumps. One says; 87 octane, the second; 89 octane with a notice of 10% ethanol, and the third; 91 octane also with a notice of 10% ethanol.
I can tell the difference between how the 87 straight gas and the 89 mixed runs in my Pathfinder.

I agree with the rest of your comment totally.

Ganjiro,
We ran into the same problems in Maricopa and Pinal countys in AZ back in the 90s when they shoved that oxygenated stuff down our throats. At the time I worked in an auto parts store and we sold a lot of fuel pumps, filters, hoses, and carb kits for a while.

Joe

[Kansas Ed]

I've been running alky in my dragster for several years, and have been supplementing my Pickup with Methanol for the octane requirements ever since I put the supercharger on it. Since Ethanol and Methanol are entirely different (albiet both alcohols) I can give you some experiences with Methanol and some of my observations in using Ethanol blends at the pump.

I have run up to 20% alcohol blends in my 1970 Chevy C-10 with no harm, and better performance. Nothing has been hurt in the two years that I have been doing this. I have used the E10 for standard fill ups, and added another 2 gallons of Methanol to the mix. I have a clear fuel filter which shows debris, and it is clean as a whistle. If the fuel lines were degrading it would show it here first.

As run by racers, straight Methanol is corrosive, but there are top lubes which come standard from many distributors which all but negate the effects of the corrosiveness. I would assume that the same can be done with Ethanol. Many of the roundy round guys out here leave the Methanol in their tanks through the winter without harm to the system...provided the top lube has been added. Drag racers have a different set of rules, and aren't allowed to run top lubes in NHRA competition, therefore the maintenance is much higher.

Firstly, Ethanol runs at a 9:1 A/F ratio, and yes thats going to take more fuel to some extent, but remember that alcohol absorbs water. Now I did some gas mileage trials here in KS, driving the same stretch of road, alternating between regular unleaded and E10. I always purchased the fuel from the same store. Every time, the E10 would run in the Pontiac Vibe a minimum of 1.5 MPG MORE than the regular unleaded. Here in KS the E10 from Casey's is also 10 cents cheaper per gallon over regular. I scratched my head over this for some time because my mileage logically should be 96.1% of normal with E10, not the 105% I was seeing. What I finally figured out was that the Ethanol was absorbing the moisture in the gas, and making the efficiency better due to the small quantities of E-fuel.

I laugh at the detractors of Ethanol using the energy inefficiency argument to try and base their case on. If you want myths, you're going to accept the ones started by big oil??? Think about it, the way we are going about it in the US is decidedly wrong, but this is really a fledgling industry here. Give it some time, and it will become more efficient. I spent some time with an Ethanol worker one afternoon and evening, and was amazed at all of the byproducts that are gleaned off of the process. If you take the Ethanol production as the only product, then yes, it probably is currently inefficient, but you aren't looking at all of the other products produced at the same time. Furthermore, corn really isn't the ideal crop for production, as is one of the sugar crops, and Milo is especially well suited for production according to my friend in the industry.

If it really wasn't feasible would Brazil be as energy independent as it is?? A close friend of mine has spent a lot of time in Brazil, and has nothing negative to say about the industry or fuel. The first step should be to make the requirement for all new gasoline cars to be E85 compatible. Without that, there will be no incentive to make the industry come around.

For those who have Excel, I put together a couple of little formulas to help pick jet sizes for their carbs while mixing either Ethanol or Methanol..I can email, or post the code here if anyone wants...

Ed

[Quick Karl]

nevermind

[J Miller]

I am not a race car or a performance car owner or driver, so I have zero knowledge about them or the fuels they use.
I'm a regular passenger car / 4x4 owner and user.

I've read and heard both sides of the argument about the so called benefits of the ethanol gas mix or oxygenated fuels, and all I can do is go by the results that I had with mine, my families, and the corporate vehicles I used.

First I can say that I never personally had any problems with fuel system degradation caused by the E/gas mix. I ran this stuff in vehicles from my Grandmoms 68 Impala - 325hp 396 High Compression V8, all the way to our 94-95 Nissans with their computer controlled fuel injected engines.

OK, what did happen is that in EVERY vehicle, gas mileage and performance dropped. EVEN with the EFI vehicles. Since the gas mileage dropped it cost more to go the same distance using the mixed fuel. Thus increasing the cost to fill up the vehicles.
Now, as I said above, when this gas was first introduced in Phx, I worked at an auto parts store. I was driver/counterman and so I got to do some pretty concise fuel mileage tests. Because of our deliveries we gassed up a minimum of once a day and sometimes twice. At first the mixed fuel was winter only. So I was able to document the decrease in gas mileage when the oxygenated gas was put in the stations, and the instant increase in gas mileage when they changed back to the straight gas.

What others have done I can't say, but the above is and was my experiences.

Joe

[Scott64A]

Fun Fact:

-adding ethanol to fuel adds around $0.25 per gallon, because it has to be added post-pipeline due to it's missability with water.

That, and it doesn't do anything but make fuel LESS efficient, so it is essentially filler.

Thank your congressman.
They voted to add it because it "helped the ecology", based on rather dubious and loosely correlated information given to them by ConAgra who makes it.

This stuff sucks.


Instead of spending the money there, we ought to put it into more drilling, or a full scale military assault on OPEC.

Either way we win.

[Old Ironsights]

I totally understand the performance benefit of Top Fuel ethanol/methanol.

My motorcycle never ran faster/hotter than the time I ran it on Everclear (had to get to Ft Sill or be AWOL... no petrol available but there was a liquor store...)

Ran great... but burnt the heads right off my pistons.

I have ZERO issues with the idea of Methanol or Ethnanol as fuel. What I have issues with is using CORN SQUEEZINS as the fuel.

There are much more efficient ways of making ethanol - and yes, Brazil does a fine job of it with Sugar Cane.

But we can't grow Cane here and the Corn Industry has an insestuous relationship with the Gooberment, so running Beet Extraction isn't commercially viable.

Get rid of the Gooberment subsidies for Corn Ethanol and we could get somewhere.

[Quick Karl]

I'm with you, Scott.

[Andrew]

I have ZERO issues with the idea of Methanol or Ethnanol as fuel. What I have issues with is using CORN SQUEEZINS as the fuel.

There are much more efficient ways of making ethanol - and yes, Brazil does a fine job of it with Sugar Cane.

But we can't grow Cane here and the Corn Industry has an insestuous relationship with the Gooberment, so running Beet Extraction isn't commercially viable.

Get rid of the Gooberment subsidies for Corn Ethanol and we could get somewhere.

I agree totally. My friend was looking into what it took to get a permit to have a denatured alcahol still. He said it wasn't that big a hassle other than you would need some land to grow the crop. I may actually ask him tomarrow about what it would take for us to get it going.

[Old Ironsights]

I have ZERO issues with the idea of Methanol or Ethnanol as fuel. What I have issues with is using CORN SQUEEZINS as the fuel.

There are much more efficient ways of making ethanol - and yes, Brazil does a fine job of it with Sugar Cane.

But we can't grow Cane here and the Corn Industry has an insestuous relationship with the Gooberment, so running Beet Extraction isn't commercially viable.

Get rid of the Gooberment subsidies for Corn Ethanol and we could get somewhere.

I agree totally. My friend was looking into what it took to get a permit to have a denatured alcahol still. He said it wasn't that big a hassle other than you would need some land to grow the crop. I may actually ask him tomarrow about what it would take for us to get it going.

Right there is 9/10 of the problem. Why in the hell should we have to ask "permission"?

Oh, yeah, because we haven't been free to distill our own without government interference since the Whiskey Rebellion.

[Wrangler John]

I added a MSD Electronic Ignition module and adjustable timing control to my old Chevy van with a 350 V-8. This allows me to advance or retard ignition timing depending on the gasoline right from the driver's seat. If the fuel pings I can adjust it right out. Units are CARB approved for Calif. with compliance stickers for under the hood. E-85 may work with such a unit depending on age and engine, but the alcohol will emulsify any water in the tank and could cause injector problems. My old van has a Quadra Jet 4 bbl, so injector pump and injectors are no problem.

Many years ago I ran gasohol from Beacon (Ultramar) to tow a trailer, ran water injection in the same vehicle - unit had a little computer to add water vapor to the air stream depending on vacuum - also kills octane knock. You can still get water/ethanol units for diesel engines and some gas engines - boosts power and lowers EGT's but they all run $300.00 or more.

[Kansas Ed]

OI, you crack me up.. ..I bet it did burn the tops off the pistons running that lean...you know what they say..."Lean is Mean". I'm surprised the plugs didn't give out first.

Ed

[piller]

I don't like gasahol, tastes terrible. There are better crops than corn to make alcohol out of, and one called milo grows in dry land as opposed to irrigated. Milo works so well that all McCormick alcohol is made from it, and the distilleries are a little North and West of Lawrence, Kansas. McCormick buys a lot of the milo grown in Kansas.

[Old Ironsights]

I don't like gasahol, tastes terrible. There are better crops than corn to make alcohol out of, and one called milo grows in dry land as opposed to irrigated. Milo works so well that all McCormick alcohol is made from it, and the distilleries are a little North and West of Lawrence, Kansas. McCormick buys a lot of the milo grown in Kansas.

Another couple of a more efficient, less polluting, less fertilizer and water intensive crops to make Ethanol out of are SORGHUM (MOLASSES) or SUGAR BEETS. (edit: apparantly milo IS sorghum...)

Brazil isn't making its massive amounts of ethanol out of corn, they are using Sugar Cane - so their Corn gets to be used for FOOD.

But no. There just aren't enough VOTES in the Molasses/Sugar Beet industry to make it "feasable".

Neither corn or maize come close to the sugar content of sugar beets. Sugar beets can be grown from Canada to the tropics and for every unit of energy put into the growing and processing you get 7 units out of sugar beets vs 1-2 for corn or maize.

While the "cost" of making ethanol fro Corn is "lower" those "costs" do not take into account SUBSIDIES or the increased costs of everything reliant on Corn as a feedstock. Also, the "increased cost" of sugar beets (for example) as a feed stock is directly related to the much more limited supply in gross convertable tonnage. Increase Demand for (sorghum) Molasses/Beets and more people will grow it... and grow it where corn CAN'T grow.

http://www.usda.gov/oce/EthanolSugarFea ... eport3.pdf

We have GOT to stop using our FOOD as fuel.

[BAGTIC]

I have noticed that since they started adding alcohol to the gas I have had to replace the gas tank cap every year as the gaskets deteriorate and crumble terribly. The caps made for cars may be alcohol resistant but the ones for tractors sure aren't.

My tractor was down twice last week due to fuel system blockage caused by gasket 'crumbs'.

[horsesoldier03]

I know several people that have cars that will run the E85. Everyone of them tells me the same thing! When running E85 you will lose around 20% of your fuel economy. Example, when running regular fuel, gas mileage is approx. 28 mpg. On E85 the same vehicle is lucky to get 20 MPG. IMO, the trade off for 50 cents per gallon hardly seems worth it.

[stretch]

Yep, horsesoldier - that's why the oil companies didn't yell too loudly
when they were told to mix alcohol with the gas. Add alcohol, lower the
mileage, and the oil company still sells the same amount of
gasoline. Big agri-business makes a killing off of government
subsidies, and EVERYBODY ELSE gets screwed.........

[Peter M. Eick]

Not only that, we get to sell natural gas and propane to the fertilizer companies to make fertilizers and pesticides to grow the corn.
We get to sell diesel to the farm tractors, harvesters and crop dusters.
We get to sell fuel oil to make electricity to pump the water to farm it.
We get to sell diesel to truck it and then more diesel to put it on a train and haul it to a processing plant.
We get to sell lube oils to everyone to keep all of that machinery running.
We get to sell more fuel oil to make electricity to run the processing plants.
We get to sell more diesel to the trucks and trains to haul the ethanol to the distribution plants because you cannot pipeline it easily.
We get to sell gas to go with it also.

At then end of the day, I am not sure who the ethanol bill was really a perk for. The economics I saw says that big oil comes out ahead on the deal. That is the real reason we did not complain much beyond the required token amount. We make money on all of the energy that is burned to make the stuff.


This whole thread reminds me of a conversation I had with a fellow oil company explorer about 10 years ago now. We were going through layoffs and he commented "Big Oil (insert company name here) sponsors my life. It provides the salary to buy all of the energy I use to live by. Without them, I would not have a job and I would not be able to turn on a light or drive a car. Everyone seems to forget that."

I was really sad to see him get laid off along with all of the others that got whacked in 98/99. He was a good explorer, a good friend and a strong geologist. I had not thought about him for many months prior to this so here's to you Pat.

[J Miller]

I suppose it would be a good idea to refresh everyones memories of what question actually started this thread:

've been curious about that e85 fuel they've been advertising lately. What I want to know, is what effect this stuff would have if used in an older, 95 vintage vehicle?

I try to use 100% gasoline when I fill up, but I'd like to know about this stuff.

Joe

Joe

[nemhed]

Joe, this is straight off the flex fuel web site:
Flexible fuel vehicles (FFVs) are designed to run on gasoline or a blend of up to 85%

ethanol (E85). Except for a few engine and fuel system modifications, they are identical to gasoline-only models.

FFVs have been produced since the 1980s, and dozens of models are currently available. Since FFVs look just like gasoline-only models, you may have an FFV and not even know it. To determine if your vehicle is an FFV, check the inside of your car's fuel filler door for an identification sticker or consult your owner’s manual.

FFVs experience no loss in performance when operating on E85. However, since a gallon of ethanol contains less energy than a gallon of gasoline, FFVs typically get about 20-30% fewer miles per gallon when fueled with E85.

If your vehicle isn't' set up to run E85, don't try it, it won't run right and could cause damage to the fuel system components. If your vehicle is set up for E85, the loss of mileage will probably offset any savings at the pump.

[J Miller]

Joe, this is straight off the flex fuel web site:
Flexible fuel vehicles (FFVs) are designed to run on gasoline or a blend of up to 85%

ethanol (E85). Except for a few engine and fuel system modifications, they are identical to gasoline-only models.

FFVs have been produced since the 1980s, and dozens of models are currently available. Since FFVs look just like gasoline-only models, you may have an FFV and not even know it. To determine if your vehicle is an FFV, check the inside of your car's fuel filler door for an identification sticker or consult your owner’s manual.

FFVs experience no loss in performance when operating on E85. However, since a gallon of ethanol contains less energy than a gallon of gasoline, FFVs typically get about 20-30% fewer miles per gallon when fueled with E85.

If your vehicle isn't' set up to run E85, don't try it, it won't run right and could cause damage to the fuel system components. If your vehicle is set up for E85, the loss of mileage will probably offset any savings at the pump.

nemhed,
Thank you. This is what I wanted when I started the thread. I know there is no ID label in the fuel cap area, and don't remember seeing any thing mentioned in the owners manual. So until I check again I'll just buy gas.

Joe