E85

[paulharvey]

I'm out of town for a waste water class and I saw E85 for sale for the first time (guess I don't get out much). Regular gas is $3.54 and E85 is $3.29. Wife is coming down and her car is a flex fuel impala. Would you buy E85? I've heard it's corrosive, and has less energy than gas. Does it have cleaning properties if used say one tank every 50,000?

 

[murphy1244]

I'm out of town for a waste water class and I saw E85 for sale for the first time (guess I don't get out much). Regular gas is $3.54 and E85 is $3.29. Wife is coming down and her car is a flex fuel impala. Would you buy E85? I've heard it's corrosive, and has less energy than gas. Does it have cleaning properties if used say one tank every 50,000?

At the rate your using it I would not worry about it.

 

[Ford850]

It is supposed to have cleaning properties. It will get less MPGs though, approximately 30% lower. I've never seen it priced 30% lower to offset that difference, so it costs more to use it. I still plan to run a tank through my truck once the weather warms up, for the cleaning properties.
I noticed yesterday 87 was $3.38 and E85 was $3.29. That's close to 3% lower priced instead of 30% lower.

 

[Diamondpilot]

It will cost you more in the long run. I have had 3 flex fuel vehicles. All got 33 to 38 % less mpg on E85 so let's keep the math easy and say it gets 33% or 1/3 less.

So the fuel has to be 2/3 the price to break even. Only thing it will do for you is clean out your fuel system. This can be a good thing as long as it does not plug up a fuel filter or injector.

Chris

 

[wyknot]

I have a 2013 Nissan dualis 2 litre 4 cyl hatch I normally get 11.3 kilometres per 1 litre of fuel when using 91 octane unleaded petrol. I put a tank of E85 in the other week and the milage went down to 8.3 kilometres per litre and the car started missing and the engine management light came on. That equates to about 200 km per tankful less. And if we use it in older engines it can mean a rebuild. The Oil companies recommend not using it in planes and boats. and in small engines like lawnmowers and chainsaws. It perishes the seals in the engines I have used it once and never again. I was 6 cents cheaper than the 91 unleaded petrol.

 

[paulharvey]

It is supposed to have cleaning properties. It will get less MPGs though, approximately 30% lower. I've never seen it priced 30% lower to offset that difference, so it costs more to use it. I still plan to run a tank through my truck once the weather warms up, for the cleaning properties.
I noticed yesterday 87 was $3.38 and E85 was $3.29. That's close to 3% lower priced instead of 30% lower.

I got 22 mpg vs 26 mpg with it. So yeah.

 

[Copperhead]

I alternate between gas and E85 as the price fluctuates seasonally. One is going to lose some mpg using E85, so you have to look at a cost per mile and not the mpg comparison. I have found in my experience that there needs to be at least a 70 cent price difference to break even. E85 being lower in price.

In my 2013 Silverado, last winter the price was a full dollar lower for E85. I used E85 most of the winter months. I was getting about 16-17 for all miles on gas, roughly 12-13 for E85. But with the big price difference, I was saving about 3-4 cents a mile on actual fuel cost using E85. When spring rolled around, the price gapped closed up a little, so I went back to gas, or more specifically, E10.

If the vehicle is made for it, and you can find a good price spread, then buy E85 if you have a mind to do so. I have grown fond of the blender pumps at some locations that offer E10, E15, E20, E30, or E85. You just select what you want. With my Silverado, I have grown fond of E30. It is about a dime a gallon less than E10, yet my mpg doesn't take a hit in relation to E10, so it is more cost effective. Choices, Choices, oh so many choices. I am glad we have so many, but it can be confusing for a lot of folks.

 

[arrow]

I question the product that is 30% less efficient to burn and thus having to use more fuel to do the same work, equates to cleaner air more than lining pockets of people who have to do with ethanol. Injector atomization, electronics, lighter and more aerodynamic vehicles and slippery lubricants I think have gone a longer way of saving fuel than when cars were heavy and had unbrained fuel systems.

 

[paulharvey]

It's not for clean air, oil independence, or economics. It's really all about winning votes in the mid west.

 

[arrow]

It's not for clean air, oil independence, or economics. It's really all about winning votes in the mid west.

I'm just as jaded thinking this was just another good ole American hoax.