turbo buicks
ESADAH!!!
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2002
anyone know anything about this ethanol/gas mix GMs doin in their cars now? i read that its 105 octane.
e85
- Thread starter turbo buicks
- Start date
yeah, go to wikipedia and look it up
its been around forever. You can make it in your garage if you want to.
Even the Model T was flex fuel, could run on ethanol or gas with the twist of a screwdriver.
also, in addition to the octane it runs much cooler since it has a higher latency of heat value than gasoline. It would be a dream to run in turbo regals and I would have done the conversion if the fuel was available here (it requires more fuel to reach stoichiometric so it would require a different chip to do it right)
ethanol is the ****, and I think an answer to our oil woes.
its been around forever. You can make it in your garage if you want to.
Even the Model T was flex fuel, could run on ethanol or gas with the twist of a screwdriver.
also, in addition to the octane it runs much cooler since it has a higher latency of heat value than gasoline. It would be a dream to run in turbo regals and I would have done the conversion if the fuel was available here (it requires more fuel to reach stoichiometric so it would require a different chip to do it right)
ethanol is the ****, and I think an answer to our oil woes.
72firebird
Active Member
- Joined
- May 18, 2004
Pablo said:
Ethanol is not a solution to our oil problems. It requires about half the oil to produce than what normal gasoline does but the problem is that we're already running into a shortage. By me atleast they just made a law where regular 87 octane could no longer use any ethanol. There's a shortage and prices are going up on it. As of right now it looks like things are going to go electric. With the large amount of hybrid cars that are coming out and the high demand for them I think we're moving closer and closer to electric. However I don't really think that's a good alternative either because the electricity has to come from somewhere. This is a much bigger problem than what most people think and a good solution has yet to be found. The closest thing to a good solution I think is Hydrogen powered cars. It'll be interesting to see what they come up with over the next 5 or so years.
The Blob
Amorphous... totally
- Joined
- May 25, 2001
They are building ethanol plants like crazy in the midwest. The problem with ethanol is the only reason it is competitive price-wise is that the govt subsidizes it.
The problem with hydrogen is that it is extremely energy intensive to make it. IIRC, manufacturing hydrogen nets near zero energy-wise... or maybe even a net loss, I forgot. Regardless, until they come up with an efficient means to manufacture it (nuclear power?) we're not going to be driving hydrogen powered cars.
The problem with hydrogen is that it is extremely energy intensive to make it. IIRC, manufacturing hydrogen nets near zero energy-wise... or maybe even a net loss, I forgot. Regardless, until they come up with an efficient means to manufacture it (nuclear power?) we're not going to be driving hydrogen powered cars.
My biggest beef with flex fuels is the E85 cars being churned out by detroit can run the stuff, but will get HORRIBLE gas mileage on it.
Long term, this will turn more people off of E85 that it turns on.
It would be smarter if they designed cars from the ground up to use E85...like a turbo 4 that had an auxially E85 tank that made 300 HP on E85, but only 200 on gas.
This way, you'd get the performance of boost E85 and the gas mileage of Gasoline.
Pretty much after the first full tank of E85 and the novelty wears off, people will only buy enough E85 to increase the octane of their gas (like we do) because the efficiency just isn't there in the current crop of E85 vehicles to run a full tank and be happy about it.
Long term, this will turn more people off of E85 that it turns on.
It would be smarter if they designed cars from the ground up to use E85...like a turbo 4 that had an auxially E85 tank that made 300 HP on E85, but only 200 on gas.
This way, you'd get the performance of boost E85 and the gas mileage of Gasoline.
Pretty much after the first full tank of E85 and the novelty wears off, people will only buy enough E85 to increase the octane of their gas (like we do) because the efficiency just isn't there in the current crop of E85 vehicles to run a full tank and be happy about it.
72firebird,
I think you are repeating the myths associated with e85, you should go look up some more info, the article on wikipedia is a good start. The argument about it having a negative energy balance has been disproven. The data used to come to that conclusion is from the 70s. Look at brazil, something like 85% of their transportation energy comes from pure ethanol, their ethanol production is so efficient that they have surplus energy that they sell to the state electric companies.
With specific tuning and engines built to run e85 or ethanol only the fuel mileage can be nearly the same. A gas engine converted to run e85 will use something like 25% more fuel per mile, which isnt HORRIBLE especially when you consider that the compression ratio of said engine is for gasoline. Even newer flex fuel vehicles are doing much better than 25% difference. I believe saab has one that is doing within 7%. And this technology is really still in its infancy. Give it 10 years in the mainstream and I wouldnt be surprised if they were doing better than gas considering the latency of heat and octane advantage
I think you are repeating the myths associated with e85, you should go look up some more info, the article on wikipedia is a good start. The argument about it having a negative energy balance has been disproven. The data used to come to that conclusion is from the 70s. Look at brazil, something like 85% of their transportation energy comes from pure ethanol, their ethanol production is so efficient that they have surplus energy that they sell to the state electric companies.
With specific tuning and engines built to run e85 or ethanol only the fuel mileage can be nearly the same. A gas engine converted to run e85 will use something like 25% more fuel per mile, which isnt HORRIBLE especially when you consider that the compression ratio of said engine is for gasoline. Even newer flex fuel vehicles are doing much better than 25% difference. I believe saab has one that is doing within 7%. And this technology is really still in its infancy. Give it 10 years in the mainstream and I wouldnt be surprised if they were doing better than gas considering the latency of heat and octane advantage
I was just throwing numbers out of the top of my head, here is some actual data
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E85
"...Unfortunately, because ethanol contains less energy than gasoline, fuel economy is reduced for most 2002 and earlier FFVs (flexible-fuel vehicles) that are currently on the road by about 30% (most after 2003 lose only 15-17%, or less) when operated on pure E85 (summer blend.) Some of the newest vehicles can lessen this reduction to only 5-15%. A few cars actually claim to provide better fuel economy on E85 than on gasoline; for example, one Saab turbocharged car actually claims better fuel economy and higher power on E85 than gasoline through using a higher compression ratio engine. Still, for almost all FFVs, more E85 is typically needed to do the same work as can be achieved with a lesser volume of gasoline. This difference is sometimes offset by the lower cost of the E85 fuel, depending on E85's current price discount relative to the current price of gasoline. As described earlier, the best thing for drivers to do is to record fuel usage with both fuels and calculate cost/distance for them. Only by doing that, can the end-user economy of the two fuels be compared....."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E85
"...Unfortunately, because ethanol contains less energy than gasoline, fuel economy is reduced for most 2002 and earlier FFVs (flexible-fuel vehicles) that are currently on the road by about 30% (most after 2003 lose only 15-17%, or less) when operated on pure E85 (summer blend.) Some of the newest vehicles can lessen this reduction to only 5-15%. A few cars actually claim to provide better fuel economy on E85 than on gasoline; for example, one Saab turbocharged car actually claims better fuel economy and higher power on E85 than gasoline through using a higher compression ratio engine. Still, for almost all FFVs, more E85 is typically needed to do the same work as can be achieved with a lesser volume of gasoline. This difference is sometimes offset by the lower cost of the E85 fuel, depending on E85's current price discount relative to the current price of gasoline. As described earlier, the best thing for drivers to do is to record fuel usage with both fuels and calculate cost/distance for them. Only by doing that, can the end-user economy of the two fuels be compared....."
also see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol_fuel
the section on energy balance is a good one, two different writers and opinions there, you decide.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol_fuel
the section on energy balance is a good one, two different writers and opinions there, you decide.
read the "talk" section on ethanol fuels too
heres one quote that I thought was on the money in reference to when people do an unfair comparison between gasoline and ethanol
"The problem here is everyone is using flex-fuel vehicles to make the comparison. In order to run without knocking, a gasoline engine need s a fairly low compression engine. Ethanol will run in both a low compression and high compression engine. So, in order to make engines work with both fuels, the auto industry has used low compression engines. This seriously discounts the potential of ethanol as a fuel because it is being run under conditions far from peak efficiency. There is no way to switch from low to high compression on the fly (it requires a rebuild of the engine). The only way for ethanol to be taken seriously is for engines to be set up as high compression, and gasoline users can use octane boosters so that they can run it with a high compression engine. I suppose if people were comparing the price to E85 to the price of 105 octane racing fuel (which it basically is) instead of regular unleaded, there would not even be a discussion. Plus we'd be seeing 250hp from a naturally-aspirated 2.3L 4-cylinder, which provide a significant weight advantage over the 3.5L V6 needed to produce that much power with regular gas. The change need to start with the fuelling stations and the automakers reaching a deal to roll out cars and have the means to fill them up everywhere. Justin 11:20, 2/17/06"
heres one quote that I thought was on the money in reference to when people do an unfair comparison between gasoline and ethanol
"The problem here is everyone is using flex-fuel vehicles to make the comparison. In order to run without knocking, a gasoline engine need s a fairly low compression engine. Ethanol will run in both a low compression and high compression engine. So, in order to make engines work with both fuels, the auto industry has used low compression engines. This seriously discounts the potential of ethanol as a fuel because it is being run under conditions far from peak efficiency. There is no way to switch from low to high compression on the fly (it requires a rebuild of the engine). The only way for ethanol to be taken seriously is for engines to be set up as high compression, and gasoline users can use octane boosters so that they can run it with a high compression engine. I suppose if people were comparing the price to E85 to the price of 105 octane racing fuel (which it basically is) instead of regular unleaded, there would not even be a discussion. Plus we'd be seeing 250hp from a naturally-aspirated 2.3L 4-cylinder, which provide a significant weight advantage over the 3.5L V6 needed to produce that much power with regular gas. The change need to start with the fuelling stations and the automakers reaching a deal to roll out cars and have the means to fill them up everywhere. Justin 11:20, 2/17/06"
72firebird
Active Member
- Joined
- May 18, 2004
Well I believe I'm right on this, but I can't garuntee it. Octane doesn't = power. Octane is just a measurement of the resistance to preignition or knock. Now most people associate octane with power because when comparing the same type of fuel the one with higher octane has the potential for more power because you can run a higher timing advance. However E85 doesn't produce the same amount of energy per gallon as your everyday gasoline. So just because you can run more timing doesn't mean anything because the actual energy that is used from the gas is much lower. This is why sometimes the suggest running larger injectors when running E85. Also since it doesn't produce as much energy it requires more fuel to reach the same power, so really you're not saving money but you are helping the enviroment.
Edit: just read the rest of Pablos posts and he mentions the gas mileage decrease.
Edit: just read the rest of Pablos posts and he mentions the gas mileage decrease.
72firebird
Active Member
- Joined
- May 18, 2004
Pablo said:
Wikipedia is a horrible source. Why would you ever try to use an Encyclopedia in the first place? Also the fact that it can be changed by anyone in the world decredits the site. Most college professors highly suggest staying away from it as any form of a reliable source. I'll look at my papers tonight and post where I got my information. I'm currently working on a project about E85 vs Gasoline and will be attending a conference sponsored by the IPCA (Indiana Petroleum and Convenience Association) about E85.
I have been looking into it a little, but since there are no E85 stations in my part of the country, it really wouldn't do me any good at this time to set my car up to run it.
But, from what I have read on it, if an engine is set up to run E85 it can be just as efficient. With the higher octane of the fuel, you can run higher compression, and more timing. This will make it as efficient as a gasoline engine(or real close to it). The problem with the FFVs is that, as stated above, the cars are designed to run on either fuel, so it can't maximize the benefits of the E85. Now, if the E85 causes mileagea to drop, say, 20%, but was 50% the price of gasoline. I'll tell you I would certainly run it. I might have to fill up just a little more often, but it wouldn't hurt the wallet as much. Right now, it costs alot more to produce the Ethanol, than to produce gasoline, but I can see that changing. Also, if the govenment is paying farmers to not farm, then they can now pay them to farm.
I have to say, if it was available, and the cost was reasonable, I would convert my vehicles to run it. Just think, you could run your race chip with pump gas, get more power and it would burn cleaner.
But, from what I have read on it, if an engine is set up to run E85 it can be just as efficient. With the higher octane of the fuel, you can run higher compression, and more timing. This will make it as efficient as a gasoline engine(or real close to it). The problem with the FFVs is that, as stated above, the cars are designed to run on either fuel, so it can't maximize the benefits of the E85. Now, if the E85 causes mileagea to drop, say, 20%, but was 50% the price of gasoline. I'll tell you I would certainly run it. I might have to fill up just a little more often, but it wouldn't hurt the wallet as much. Right now, it costs alot more to produce the Ethanol, than to produce gasoline, but I can see that changing. Also, if the govenment is paying farmers to not farm, then they can now pay them to farm.
I have to say, if it was available, and the cost was reasonable, I would convert my vehicles to run it. Just think, you could run your race chip with pump gas, get more power and it would burn cleaner.
72firebird said:
I dont know much about E85 but have enough experience with racing alcohol cars to know that even though it doesnt contain the same amount of energy per gallon as gasoline the fact that you have to burn more of it to get the proper ratio(significantly more in racing applications on methanol, not a blend like E85)means it will make more power. I've personally seen cars pick up from .3-.7 by just switching to alcohol from gas, and more for cars that made changes to compliment the alcohol. Thats why cars running alcohol injection can make more power than any type of gas alone.
Steve
a horrible source that can be challenged right there where it stands and even be edited is better than a source that can remain unchallenged and unedited by only one person - the original author. Just because someone published something does not make it free of errors or bias. Wikipedia articles are every day subject to peer review, and if you wanted you could put information on any of those articles to counterpoint anything you see incorrect.
Not to mention that a paper is set in stone and not subject to constant revision or updates. In the few months that I have followed the wikipedia alcohol fuel articles they have evolved with the changing political/scientific climate surrounding those fuels.
about your point about the ethanol not being able to be made more efficient, I will post data here shortly to the contrary.
Not to mention that a paper is set in stone and not subject to constant revision or updates. In the few months that I have followed the wikipedia alcohol fuel articles they have evolved with the changing political/scientific climate surrounding those fuels.
about your point about the ethanol not being able to be made more efficient, I will post data here shortly to the contrary.
E85 has 60% of the BTU's/gallon of gasoline, so science says a car will NEVER get better mpg with E85 vs. gas, Automotive Company Marketing departments not withstanding.
The Problem with E85 is what I will refer to as the "Julio Problem". Do you NEED 105 octane to drive to work? Sure you do, but only for about 20-30 seconds total. The rest of the time 87 octane will do fine.
E85 injection is and WILL ALWAYS BE a much more efficient means of using E85. Because E85 costs more to make than it is sold for (and the difference is subsidised), the Price of E85 will be based on the price of Gasoline.
E85 WILL NEVER BE 60% of the price of Gasoline, so Gasoline powered vehicles (or gasoline powered with on demand E85 injection) will always be cheaper to run than straight E85.
The sooner car makers recognize this, the brighter the future E85 will have. As it is now, they are Selling Sizzle and when the steak shows up cold and tough, people are going swear the stuff off for good (and tell their friends)
They only have one chance to make a good impression and I'm afraid the impression they are going to make is a bad one.
The Problem with E85 is what I will refer to as the "Julio Problem". Do you NEED 105 octane to drive to work? Sure you do, but only for about 20-30 seconds total. The rest of the time 87 octane will do fine.
E85 injection is and WILL ALWAYS BE a much more efficient means of using E85. Because E85 costs more to make than it is sold for (and the difference is subsidised), the Price of E85 will be based on the price of Gasoline.
E85 WILL NEVER BE 60% of the price of Gasoline, so Gasoline powered vehicles (or gasoline powered with on demand E85 injection) will always be cheaper to run than straight E85.
The sooner car makers recognize this, the brighter the future E85 will have. As it is now, they are Selling Sizzle and when the steak shows up cold and tough, people are going swear the stuff off for good (and tell their friends)
They only have one chance to make a good impression and I'm afraid the impression they are going to make is a bad one.
My experience with ethanol goes back 20 years. Being from Nebraska, I happily filled up with "Gasohol" back in the 80's because it was cheaper and higher octane. When I got older, I actually started measuring my gas mileage. The "Cheaper" gasohol was actually costing me more.
I became a "non believer".
The current crop of "flex fueled vehicles" will have the same effect on a new generation of people.
E85 is 95% marketing hype and 5% reality.
You can believe the marketing hype all you want. 5 to 10 years from now, you will say, "UNGN was right."
All you are saying about compression ratios and turbochargers and designing a vehicle to run on E85 from scratch may be true (only time will tell), but those aren't "flex fuel vehicles".
Flex fuel vehicles will KILL E85 from the bad taste it leaves in consumers mouths when they fill up their taurus with E85 and get 14 mpg.
I became a "non believer".
The current crop of "flex fueled vehicles" will have the same effect on a new generation of people.
E85 is 95% marketing hype and 5% reality.
You can believe the marketing hype all you want. 5 to 10 years from now, you will say, "UNGN was right."
All you are saying about compression ratios and turbochargers and designing a vehicle to run on E85 from scratch may be true (only time will tell), but those aren't "flex fuel vehicles".
Flex fuel vehicles will KILL E85 from the bad taste it leaves in consumers mouths when they fill up their taurus with E85 and get 14 mpg.
72firebird
Active Member
- Joined
- May 18, 2004
UNGN said:
yeah since flex fuel vehicles never actually take advantage of the Ethanol it really doesn't help. The idea of creating a vahicle for the market and basing the drivetrain on a "potential" alternative fuel will more than likely never happen. There isn't enough Ethanol support and facts to have them actually start switching. A lot of gas stations don't want to get E85 because they have to upgrade their systems and spend quite a bit of money into making their station E85 compatible. I don't think that there will ever be enough support to make everything switch. Besides the Ethanol supply is already not reaching the demand. Imagine if they were to try to convert to this as a primary power source.
E85 currently has two things going for it. Governments are mandating it for "cleaner air" and since gasoline additives pay no road taxes, you get a vehicle fuel that only has 15% of the tax of gas.
Since the market for E85 is miniscule now, these two forces haven't butted up against each other...yet. But Just like government getting rich off cigarette taxes, if E85 did take off and start to eat into road tax revenues, the government will be there to tax it back into submission, slapping the demand back down.
The clean air aspects of E85 are on paper only. An old carbed clunker may put out cleaner emissions (after extensive conversion costs to run E85), but it's still 2 orders of magnitude dirtier than a 2006 model running gas.
New cars have almost zero NOX and CO. Running E85, they still have almost zero.
Don't get me wrong. E85 can be a great fuel for a turbocharged car and all these ethanol plants will ensure a cheap source of ethanol injection for the lives of our T/R's. I just see E85 have a tough time shedding the negative impression its going to make in the next 5 years.
Over the next 5 years, the owners of the 10 million or so Current E85 compatible cars are going to pull into their local E85 station, fill up their car... and for the next week watch their gas gage drop like a rock.
Then, they will proceed to tell everyone and their brother how much "E85 sucks".
Think 1980's GM Diesels. If they had made a 4 cylinder turbo Diesel, they would have changed the world. Instead they made a stigma that has required 20 years to erase (and it still isn't erased).
Since the market for E85 is miniscule now, these two forces haven't butted up against each other...yet. But Just like government getting rich off cigarette taxes, if E85 did take off and start to eat into road tax revenues, the government will be there to tax it back into submission, slapping the demand back down.
The clean air aspects of E85 are on paper only. An old carbed clunker may put out cleaner emissions (after extensive conversion costs to run E85), but it's still 2 orders of magnitude dirtier than a 2006 model running gas.
New cars have almost zero NOX and CO. Running E85, they still have almost zero.
Don't get me wrong. E85 can be a great fuel for a turbocharged car and all these ethanol plants will ensure a cheap source of ethanol injection for the lives of our T/R's. I just see E85 have a tough time shedding the negative impression its going to make in the next 5 years.
Over the next 5 years, the owners of the 10 million or so Current E85 compatible cars are going to pull into their local E85 station, fill up their car... and for the next week watch their gas gage drop like a rock.
Then, they will proceed to tell everyone and their brother how much "E85 sucks".
Think 1980's GM Diesels. If they had made a 4 cylinder turbo Diesel, they would have changed the world. Instead they made a stigma that has required 20 years to erase (and it still isn't erased).
