E-85 Gasoline/Ethanol blends. OK for Subaru Turbo?

[ZZ]

I recently saw this post on a Las Vegas, NV based newsgroup. $1.99 a
gallon is sure better than the $2.76 for 91 octane needed for the
turbo.

Does anyone know if this information is the result of an urban legend,
or if the damage is documented. Also, is Subaru (2005 Forester XT)
FFV compliant?

BEGIN QUOTE:
E-85 has finally arrived in the valley. Yes folks, that
witches brew of 15% gasoline and 85% corn/grain based ethanol has
made its public debut in Henderson, at a little hole in the wall
outlet on the Boulder Highway. The attraction for the lines of
people waiting to pump it into their cars is....... $1.99 per gallon
prices. That's currently about $.50 a gallon CHEAPER than regular
unleaded in the valley. That price is sure to be raised soon, but
should, if prices follow the rest of the country where E-85 is
available, stabilize around $.20-.30 a gallon less than regular
unleaded.
The only problem is, 99% of the cars people are pouring E-85 into
here aren't designed to work with it, which will cause innumerable
problems down the line when their fuel systems start melting down.
See, the ethanol tends to eat away at the rubber and fiber parts of
the average fuel system, as well as the mild steel of the fuel lines.
Cars designed as FFV's (E-85 compatible) have stainless steel fuel
lines, and fuel pumps and injectors designed to handle the demands of
high ethanol content. Their computer systems are also designed to
recognize the additional oxygen in the fuel and adjust for it.
END QUOTE.

 

[mulder]

I recently saw this post on a Las Vegas, NV based newsgroup. $1.99 a
gallon is sure better than the $2.76 for 91 octane needed for the
turbo.

Does anyone know if this information is the result of an urban legend,
or if the damage is documented. Also, is Subaru (2005 Forester XT)
FFV compliant?

BEGIN QUOTE:
E-85 has finally arrived in the valley. Yes folks, that
witches brew of 15% gasoline and 85% corn/grain based ethanol has
made its public debut in Henderson, at a little hole in the wall
outlet on the Boulder Highway. The attraction for the lines of
people waiting to pump it into their cars is....... $1.99 per gallon
prices. That's currently about $.50 a gallon CHEAPER than regular
unleaded in the valley. That price is sure to be raised soon, but
should, if prices follow the rest of the country where E-85 is
available, stabilize around $.20-.30 a gallon less than regular
unleaded.
The only problem is, 99% of the cars people are pouring E-85 into
here aren't designed to work with it, which will cause innumerable
problems down the line when their fuel systems start melting down.
See, the ethanol tends to eat away at the rubber and fiber parts of
the average fuel system, as well as the mild steel of the fuel lines.
Cars designed as FFV's (E-85 compatible) have stainless steel fuel
lines, and fuel pumps and injectors designed to handle the demands of
high ethanol content. Their computer systems are also designed to
recognize the additional oxygen in the fuel and adjust for it.
END QUOTE.

Read your owners manual. It will tell you which fuels are acceptable
and which ones aren't. I don't think Subaru allows more than 10-15%
ethanol.
I wouldn't use the E85 especially on a brand new vehicle. If there are
engine problems resulting from the fuel the warranty will not apply
and you could have some expensive repairs. Definitely not worth saving
a few cents per gallon.

 

[Edward Hayes]

Are you sure it's not 85% gas and 15% ethanol? That's the ratio in the
corn belt states like IL, IA and Wis. ed

 

[Blair Baucom]

There are only a few cars that I know of that take E-85 fuel. Ford Ranger
3.0L FFV and the Ford Taurus. They are both well marked with the E-85 symbol
on the exterior. Fuel mileage is greatly reduced when using this fuel.

See http://www.e85fuel.com/index.php

See http://www.e85fuel.com/e85101/flexfuelvehicles.php for a list of
compatible vehicles.

Blair

 

[Blair Baucom]

Some more information on this topic here:

https://www.fleet.ford.com/showroom/environmental_vehicles/EthanolTechnology.asp

Blair

 

[Rick Courtright]

or if the damage is documented. Also, is Subaru (2005 Forester XT)
FFV compliant?

Hi,

I wasn't aware of any vehicles outside the Ford family that are
currently FFV compliant, and you can tell them from a distance by the
big stickers advertising that fact! I'd definitely check w/ Subaru for
something ok'in it in print before running it in your new Forester. As
others have said, the potential warranty issues aren't worth it, and the
reduced fuel economy probably means you're saving just about nothing...

Rick

 

[Spudster]

Lots of info here for you put together by a knowledgable guy:

http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=803341

Pretty confident the fuel system will not disintegrate, but you would need
to upgrade to larger injetors and deal with a possible check engine light
warning about for evap emissions sensors if running high concentrations of
E85.

Steve.

 

[Carl 1 Lucky Texan]

Nope, the E85 is 85% ethanol.

And it only has like 60% the BTU energy of gasoline so there will be a
price/mpg trade off in addition to possible damage in vehicles not
designed for it.

Carl

 

[Frank Logullo]

Nope, the E85 is 85% ethanol.

And it only has like 60% the BTU energy of gasoline so there will be a
price/mpg trade off in addition to possible damage in vehicles not
designed for it.

Ethanol fuel was foisted on us by agricultural interests led by Archer
Daniels Midland.
It probably takes more energy to make the ethanol than there is in the
ethanol.
It is not cheaper to make but tax subsidies make it profitable for the ag.
interests.
Look at it as partially burnt hydrocarbon - there is less energy and
subsequently lower mileage.
The oxygenate requirement pushed by ADM led the oil companies to use MBTE
with the subsequent problems therein.
There is also phase separation at certain ethanol contents and need to
transport separately. If EPA would get its act straight and just let the
oil companies give us good none polluting gasoline, it would be a lot
cheaper.

 

[Carl 1 Lucky Texan]

I mostly agree. The maketplace is being warped by subsidies. Plus,
although it is now something of a waste product from ag., it would be a
shame to think we ever get to the point we're growing food for CARS
instead of people!

Carl

 

[nothermark]

Sounds like it needs to cost 60% of pump gas or one is getting fooled
by the pricing as one should get around 60% of the milage on gas. To
keep it simple if I'm getting 10 mpg on gas at $2.50 gal I would get
around 6 mpg so I would need 1.67 gal of E85 so it would need to cost
less than $1.50 gal or gas would be cheaper overall.

 

[Carl 1 Lucky Texan]

WEll, I shoulda stated that ethanol (pure) only has about 60% (IIRC) the
chemical energy of petroleum fuels. Exactly what the other 15% of E85
is, and wht 'energy' itbrings to the mix I dunno. But yeah, that needs
to be figured into any price comparison. To make matters worse, it is
subsidized by the gumint - so those of you who can't or don't use it are
helping those Ford drivers save a little money - maybe.

Carl

 

[ZZ]

After reading all that, I will stick with conventional gasoline.
Thanks to all the responders.

 

[JD]

I recently saw this post on a Las Vegas, NV based newsgroup. $1.99 a
gallon is sure better than the $2.76 for 91 octane needed for the
turbo.

Does anyone know if this information is the result of an urban legend,
or if the damage is documented. Also, is Subaru (2005 Forester XT)
FFV compliant?

BEGIN QUOTE:
E-85 has finally arrived in the valley. Yes folks, that
witches brew of 15% gasoline and 85% corn/grain based ethanol has
made its public debut in Henderson, at a little hole in the wall
outlet on the Boulder Highway. The attraction for the lines of
people waiting to pump it into their cars is....... $1.99 per gallon
prices. That's currently about $.50 a gallon CHEAPER than regular
unleaded in the valley. That price is sure to be raised soon, but
should, if prices follow the rest of the country where E-85 is
available, stabilize around $.20-.30 a gallon less than regular
unleaded.
The only problem is, 99% of the cars people are pouring E-85 into
here aren't designed to work with it, which will cause innumerable
problems down the line when their fuel systems start melting down.
See, the ethanol tends to eat away at the rubber and fiber parts of
the average fuel system, as well as the mild steel of the fuel lines.
Cars designed as FFV's (E-85 compatible) have stainless steel fuel
lines, and fuel pumps and injectors designed to handle the demands of
high ethanol content. Their computer systems are also designed to
recognize the additional oxygen in the fuel and adjust for it.
END QUOTE.

Seems sort of right. Ethanol is corrosive to rubber and some metals. But,
it is really good for turbo applications since you can run significantly
higher boost pressures with it. One of the other downsides, is that ethanol
will remove all of the oil from inside the cyclinders and it dramitically
reduces the viscosity of the oil in the crankcase from any blow-by. But,
there are special lubricants you can get; you can't use conventional oils
for very long.

It also takes a lot more of it to get the same kind of power as you can from
gas.

 

[iksalama]

Ok, gonna play devils advocate here, even though I don't personally use
E-85.

Yes, the ethanol market is currently subsidized, but with all the tax breaks
that the oil/energy industries get you could say they are subsidized as
well. As for the comment that it would be a shame to grow food for cars
instead of people, think about it this way, isn't it also a shame if we
don't start looking for alternative sources of fuel/energy? If it is a
renewable energy, how can we really go wrong? Yes, our current technology
uses about as much energy to make ethanol as ethanol will make, that
technology won't get more efficient until the process is perfected more and
more research is done with ethanol production, without subsidies/grants that
technology will never advance. I like the idea of ethanol, I don't think in
my lifetime that I'll see ethanol take over for gasoline, but I do think it
will become much more common since it is more of a stable commodity than is
crude oil.

Oh, by the way, the byproducts of the corn used for ethanol can also still
be used for feed for cattle so really we are killing 2 birds with one stone,
we develop an alternative to gasoline AND provide feed for a food source for
humans.

Now, what I'd like to know is this, does high octane fuel (say 104 unleaded,
non-oxygenated) have the same BTU as "normal" 89 octane found at the pumps?
Or is it safe to say that since high octane fuel is harder to ignite that
its BTU is lower than pump gas? I don't know those answers, I'm just
throwing them out there to the group for discussion.

-Chuck

----- Original Message -----
From: "Carl 1 Lucky Texan" <(e-mail address removed)>
Newsgroups: alt.autos.subaru
Sent: Sunday, August 07, 2005 10:39 PM
Subject: Re: E-85 Gasoline/Ethanol blends. OK for Subaru Turbo?

 

[Carl 1 Lucky Texan]

Well, I'm not aware of any or to what level the oil industry is
subsidized, I do know it is and has been taxed at several levels,
including some complex 'old oil/new oil' taxes at the well head. I doubt
corn is taxed as it comes from the field. You can;t tax businesses
anyway - they view it as a cost of operating and just pass it along to
the little guy in higher prices (hidden taxes) usually (or layoffs due
to automation or moving overseas,etc.)

I'm not sure we know what the formaldehyde caused by combusting alcohol
does in the atmosphere yet, maybe someone can educate me about that.

As for the difference in BTU between petroleum fuels, I'm not sure. I
think the higher octane just allows an engine design to 'recover' the
energy better by avoiding knock at the higher compression required.
Probably not much difference.

Carl

 

[iksalama]

Again, playing devils advocate here. Subsidies for the oil industry:
http://www.ethanol-gec.org/winter2000/winter0020.html

I haven't really found any info on formaldehydes effect on the environment.

E-85 has 87,250 BTU/Gallon whereas Gasoline is 114,000 BTU/Gallon.
According to everything I can find on google, traditional gasolines
(including leaded race fuel) have approximately the same BTU's.

 

[Carl 1 Lucky Texan]

Well, I don't think ethanol producers should be taxed either. But NOT
paying a tax (which will just be passed along to the consumer if it is a
business we're speaking of) is not the same as getting a subsidy. It
seems particularly harsh for the gumint to force a recently unemployed
oil field worker to PAY someone to make ethanol.

Still, the whole market is very complex.

I wonder if we would allow Kansas and Illinois to join OPEC? ;^)


Carl

 

[iksalama]

I agree, there are differences between taxes and subsidies, but if you look
at that link you will see how the oil industry is subsidized.

 

[Carl 1 Lucky Texan]

Well, we could post conflicting sources all
year.(http://slate.msn.com/id/2122961/)

It would be interesting to compute (if possible) the BTU/subsidy ratios
but it would still be tricky to draw a conclusion.

I just wish both these fuels - as well as any other transportation
alternatives, were allowed to compete without some buearacrats trying to
'pick the winner' or a Congressman trying to 'bring home the pork'.

I worked in an oil related field for 12 years before being laid off - I
know that, as soon as a tecnology begins to look like a viable
alternative OPEC will just reduce the price enough to kill the
incentive. I get headhunters calling me with position eveytime the
price jump 5-10% ,throughout the intervening 17 years, but I know, if I
go back - say - now at $66 a barrel, in a few weeks or months it may go
down to $54 a barrel and Id just get laid off again.

It's a poor parasite that kills its host, and OPEC knows just how much
blood to remove and keep the host alive. They know that Americans would
pay 5$-7$ a gallon. At present we are not even paying an historically
high price - that was 1980-81 ($92/barrel inflation adjusted).

I feel that eventually we will have a mix of alternatively fueled
vehicles on the roads. I just don't see E85 being one of them -
certainly not soon.

Carl