[MSP]

I found this company that offers ethanol conversion kits starting at around 500 bucks. Apparently these have been in use in Brazil for a long time. Anyway, what do you guys think? Being from the Midwest this seems like a decent idea. I wonder what (if any) drawbacks exist? Apparently you can go from gasoline to ethanol with the flip of a switch.

FlexTek

[super_Chris]

Ethanol works in most cars now. The only problems with ethanol is that it's a better solvent than gas. When they started adding ethanol to gas, it melted every fuel line in my uncle's model A.

The real thing I don't like is that you get poor milage. Fill you're tank with Arco, see how many miles you get on that tank, do the same with Chevron. You'll notice that you get better milage with the Chevron. It's because the ethanol in the Arco gas. It only makes up a couple percent of the gas, but it's enough to have a notice effect on milage. (on my old car, it would cut as much as 30 miles off a tank.)

On the production of ethanol. Why the hell do we make it from corn? Why not sugar beets?

[Jishory]

is ethanol cheaper then gas where you are?

[El_Presidente_Pufferfish]

Originally Posted by super_Chris

Why the hell do we make it from corn? Why not sugar beets?

Corn has massive subsidies in the USA. Ridiculously massive.

[MSP]

Here in Cincinnati corn squeezins are about the same price, but as super_chris said the mileages is about 40% less! My buddy went from 15mpg in his F-150 to 11mpg running E85.

But for me it isn't about saving money per se, I'd just like the option. I'd rather give my money to farmers in Iowa than Victor Chavez and the sheiks.

[Jishory]

you would be way better off getting a diesel then converting it to biodiesel. the fuel is just about free minus the time you spend filtering it/collecting it. the engines are also more efficent then gasoline engines and show no economy loss from the conversion, unlike ethanol which is a huge scam imo

[Alex B]

E85 has a lot positives that, IMO, outweigh the loss in fuel economy:

1. It's NOT corrosive to modern fuel systems as many people have been lead to believe. Methanol however, is bad for your car.
2. E85 is roughly 105 octane so you can run more boost/timing/higher compression.
3. It is better for the environment than gasoline.
4. E85 is in most cases at least 5% more efficient than gasoline at the same lambda value (up to 25% more efficient on some cars optimized solely for E85).
5. Since E85 has very good cleaning properties as well as leaving behind a by-product of water, it cleans the fuel system and will keep the injectors nice and clean. The combustion chambers, valves, ports and the exhaust will also be clean(er), almost like the car had water injection.

E85 is the stuff to get if you are running forced induction or a hot normally aspirated engine. There is a reason the Swedish Touring Car Championship went over the E85 for the '07 season.

[bigwill51534]

Originally Posted by jag_e_fattig

E85 has a lot positives that, IMO, outweigh the loss in fuel economy:

1. It's NOT corrosive to modern fuel systems as many people have been lead to believe. Methanol however, is bad for your car.
2. E85 is roughly 105 octane so you can run more boost/timing/higher compression.
3. It is better for the environment than gasoline.
4. E85 is in most cases at least 5% more efficient than gasoline at the same lambda value (up to 25% more efficient on some cars optimized solely for E85).
5. Since E85 has very good cleaning properties as well as leaving behind a by-product of water, it cleans the fuel system and will keep the injectors nice and clean. The combustion chambers, valves, ports and the exhaust will also be clean(er), almost like the car had water injection.

E85 is the stuff to get if you are running forced induction or a hot normally aspirated engine. There is a reason the Swedish Touring Car Championship went over the E85 for the '07 season.

OK, first of all I have to ask you one question... Do you have any references for the above mentioned information? Where are you getting the idea that it is better for the environment than gasoline? Do you realize that it takes more energy to make E85 as compared to gasoline? Are you also aware that E-85 contains far less energy than gasoline (hence, the lower gas mileage)? Where is the benefit?

If you compare the benefits to the cost, E85 is still worse for the environment. On average, you can see only a .5% decrease in environmental polution due to CO2 released for any given trip when compared to gasoline. Is this worth the extra costs and the extra energy expended to extract the useable ethanol?

Also, you have no idea what you are talking about when you say it leaves behind water as a biproduct.... Ethanol is an alcohol based liquid, that dissolves with water to make it all flammible. That is why 99% of mechanics recommend filling a contaminated gas tank with a higher ethanol content gas to aid in flushing the system. Next, you say it is similar to water injection... Once again, what are you talking about? Water injection hasn't been used in a mianstream vehicle since the early 1900's on tractors (John Deer used it). Water does not aid in the burning of fuel, and only cools the incoming air temperature.

Need a reference? Take a look at this:
E85 Vs. Gasoline Comparison Test

Also, I am originally from Iowa (largest corn growing state in the country). It isn't because I don't see the advantages towards the Midwest. It is just not practical in the big picture sense.

~Will Courtier~

[Alex B]

You're obviously smarter than I am, so we'll see how far my high school diploma gets me here.

Ok, it seems you aren't reading my post properly. First of all, this information I'm spewing here is mostly from personal experience and from speaking with people smarter than I who have been using E85 for a long time and made big power with it.

When I say better for the environment, I mean from a purely emissions point of view (13% less greenhouse gas vs. gasoline). Net energy used to produce ethanol vs. gasoline is a fuzzy subject that I'm not very well read on, so I honestly can't comment. In my post, I said ethanol is more efficient than gasoline AT THE SAME LAMBDA VALUE. Energy by volume is unrelated.

Obviously your reaction equations are a little rusty. Combustion of ethanol forms carbon dioxide and water:

C2H5OH + 3 O2 → 2 CO2 + 3 H2O

Saab offered water injection as an option for the first few model years of the 99 Turbo. I never said water aids in burning fuel, it cleans the inside of the engine and removes carbon deposits. Water injection is VERY commonly used in modified turbocharged cars or hot normally aspirated cars for an extra boost in performance without the need for leaded race fuel or octane booster.

I have opened up several engines that have been run on E85 for an extended period. There was much less carbon build up in them than comparable engines run only on gasoline for similar periods of time.

[bigwill51534]

Originally Posted by jag_e_fattig

You're obviously smarter than I am, so we'll see how far my high school diploma gets me here.

Ok, it seems you aren't reading my post properly. First of all, this information I'm spewing here is mostly from personal experience and from speaking with people smarter than I who have been using E85 for a long time and made big power with it.

When I say better for the environment, I mean from a purely emissions point of view (13% less greenhouse gas vs. gasoline). Net energy used to produce ethanol vs. gasoline is a fuzzy subject that I'm not very well read on, so I honestly can't comment. In my post, I said ethanol is more efficient than gasoline AT THE SAME LAMBDA VALUE. Energy by volume is unrelated.

Obviously your reaction equations are a little rusty. Combustion of ethanol forms carbon dioxide and water:

C2H5OH + 3 O2 → 2 CO2 + 3 H2O

Saab offered water injection as an option for the first few model years of the 99 Turbo. I never said water aids in burning fuel, it cleans the inside of the engine and removes carbon deposits. Water injection is VERY commonly used in modified turbocharged cars or hot normally aspirated cars for an extra boost in performance without the need for leaded race fuel or octane booster.

I have opened up several engines that have been run on E85 for an extended period. There was much less carbon build up in them than comparable engines run only on gasoline for similar periods of time.

OK, I see what you're saying on the water thing now. The only thing, is that the water doesn't ever condense. It will just be carried throughout the mtoor, and exhausted as steam. Also, water injection is used to cool the incoming air (upstream of the MAF) to do two things. First, it cools the incoming air (making it more dense), allowing forced induction motors to feed even more fuel (due to there being more air) and therefore make more power. This also acts as sort of an intercooler, to aid in preventing predetonation. Thus, the higher octane rating. The water won't clean the inside of the motor, but the alcohol tends to burn hotter and cleaner giving this impression. Alcohol has much less suet (sp?) formed when it is burned, and doesn't produce as much carbon. Therefore, that is why you notice the engines are cleaner as compared to those that burn regular gasoline.

Oh, and I'm sorry if I came off as arogant. I was just really pissed off and fighting with the wife before I wrote that. I hope you don't take offense to it.

~Will Courtier~