: Summer high gas prices coming? Do we switch to E85?



N0DIH
02-25-06, 02:46 PM
I have been still pondering running E85 in my Cad once I can find it near me. Currently I have to drive 50+ miles out of my way to get it.

The O2 sensor will compensate for the O2 content and the long term fuel trim SHOULD be sent off to higher numbers (possibly setting codes) to maintain it.

Typically E85 will run around 9:1 A/F mix.

Only mods might be needed are injectors (larger, like 30#) and maybe increased timing. I can see increased compression to be a benefit also.

Anyone have thoughts on it? Once I get my data cable working so I can do some real time monitoring of the trims, etc, I will start to run it experiementally on the stock injectors. But larger might be soon in the works...

I have a friend at work who messed with a E85 race car in college, so I have some good sources of info on it.

You 307 guys should be able to also, just need to have a functioning ECM w/O2 and possibly put larger jetting in the carb (if it proves needed based on O2 readings).

Non ECM cars will need some major carb jetting changes.

davesdeville
02-26-06, 06:35 PM
I'm not sure longterm fuel trim has the "headroom" to compensate that far. Larger injectors would likely be required. Give it as much compression and advance as possible.

And beware that prolonged exposure to E85 will damage any rubber in your fuel system.

N0DIH
02-27-06, 01:24 AM
I had my Suburban on empty today and filled it with 1/2 tank 87 octane and 1/2 tank E85. So far it seems to run fine. No issues with anything initially in the first 20 miles.

Note that I have a PCM program modified to make use of higher octane fuel, which will push timing up as much as it can. The factory PCM program has this provision limited to make use of 87 octane only, higher octane would do nothing with the timing.

So within the 20 mile test run, WOT runs seemed to have excellent power, better than with 87 or even 93 octane only. No check engine lights, so I will keep monitoriing it for operation and for codes. I should be doing some datalogging this week with it.

The Cadillac is next. The Suburban (Vortec 350) has that goofy CFI, so I really can't change the injector to a larger one. But the LT1 I can easily get new injectors for it and will be changing the PCM tuning for it.

ocjmakaveli
02-27-06, 04:17 AM
How much does the miracle e85 cost?

It's finally nice to hear a somewhat good(at first glance) alternative to hybrids.

Most of the sites say a conversion won't help emissions wise on regular cars but that it has a higher octane rating of 105 etc.

Is it worth it to convert over? Once E85 becomes popular I think there's a good chance the prices will go up but then again competition always brings prices down and that's what oil companies need is some good old competition.

Hopefully for those of us that can't switch over just yet the competition brings prices down.

If you do go ahead and do the conversion post pics of what was done and how it went overall performance, mpg, etc. very interesting idea.

N0DIH
02-27-06, 12:31 PM
Hybrids are a joke, people who buy them are going to pay far more than they will ever think they are saving over the next 8 years, assuming the car can even survive that long. The cost of the car outweighs the fuel savings that you would ever see. The difference isn't that dramatic from a regular car.

You don't NEED to convert a PCM/ECM controlled car (w/feedback O2 sensor). At most you need to put in larger injectors and revise timing maps.

I will be doing some serious inspecting of fuel lines for ones that might not survive, but from what I had thought, was most cars with PORT EFI after around 1990 or so, were compatible with the high ethanol content. Older cars that are TBI or carb will need fuel lines replaced (rubber ones).

Currently in Popular Grove, E85 is $1.999. Gas there was 2.339.

Plugging this into my handy dandy spreadsheet, with the assumption of a 12% loss in mpg, and the reduced cost of E85 (if you can run on it safely), you can go 380 miles to a tank on gas, 391 miles on the same $ amount of E85. That is, the $ spent on the fuel (20 gallons vs 26.8 gallons) will get the E85 car slightly farther with the same $$ spent.

So, IF we can start getting E85 here (Lake and McHenry County have no E85, Rockford area has 3 stations pumping right now), then it might end up being feasable.

Honestly, if it was me, I very well might remove the cat converters to get some better power and less restriction there, as if the politicians are correct, the E85 gets better emissions. Can't say I believe too many politicians.... Well, being I track fuel economy and other info closely on the Cad, I will post my findings, if I can get the fuel to run. It is way out of my way to get it for my normal weekly driving. Around 30-40 miles out of my way, so it would cost me to actually use it until I get it closer to me.

N0DIH
02-27-06, 06:08 PM
Just found a different E85 station, $1.749 for E85.

That really does make it worth while, even with the 12% less (worst case guestimate) mpg loss.

cool, gonna play with this for sure....

ocjmakaveli
02-27-06, 09:15 PM
Oh I don't know what I was thinking I thought E85 was going to be cheap but I was dreaming unrealistically I was thinking abotu $1-1.50 or so.

Hopefully the real effect I'm thinking about is if E85 gets popular it'll at LEAST keep gas prices where they are at now and keep it from going to $3.00 a gallon OUCH :rant2:

If I drove more often then it would be a good choice but at the moment with the roughly 200 miles a month i put on the caddy it wouldn't make too much of a difference to switch at least not now.

Let us know how it goes and any estimates on how much $ it'll take to convert to E85?

As the previous poster mentioned that rubber is harmed by E85 would the rubber hoses need to be replaced?

lacmang
02-27-06, 10:28 PM
I have a 93 Fleetwood could I use that ethanol fuel? or do I need to modify something.

davesdeville
02-28-06, 03:10 AM
Anything in the fuel system made of rubber will need to be replaced eventually. Rubber will last a couple years... There are more things than you might think that are made of rubber or materials that are susceptible to damage from E85.

N0DIH
02-28-06, 07:32 PM
A friend of mine messed with a 98 Malibu and converted it to run on E85. They did NOT mess with fuel pump or O-rings. It was fine after 20K miles. There was some carbon tracking on the fuel pump. E85 is conductive, gasoline is not. So this can be an issue. After 20K it still had not hurt anything, but life of the fuel pump was likely going to be less.

I don't mind, as my car is 180K now, chances are it will need a pump someday, and I doubt that I will be changing much life on it. The key is to find an E85 pump now, if the new ones aren't already with Viton seals.

So the injector o-rings, the fuel pressure reg and the pump seem the only potential issues.

Yes, the 93 FW should be fine with it, but run in moderation to start, and if you can, I HIGHLY recommend you monitor fuel trims with some PCM program. I will be shortly here, but I am running 50/50 in the Cadillac now, with the last 120 miles on it, no differences drivability. Power MIGHT be down slightly at WOT, but cruise is fine.

The real mods would be rubber stuff get replaced.
Higher compression if you can, not manadatory, but good idea for more power
Revised timing curves and maps.

Note that pure E85 will likely NOT be able to be started and can cause engine damage below 32F! The vaporization point of E85 is low, so it just sprays liquid when below 32F and will fill up the cyl, when it does fire, it can do damage. BUT, the gas stations don't always give you E85 as advertised. They modify the fuel for colder weather, so you really have no idea what sort of mixture you are actually working with.

BUT, the O2 does, and will adjust and manage the fuel mixture to run at stochiometric. Which for E85 is 9.8:1, for gasoline, is 14.6x:1. So, the math says we need to run larger fuel injectors. My LT1 I think has 24 lb injectors. for E85, 35 lb would be an excellent choice based soley on the % more fuel needed.

PLEASE note that the car WILL NOT set a code due to lean fuel mixture at WOT. At this point the PCM is on data tables and is not monitoring O2 readings!!! A DVM connected to the O2 would give you a better idea what is going on and read it manually. The PCM will go to 128 fixed at WOT on most cars.

I am going to work on the long term fixes, as I plan on keeping my car on E85 as much as I can, can't hurt the pocketbook.

davesdeville
02-28-06, 10:04 PM
VITON! Thank you! I'd been trying to remember that word for 3 days now.

N0DIH
03-01-06, 12:17 PM
I wonder if there is any long term effects on the exhaust.

So, if E85 is SOOOO good for emissions, will the cat converter become obsolete and get removed? In reality it is designed to work on the engine as a gas powered car, so it may, and likely is not as effective on E85. . .

N0DIH
03-17-06, 05:22 PM
Some good reading on E85: http://www.hptuners.com/forum/showthread.php?p=3326

N0DIH
03-17-06, 07:26 PM
I am actively working on a E85 friendly .bin file for the LT1. My first rev is in now, running 50/50 E85. Power is better throughout powerband. I have started with a supposedly professionally tuned LT1 and modified it as I feel it needs it with the E85 and with the V4P shift patterns (VERY different than the non V4P cars that I have dug through, even 9C1 is much milder, but closer than any)

Destroyer
03-17-06, 08:30 PM
Gas is up to $2.65 here already!. Spent over $200 filling all 5 cars up this week. I need to sell a couple already. :rant2:

N0DIH
03-18-06, 02:42 AM
It is $2.499 to $2.599 here, E85 is $1.999....

Not hard to do the math on that one!

If there is anyone who is willing to help me develop a E85 program for the LT1 who has access to E85, please let me know. You would need LT1 Edit or Tunercat, be willing to data log while you drive and put up with a "beta" PCM program....

durrk
03-18-06, 01:10 PM
I was talking to a mechanic at Car X about this fuel and he basically stated how yes, its good for the enviroment, but horrible for the cars...

He said, "We see what it does to the cars here, that enough will get me to stay with gasoline..."

I dont remember what he explained exactly, but it was something to do with the high alcohol/ethanol? content in the fuel...

N0DIH
03-18-06, 07:15 PM
I have heard that it affects the oil, but I haven't heard how (the comment was "wait till you change your oil the first time" I will soon, right now I have a few K to go. And not running 100% E85 till temps are higher (above 32F) and see how it goes.

I have a set of LS6 fuel injectors lined up, now to find out of if they fit. They are 28.5#/hr, compared to stock 24#/hr in the LT1.

The E85 has LESS carbon buildup on pistons/chambers and most importantly on back sides of intake valves. I have heard some complain about fuel injectors getting clogged with E10, but no comments on E85. The claim was ethanol molocules are larger and clog up. Not sure if I can buy that without more info on what the person really meant.

N0DIH
03-18-06, 11:14 PM
Further notes:

Running around 80-90% winterblend E85 now, during normal driving, Long Term Fuel Trim (Integrator) is running around 150, which short term is maintaining a good tight tolerance around 128. So the car is handling the E85 well.

BUT, I did some WOT runs, and when I would get up to >5000 rpm, I was getting around 100% duty cycle on the injectors, and sudden pull of timing and knock count would take off. So I will have to pull down the % of E85 for now, till I get some larger injectors.

Power is excellent. 0-90 mph comes in around 16.2 seconds with wheelspin problems galore. So to make that run I had to take it very easy and nail it after 10 mph, so it didn't get a really good launch. I had traction control off, as the datalogger doesn't get along with traction control, so it triggered a traction control fault. I am having more wheelspin problems than before the tune and E85. My experience in the past with E10 fuels is it often has slightly less off the line power than with straight gas. The cars with lower compression are more suceptable than ones with higher compression to this.

I am using a custom tune that was for a Impala SS that I got over the net, that I have done much custom work on to make it work well with E85. If anyone is interested in playing with my tune, let me know.

N0DIH
03-28-06, 12:09 PM
More info to read:

http://www.megasquirt.info/flexfuel.htm

http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=803341

I am now running LS6 injectors on the LT1 (minor mods needed, but else a good fit). they can be installed in around 1 hour w/mods.

I am still up to 90% duty cycle on the LS6 injectors @ WOT. BLM (Long term fuel trim) is running around 190-200 at cruise. Compared to gas, the Integrator (Short Term Fuel Trim) is very sloppy, fluxuates between 122-136 or so, very fast, hard to catch, where the gasoline is pretty tight on 128 most of the time at cruise.

I will post more info is anyone is interested. I am actively working on a E85 LT1 tune with the LS6 injectors. That will take some time to get nailed down. What I expected to do didn't work, so I had to step back to known good and be more conservative. But it works for now, mileage isn't too bad, I got 100 miles to get the gauge to get off full, which is around 10 miles less than gasoline. I am guessing 15-16 for mpg best guess at this time.

davesdeville
03-29-06, 07:01 AM
Keep us updated, and good luck.

BCs71
03-29-06, 06:05 PM
I am still up to 90% duty cycle on the LS6 injectors @ WOT.

From what I've read about heavily modified LT1 vehicles, anywhere at 85% or higher duty cycle can be kinda unsafe for engine health, and indicates a larger injector may be in order.
But then again, these cars see a lot more WOT runs than a daily driver....

Just passing on the knowledge, which is more of hearsay anyway. Good luck with the testing

N0DIH
03-29-06, 06:17 PM
With the 28.5# injectors, I am peaking at 93-94%. so in reality, they aren't big enough. A friend thinks that if I boost pump pressure some with an adjustable reg to 46 psi, that I should be having more than enough. Anyone experiement with boosting pump pressure?

I am at 94% in 5 degrees C weather. As it warms, the fuel demands are less, so I won't need as big injectors then. I will keep monitoring it. I have probably 3-4 hours of data logs of driving in various conditions, cold, hot, WOT, cruise, hills, etc. My current tune drivability is pretty good now. Need to tweak a little at cold (0C temps), it is generally pretty decent, but needs to be refined. No pinging at this time except when the rev limiter kicks me, so I have lowered shift points to cover that and set some manual mode shift points . Most of my WOT runs are 2nd gear runs. I am not seeing much over 250 gm/sec air flow, so that isn't a problem. I was wondering if the MAF is a real restriction, but it doesn't look like it is. MAP gets very close to 100 (99.7 close enough?), so I can see the MAF isn't a restriction either.

I wholeheartedly agree, I want more headroom. I want to see more like 75% duty cycle at WOT in most conditions. I guess now to find other injectors that are larger for my LT1....

N0DIH
03-30-06, 01:42 PM
Well, learning about E85 is an experience!

Timing. With 105 octane, one would think that you can increase timing across the board. NOT. Not with E85. The burn rate is so much slower, the car is content with stock timing as a good guideline. Likely need to drop it in some areas to get optimum drivability. Everytime I would try to increase timing, I would get all sorts of bogging problems. No pinging ever.

I have 13 tunes for E85 already, and only 1 is worth much. All have screwed me up with something, from no starts to engine stalling (that handoff from open loop AFR to close loop is a pain!), to hesitation/bogging, etc.

It is fun, can be discouraging (like today). I had to go way back to baseline gas (my last good solid gasoline tune) and go from there just to get it to correct some low rpm problems that I have messed up and I want fixed.

MPG is 16.1 though, so not too bad for $1.999 fuel that is 100% E85 in my tank. The radio said today (WBBM AM780) that expect $3 very soon, some parts of Chicago are already there.

My current pain in the booty is EGR. The timing offset when EGR comes in is messing things up a lot. E85 is very timing sensitive. I have it now disabled in Tune #14.....

Unfortunately, at this time, I can't make it dual fuel, not worrying about it yet, as I need to dial in my E85 tune, once that is done, I will work on making it dual fuel where I can run either 87 (hopefully) or E85. I just don't have a free input to the PCM for a fuel sensor. That will take more work to work around. I have some ideas, but my goal is hands free dual fuel, no switches to mess with or guessing what mix you have in the tank.

scurling
03-30-06, 02:54 PM
Ok, this thread really sparked my interest, as I was not aware of any Ethanol refueling locations in the NoVa area. I went online to the E85 fuel.com site and looked up the locations around my house. Almost all are not open to the public. Two sites are available. I called and checked availablilty and price. One was $2.85/gal, the other at a county government site was $2.49/gal. I thought E-85 was suppose to be CHEAPER? At least while it is still under the Gov't. subsidy program.

The more expensive site gave me song and dance about how they have to ship it in from Tenn. and it cost a lot to transport, etc. , etc. ,etc.

I have been a proponent of Ethanol foe more than 20 years, but at these prices, I'll stay with gas untill it goes to $2.80/gal.

What are some of the prices others are seeing at the E-85 pump?

N0DIH
03-30-06, 06:08 PM
I am seeing $1.99 in Rockford, Ill, (2 pumps) and $2.25 in Popular Grove, IL, which is close to Rockford.

Else, that is it, no other stations in the region.

N0DIH
03-31-06, 01:53 PM
Seems that I have found my major tuning headache. I have LS6 injectors: 12561462. They have some comflicting ratings. On this website, which seemed like it had a great amount of info, said these were 28.5 lb/hr. Seems that it DOES flow 28.5 lb/hr, but not at 3 bar (43.5 psi) like they show, but at 4 bar, 58 psi. So I replaced my injectors with ones roughly the same size. My new injectors are: 0-280-155-931, which this chart (http://users.erols.com/srweiss/tableifc.htm) shows as 28.55@43.5 psi. Which is incorrect.

Well, at least 90+% of my tuning issues are gone, power is great again, some minor tweaking now (EGR is still a nusance).

There is still something in my timing maps that is doing an offset at WOT that is messing me up, anywhere from 3-5 degrees @ WOT. Anyone have any thoughts? It is in the 3600-5500 rpm range, 90-100 MAP. I can pull out the timing there in the main and ext timing maps, but honestly, I would rather find out what is offsetting it and correct it instead of bandaiding the main map.

I did experiement (with the wrong injector flow rate setting) with 96 SS Z28 timing. I like, it is nice, old school, making the main and ext maps handle almost ALL the timing adjustments and nothing doing anything else except the EGR offset. Nice.

scurling
04-02-06, 01:32 PM
Nodih:


Which product are you using to tune your '94. I'm just getting into the electronic tune/modifications, and everything I find is '96 (OBDII) and newer.

thanks,
stan

N0DIH
04-02-06, 08:14 PM
TunerCat, http://www.tunercat.com. Pretty good program, can be buggy at times, like using the graphs to tune tables with the data values showing, will crash it everytime.

But else seems pretty good. Unlimited access to any LT1 PCM, not VIN locked like LT1 Edit. That was a show stopper for me, no excuse for that sort of limitations on a program. Bad business no matter how good the program, especially with the significantly higher price of the software. But, hey, that is my opinion. How many more sales have been lost to Tunercat for LT1Edit doing that? The list is likely long, and very likely an overall loss despite the higher cost of the software.

I got my cable from PCMPerformance.com, and it works fine, seems to be a fairly solid cable design. Can't complain about it.

As for LT1 Edit and Tunercat, there is a lot of .bin and .lt1 files out there to learn from, so the possibilities are endless.

N0DIH
04-11-06, 04:41 PM
Latest update:

Still running E85. Had to put some 93 octane in (did 93 out of safety for my tune for 105 oct E85) for a couple days, but I am back on E85.

After some excellent advise from some other tuners, I have changed the tune to be fantastic running on E85. Cold start is excellent now (well, if you call 40's cold...), transition to closed loop from open loop is seamless now. I have BLM's back to low to mid 130's and I am working on getting them back to 128.

MPG was down last tank, but then again, I wasn't on my latest tune. Now power is very crisp, and we will get some ideas of fuel economy later in the week. But indications are excellent.

Thanks Katshot for pointing me to the right place!

caddycruiser
04-11-06, 05:24 PM
Still an interesting thread. It's finally hit me that I'll be commuting quite a distance 5 days a week this summer, and never really considered the whole fuel economy thing when car buying. Then again, I drove to the same area just as much every day in high school with the '93, and if my '95 can match that same highway fuel economy, I should be fine...even with a gallon of regular costing quite a bit more.

Mom, on the other hand, is apparently really not liking her Suburban lately. Called me today and said "Do you know how much I just spent to fill the tank?! If it weren't for having to haul all your crap to school and back, I'd trade it in for a small car tomorrow. A new VW Bettle.":holycrap:

Her truck, at least, is already set up for E85 from the factory, but I don't think there's a single station anywhere local that has it.

caddieboy
04-11-06, 06:42 PM
And beware that prolonged exposure to E85 will damage any rubber in your fuel system.

This is true. It says in the owner's manual not to use Ethanol fuel for this very reason. It says it may also corrode metal parts as well.

scurling
04-12-06, 12:28 AM
Caddieboy

Most folks don't realize Ethanol (alcohol) is a corrosive. Realize there are multiple types of alcohol, only one of which our bodies will tolerate...in moderation of course.

Over time, Ethanol turns dull metal into "nice and shiny". The rubber is an issue. If I end up going with the E85 to any high percentage, I will probably replace all the rubber in the fuel lines. Haven't investigated that part of the setup, but I assume there must be some flex lines at the gas tank.

N0DIH
04-12-06, 12:44 PM
Reread this thread. How much rubber is in a LT1? I can find 2 places. FPR and O rings on injectors. MAYBE on the fuel line connectors themselves. That is about it. It isn't like we have rubber lines from the tank to the pressure rail.

Yes, technically I should toss in stainless steel fuel lines, but don't have any rush to do that. Heck, they might even be plastic, if so, that is even less to worry about.

Nutshell. I personally, am not worrying about the rubber till it truly poses an issue. People preach whine and cry that it eats rubber. Yes, it DOES. But it is NOT ACID, it takes many YEARS to do anything at all.

scurling
04-12-06, 10:07 PM
Nodih:

I hear what you are saying. You're right, I know there's not much rubber, and it may even be plastic now that I think about it. If I remember right, there was plastic involved with the quick disconnect fittings around the fuel filter assembly. I guess I'm just looking for an excuse to do something.

I wasn't even thinking about the injector seals. I had to change those once on my old 3.8L Buick V6 when a couple were leaking.

N0DIH
04-13-06, 12:07 AM
Anyone know how to ID Viton injector seals?

I did mess with the stock V4P tune on my Cad today, as my AC wasn't working and I couldn't figure out why (it ~should~ have been), and found it was my tune, which was based on what was described as a SS Z28 tune (my guess a OBDI car, as I can't open a OBDII tune), not sure what it was, but it was definately a Z28/TA tune. (grounding pin D24 on the PCM will fix this too).

But the SOTP feel that my tune for E85 has over the stock (also run on E85) is much much better. My wife drove the car tonight and really enjoyed the extra power compared to her Suburban Vortec 350.

My tune does work fine on 93 octane (I haven't braved 87 on it yet), but you do need to make one change, so it isn't dual fuel yet. It CAN run on it, but might trigger a check engine light, as I am keeping the stock limits for Integrator/BLM (STrim/LTrim). It also might have some small hesitation from open loop to closed loop. I am working on nailing that one down....

Oh, mpg update. 15.7. This is with 60 miles with the stock V4P tune, and bad traffic on that run (followed a 16x70 mobile home for 20 miles on a two lane road, it sucked...). So, mpg to date:

mpg
16.1 Winterblend 90% E85 early tune, tune based on stock V4P tune, not much overall timing (limited to 46, and rarely saw it)
16.7 Winterblend 90% E85 early tune, as above
14.3 ????? Blend 95% E85 early tune, engine was missing at cruise with EGR on, suspect too much EGR flow
15.7 ????? Blend 100% E85 revised tune, with 60 miles bad traffic on stock tune

I am filling up around 300 miles and putting in 18-19 gallons with E85. I was also hoping the corrosiveness of the E85 might HELP my fuel gauge! But alas, no, not yet....
------
Average mpg 15.7.
Stock mpg is around 16.5 to 17.5 in this weather/driving. So not too bad off.

N0DIH
04-13-06, 01:57 AM
Some good reading here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E85

BUT, I don't agree with all of it, but the author is on track at least. Some of her/his statements are off, for example, on CEL for running more than 50% E85. It does NOT kick into open loop, it still maintains closed loop, but exceeds the BLM range value, which is meant to throw a code to id a potential problem.

As for water contamination. Note the concentration. 11% is considered bad. Not as small as 1%. But once contaminated, it IS messed up stuff. Then again, so is gasoline. But the presense of Ethanol or Methanol (Methanol is best) will suck up that water faster than, well, never mind...

caddieboy
04-13-06, 02:18 AM
Caddieboy

Most folks don't realize Ethanol (alcohol) is a corrosive. Realize there are multiple types of alcohol, only one of which our bodies will tolerate...in moderation of course.

Over time, Ethanol turns dull metal into "nice and shiny". The rubber is an issue. If I end up going with the E85 to any high percentage, I will probably replace all the rubber in the fuel lines. Haven't investigated that part of the setup, but I assume there must be some flex lines at the gas tank.

Thanks for the additional info. I was just reporting what the manual says.

N0DIH
04-17-06, 08:31 PM
See oil prices? >$70 a barrel....

I like my E85....

scurling
04-18-06, 12:29 AM
Nodih:

Have you heard anything about the harmful mix of Gasoline aditives and Ethanol resulting in a sludge like material? A guy at work was describing it to me, but I have never read anything about it. He was relating it to the storage issues of E85 in older gasoline storage tanks.

tripleyellow78cad
04-18-06, 04:00 AM
would that e85 FUEL work in a 1978 deville 425carb V-8?

N0DIH
04-18-06, 10:38 AM
I haven't heard and I haven't seen any issues yet either. Granted, I have only run 1500 or so miles on the stuff, but I haven't seen my fuel filters show any signs of plugging up either.

I can see an older tank with water being some issues. There are 2 stations I frequent, on has had some noticable pump slowdowns due to plugged filters, so I know they are getting some junk there, but the fuel is clear and I am not seeing issues. They other one pumps very fast. I prefer that one, but it is harder to get to, but slightly cheaper too.

N0DIH
04-18-06, 02:43 PM
Technically, yes. But you will require mods to do it, jetting and metering rod changes to make it rich enough. I would honestly go snag a Holley carb (I never thought I would ever say that.... Uggg) and get the alcohol jets for it. Holley's support alcohol well. Ensure it has the viton seals and diaphrams (power valve, secondary opening valve). And a float that is alcohol ok. But it will support it well. You can buy new out of the box Holley's for alcohol, but they aren't cheap.

http://www.jegs.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CategoryDisplay?lang=-1&catalogId=10002&storeId=10001&categoryId=12669
http://www.jegs.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CategoryDisplay?catalogId=10002&storeId=10001&categoryId=55268&parentCategoryId=10285&langId=-1
http://www.jegs.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CategoryDisplay?catalogId=10002&storeId=10001&categoryId=21731&parentCategoryId=10285&langId=-1



Now, you will NEED to only run E85. You can't do dual fuel easily. A thought is a 4BBL Holley divided to work only as a 2BBL, and one side setup as E85 and one as Gasoline. And somehow "turn one off" when you are using the other fuel.

Bump up timing a bit (E85 is 105 octane) and enjoy! It should work well.

Expect the E85 over time (especially on an older car) to eat the rubber in the tank, at the tank and under the hood, in the fuel pump in a more accelerated rate. So plan on replacing them with plastic or viton rubber. GM puts on stainless steel lines on the E85 cars/trucks, my LT1 has plastic lines at least from the filter to underhood. So they are ok.

It can be done, and not too hard, but some attention to the corrosiveness of E85 and you can run it for a long long time.

Cold starting below 32F might be harder, as the volatility of E85 is poor, so flooding can occur much easier, hydrolock if you are really having a hard time, so you might need to add some additional gasoline to help the mixture some, at the pump you will get E65-E70 then anyway, so it may not be too bad.


would that e85 FUEL work in a 1978 deville 425carb V-8?

tripleyellow78cad
04-18-06, 06:56 PM
[quote=N0DIH]Technically, yes. But you will require mods to do it, jetting and metering rod changes to make it rich enough. I would honestly go snag a Holley carb (I never thought I would ever say that.... Uggg) and get the alcohol jets for it. Holley's support alcohol well. Ensure it has the viton seals and diaphrams (power valve, secondary opening valve). And a float that is alcohol ok. But it will support it well. You can buy new out of the box Holley's for alcohol, but they aren't cheap.
Now, you will NEED to only run E85. You can't do dual fuel easily. A thought is a 4BBL Holley divided to work only as a 2BBL, and one side setup as E85 and one as Gasoline. And somehow "turn one off" when you are using the other fuel.

Bump up timing a bit (E85 is 105 octane) and enjoy! It should work well.

Expect the E85 over time (especially on an older car) to eat the rubber in the tank, at the tank and under the hood, in the fuel pump in a more accelerated rate. So plan on replacing them with plastic or viton rubber. GM puts on stainless steel lines on the E85 cars/trucks, my LT1 has plastic lines at least from the filter to underhood. So they are ok.

It can be done, and not too hard, but some attention to the corrosiveness of E85 and you can run it for a long long time.




can i use my qjet with this fuel , and if so do i just fillerup?
i found my closet e85 fuel location is in lompoc ca , at of all places vandenburg afb, which is 150 mi away:thepan:

N0DIH
04-18-06, 07:12 PM
No, it will run waaaaay lean, like possible damage to engine lean. You must have mods to the carb. As no alcohol jets were made for the Q-Jet, you would need custom made ones.

If you don't, you will likely experience poor performance and a chance at melting a hole through a piston if you run it hard trying.

If you are determined, maybe you can calculate the jet sizes needed and try to drill them out. I don't recommend this honestly, you can't be accurate enough and precision is required. Holley jets are all different and cannot be interchanged. Most people if they are running alcohol are already a point that the Q-Jet isn't enough for them and have already stepped up (down?) to a Holley...

Even the Carter/Edelbrock AFB's don't have alcohol jets available.



can i use my qjet with this fuel , and if so do i just fillerup?
i found my closet e85 fuel location is in lompoc ca , at of all places vandenburg afb, which is 150 mi away:thepan:

davesdeville
04-19-06, 05:35 AM
In the next couple months I might be bugging you for info on this. I've been seriously considering running E85 in my MarkVIII if I end up turbocharging it - I'll need bigger injectors and engine management anyway, may as well get 105 octane for cheap and run some decent boost while I'm at it..

The Cadillac Queen
04-19-06, 09:37 AM
would that e85 FUEL work in a 1978 deville 425carb V-8?

That was my first Caddy . . . oh, the memories...

However, I ran a 318 and a 427 ('78 Deville D' Elegance) on Ethanoyl and nothing happened. No sputtering, no hesitation, and certainly no power loss. The funny thing is, when I put E85 in my 318 (Dodge RAM) it cleaned something up in the fuel line and it ran much better by the time it was time to refill (lol). The 427, oh yeah, power loss . . . you better believe it. But the power loss occurs because of the lack of octane. It's required to allow the combustion, obviously. If you were to put Kerosene (please do not do this, you will regret it) in the tank instead... it wouldn't start. It would cycle once and then shut off. The closest E station (for me) is 30 minutes away, so I'm going to stick to 87. But if it gets to $3.15 or $3.40 or something, I think it will be worth the drive. *chuckles*

I recommend that you continue to put 87 in it. E85 will put some stress on the drive train . . . not enough combustion juice to get than 2.6 ton car around, lol. The bigger the engine, the less performance you will have because of the design of the combustion chamber. Piston speed, the combustion chamber size, and so many other factors will determine the usability of E85. Chemically speaking, it has everything to do with how well the fuel resists detonation (which is directly related to the amount of energy (heat) required to get the fuel burning in the first place). E85 is "just hot enough" for the engine to use to get you around. However, the higher the octane rating, the more power you will get out of your vehicle. Just me 15 cents . . . hope that helped. Thanks!

Addenum: Like other posters have already mentioned, you WILL have to do some modifications to your engine if you wish to contine to run off of Ethanoyl-type fuel.

N0DIH
04-19-06, 12:21 PM
E85 typically makes MORE power at the rear wheels than gasoline, despite it has less BTU's. Everyone argues this one. But, the E85 has more O2 present, so more O2 bonds with the Alcohol under combustion and actually burns more of it, so the actual output is more at the wheels. Note I didn't say it has more power per gallon, it does not. You need 50% more E85 to make the same power out. BUT, with good tuning and compression, typically you don't lose 50% mpg, you get more like 10-20% loss in mpg. Being E85 is around 105 octane, you can tune for that too and get your timing events closer to TDC (more lead so the actual event is nearly perfect on TDC) instead of after it. Remember too, that E85 burns slower than gasoline.

It isn't hard at all on the drivetrain, works well. I highly recommend it if you follow the "rules".

Gas in Chicago is already $3.20 for 87 octane.

N0DIH
04-20-06, 03:00 PM
A little bit more E85 reading:
http://www.chevelles.com/forums/showthread.php?p=688805

I was running on gas part of this week, got back on E85 last night, the car does feel like it runs better on E85 than gas. I guess I am getting the tune down good....

The Cadillac Queen
04-20-06, 05:44 PM
E85 typically makes MORE power at the rear wheels than gasoline, despite it has less BTU's. Being E85 is around 105 octane, you can tune for that too and get your timing events closer to TDC (more lead so the actual event is nearly perfect on TDC) instead of after it.

It isn't hard at all on the drivetrain, works well. I highly recommend it if you follow the "rules".



That's exactly right, N0DIH. I recommend 87 because that what belongs in the car with it's current engine setup. And like I said, there was a noticeable difference in my truck and I had power loss in my car. The power was there (in the rear) yes... but it took too damn long to get up to 75 MPH! It holds strong wherever you hold the gas pedal at, but out here in Kansas, you need to get up to speed within 7 seconds or your toast, lol. Average speeds out here are 85 on our highways. And . . . I like my power and going fast. *grins*

When I meant hard on the drivetrain, I meant the power loss and while I'm mashing the pedal to the floor, it takes too long for everything to catch up. I didn't mean physically like a torque converter or a gear wheel was gonna crack or snap. *lol* Hope that cleared that up. Thanks. :highfive:

However with the way gas continues to go UP, it looks like my precious Cadillacs will become weekend cars and my S-10 will be used for work. *sigh*

Gas here is currently 2.87 . . . it went up 8 cents last night. :rant2:

N0DIH
04-20-06, 07:35 PM
Yup, I paid $2.93 last night to get me to the E85 station where I paid $2.459, which was very high, the station across the street (closed for the night) was $2.259 for E85.

So the price spread is still very wide. I prefer how my Cad runs on E85 over gas, so for me, unless there is a reason I cannot run it, it will get that for a long time to come.

scurling
04-30-06, 09:43 PM
Hey guys, I just received a message from the National Ethanol Vehicle Coalition (E85) pointing me to a web site enabling the user to send letters or e-mail messages to their respective Congressional Representatives.

Ethanol is getting a lot of attention these days in congress. This letter or message basically asks congress to vote on an $8 million dollar bill that would support the development of 1,500 new E85 stations.

If you are interested, send me a personal note and I'll forward the message to you.

N0DIH
05-01-06, 01:28 AM
Your PM box is full, but please send me the info. I have been in contact with one of my state senators about it. Got him thinking at least.

davesdeville
05-01-06, 01:56 AM
Hey guys, I just received a message from the National Ethanol Vehicle Coalition (E85) pointing me to a web site enabling the user to send letters or e-mail messages to their respective Congressional Representatives.

Ethanol is getting a lot of attention these days in congress. This letter or message basically asks congress to vote on an $8 million dollar bill that would support the development of 1,500 new E85 stations.

If you are interested, send me a personal note and I'll forward the message to you.

I'd like the info as well.

N0DIH
05-01-06, 10:41 AM
I just got the email from them.

Check out the latest Hot Rod I think, they have a write up on a guy who is building his 454 to run on E85. I don't agree with 100% of what Marlan responds with, but 98% he is right. Mainly that you get less HP with E85 vs gas. That technically from the standpoint of less BTU's is correct, but the offset of more O2 present in the mix allows it to burn MORE of the fuel molocules, allows for more of the fuel to be used, so more power can be had.

N0DIH
05-01-06, 12:30 PM
A Brazil conversion kit:
http://xcelplus.com/e85/flextek_faq.htm

Not legal, but I honestly don't see how this works at WOT and keeps you from leaning out enough to punch holes in your pistons.....

You NEED larger injectors, period. Then you need to be able to richen it up when you are on E85 when cold start (anytime Open Loop).

This doesn't sounds safe to me. If I am not comfortable running it on a dyno at WOT at 260-300 hp, no, it is wrong.

scurling
05-02-06, 12:03 AM
Ok, my mailbox is fixed. Didn't realize the 10 messages included those that I sent out also.

davesdeville
05-03-06, 06:47 AM
^^ Thanks, I went ahead and sent my representatives a modified version of the letter.

N0DIH
05-03-06, 12:04 PM
This is a negative article on it.

I honestly haven't read much on it, but this is worth reading to get another viewpoint on it for emissions and such. I still think many details on emissions is left out and/or not accurate, so it must be viewed with caution on that:

http://www.businessweek.com/autos/content/apr2006/bw20060427_493909.htm

scurling
05-04-06, 12:19 AM
Ref: The Businessweek article, above.
The author seems to have an ax to grind. I think a number of his figures are exaggerated. His logic that Ethanol isn't viable when evaluated within a business model, “because the oil companies have not converted”, just doesn't hold water.

Ethanol isn't the golden fuel that will save America, but it can reduce our dependence on foreign oil. The oil companies haven't dived in because it hasn't been to their advantage yet. Who knows if it ever will? Has anyone heard about the huge profit figures the oil companies have been raking in lately? Why should big oil start changing their infrastructure away from the black gold when they are in the driver's seat and the money is rolling in?

pimpin88
05-04-06, 11:19 AM
ethanol would work on a 1992 buick roadmaster, 350 TBI, correct?

would it just require replacing the rubber lines and larger injectors?

thanks

N0DIH
05-04-06, 11:35 AM
If it was me? Take a good close hard look at all fuel lines from tank to engine. Steel or plastic is ok. Stainless steel is the preferred, I think plastic is fine also. Any plain rubber must be changed for any long term usage. Fuel press reg and you need larger injectors. So 454 injectors if they are larger would be a start. Take current injector size, multiply by 1.5 and that is a very good ballpark.

The fuel pump is a ? I don't know if there is any rubber in it. So I have heard some people experience failures in short order, but who knows if the pump was already on the way out. Mine was making great pressure before I started. And still is.

A quick fix would be to disconnect FPR hose on E85 to boost pressure, which is boosting some part throttle fuel making the injectors seem somewhat larger, but at WOT where you need it, it isn't large enough.

Then you should boost timing around 4-6 degrees, depending on what it will take and you should be fine. Basically boost it up till it pings if you don't have knock sensors, if you do, monitor carefully the knock counts with a datalogger.

Ideally? Retune the PCM for it with TunerCat or the like. That is best to do, then you can really take good advantage of it.

You might see some cold start issues without PCM retuning. I am working on a fix for that, so I'll keep you posted on that one. I hope to know shortly.

Expect no less than 1.5 mpg loss, so play with the calculations to see if it is even worth it.

If you can get a 454 TBI you might get injectors and larger airflow to boot. Not sure details on the L05 TBI vs 454 TBI.

scurling
05-17-06, 06:59 PM
Just an FYI. I received a message from the National Ethanol Vehicle Coalition indicating the U.S. House of Representatives Appropriations Committee accepted an amendment to the 2007 Federal Fiscal Year appropriation that provides $8 million to support the continued development of E85 fueling infrastructure.

It's a small step, but it's a step in the right direction.

BCs71
05-22-06, 02:53 PM
Just found this article interesting for many reasons:
http://www.yahoo.com/s/313000

Automakers Warn Against Using E85 Blend

By DEE-ANN DURBIN, AP Auto Writer
1 hour, 30 minutes ago



ROCHESTER, Mich. - Automakers said Monday that they are trying to get ethanol-capable vehicles on the road quickly, but warned in the meantime that consumers should not use an E85 ethanol blend in their conventional vehicles.


"Your vehicle was built a certain way for a certain reason. You really shouldn't tamper with that," Mary Beth Stanek, who manages General Motors Corp.'s partnerships with ethanol producers, told members of the U.S. House Agriculture Committee.

The committee was meeting at Oakland University in suburban Detroit.

U.S. Rep. Stephanie Herseth (news, bio, voting record), D-S.D., said she fills up her conventional vehicle with a blend of about 30 percent ethanol and has been happy with its performance.

But representatives from GM, Ford Motor Co. and other automakers said anything more than a 10-percent blend can corrode the parts on a vehicle that is not intended to use ethanol.

E85, which is available at some gas stations, is 85 percent alcohol distilled from corn and 15 percent gasoline.

Automakers' representatives also said it's not legal for consumers to try to convert conventional vehicles to ethanol-capable ones because of emissions rules.

N0DIH
05-22-06, 02:59 PM
I agree, the average joe should NOT use it. I am not the average joe.... My goals are to make it work, legally and safely. It needs attention and should be closely monitored.

I hope to get some emissions testing started as a baseline gas tune soon....




Just found this article interesting for many reasons:
http://www.yahoo.com/s/313000

Automakers Warn Against Using E85 Blend

By DEE-ANN DURBIN, AP Auto Writer
1 hour, 30 minutes ago



ROCHESTER, Mich. - Automakers said Monday that they are trying to get ethanol-capable vehicles on the road quickly, but warned in the meantime that consumers should not use an E85 ethanol blend in their conventional vehicles.


"Your vehicle was built a certain way for a certain reason. You really shouldn't tamper with that," Mary Beth Stanek, who manages General Motors Corp.'s partnerships with ethanol producers, told members of the U.S. House Agriculture Committee.

The committee was meeting at Oakland University in suburban Detroit.

U.S. Rep. Stephanie Herseth (news, bio, voting record), D-S.D., said she fills up her conventional vehicle with a blend of about 30 percent ethanol and has been happy with its performance.

But representatives from GM, Ford Motor Co. and other automakers said anything more than a 10-percent blend can corrode the parts on a vehicle that is not intended to use ethanol.

E85, which is available at some gas stations, is 85 percent alcohol distilled from corn and 15 percent gasoline.

Automakers' representatives also said it's not legal for consumers to try to convert conventional vehicles to ethanol-capable ones because of emissions rules.

scurling
05-22-06, 08:21 PM
Well, I take the cynical approach.

Lets see, automaker want me not to convert old car to E85....but, automake want me to buy new car they made for E85.....hmmmmm, me want to think about that for a minute.

N0DIH
05-23-06, 12:37 AM
And because of idiots in the 70's making screwed up propane or LPG conversions, the EPA passed a law stating conversions are illegal.

I'm not buying new.

N0DIH
05-30-06, 08:05 PM
Iowa is getting on the bandwagon....

Iowa Governor Signs E85 bill

Jefferson City , MO - Iowa Governor Tom Vilsack signed a bill into law that is touted as being the most aggressive renewable fuels legislation in the country. The legislation is intended to boost availability of ethanol and biodiesel throughout the state. A 25% Iowa Renewable Fuels Standard (RFS) is the centerpiece of the comprehensive renewable fuels bill.

“With the Governor’s signature, Iowa is on the path to be the number one renewable fuels consuming state,” stated Iowa Renewable Fuel Associaiton’s (IRFA) Executive Director Monte Shaw. “ Iowa is already the ethanol and biodiesel production leader. Now we have the most aggressive renewable fuels usage policy of any state as well. IRFA has already been contacted by several states who want to follow in Iowa’s footsteps.”

House Bill HF 2754 and its companion appropriation bill, HF 2759, intends to assist retailers with E85 infrastructure and could reduce the price of the alternative fuel at the pump. The bills also create:

An aggressive, accountable renewable fuels standard (RFS) starting at 10% in 2009 and increasing to 25% by 2019.
A new ethanol promotion tax credit for each gallon of ethanol blended into gasoline (replaces existing tax credit beginning in 2009). This incentive is linked to a retailer dealer’s achievement of the RFS schedule. The tax credit increases from 2.5 cents per gallon for retailers within 4% of the RFS schedule to 6.5 cents per gallonfor retailers meeting or exceeding the RFS schedule.
A retail tax credit for E85 of 25 cents per gallon (phases out by 2020).
$13 million over three years to expand an infrastructure program designed to help retailers and wholesalers offset the cost of bringing E85 and biodiesel blends to consumers.
Shaw indicated that consumers should see immediate relief of pricing at the E85 pump.

There are currently 43 E85 fueling locations in the state of Iowa. For a complete listing, go to www.E85Fuel.com.

http://www.legis.state.ia.us/aspx/Cool-ICE/DisplayBills.htm

cl1986
06-11-06, 12:03 AM
A friend of mine messed with a 98 Malibu and converted it to run on E85. They did NOT mess with fuel pump or O-rings. It was fine after 20K miles. There was some carbon tracking on the fuel pump. E85 is conductive, gasoline is not. So this can be an issue. After 20K it still had not hurt anything, but life of the fuel pump was likely going to be less.

.

The reason he doesnt have any problems with E85 and his orings is that all cars made after 1988 have the correct rubber, plastic, and metals to handle ethanol........it wont hurt anything...

Man u guys really should do some reading before posting all this BS.....

scurling
06-11-06, 01:06 AM
Man u guys really should do some reading before posting all this BS.....

Well, damn cl1986, it's so nice for you to chime in with your helpful attitude. Maybe you could provide us with a technical reference, so we could all read about it and become more knowledgeable, because it's obvious,
we've all just fallen off the turnip wagon. BTW, where were you in February when this thread got started? :hitstick:

cl1986
06-11-06, 01:25 AM
well....i was reading all this crap in another post so i had to investigate myself..... then i found this thread....

try these.....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E85

http://www.agriculture.state.ia.us/e85facts.html

N0DIH
06-12-06, 12:12 PM
I have re-established my mpg, and around $0.40 is break even per gallon difference. If gas is more, I save $ on E85, if less, I lose....

scurling
06-22-06, 11:16 PM
I know this is a long shot, but I though someone on the central east coast might be interested in attending. The NEVC (National Ethanol Vehicle Coalition) is having a meeting in D.C. to discuss E85 issues, and any member is invited to attend. The registration was just extended to June 26th. An added special meeting will include invited members of congress and a reception.

I'm local, so it will not include hotel costs for me, I just have to get off from work. If you know the area, you could probably stay outside of the city, save on hotel costs, and metro into D.C. for the two days events. NEVC is really pushing to get as much group representation as possible, that's why they extened the registration.

Here is the email I received with the details:
http://members.cox.net/scurling/NEVCMeeting.htm

scurling
06-22-06, 11:36 PM
How much does the miracle e85 cost? ....
.... Hopefully for those of us that can't switch over just yet the competition brings prices down.

Mak, this article is just for you. I too haven't taken the plunge just yet. I'm slowly gearing up for the conversion, but currently, the E85 pricing and local availability have kept me at bay. In my area of Va., E85 is currently only about $0.10 /gal cheaper that Regular octane gas.

http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/energy/2006-06-21-ethanol-usat_x.htm

N0DIH
06-23-06, 02:36 PM
Wish I could go. But in my experience, $0.40 is the break even point. Less, don't waste the $$ the gains (mpg losses) on my LT1 at least, do not make up for it.

I am reevaluating all my #'s, so with gas I am around 18.75 mpg or so top of the head calculating average. With E85 it fluxuated more. From 14.7 to 16.75.

scurling
06-23-06, 11:18 PM
Nodih:

Yes, I wait eagerly to hear more from your test results. 16.75 mpg is fantastic. That's only an 11% decrease....not bad. You must really have that LT1 dialed in!
:thumbsup:

N0DIH
06-24-06, 11:49 PM
It seems to vary more than gas mpg does. I should be getting back on it soon, for now I am hanging onto 89 octane, I just seem to see too much pinging between shifts and I was constantly pulling it out, but 89 fixed it up. I am trying to keep timing up as much as I can. At least on the tune I am running right now.

I have DFCO going pretty well finally. (Deceleration Fuel Cutoff). That is somewhat helpful. Probably on the order of 5-8%. GM is pretty conservative on DFCO, I have it as agressive as I can, would get more if I can figure it out....

I'll probably get back on E85 in a few weeks. We'll see how gas prices are holding too, I am at $2.92 for 89 octane ($2.85 for 87) and $2.33 for E85.

My anomolly is that cruise control is non functional at the moment, as I it broke, so that is 18.75 without cruise. I try to keep a gentle foot as much as I can, but it just has to go to the floor now and then, like that 2006 Cummins Diesel Dodge I got to spank from 75-95 mph the other day.... And he had a straight through exhaust! He didn't do bad, but I still could pull on him. If he modded it, it would be a very different story..

subiemech85
08-07-06, 12:07 AM
BTW, where were you in February when this thread got started?

I was on the USMB playing with E85 in the subaru RX 1.8 4cyl TURBO!!
16 mpg on E85 20 mpg on E10
ran best with 2g of low grade E0 and the rest, 16g of E85
started better with E85 in the middle of winter

N0DIH
08-07-06, 12:26 AM
I live in SE WI, about 40 miles NE of Rockford, IL. I have been running E85 off and on now for a while, never a single issue. Back on it today again, $49 to fill my tank vs $65. I'll take $49! And have the higher octane to boot....

I can't say E85 started easier when cold, but it ran fine once it was started.
Just took a few more revolutions.

ewill3rd
08-07-06, 01:17 PM
For the love of Mike.... do some research before you just go tossing any kind of liquid that will burn in your car.
Then read the following excerpt from National Ethanol Vehicle Coalition (http://www.e85fuel.com)



CAN A VEHICLE BE CONVERTED TO OPERATE ON E85?

Response:

This is a common question that is asked of the National Ethanol Vehicle Coalition. Unfortunately, there is no simple answer. In the strictest sense, yes, a vehicle that was designed to operate on unleaded gasoline only could be converted to operate on E85. Realistically, the conversion is extremely difficult. Below explains the reasoning.

During the 1980’s and early 1990’s, many small companies were formed that were altering gasoline powered vehicles to operate on other forms of fuels such as propane, compressed natural gas, 85 percent ethanol, and 85 percent methanol. The marketing program of these conversion companies was based on the premise that it was cheaper to operate a vehicle on alternative fuels. However, the vehicles being converted were engineered, designed and built to operate on unleaded only. Shortly after the emergence of the “conversion firms” the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) determined that when converted from gasoline to another form of fuel, the exhaust emissions from these converted vehicles were often much “dirtier” than prior to conversion. See explanation regarding EPA Memo 1A. The use of alternative fuels in the transportation sector has been built around the objectives of using cleaner, non-gasoline based components.

Based on the federal authority provided to the EPA through the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, the EPA implemented regulations that required the exhaust emissions from vehicles converted to run on alternative fuels be “as clean as the exhaust emissions of the original gasoline equipment.” That is, if Ford Motor Company manufactured a vehicle to meet federal emissions standards on gasoline, a company converting that vehicle to operate on propane, must be able to certify that the emissions from the converted vehicle was as good as the original. A process to certify such after-market equipment was initiated and ultimately, few if any conversion kits were able to qualify.

Today, 99.9 percent of the vehicles that are capable of operating on alternative transportation fuels are produced by the original equipment manufacturers such as Ford, General Motors, and DaimlerChrysler. Engineers from these companies are able to design and build vehicles that meet the EPA exhaust emission standards. These companies also are required to warranty the exhaust emissions from these vehicles for 10 years or 100,000 miles, something very few conversion companies are able to accomplish. However, as you will read below, that might be changing.

IS IT POSSIBLE TO CONVERT A VEHICLE THAT WAS DESIGNED FOR GASOLINE TO OPERATE ON E85?

Yes. However, there are no conversions or after-market parts that have been certified by the EPA as meeting the standards to maintain clean exhaust emissions. Technically speaking, converting a vehicle that was designed to operate on unleaded gasoline only to operate on another form of fuel is a violation of the federal law and the offender may be subject to significant penalties. No after-market conversion company has successfully certified an E85 kit that would allow a gasoline vehicle to operate on 85 percent ethanol.

The differences in fuel injector size, air-fuel ratio, PCM calibrations, material composition of the fuel lines, pumps and tanks are just a few of the components that contribute to making an E85 conversion extremely complex. It is our understanding that at least one company is working to obtain EPA certification. We will monitor the situation closely, understanding the certification process can be time consuming, difficult and expensive.

U.S. Department of Energy - Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Clean Cities - Alternative Fuels Data Center
A History of Memorandum 1A
In June 1974 the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued Mobile Source Enforcement Memorandum 1A (Memo 1A). The original purpose of Memo 1A was to enforce the tampering prohibitions under Section 203(a)(3) of the Clean Air Act with respect to maintenance and use of aftermarket parts. Memo 1A and its subsequent revisions also outline procedures for converting vehicles to operate on alternative fuels while still complying with the Clean Air Act's tampering prohibitions and ensuring that emissions are not degraded through the conversion process. Below is a timeline and information about subsequent revisions to Memo 1A.

In the mid 1990s, testing determined that some vehicles that had been converted to operate on alternative fuels, specifically propane and natural gas, produced emissions that were worse than those of baseline gasoline vehicles. EPA issued an Addendum to Memorandum 1A in September 1997, requiring more stringent emissions testing for alternative fuel vehicle (AFV) conversions. The addendum specified three options through which a manufacturer can demonstrate that it has a "reasonable basis" to believe that its aftermarket part, vehicle add-on, or alteration to the vehicle would not adversely affect vehicle emissions performance. In order to promote initial growth of the alternative fuels industry, Option 3 outlined less stringent requirements than obtaining a Federal Certificate of Conformity required under Option 1 or the California Air Resources Board retrofit system certification required under Option 2.

Due to comments received from industry and concerns about the testing process and timeline, EPA issued a Revision to the Addendum to Memo 1A in June 1998. The revision clarified certain points and extended the timeline for performing conversions according to the guidelines specified under Option 3 to June 30, 2000. Additional concerns from the small alternative fuels industry related to the costs of "full certification" under Options 1 and 2 led to another extension of Option 3, which was issued in May 2000 and extended the deadline for performing conversions without full certification to December 31, 2001. Finally, on January 24, 2002, EPA extended Option 3 through March 31, 2002 in order to allow time for a new set of certification procedures for fuels converters to be fully developed by EPA.

Following these three extensions, Option 3 of the addendum to Memo 1A officially expired on March 31, 2002. Option 3 had permitted the use of alternative fuel conversion systems or "kits," which were designed for specific engine families, provided that the aftermarket conversion company performed satisfactory emission testing demonstrating that the converted vehicles conformed with EPA emissions standards. Options 1 and 2 remain in effect, and EPA now certifies converted vehicles, rather than conversion systems or "kits." For more information about current conversion certification procedures, please see Conversions 101.

For more information about Memorandum 1A and mobile source emissions standards, please visit the following Web pages:

Light-Duty Vehicle and Engine Emission Certification
Vehicle Standards and Regulations
A Guide to the Emissions Certification Procedures for Alternative Fuel Aftermarket Conversions (PDF 2 MB) Download Acrobat Reader. (This document should be referred to for historical and background purposes only.)
Mobile Source Enforcement Memorandum No. 1A: Interim Tampering Enforcement Policy (PDF 292 KB)
Addendum to Mobile Source Enforcement Memorandum 1A (PDF 32 KB)
Revision to Addendum to Mobile Source Enforcement Memorandum 1A (PDF 380 KB)

ewill3rd
08-07-06, 01:22 PM
Here are a couple more great reasons to use it!


Contains less energy per gallon than gasoline

§ Has lower energy content than gasoline which translates to slightly lower fuel mileage

§ Must use winter grade fuel (E70) for starts in cold (-20 degree weather)

N0DIH
08-07-06, 01:51 PM
I am quite sure I have posted time and time again, this isn't for everyone and it isn't something to do without digging in detail your car and fuel system. I have, and I am comfortable with what I have. I do need larger injectors, which I hope to get soon.

With current PCM in the LT1, there is no way to make it DUAL FUEL, only single. So reflash for what fuel I am running at the time. Running stock injectors at WOT and not monitoring the duty cycle can get you holes in the pistons on higher hp cars. I have seen my duty cycles hit as high as 116%, recommended you don't exceed 85% (the injector could care less, it is the fuel being sprayed at a closed intake valve that is the problem). In reality, it all depends on your camshaft intake duration.

scurling
08-07-06, 09:37 PM
NoDih;

Please explain the duty cycle of the injectors; How you you run 116%?

Does the PCM control the duration cycle of the injector too, and is that variable within the code?

N0DIH
08-08-06, 12:13 AM
It isn't the pulse width being 100%. I really think duty cycle isn't really the correct term either. In reality duty cycle should be 100% max, and vary up to that. 0% being always off, 50%, being on for half of the period the injectors are on, etc. 1/PW = Frequency and 1/freq = PW.

The formula is rpm*pw/1200 = calc dutycycle.

Stealth 316 - Injector Duty Cycle Calculation (http://www.stealth316.com/2-calc-idc.htm)

The PW is a calculation of temp, tps, iat, rpm, baro, map, maf, VE tables, etc. So any change in any of these will result in a change in PW.

N0DIH
08-09-06, 02:20 PM
Take a look at this: AGE 85: Aviation Grade Ethanol - A Project Funded by The South Dakota Corn Utilization Council (http://www.age85.org/research.htm)

This supports all of the research that I have been doing on E85.

All the "bad" info is unfounded! If it meets FAA spec (which is still pending), it is got my interest even more.

scurling
08-20-06, 11:08 PM
On a Saturday drive, I went by the only commercial (Citgo) station in NoVa that sells E85. Can you believe $3.85/gal!! I don't know how they expect anyone to support that price.

I've been in touch with the Fed. Senator and Congressional offices for Va. giving them a piece of my mind on the availability of E85. I continue to get the bla-bla-bla. In fact I recently got a three page bla-bla-bla. My reply was it doesn't do me any good if I can't access the fueling station and can't afford the price even if I could get there.

I just keep waiting....

N0DIH
08-21-06, 12:19 AM
Beat up the politicians. Try to convince them to repeal all taxes on E85 for the next 2 years to bring up sales and convince stations to start to stock it.

Until there is much infrastructure and support for it the costs will be higher. Like for me, I can get decent prices because the refinery is close. And they are building more. They have already realized this is a good money maker for the future.


On a Saturday drive, I went by the only commercial (Citgo) station in NoVa that sells E85. Can you believe $3.85/gal!! I don't know how they expect anyone to support that price.

I've been in touch with the Fed. Senator and Congressional offices for Va. giving them a piece of my mind on the availability of E85. I continue to get the bla-bla-bla. In fact I recently got a three page bla-bla-bla. My reply was it doesn't do me any good if I can't access the fueling station and can't afford the price even if I could get there.

I just keep waiting....

scurling
08-21-06, 12:04 PM
I realize the high cost here on the east coast is due to the additional shipping, or so I m told by the station operator. Pipelines aren't running yet with the E85 blend or Ethanol to provide the lowest pricing available.

I keep waiting....

N0DIH
08-21-06, 06:39 PM
Yup, until that happens, E85 will have a hard time taking a foothold in either country. Look at Brazil, they did it. They convinced the oil companies to embrace and support it and they did and made it successful.

I think in so many cases people are just looking for reasons to not accept it, from "deposits" that don't exist to complaing it gets worse mileage, and not even noticing the 5% hp gain.... I am staying steady at 15mpg with it, and 17.5-18.3 with gas. I am not complaining at all. Runs fine.

I need to dial in more cold starting and warm restart fuel mix, but else I can't complain at all.