whats the point of E85 gas anymore?

[OverVolt]

Ethanol from cane sugar is the cheapest. Brazil can make ethanol way cheaper than we can with corn. Thats why the return on energy invested is so craptastic. Thats why with the reduced mileage per gallon, the cost savings just don't add up at saving 50cents a gallon with corn ethanol.

We do import some cane sugar ethanol from Brazil but we tax the crap out of it.

 

[Ackmed]

It plays hell with small engines, too. I don't understand all the chemistry, but apparently ethanol is hydrophilic, or something like that, and helps build up moisture in the fuel. There are additives that do a good job of reversing the effect.

It does. Carbureted engines were not designed for ethanol. Most lawn mowers and weed eaters included. Most people have no idea, they just get the shitiest, cheapest gas they can. Which is why an above poster mentioned buying gas near a lake, or somewhere that has lots of boats near by. I bought 100 octane, 100% gas last summer. Was $7.50 a gallon, filled up my tank, $75. Couldn't do it all the time, but I like to use it ever so often. Runs better, smells better, cleans it up. Better than octane booster you get at Walmart.

Since we're on the subject, I don't like how it used to be 10 cents between grades, now it seems 15 cents is the norm. AND why not just round up, stop calling it $2.89 and 9/10, just fucking call it $2.90.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

So fuel with 97% of the energy of straight gas gives you 80% of the mileage?

kinda doubt that.

*shrug*

Between 28 and 29 mpg going there, >33mpg on the return trip. I make the trip several times a year, and it's the same every time.

*commences to cipherin'*

Okay, so that's like a 16% improvement. Sue me.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

Ethanol from cane sugar is the cheapest. Brazil can make ethanol way cheaper than we can with corn. Thats why the return on energy invested is so craptastic. Thats why with the reduced mileage per gallon, the cost savings just don't add up at saving 50cents a gallon with corn ethanol.

We do import some cane sugar ethanol from Brazil but we tax the crap out of it.

Se should just fucking buy Cuba and call it a day.

 

[natto fire]

I originally misinterpreted the E-85, and attempted to make the general point that NJ had mandated a certain level of ethanol in all our gas, and it hadn't led to any reduction in cost. I could have explained what I meant if you hadn't acted like a complete asshole.

Yeah, right when I read your post I thought to myself that you had confused the two. Then Outhouse, instead of clearing the misunderstanding, responded like a douche, and I remembered I was in OT and not The Garage. It was a federal mandate that led to the 15% ethanol blends, and was originally designed to cut dependence on foreign oil. As all things that start out as a good idea, it backfired and has ruined large swaths of land in Iowa and other corn-producing states chasing federal subsidies. Coupled with increased domestic production, it should be repealed, but big corn (including everyone's favorite Monsanto) is lobbying to keep it in effect. AKA, it's Obama's fault

 

[Meghan54]

It does. Carbureted engines were not designed for ethanol. Most lawn mowers and weed eaters included. Most people have no idea, they just get the shitiest, cheapest gas they can. Which is why an above poster mentioned buying gas near a lake, or somewhere that has lots of boats near by. I bought 100 octane, 100% gas last summer. Was $7.50 a gallon, filled up my tank, $75. Couldn't do it all the time, but I like to use it ever so often. Runs better, smells better, cleans it up. Better than octane booster you get at Walmart.

Since we're on the subject, I don't like how it used to be 10 cents between grades, now it seems 15 cents is the norm. AND why not just round up, stop calling it $2.89 and 9/10, just fucking call it $2.90.

BS on all counts. The carburetor knows not what's flowing through it....pure gas or ethanol. The only problems a carburetor could possibly have with ethanol is either gaskets that aren't alcohol resistant or old, oxidized fuel. Other than those instances, there are NO reasons a carb'd engine cannot run on E10. I know my 2000 Johnson 115hp outboard, with 4 carbs, runs like a scalded dog on E10. Mounted on my 17' Javelin, it pushes it to 52mph per gps and has absolutely no problems with the fuel.

Why do people continue with the misinformation? Guess hyperbole is more interesting than fact.

 

[natto fire]

BS on all counts. The carburetor knows not what's flowing through it....pure gas or ethanol. The only problems a carburetor could possibly have with ethanol is either gaskets that aren't alcohol resistant or old, oxidized fuel. Other than those instances, there are NO reasons a carb'd engine cannot run on E10. I know my 2000 Johnson 115hp outboard, with 4 carbs, runs like a scalded dog on E10. Mounted on my 17' Javelin, it pushes it to 52mph per gps and has absolutely no problems with the fuel.

Why do people continue with the misinformation? Guess hyperbole is more interesting than fact.

You are half right. The carburetor itself doesn't care, but the jets are calibrated for the stoichiometry of the fuel that will be going through them, sized relative to the venturi. As you should know, pure ethanol and pure gasoline have different stoichiometric ratios, so a jet sized for pure gasoline or pure ethanol would have to be different sizes to get the ideal 14.7 stoich ratio at idle. Thread over at modular Fords about this.

As you said, the engine will run just fine with a blend, but your example of a 2000 engine being designed to run on a 10% blend, which is much older than the current 15% blend you see is hardly a smoking gun for misinformation. Some people have motors that were made before 2000, some well before, and a 15/85 ethanol/gasoline blend can throw off the stoich. ratio quite a bit with no modification. That is the fact.

 

[BoberFett]

The fucking morons here in corn country are mandating E20 soon. I'm sure the auto companies and repair shops are LOVING this shit.

 

[jagec]

it was always eco-KOOK liberal mythology that it was somehow better. the products of combustion are worse and it has less BTU's per gallon resulting in lower mileage. And ran up the prices of grain based food supplies. Lies about lies.

No, it was always about shoveling more money at the corn lobby. No one who had the least bit of common sense ever thought it was for environmental reasons. Go back to trolling P&N.

But as mentioned previously, it IS good for racers running highly boosted engines.

 

[IGBT]

No, it was always about shoveling more money at the corn lobby. No one who had the least bit of common sense ever thought it was for environmental reasons. Go back to trolling P&N.

But as mentioned previously, it IS good for racers running highly boosted engines.

go back and listen to your high eco-KOOK shaman alGore..then listen to what he says now. alGore was most certainly pushing "enviro" gaga's to make low information slobs like you buy into it. And nearly all of you did.

 

[Markbnj]

I bought 100 octane, 100% gas last summer. Was $7.50 a gallon, filled up my tank, $75.

I don't know if I can even do that legally in our state. I will if I can.

 

[Markbnj]

Coupled with increased domestic production, it should be repealed, but big corn (including everyone's favorite Monsanto) is lobbying to keep it in effect. AKA, it's Obama's fault

I don't think it will ever get repealed. There are too many powerful interests suckling on that teat, and it's a bipartisan feast.

 

[alkemyst]

im not sure what you are blabbering about or what point you are trying to make.

Wow…that was a spaz. It's clear what his point was.

 

[natto fire]

I don't think it will ever get repealed. There are too many powerful interests suckling on that teat, and it's a bipartisan feast.

I agree with that, unless down the road some other fuel industry spends more dollars lobbying congress, or the environmental damage in corn producing states gets widespread national attention. As it stands now, Iowa and Nebraska don't hold a lot of sway in congress and probably prefer the extra revenue anyways.

 

[LTC8K6]

The direct corn ethanol subsidy ended in January of 2012, but there are still other incentives to keep using corn to make ethanol.

The EPA has cut the ethanol blend requirement from 18B gallons to 15.5B gallons for 2014, so ethanol my be dying a slow death.

 

[Ackmed]

BS on all counts. The carburetor knows not what's flowing through it....pure gas or ethanol. The only problems a carburetor could possibly have with ethanol is either gaskets that aren't alcohol resistant or old, oxidized fuel. Other than those instances, there are NO reasons a carb'd engine cannot run on E10. I know my 2000 Johnson 115hp outboard, with 4 carbs, runs like a scalded dog on E10. Mounted on my 17' Javelin, it pushes it to 52mph per gps and has absolutely no problems with the fuel.

Why do people continue with the misinformation? Guess hyperbole is more interesting than fact.

No, not bs. I never said all engines can't run on 10%, obviously they can. They have to make it work on the lowest common denominator. They just run more poorly comparatively. Especially older cars that are not fuel injected. My car runs like shit on 10%. Especially 87 octane. I have to run premium, or else I get misfires and overall poor performance. I have a 4 barrel carburetor, and have to adjust it all the time if I do not run 100% gas through it.

A 2012 study by Auto Alliance showed that some cars (model years 2001 to 2009) showed internal engine damage as the result of using an ethanol fuel blend. Damage to the valves and valve seats was evident in some of the cars tested.

http://auto.howstuffworks.com/fuel-efficiency/alternative-fuels/ethanol-damage-engine.htm

And those cars aren't even old.

Poor engine performance:The fuel pump could easily pick up a slug of the water/ethanol slurry at the bottom of the tank, interrupting the flow of gas to the engine. This will cause the engine to miss, run rough and possibly stall altogether.

Carburetor float valve: Float valve needles on early cars were brass, and these were replaced with plastic needles or brass needles with Viton (a specific type of rubber) tips. Ethanol can cause the plastic needles to swell up and stick either open or shut, which causes either massive flooding or starves the carburetor for fuel. Some owners have resorted to shaving down the plastic needle to get it to ride smoothly and seat properly. Instead, you can install an all-brass needle and seat, or a Vitontipped needle if available for your car model, which are not affected by lower levels of ethanol.

Carburetor floats: The Zenith-Stromberg floats found specifically/ only in the TR4 and 4A made of foam covered with a skin may deteriorate when exposed to ethanol. Other plastic floats, like those used by SU, may also be affected.

In the interest of space, I only quoted a few parts of the article.

http://www.mossmotors.com/SiteGraphics/Pages/ethanol.html

That was just 2 top links from the search "Ethanol and older engines". Buying that gas, and then running octane booster as is suggested sucks. The fact is 10% and especially 15% runs far worse than 100% pure fuel. You can disagree all you want, but you'll just be wrong.

 

[darkswordsman17]

Ethanol would be great (and it would offer a renewable source of energy that helps low pollution and would help lessen dependence on importing of fossil fuels), provided its done right, but we're nowhere close to that being possible on a large enough scale to do anything about supplanting gasoline, let alone economically speaking.

In the US its a mess. The way that corn ethanol is managed here is just bad and should not have been allowed since it was going to impact food (but both parties let it happen; oh and its kinda funny that Republicans have made such a fuss about failed companies from government grants under Obama since the same stuff happened under Bush). It basically is taking corn out of food/feed markets and wasting it on inefficient plants to produce it. Any pollution reduction burning it in cars compared to gasoline is nullified by the production and transportation of ethanol here.

There's better ways to do ethanol, but our government has fucked up so much that without a major breakthrough that can convert total waste cheaply and on a large scale we won't see what it could be.

Ethanol from cane sugar is the cheapest. Brazil can make ethanol way cheaper than we can with corn. Thats why the return on energy invested is so craptastic. Thats why with the reduced mileage per gallon, the cost savings just don't add up at saving 50cents a gallon with corn ethanol.

We do import some cane sugar ethanol from Brazil but we tax the crap out of it.

Sugar cane and other materials are much better for ethanol production. It works well for Brazil because they've spent a lot in converting everything to support it as well (I think all new cars there run on it, they've adjust their infrastructure to support transport - pipelining it requires special care, they have also have power plants that can burn the waste from ethanol production).

The sugar lobby in the US might be even worse than the corn one, and that's why we can't get proper sugar beet/can ethanol production going here or import it.

 

[marvdmartian]

It makes Obama happy. And that's what life is all about, is making him happy! :awe: