Scratched my head about where to put this…
I tried E85 fuel in my 2005 Suburban when it became available in area (Central Texas).
Mileage went from 18 to 12; the price was not 30% less.
Scratched my head about where to put this…
I tried E85 fuel in my 2005 Suburban when it became available in area (Central Texas).
Mileage went from 18 to 12; the price was not 30% less.
There are a number of ways to achieve a level foundation and mudsill.
"I have learned so much thanks to the searchable articles on the FHB website. I can confidently say that I expect to be a life-long subscriber." - M.K.
Get home building tips, offers, and expert advice in your inbox
Fine Homebuilding
Get home building tips, offers, and expert advice in your inbox
© 2024 Active Interest Media. All rights reserved.
Get home building tips, offers, and expert advice in your inbox
Become a member and get instant access to thousands of videos, how-tos, tool reviews, and design features.
Start Your Free TrialStart your subscription today and save up to 81%
SubscribeGet complete site access to expert advice, how-to videos, Code Check, and more, plus the print magazine.
Already a member? Log in
Replies
Got a -07 Impala rental this week that says 85% on the trunk, no idea what is in it, probaly gas. Don't even know where one could get 85% in Tucson to try it out. Would drive it back to rental house full of 85%, all stations here look to not have any of it.
Drives OK on 10%
E85 has to be one of the biggest scams ever pulled. Lets see:1) Same or higher price at the pump
2) 25%-30% less mileage
3) Corrodes existing steel pipelines and valves
4) Raises the prices of milk, beef, pork, and poultryIt does help the big farm corporations in a few midwestern states, as if they need it. MB, Toyota, and Honda all have modern, clean diesel engines and have been selling them in Europe for years. If we switched from gasoline to diesel our oil consumption for cars would drop 30% and we could feed the corn to cows and pigs again. WTF, over?
A few month ago I did a Google search to find out the actual cost of producing a gallon of ethanol as no one ever seems to publicize it. I found a study which broke it down into around 10 areas including cost of the grain (which is now a lot higher), production costs, transportation ( which IIRC has to be in tanker trucks), etc. The study concluded that a gallon of ethanol costs over $6.00 to bring to a gas pump. So we are paying a lot more than $3 a gallon at the pump when you consider the subsidies which must be given to the producers.
I have also found that even with the 10% blend I lose enough mileage in my 02 F150 that I actually save money by paying the higher price for regular gas.
My conclusion: ethanol is not the answer. I just read in Popular Mechanics (or Popular Science) about the advances in diesel technology and that seems to hold promise.
That message can't be repeated loud enough of often enough. It's insanity
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
The answer isn't a mass switch to diesel. Diesel fuel is currently selling for more than gasoline. Europeans that have huge taxes on motor fuel really need higher mpg, so they generally have smaller vehicles, plus their current fleet is about half diesel. Believe it or not motor fuel is a global commodity. In the US we are importing gasoline from Europe. Free market supply and demand sets the price.
First of all, I assume your Suburban is a FFV (Flex Fuel Vehicle). If not, you should quit using e85 because the vehicle's metallurgy won't hold up. I could go off on a major tirade about e85 but I'll just say this; e85 contains 25% less energy than 100% gasoline. GM gets a significant tax break for producing flex fuel vehicles, even if they never run anything but "normal" gas. The farmers are also happy. Meanwhile everyone that buys food that uses corn (like beef) pays more because supply and demand.
Yep, it is flexfuel.
I had read that the mileage would probably be less but did not expect it to be a 1/3 less.
I have read some of the secondary effects (higher food prices being a big one).
GM gets a significant tax break for producing flex fuel vehicles, even if they never run anything but "normal" gas.
There is also a break on the CAFE standards. The car makers get a "credit" of a little over 1 mpg on a flex fuel vehicle when calculating the fleet average mpg. Of course it applies even for flex fuel vehicles that never use e85.
I misspoke, it wasn't a tax break but the avoidance of a CAFE(Corporate Average Fuel Economy) fine that GM benefits from when they sell flex fuel vehicles. I hate to slam the General because I've always been a big GM fan but the way it works is that GM only has to count the 15% gasoline part of e85 when they report fuel economy. This results in a big jump in their e85 vehicle mpg results. A Suburban's reported mileage would jump from 20.1mpg to 33.3 mpg. In 2005 this e85 loophole saved GM more than $200million in fines. I'm fairly certain the number of flex fuel vehicles they sell is even higher now.
E-85 does kill your mileage, 'cuz alcohol's BTUs / lb is a little more than half that of gasoline; while its air/fuel ratio is about half. Given that you're pumping the same amount of air through your engine, you'll burn more lbs of E-85 than gasoline, but get more power per unit of air.
Car Craft Magazine's latest issue details the 7-car finals of DynoMax's "Horsepower Shootout", for street licensed, legal, and street driveable cars - they put them on a chassis dyno.
Something like 9,450 horsepower aggregate among the seven - the winner got over 1640 to the tires - so figure close to 2000 at the flywheel. I followed him a few dozen miles during the Power Tour in 2006, when he had a little less squeeze on, and was at about 1000 hp - in a home-made, black-primer 4-door Rambler!
View Image
This is on pump gas, okay? Not race fuel.
But -
They all chose to run E-85.
All the major hot rod carb companies are offering bigger jet kits and bigger needle and seat assemblies for the MUCH higher flow requirements of E-85. Fuel injection is a little easier; just cycle the injector on for longer. Car guys are happy to be able to run higher, more efficient compression ratios again with E-85.
Forrest - guy I know in the next town got third - ONLY a little over 1400 in a 'Cuda. I have driven beside him occasionally on the street at our little summer cruise-ins on the square- kinda' frightening! He was the only competitor without a blower or turbos, just a huge Hemi and lots of nitrous. Can go back and forth to E-85 changing jets.
Edited 1/15/2008 7:33 am by McDesign
ok,you got me stumpped a little,i'm pretty good at old cars and what they are,when my eyes first hit that pic ,it's a 64 fairlane,wait no it's not. is that the rambler you mentioned? i have to admit that ramblers are not in my memory bank!!! maybe a javlin or amx.
1600 hp,what the heck would that feel like? i'd want to wear 2 pair of underwear for that ride.if that is black primer in that pic,he's got a hellof a painter on board. larryif a man speaks in the forest,and there's not a woman to hear him,is he still wrong?
http://www.dynomaxdynotourblog.com/ (It's safe, I promise!)
Here's the sheet from qualifying -
View Image
1964 RAMBLER CLASSICBrian Anderson
Occupation: Electrical EngineerHometown: Kathleen, Ga.Qualifying Event: SUMMIT Racing Summer EventBest Prior e.t.: 7.91 at 176 mphBest Prior DynoMax HP: 1267Best Prior DynoMax TQ: 974
Engine: Small-block ChevyDisplacement: 427 ciCompression: 9:1Cylinder heads: BRODIX AluminumCamshaft: COMP CamsPistons: CP PistonsConnecting Rods: OliverCrankshaft: LunatiCarburetor: BigStuff3Power Adder: Turbos, PrecisionTorque Converter: Neal ChanceIntake Manifold: Custom-Built by Brian Anderson, AnderFab RacingTransmission: PowerglideRearend: Ford 9-inchWheels: WeldTires: Mickey Thompson
Muffler & Exhaust System Specifics:Anderson’s Rambler features 4-inch piping, two pairs of DynoMax Bullet mufflers, and custom-built headers by AnderFab Racing.
Thanks:“Special thanks to my parents, David and Pat Anderson, John Meyers, Bobby Honrath, Craig Taylor, Proline Racing Engines, Reeves RPM Performance and to all my other friends who’ve helped along the way!”
View Image
Edited 1/14/2008 9:21 pm by McDesign
thanks for the link,had to go get a towel to keep from droolling on the keyboard
i'm going to have to start a new thread about what i'm lusting after,that black 59 chevy.had one when i was a kid and now i want another one:]
how does a guy start with a rambler and end up 1600 hp later,i'd like to hear what kind of dollars it took to get there,but i'm sure it's all worth it to him when he's wiping that vettes rear. larryif a man speaks in the forest,and there's not a woman to hear him,is he still wrong?
Engine: Small-block ChevyDisplacement: 427 ci
I thought a 427 was a big block or is that a small block bored out to 427 ci?
Grant- just wonderinghttp://grantlogan.net/
"Because I really want to live in a country where the poor people are fat. "- Unidentified Indian Immigrant when asked why he wants to come to America
< 427 was a big block >
Aftermarket blocks, like World, have traditional configuration Chevy-pattern small-blocks available in 427 and 454 cubic inch displacements - even in aluminum! http://www.worldcastings.com/prods_pages/shorts/kits/motown.htm (safe link, I promise). Gen III small-blocks are available in 481 also.
Standard Chevy-pattern big-blocks are now 540, 572, and 632. Just stupid big.
All these would make great power with E-85!
Not so great on mileage, though!
Forrest - drooling
World advertises that you can run any of their race gas offerings on the street with E-85 - Lots of E-85, and kick up the HP rating by 3-12% (new jetting, or course) -
View Image
Build Sheet
Drag Race Big Block Chevrolet Engines
Part #
Block
Displacement
Cylinder Heads
Fuel Type
HP
Torque
108080
Merlin III Cast Iron
540 c.i.d.
Cast Iron
Racing Gas
775
690 Ft. Lbs.
108081
Merlin III Cast Iron
540 c.i.d.
Aluminum
Racing Gas
825
710 Ft. Lbs.
108081A
Merlin X Aluminum
540 c.i.d.
Aluminum
Racing Gas
825
710 Ft. Lbs.
108086
Merlin III Cast Iron
572 c.i.d.
Aluminum
Racing Gas
850
725 Ft. Lbs.
108086A
Merlin X Aluminum
572 c.i.d.
Aluminum
Racing Gas
850
725 Ft. Lbs.
108090
Merlin III Cast Iron
632 c.i.d.
Aluminum
Racing Gas
900
750 Ft. Lbs.
108090A
Merlin X Aluminum
632 c.i.d.
Aluminum
Racing Gas
900
750 Ft. Lbs.
Edited 1/15/2008 7:32 am by McDesign
in my late model dirt track days... we ran 100% alky... because we could run higher compression and it ran alot cooler... thats the plus side... the down side is it has right at 50% of the btu's of gas... so bigger jets... bigger fuel lines... bigger fuel pump...special carbs & fittings and.. yes we'd used twice as much fuel than if we used gas... plus it's a very dry fuel... very hard on everything it comes in contact with... even with special fittings and carbs designed for alky... if you didn't flush it with gas after the race it'd gum up and eat up about every part it contacted... very hard on any alum. part and most rubbers...
as a fuel for automotive use... it's only worth would be if you had nothing else... as in zero gas....none nada... other than that..... it's a bill of goods and best left to the camp stoves... gas at twice the price is a better deal
p
I think the alcohol in E-85 is ethanol (grain alcohol), and you ran with methanol (wood alcohol).
Ethanol seems to be a little easier to deal with, elastomers-wise.
Forrest
you are correct... thanks... but... it sure smells good at the race track... when i was like 12-14 i ran 2cycle karts... very fast & fun... again we ran an alky mix... with Klotz oil... to get the gas & alky to mix and stay mixed we used drug store ayctone (sp) ?...
what a sweet smell....
glad i'm still have'n fun
p
Well of course, plain and simple, alcohol doesn't have the energy that gasoline has and the typical experience is that mileage suffers.
Engines can be designed for alcohol, but typically, a flex fuel engine cannot do both gasoline and alcohol with efficiency.
This also carries over to the environmental aspects too. Sure alky produces less pollutants but with increased fuel used because of mileage being less, the benefits are questionable.
There will be screaming and yelling about this stance but that is my story and I am stickin to it....
My mechanic has learned the workaround to take the E85 fuel sensor out of the loop. Cost is above $700 to replace and the vehicle will not run correctly when it quits.
He's doing pretty well @ $150 a vehicle.
Can't find the fuel around here, anyway.
Liberty = Freedom from unjust or undue governmental control.
American Heritage Dictionary
E85 has been available in the Chicago area for at least 3 years maybe more. When I first got my truck (2005 Colorado), I wished it was E85 compatible until I started learning about the lack of fuel economy and other mechanical issues (like corrosion to the fuel system, sensor troubles, etc.).
You've learned what one of my co-workers (2006 Avalanche) and my boss (2007 Yukon XL) learned. They each ran a couple of tanks through their trucks when they first got them and swear that it will never happen again. E85 is worthless when it comes to saving you money. But farmers and the ethanol industry love it.
I wonder how many people using E85 actually calculate their fuel milage and compare the cost per mile between regular unleaded and the E85? It can't be too many or they'd stop buying the vehicles (and fuel) that work on it.
Edited 1/14/2008 11:00 pm by boiler7904
I got a kick the other day when I say a Tahoe with Manufacturer's plates at the Mobil station filling up. The Tahoe was covered with a show style decal package touting e85. Only problem was the station doesn't sell e85. Not even the manufacturer's reps are using it!