E85 Vs E10

[jeg1]

E10 is the midgrade gas around here 89 octane, selling today for $3.50 a gallon. Premium is selling for $3.76 a gallon. Filled the truck today,and the last couple of tanks with E85 and it's still $2.56 a gallon. E85 is currently far past the reduced mileage break even point and the truck runs great. How manny are running E85?

[sic lsx]

Just filled up for first time and saved $20 so Im going to stick with it as much as i can. Its only two miles from my house

[AzDragonLord]

I run E85 almost exclusively, but the price spread isn't that great here. I figure clean-burning and domestic-made must count for something!

[RyanbabZ71]

I have run 951 gallons of E85 since Nov 2010 when I bought my truck and 284 gallons of 93 Octane ( appx 70% E-85)

[jimbrown1]

Because ethanol contains less energy than gasoline, fuel economy is reduced for most 2002 and earlier American FFVs (flexible-fuel vehicles) by about 30% (most after 2003 lose only 15-17%, or less) when operated on pure E85 (summer blend). Some of the newest American vehicles can achieve only a 5-15% loss, but as recently as 2007 the Environmental Protection Agency stated on its website that several of the most current American FFVs were still losing 25-30% fuel efficiency when running on E85. Some Swedish engineered cars with engine management systems provide much better fuel economy on E85 than on gasoline; for example, the Saab Aero-X turbocharged concept car produces higher fuel economy and higher power on 100% ethanol (E100) than gasoline through using a higher compression ratio engine with advanced SAAB engine control computers. Another car that has higher power on ethanol is the Koenigsegg CCXR, which on ethanol is the third most powerful production car with 1020 hp. According to the manufacturer, this is due to the cooling properties of ethanol. Still, for almost all American-made FFVs, more E85 is typically needed to do the same work as can be achieved with a lesser volume of gasoline. This difference is sometimes offset by the lower cost of the E85 fuel, depending on E85's current price discount relative to the current price of gasoline. As described earlier, the best thing for drivers to do is to record fuel usage with both fuels and calculate cost/distance for them. Only by doing that, can the end-user economy of the two fuels be compared.

 

For example, an existing pre-2003 model year American-made FFV vehicle that normally achieves, say, 30 MPG on pure gasoline will typically achieve about 20 MPG, or slightly better, on E85 (summer blend.) When operated on E85 winter blend, which is actually E70 (70% ethanol, 30% gasoline), fuel economy will be higher than when operating on the summer blend. To achieve any short-term operational fuel cost savings, the price of E85 should therefore be 30% or more below the price of gasoline to equalize short term fuel costs for most older pre-2003 FFVs for both winter and summer blends of E85. Life-cycle costs over the life of the FFV engine are theoretically lower for E85, as ethanol is a cooler and cleaner burning fuel than gasoline. Provided that one takes a longterm life-cycle operating cost view, a continuous price discount of only 20% to 25% below the cost of gasoline is probably about the break-even point in terms of vehicle life-cycle operating costs for operating most FFVs on E85 exclusively (for summer, spring/fall, and winter blends).

 

Fuel economy in fuel-injected non-FFVs operating on a mix of E85 and gasoline varies greatly depending on the engine and fuel mix. For a 60:40 blend of gasoline to E85 (summer blend), a typical fuel economy reduction of around 23.7% resulted in one person's carefully executed experiment with a 1998 Chevrolet S10 pickup with a 2.2L 4-cylinder engine, relative to the fuel economy achieved on pure gasoline. Similarly, for a 50:50 blend of gasoline to E85 (summer blend), a typical fuel economy reduction of around 25% resulted for the same vehicle. (Fuel economy performance numbers were measured on a fixed commute of approximately 110 miles roundtrip per day, on a predominantly freeway commute, running at a fixed speed (62 mph), with cruise control activated, air conditioning ON, at sea level, with flat terrain, traveling to/from Kennedy Space Center, FL.). It is important to note, however, that if the engine had been specifically tuned for consumption of ethanol (higher compression, different fuel-air mixture, etc.) the mileage would have been much better than the results above. The aforementioned fact leads some to believe that the "FFV" engine is more of an infant technology rather than fully mature.

 

The amount of reduction in mileage, therefore, is highly dependent upon the particulars of the vehicle design, exact composition of the ethanol-gasoline blend and state of engine tune (fuel air mixture and compression ratio primarily).

[AntelopeLTZ]

Filled up with E85 for $3.13. 87 gas is running around $3.80

[jeg1]

Because ethanol contains less energy than gasoline, fuel economy is reduced for most 2002 and earlier American FFVs (flexible-fuel vehicles) by about 30% (most after 2003 lose only 15-17%, or less) when operated on pure E85 (summer blend). Some of the newest American vehicles can achieve only a 5-15% loss, but as recently as 2007 the Environmental Protection Agency stated on its website that several of the most current American FFVs were still losing 25-30% fuel efficiency when running on E85. Some Swedish engineered cars with engine management systems provide much better fuel economy on E85 than on gasoline; for example, the Saab Aero-X turbocharged concept car produces higher fuel economy and higher power on 100% ethanol (E100) than gasoline through using a higher compression ratio engine with advanced SAAB engine control computers. Another car that has higher power on ethanol is the Koenigsegg CCXR, which on ethanol is the third most powerful production car with 1020 hp. According to the manufacturer, this is due to the cooling properties of ethanol. Still, for almost all American-made FFVs, more E85 is typically needed to do the same work as can be achieved with a lesser volume of gasoline. This difference is sometimes offset by the lower cost of the E85 fuel, depending on E85's current price discount relative to the current price of gasoline. As described earlier, the best thing for drivers to do is to record fuel usage with both fuels and calculate cost/distance for them. Only by doing that, can the end-user economy of the two fuels be compared.

 

For example, an existing pre-2003 model year American-made FFV vehicle that normally achieves, say, 30 MPG on pure gasoline will typically achieve about 20 MPG, or slightly better, on E85 (summer blend.) When operated on E85 winter blend, which is actually E70 (70% ethanol, 30% gasoline), fuel economy will be higher than when operating on the summer blend. To achieve any short-term operational fuel cost savings, the price of E85 should therefore be 30% or more below the price of gasoline to equalize short term fuel costs for most older pre-2003 FFVs for both winter and summer blends of E85. Life-cycle costs over the life of the FFV engine are theoretically lower for E85, as ethanol is a cooler and cleaner burning fuel than gasoline. Provided that one takes a longterm life-cycle operating cost view, a continuous price discount of only 20% to 25% below the cost of gasoline is probably about the break-even point in terms of vehicle life-cycle operating costs for operating most FFVs on E85 exclusively (for summer, spring/fall, and winter blends).

 

Fuel economy in fuel-injected non-FFVs operating on a mix of E85 and gasoline varies greatly depending on the engine and fuel mix. For a 60:40 blend of gasoline to E85 (summer blend), a typical fuel economy reduction of around 23.7% resulted in one person's carefully executed experiment with a 1998 Chevrolet S10 pickup with a 2.2L 4-cylinder engine, relative to the fuel economy achieved on pure gasoline. Similarly, for a 50:50 blend of gasoline to E85 (summer blend), a typical fuel economy reduction of around 25% resulted for the same vehicle. (Fuel economy performance numbers were measured on a fixed commute of approximately 110 miles roundtrip per day, on a predominantly freeway commute, running at a fixed speed (62 mph), with cruise control activated, air conditioning ON, at sea level, with flat terrain, traveling to/from Kennedy Space Center, FL.). It is important to note, however, that if the engine had been specifically tuned for consumption of ethanol (higher compression, different fuel-air mixture, etc.) the mileage would have been much better than the results above. The aforementioned fact leads some to believe that the "FFV" engine is more of an infant technology rather than fully mature.

 

The amount of reduction in mileage, therefore, is highly dependent upon the particulars of the vehicle design, exact composition of the ethanol-gasoline blend and state of engine tune (fuel air mixture and compression ratio primarily).

 

So are you running E85?

[jimbrown1]

No because it doesn't make sense financially until the spread of E85 and 87 octane gas reach a certain point because of the reduction in mpg when using E85. I find it hard to believe some users say theyonly lose 1-2.5 mpg when using E85.

Because ethanol contains less energy than gasoline, fuel economy is reduced for most 2002 and earlier American FFVs (flexible-fuel vehicles) by about 30% (most after 2003 lose only 15-17%, or less) when operated on pure E85 (summer blend). Some of the newest American vehicles can achieve only a 5-15% loss, but as recently as 2007 the Environmental Protection Agency stated on its website that several of the most current American FFVs were still losing 25-30% fuel efficiency when running on E85. Some Swedish engineered cars with engine management systems provide much better fuel economy on E85 than on gasoline; for example, the Saab Aero-X turbocharged concept car produces higher fuel economy and higher power on 100% ethanol (E100) than gasoline through using a higher compression ratio engine with advanced SAAB engine control computers. Another car that has higher power on ethanol is the Koenigsegg CCXR, which on ethanol is the third most powerful production car with 1020 hp. According to the manufacturer, this is due to the cooling properties of ethanol. Still, for almost all American-made FFVs, more E85 is typically needed to do the same work as can be achieved with a lesser volume of gasoline. This difference is sometimes offset by the lower cost of the E85 fuel, depending on E85's current price discount relative to the current price of gasoline. As described earlier, the best thing for drivers to do is to record fuel usage with both fuels and calculate cost/distance for them. Only by doing that, can the end-user economy of the two fuels be compared.

 

For example, an existing pre-2003 model year American-made FFV vehicle that normally achieves, say, 30 MPG on pure gasoline will typically achieve about 20 MPG, or slightly better, on E85 (summer blend.) When operated on E85 winter blend, which is actually E70 (70% ethanol, 30% gasoline), fuel economy will be higher than when operating on the summer blend. To achieve any short-term operational fuel cost savings, the price of E85 should therefore be 30% or more below the price of gasoline to equalize short term fuel costs for most older pre-2003 FFVs for both winter and summer blends of E85. Life-cycle costs over the life of the FFV engine are theoretically lower for E85, as ethanol is a cooler and cleaner burning fuel than gasoline. Provided that one takes a longterm life-cycle operating cost view, a continuous price discount of only 20% to 25% below the cost of gasoline is probably about the break-even point in terms of vehicle life-cycle operating costs for operating most FFVs on E85 exclusively (for summer, spring/fall, and winter blends).

 

Fuel economy in fuel-injected non-FFVs operating on a mix of E85 and gasoline varies greatly depending on the engine and fuel mix. For a 60:40 blend of gasoline to E85 (summer blend), a typical fuel economy reduction of around 23.7% resulted in one person's carefully executed experiment with a 1998 Chevrolet S10 pickup with a 2.2L 4-cylinder engine, relative to the fuel economy achieved on pure gasoline. Similarly, for a 50:50 blend of gasoline to E85 (summer blend), a typical fuel economy reduction of around 25% resulted for the same vehicle. (Fuel economy performance numbers were measured on a fixed commute of approximately 110 miles roundtrip per day, on a predominantly freeway commute, running at a fixed speed (62 mph), with cruise control activated, air conditioning ON, at sea level, with flat terrain, traveling to/from Kennedy Space Center, FL.). It is important to note, however, that if the engine had been specifically tuned for consumption of ethanol (higher compression, different fuel-air mixture, etc.) the mileage would have been much better than the results above. The aforementioned fact leads some to believe that the "FFV" engine is more of an infant technology rather than fully mature.

 

The amount of reduction in mileage, therefore, is highly dependent upon the particulars of the vehicle design, exact composition of the ethanol-gasoline blend and state of engine tune (fuel air mixture and compression ratio primarily).

 

So are you running E85?

 

[00Silverado4x4]

I try to fill the truck when I'm at 1/2 tank or so. It's an old habit from driving in Alaska for 4 years. I would typically fill with regular one time, e85 the next. I find that I only lose about 1 mpg doing this. If I were to run exclusively e85 I would lose 3-4 mpg. The cost spread hasn't hit the magic "break even" point & I doubt it will. I do like to run the e85 as my truck seem to have better throttle response & I've noticed that my exhaust pipe tends to be a bit less black after a tank of e85.

[RyanbabZ71]

I find it hard to believe some users say they only lose 1-2.5 mpg when using E85.

 

Why is that? I have data to back it up with my truck and tahoe

[f0st3r]

I find it hard to believe some users say they only lose 1-2.5 mpg when using E85.

 

Why is that? I have data to back it up with my truck and tahoe

 

 

I just put my first tank of E85 in my silverado this past weekend. I am already hitting 1/4 tank today. According to the DIC I have taken about a 3mpg hit, I usually get about 16mpg average every tank, now I am scratching the 13mpg mark. Ouch...

 

But, Gas is currently 3.40-3.50 a gallon in my area, E85 was 2.45 on Sunday when I got it.. It saved me over 20 bucks! Plus, I maybe(well I am) retarded, but my truck feels like it has gained 20hp from this stuff, it is running AWESOME!

 

I am guessing that I am gonna loose about 50 miles a tank with E85, so in reality, I am saving about 10 bucks at current prices? Ill take it if its better for the environment, saves me a couple of bucks, keeps more of my money in the states, and is a little more power!

[jimbrown1]

I find it hard to believe some users say they only lose 1-2.5 mpg when using E85.

 

Why is that? I have data to back it up with my truck and tahoe

 

 

I just put my first tank of E85 in my silverado this past weekend. I am already hitting 1/4 tank today. According to the DIC I have taken about a 3mpg hit, I usually get about 16mpg average every tank, now I am scratching the 13mpg mark. Ouch...

 

But, Gas is currently 3.40-3.50 a gallon in my area, E85 was 2.45 on Sunday when I got it.. It saved me over 20 bucks! Plus, I maybe(well I am) retarded, but my truck feels like it has gained 20hp from this stuff, it is running AWESOME!

 

I am guessing that I am gonna loose about 50 miles a tank with E85, so in reality, I am saving about 10 bucks at current prices? Ill take it if its better for the environment, saves me a couple of bucks, keeps more of my money in the states, and is a little more power!

 

 

If the price of gas is $3.40 and E85 is $2.45, and you get 13 mpg with E85 compared to 16 mpg with gasoline you are getting 5.3 miles per $ with E85 and 4.7 miles per $ with gas so you're doing the right thing financially. GM actually quotes horsepower on the newer trucks if you use E85 and it's around 10-11 more hp. I just filled up with E85 this morning for the first time to see what kind of mpg I get on it. I'm betting I get 12 or so which will not be in my favor.

[rebelman06]

Ill take it if its better for the environment, saves me a couple of bucks,

keeps more of my money in the states, and is a little more power!

 

I have some bad news for you....

1) I'd argue it is not better for the environment. The amount of water and other resources it takes to grow the corn is insane. The power used to refine the grain alcohol into E85 also uses power, which usually comes from coal (or other fossil fuel) power plants. Yeah...much cleaner.

2) If Uncle Sam didn't pay the farmers and producers to subsidize the costs, it would cost MORE to run E85 than regular gas.

3) E85 does not increase "power" on our n/a engines. E-anything causes a decrease in MPG and efficiency for most engines.

 

Florida requires all gas to be E10, which I absolutely hate. The ethanol is terrible for small engine and boat fuel systems. I get less miles per tank, while paying just as much (if not more) for diluted gas. Corn based ethanol is not a realistic solution. I believe we need to look for fuel sources that are more efficient than what we have today. Since switching to E10 down here, all of our vehicles have seen a drop in MPG and a somewhat rougher idle. I have also noticed my truck seems to have more KR with the ethanol mixed fuel. My personal opinion is that the Middle East oil suppliers are not the biggest problem when it comes to oil/gas. The biggest problem is how speculators can drive the oil/gas prices up at will. If the price of oil goes up today (on oil to be delivered/refined in several months), why does the price of gas rise immediately? Why does the market not fall the same amount if the price of oil drops? Something is not right in the way investors bet on oil. I have only taken a few basic business and economics classes during my time in college, but I have taken enough to see that something is clearly wrong here. I'd argue that some of the worst villains in the oil/gas price situation are probably wealthy Americans with money to invest in crooked oil futures.

[chas0218]

I think you are wrong when it comes to less power. They run alcohol in race cars because it can support much higher compression ratios and timing advances meaning it is less likely to cause spark knock and detenation.

 

The flex fuel vehicles increase the amount of initial timing of the engine. Any increase in timing will increase hp/torque to an extent. I would be willing to bet there is a 20% increase in performance from regular E10 to E85.

[f0st3r]

Ill take it if its better for the environment, saves me a couple of bucks,

keeps more of my money in the states, and is a little more power!

 

I have some bad news for you....

1) I'd argue it is not better for the environment. The amount of water and other resources it takes to grow the corn is insane. The power used to refine the grain alcohol into E85 also uses power, which usually comes from coal (or other fossil fuel) power plants. Yeah...much cleaner.

2) If Uncle Sam didn't pay the farmers and producers to subsidize the costs, it would cost MORE to run E85 than regular gas.

3) E85 does not increase "power" on our n/a engines. E-anything causes a decrease in MPG and efficiency for most engines.

 

Florida requires all gas to be E10, which I absolutely hate. The ethanol is terrible for small engine and boat fuel systems. I get less miles per tank, while paying just as much (if not more) for diluted gas. Corn based ethanol is not a realistic solution. I believe we need to look for fuel sources that are more efficient than what we have today. Since switching to E10 down here, all of our vehicles have seen a drop in MPG and a somewhat rougher idle. I have also noticed my truck seems to have more KR with the ethanol mixed fuel. My personal opinion is that the Middle East oil suppliers are not the biggest problem when it comes to oil/gas. The biggest problem is how speculators can drive the oil/gas prices up at will. If the price of oil goes up today (on oil to be delivered/refined in several months), why does the price of gas rise immediately? Why does the market not fall the same amount if the price of oil drops? Something is not right in the way investors bet on oil. I have only taken a few basic business and economics classes during my time in college, but I have taken enough to see that something is clearly wrong here. I'd argue that some of the worst villains in the oil/gas price situation are probably wealthy Americans with money to invest in crooked oil futures.

 

 

You have no bad news for me..

 

1) It is better for the environment.. I am burning about 80% less oil based fuel than before.. True it has to be manufactured in a plant, but so does regular gas. I am still burning a cleaner fuel..

2) I'm glad some one is.. I pay a ton in taxes, I'd rather it go to the farmers, than the useless garbage on welfare..

3) Wrong... I have read numerous reports that said you gain power with it, I am on my second tank of E85.. I can feel a noticeable power gain with it.. I am not one of the loons that says that simply putting premium in my truck gives it more power, but this stuff gives it a nice boost!

It does cause a decrease in MPG, a pretty significant one.. And honestly, if you drive on the highway mostly, its probably not the best option ($ wise).. As I have noticed I get 13mpg in the city and 13mpg on the highway.. While I can get 15 city 20 Hwy on regular gas..