E85

[Copperhead]

Well, when the engine is actually designed around E85 as opposed to trying to make an engine that wasn't, use it, then the dynamics change a little.

To wit, the 3.2L V6 EBDI engine that is a co-development of GM and the British engine designer Ricardo. It is being tested in some of GM's 2500 and 3500 HD pickups. Now, that 3.2L gets as much HP and Torque as the 6.6L Duramax diesel and better fuel economy as well, and does it on...... E85. There is a lot of articles and a few youtube videos out there on this engine. Not sure of any timeline when it will make it out as an option in production pickups. Seems to always take about 10 years from prototype to production.

Yeah, there is a lot of politics and finger tickling that went on with how ethanol came to be a big player in the fuel game. But it is what it is. Now, I just wish the OEM's would get off their backsides and develop more engines that take advantage of it and then the consumer will still win in the long run. And ethanol is a substantially cleaner burning fuel, when the engine is made to take advantage of it.

Lots of folks like to demonize the ethanol folks regarding this, and to be sure, they are not as pure as the wind driven snow. But the primary blame has to be laid on politicians. Knowing full well that blends of ethanol get lower mpg in regular production gas engines, they promoted this because fuel taxes are based on a per gallon thing. The more fuel sold, the more fuel taxes. It really is all that simple, folks. No Geraldo Rivera, conspiracy stuff. The ethanol producers just hopped on the wagon for the ride. Now that it is the cards that are dealt, we just need to know how to play them to our advantage. And getting engines out in the market that take advantage of this stuff would really be a nice ace up the sleeve.

 

[greggn]

The Risks of E15 Fuel Blends are Real | ForConstructionPros.com

 

[Copperhead]

Two issues with the article you linked. The primary focus of the article is small engines and outboards. No one really has a dispute about potential problems with E15 and them. There is no real evidence that E15 is a detriment to automobile engines and fuel systems after the late 90's. Now if someone has an old Evinrude powering their pickup, then they might want to take precautions.

Secondly, they love to zero in on the ethanol attracts water. That is true, but it only attracts the water that you have in the fuel system! You know, they way the fuel anti-icer Heet does. It is not like once you put ethanol in your tank, that it is putting a sign out inviting all the moisture in the area to come join the party. Gasoline auto fuel systems are closed systems. You know, that round device in your engine compartment, connected to the fuel tank, that collects gas fumes and such form the tank to burn them off instead of letting them vent to the atmosphere. You want a dry, moisture free fuel system? Then fill up with ethanol blended gasoline!

The moral of the story is... don't go pouring water in your fuel tank and you won't have a problem with ethanol and water! Do a little internet digging. There are numerous articles from boating and marine magazines that dispel a lot of the myths about ethanol that get recycled all the time. If anyone should have a real problem, it would be boaters. And their own industry rags have written volumes of articles that dispel much of the hype. Sure, one needs to be aware of things and use common sense, but ethanol in fuel is not going to be the death of the industrialized world as we know it.

 

[SATOHBULL]

There is another aspect to the real cost of E85: My Tundra requires 8 qts of 0w20 full synthetic. Recommended oil change intervals are 5000 mi. Unless, you use E85, then it becomes 2500 miles.!

Let's see, 8 qts at around $8 per qt, $64 in added expense in 2500 miles. E85 is rated in that truck at 13 MPG, E10 at 17.

There's no way mine will ever see any E85!

 

[paulharvey]

I saw this on a gas pump today in Lake City, FL. I assume it's something this station does, cause I haven't seen it before. It was a shell station. I like the idea of reminding people that $0.52/gallon is tax. I'm not arguing the merits, after all gas tax has got too be the fairest way to fund roads. Just regular E10 or E8, or whatever they sell us now, so don't know how that tax relates to E85.


$3.62 if it matters or really $3.10 plus tax

Pic is sideways, not smart enough to rotate it...

 

[Copperhead]

There is another aspect to the real cost of E85: My Tundra requires 8 qts of 0w20 full synthetic. Recommended oil change intervals are 5000 mi. Unless, you use E85, then it becomes 2500 miles.!

Let's see, 8 qts at around $8 per qt, $64 in added expense in 2500 miles. E85 is rated in that truck at 13 MPG, E10 at 17.

There's no way mine will ever see any E85!

Wow, that too bad that Toyota built and engine that couldn't take it. I regularly go out to around 10% left on the oil life monitor on my Silverado, which equates to around 7500 miles, give or take, on oil changes using E85. There is no special oil change interval recommended by the OEM, and the oil samples look fine. I might not even do them, but my oil supplier provides free oil sample kits with free analysis, so it just makes sense to send one in on the pickup along with my commercial stuff now and then. Granted my Silverado doesn't need 8 qts, but it gets a diet of synthetic also. But I get my synthetic from Schaeffer Oil for about $5.50 a quart, delivered free to the house.

I guess the major question would be for Toyota would be, what is the major issue with E85 that makes them feel the OCI needs to be substantially shorter. That is the first OEM I have heard of doing something like that on a flex fuel engine design. Oh well, one learns something every day. Probably not a good idea for you to use E85 then. I filled up today again with E85 at $2.64 a gallon. Only 3 mpg loss over using regular and regular is 3.45 right now near me. So a roughly 80 cent spread. Now, based on the 17 mpg average with regular my Silverado gets mostly running rural two lane and farm roads, that is a little over 20 cents a mile for regular. With getting around 14-15 mpg on E85, the cost is ballpark 18 cents a mile. almost a 2 cent a mile saving. Not much, but it makes it worthwhile to use E85 in my pickup. And even the OEM hp/torque charts on my engine show a 6 hp and 8 lb torque increase across the rpm range using E85 over regular. Sounds like a decided win-win.

I guess each persons has to weigh the issue for themselves and make their own conclusions. No wrong answer here either! I may use E85, but that frees up more gas for those that don't. We all win!

Oh, and the tax thing, the 52 cent tax at the pump is for every gallon of gas, E10, E15, E30 or E85. That is Federal and State fuel taxes on a gallon. Usually a few cents higher on diesel. It does reveal something that some don't realize. Some may blame the ethanol producers and corn growers for the mandates on ethanol, but in reality, it is because of the more fuel taxes generated by use of more fuel as a result of lower mpg that the politician have embraced the ethanol gig. Always follow the money trail. Sure, the ethanol folks are taking advantage of the mandates and such, but it is the hired help in D.C. and state capitols who need to have the bulk of the blame laid at their door step.

 

[CowboyRon]

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

What's strange about it is Paul Harvey pushed the ethanol and ADM.

 

[Monster5601]

Well, when the engine is actually designed around E85 as opposed to trying to make an engine that wasn't, use it, then the dynamics change a little.

To wit, the 3.2L V6 EBDI engine that is a co-development of GM and the British engine designer Ricardo. It is being tested in some of GM's 2500 and 3500 HD pickups. Now, that 3.2L gets as much HP and Torque as the 6.6L Duramax diesel and better fuel economy as well, and does it on...... E85.

This just doesn't make since to me simply because E85 has around 27% less energy as compared to the same amount of gasoline and a lot less than diesel. If GM can get an engine to perform on E85 equal with a diesel (many more BTUs) then I would think they (GM) could do wonders with both diesel and gas engines.

I've found nothing good about E85 outside of politics.

E85 and Fuel Economy
E85 vs. Gasoline Comparison Test

Regarding the new Ricardo engine I found this SAE article but it doesn't support the performance you are saying with respect to this engine using gasoline, E85 still has mush less power.
Ricardo begins EBDI V6 road test program - SAE International

 

[Toyboy]

I avoid using blended fuel as much as possible. Where I live straight gas is readily available and I use it in everything from our vehicles to weed whackers and everything in between. I could care less about the price difference.

The only time I use it is when I'm forced to, as in traveling, and don't have a choice.

 

[Copperhead]

Even though E85 does have a lower BTU content, that is only one part of the equation. When the engine is designed to take advantage of the other properties like vaporization rate, cooling effect of injected ethanol, much higher octane than gas, ability to handle compression ratios that would destroy a similar engine on gasoline, etc, the dynamics change. In the current crop of flex fuel engines, primarily naturally aspirated, which the design is primarily for gasoline but you can also use high ethanol blends, yes, the BTU factor is more in play.

But here is an article with some details on the EBDI engine and you can see their explanation of things.

New Ricardo engine technology offers true flex-fuel engine optimization. | MOTOR Information Systems