E85 fuel into a 03 5.4 Ford

Has anyone ran it straight. I have put enough in to make it 30% alcohol. Have pulled my gooseneck trailer seems to run good. Does anyone know how much the octane goes up as you add alcohol. 10% brings the octane up 2 points. I think I have answered my own question E85 is 105 octane. so every 10% adds 2 points So 30% should be 92 octane. If we are starting with 87 octane. The reason I am wondering is my truck has a super-chips controler. It will run and pull noticeably better when set for 92 octane. And it is in the tank. If I am wrong don't hesitate to tell me. Vic

Unless your truck is a flex fuel, and an 03 probably isn't , not recommended . Injector issues are likely other fuel system problems possible. If you start getting lean codes you may overheat the cats . The flex fuel vehicles have different injectors, and an ability to determine alcohol percentage of the fuel that a regular vehicle does not. Without that the PCM cannot control fuel correctly. Octane does not make up for lean condition. That engine does not have enough compression to need much mote octane than 87-89.

Since E85 has only 70% of the energy of gasoline, the price needs to be 70% of the gasoline price to get equal MPGs. So if gasoline is $4.00 a gallon, E85 would have to be $2.80 or less a gallon to make economic sense. I understand you are concerned about octane, but the economic indicator is kinda neat to look at.

I can't tell you how it will run in your truck but I can tell you this. Back in 2006-2007 when gas got so high I had a newer model Mustang Cobra with the 4 valve 4.6. Of course it wasn't a flex fuel car but will regular gas here at $4.50 a gallon and E85 at $2.65 I tried it. I didn't blend it,I ran the car on straight E85. I ran it that way for a long time. I never had an issue. The only thing I guess you could call an issue is it idled a little funny which is normal since E85 burns cleaner the oxygen sensors have a harder time reading it. That's it. I had. I problems in over a years worth of running straight E85 and the car is still running to this day.

To counter the poorer btu value of ethanol, it does burn slightly cleaner, more efficiently, losing less btu to waste heat.

Put another way, ethanol is slightly more efficient, less waste, than gasoline. Gasoline is made of many different compounds, all with different flash points, which makes the bang of combustion a bit less controlled - or more wasteful.

So your equation isn't right.

Generally a 50 to 60 cent difference in price is enough to justify ethanol being a better buy.

For a non-flex vehicle, research has found the 30% blend the original poster is using is often the 'sweet spot' of the best efficiency per gallon and per dollar. Going higher than that may cause some of the problems mentioned - or may not. Depends on the setup and components of that engine and fuel system.

Now, if you set up an engine from the design to use the strong suits of ethanol - higher octane, less heat waste, smoother flash point - you could have a pretty efficient engine, a lot cleaner and energy efficient than a gasoline engine. However, we are stuck, at this point in time, using gasoline engines and making them work with ethanol as well. The compromise is all on ethanol, not on the gasoline side.....

Paul

(quoted from post at 21:22:06 07/27/14) ".....10% brings the octane up 2 points. I think I have answered my own question E85 is 105 octane. so every 10% adds 2 points So 30% should be 92 octane....." Vic

Click to expand...

Just to be clear:

Remember, 87 octane E-10 is a blend of 10% ethanol and 90% 85 octane gasoline therefore, it already contains 10% ethanol. The baseline for the 2 points per 10% "rule of thumb" would be 85 octane rather than 87 octane. For example; Adding an additional 20% ethanol to E-10 gasoline would result in a 30% ethanol/70% gasoline mixture and approximately 91 octane.

I have never found that Ethanol was more efficient or more powerful in any vehicle I ever tried it in. Always noticed at least a 20% reduction in MPG. If ethanol was truly more efficient, and had better octane, wouldn't we all be running it with little to no gasoline in it? Sorry, the math here does not add up to reality, Ethanol consumes 30% more energy to create than it provides.

Octane and BTU content are two separate things.

(quoted from post at 15:38:43 07/28/14) I have never found that Ethanol was more efficient or more powerful in any vehicle I ever tried it in. Always noticed at least a 20% reduction in MPG. If ethanol was truly more efficient, and had better octane, wouldn't we all be running it with little to no gasoline in it? Sorry, the math here does not add up to reality, Ethanol consumes 30% more energy to create than it provides.

Click to expand...

If you ran 87 octane and E85 in a 8.5:1 compression engine you would notice a considerable loss in mpg with ethanol. But because of E85's higher octane you can increase the compression to 10.5:1 or more to take full advantage of its higher octane. When you start doing that you make up the losses for E85 having lower BTU's. I'm currently gathering up the parts to build a 12.5:1 E85 Boss 302 for a mustang that I have. I'm doing it just to be different.

A fellow was playing around with E85 in a Buick car back when I worked there and it got towed in because it would not run. Took awhile to get the complete story. Tech was not too happy he wasted a lot of time looking for problems that were not there. Once he learned the truth all it needed was drained and refueled with the proper fuel and was good to go.

So DO NOT use it unless your car is made for it !

For what it's worth the Epa mantra from extensive testing is E15 is safe to use in most 2001 vehicles thru to 2014. It will result in 15-20% reduction in mileage. Some car companies made vehicles before 2011 designed to run E85 from the get go.

i ran it in a 93 crown vic 4.6l. ran it bout 50/50 with 87. ran fine, didnt hiccup. probly put 50k on it like that. drove it everyday. 01 ranger 3.0 v6 runs fine on it but check engine light comes on. probly lean ratio. dont let it sit in tank long if u got it in tank use it up if they sit for a spell.

By 'more efficient' I mean burning a gallon of gasoline might use 35% of the btus in a gallon to move the car and waste 65% as heat in exhaust and friction.

An E85 vehicle might use 37% of the available btu and waste 63%. Because of the cleaner burning, added oxygen, and more even flash point.

If you run through all the math, a gallon of E85 has less BTU so it gets less mpg, but that 2% better efficiency means 50,000 btu of ethanol will get you farther than 50,000 but of gasoline. The ethanol is more efficient, tho starts out with less btu.

Actually taking everything into consideration, ethanol returns 1.3 units of energy for every 1 unit of energy used in making it, in a full on energy audit of the process from seed to tank. This is not really all that earth shakingly great, but none the less it is a net energy increase. It will be nice of someday we get something with a better conversion rate, but today 1.3 is better than doing nothing......

As well ethanol generally uses lower forms of energy to create a liquid fuel energy, and that conversion has a value too, it is enhancing the value of a non-mobile heating fuel like natural gas into a higher btu transportation fuel. Value added.

And we are running ethanol in engines designed for gasoline. Of course that is not ideal. If we could design the engine to run on E85 from the get go as Brazil does, ethanol would look much better than it does now.

But I understand, folks from oil states especially are fed a lot of rather partisan info. And as a farmer that grows corn, it doesn't pay for me to get on a soap box too much.

Ethanol adds a little bit to our fuel supply, it allows use of lower octane gasolines which lets is get more gallons of fuel per barrel of crude, it changes the pollution to slightly better air quality. A lot of positives to ethanol.

It isn't going to change the world long term, it isn't any sort of total solution to our energy needs. But it is a step to change, and a step in the right direction.

Paul

And for the original question, his car is more or less approved for an E15, and likely will work best ($ per mile) at an E25- E30 with a low risk of problems. Going above those levels would be an experiment, and might not work well depends a lot on many little details of the particular vehicle.

Paul

(quoted from post at 15:48:49 07/28/14)

(quoted from post at 15:38:43 07/28/14) I have never found that Ethanol was more efficient or more powerful in any vehicle I ever tried it in. Always noticed at least a 20% reduction in MPG. If ethanol was truly more efficient, and had better octane, wouldn't we all be running it with little to no gasoline in it? Sorry, the math here does not add up to reality, Ethanol consumes 30% more energy to create than it provides.

Click to expand...

If you ran 87 octane and E85 in a 8.5:1 compression engine you would notice a considerable loss in mpg with ethanol. But because of E85's higher octane you can increase the compression to 10.5:1 or more to take full advantage of its higher octane. When you start doing that you make up the losses for E85 having lower BTU's. I'm currently gathering up the parts to build a 12.5:1 E85 Boss 302 for a mustang that I have. I'm doing it just to be different.

Click to expand...

hat may be true, but who in the heck is going to raise their compression in a daily driver just to run e-85?

(quoted from post at 21:05:57 07/28/14)

(quoted from post at 15:48:49 07/28/14)

(quoted from post at 15:38:43 07/28/14) I have never found that Ethanol was more efficient or more powerful in any vehicle I ever tried it in. Always noticed at least a 20% reduction in MPG. If ethanol was truly more efficient, and had better octane, wouldn't we all be running it with little to no gasoline in it? Sorry, the math here does not add up to reality, Ethanol consumes 30% more energy to create than it provides.

Click to expand...

If you ran 87 octane and E85 in a 8.5:1 compression engine you would notice a considerable loss in mpg with ethanol. But because of E85's higher octane you can increase the compression to 10.5:1 or more to take full advantage of its higher octane. When you start doing that you make up the losses for E85 having lower BTU's. I'm currently gathering up the parts to build a 12.5:1 E85 Boss 302 for a mustang that I have. I'm doing it just to be different.

Click to expand...

hat may be true, but who in the heck is going to raise their compression in a daily driver just to run e-85?

Click to expand...

Not just for E85...I have raised the compression in some of my gas burner daily drivers. Just makes a more efficient engine.

Ethanol has less energy per gallon(76,000 btu) when compared to gasoline (115,000 btu) so yes, fuel mileage will drop. However, efficiency is defined as energy out divided by energy in. For an engine, the energy in, is in the form of heat energy (btu) and the energy out, is in the form of work (hp). MPG is based on the volume of fuel used and as such is not a direct measure of energy input or engine efficiency. Consider that diesel fuel has significantly more energy per gallon (135,000 btu) than gasoline, in this case, resulting in an increased MPG for a diesel engine as compared to a gasoline engine. See note below.

The stoichiometric air/fuel ratio for ethanol is 9.0 to 1 as compared 14.7 to 1 for gasoline. If the engine is adjusted (or computer controlled) for the fuel applicable air/fuel ratio the energy delivered to the combustion chamber is equivalent between the two fuels. Therefore, the engine will make the equivalent power on ethanol, gasoline or blends there of.

Note: The increased efficiency of the diesel engine is due to: 1) higher compression and 2) the inlet manifold is never below atmospheric pressure. The manifold vacuum in a gasoline engine respresents negative work and reduces efficiency.

Thanks for all the replies. I would change the
compression ratio of my vehicles, if I ever had to
take one apart. But thankfully they seem to be made
so good we grow tired of them before they wear out.
Vic