I loaded up my 99 Ford Ranger with it and seems to run fine, was about $1 a gallon cheaper. I am thinking to load it in my Fairlane. The website for E85 says that it will clean the varnish and clog filters and carburetor. E85 runs cooler so, I would think the running it as is should not burn anything up. The recommendations for running E85 include larger jets or bigger injectors to feed more fuel so that you do not lose power. I do not need so much power anyway!

What are you doing, what do you know?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that

- If you try to get full power, since the injectors don't flow enough, you'll be running lean (really bad for the engine), and
- E85 is corrosive to rubber components, so it'll make your fuel delivery system fall apart unless you buy E85-tolerant lines made from different materials

Also be aware that E85 contains about 75% of the energy per volume compared to gasoline, so you'll get significantly worse gas mileage using it. This may negate most, if not all, of the perceived cost savings.

[This message has been edited by masospaghetti (edited 03-20-2012).]

Too much alcohol, it will eat rubber parts and cause rust on some metal parts I advise against it.

A 99 Ford might be ok, it might only be before they advertised it as "Flexfuel".

Someone I know mistakenly filled his Dodge cargo van with E85 at the company pump and afterward it basically quit running. Had to tow it to the shop and pump out the tank and change the fuel filter to get it going again. The ones designed to use flex fuel seem to do OK with E85 if you don't mind fueling up more often. I don't think there is any economic reason to use the stuff but it might make some feel better to do so.

Do NOT!!! put E85 in a car that wasnt built for it. Drain it out and refill. It will destroy everything in your fuel system thats steel or rubber or some plastics. People convert non E85 cars to run on it but you cant just put it in any old car. There are many reasons to run it though. I could care less about the environment. I could run 6-7 psi more boost with E85 than I could with gas. My buddy did a E85 conversion on his 2010 legacy GT and is making almost 400 whp with just a turboback exhaust and E85.

[This message has been edited by turboguy327 (edited 03-20-2012).]

quote Originally posted by masospaghetti: Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that - If you try to get full power, since the injectors don't flow enough, you'll be running lean (really bad for the engine), and - E85 is corrosive to rubber components, so it'll make your fuel delivery system fall apart unless you buy E85-tolerant lines made from different materials Also be aware that E85 contains about 75% of the energy per volume compared to gasoline, so you'll get significantly worse gas mileage using it. This may negate most, if not all, of the perceived cost savings.

^^^^^^^^^^^^What he said^^^^^^^^^^^!

According to this website by today's price in a car you pay $3.846 per gallon for regular gasoline, and $3.272 per gallon for E85.

However, the very next line is E85 adjusted for mileage is $4.306 per gallon.
(**E85
MPG/BTU
adjusted
price)

Now what are you saving again?

Brad

quote Originally posted by twofatguys: According to this website by today's price in a car you pay $3.846 per gallon for regular gasoline, and $3.272 per gallon for E85. However, the very next line is E85 adjusted for mileage is $4.306 per gallon. (**E85 MPG/BTU adjusted price) Now what are you saving again? Brad

Yes, I believe the cost per BTU is a loser.

It burns cooler, should not be able to melt pistons. Do not need more power = do not increase the volume of fuel = cheaper based on volume price. Completely applicable to the 64 Fairlane, the Ford Ranger can adjust itself some.

If I was looking for big power, I would put the 302 in with the big cam, high compression, adjust the jets based on whatever Holly recommends, and set the timing to what it is supposed to be.

quote Originally posted by FriendGregory: Yes, I believe the cost per BTU is a loser. It burns cooler, should not be able to melt pistons.

It will if it's running lean.

quote Do not need more power = do not increase the volume of fuel = cheaper based on volume price.

I think your logic is flawed. It takes a (relatively) fixed amount of BTU's to move your car down the road. E85 has fewer BTU's per gallon and thus you will consume E85 that much faster.

The ironic thing about this, is that E85 can allow you to make big power gains if you tune for it, since its effective octane rating is extremely high (over 100 IIRC).

I ran E85 in my Ecotec swapped Fiero for 2 years. I also did a 6th month experiment on E85 prior to that on an assortment of metals, rubbers and other items that would come in contact with E85, This was done in sealed/vented containers. The E85 went bad in the vented containers by the end of the experiment, but everything still worked at the end of the experiments. The newest materials tested came of a mid 90s Chevy. Had parts from the mid 70s, 80s (fiero obviously) and 90s.

I stopped using it because it was awful to tune with the equipment I had. I was tuning to gauges set for E10, then converting those numbers on paper to E85 and because its not a straight-line difference it was more than I could handle by myself. With no support from friends or other like-minded people I had to stop if I ever wanted to drive my car more. It was neat though, while my tune was off, the car would shoot vibrant blue flames between shifts.

quote Originally posted by Fosgatecavy98: I ran E85 in my Ecotec swapped Fiero for 2 years. I also did a 6th month experiment on E85 prior to that on an assortment of metals, rubbers and other items that would come in contact with E85, This was done in sealed/vented containers. The E85 went bad in the vented containers by the end of the experiment, but everything still worked at the end of the experiments. The newest materials tested came of a mid 90s Chevy. Had parts from the mid 70s, 80s (fiero obviously) and 90s. I stopped using it because it was awful to tune with the equipment I had. I was tuning to gauges set for E10, then converting those numbers on paper to E85 and because its not a straight-line difference it was more than I could handle by myself. With no support from friends or other like-minded people I had to stop if I ever wanted to drive my car more. It was neat though, while my tune was off, the car would shoot vibrant blue flames between shifts.

Thanks Fosgatecavy, I knew there was some adventures here. What is your opinion on E85 about running lean, do you consider it an issue?

I ran into absolutely every issue possible. But the very first thing I did was upgrade the fuel pump and injectors upgraded to about 35% more capacity than original, I personally wouldn't run E85 without doing this in a non-flex fuel vehicle. Another thing to note, while my setup didn't have any issues handling E85, it was also a brand new setup, tank was cleaned out when the pump was in, and the rubber lines going to the engine bay were the only ones that stayed in the car. I would hesitate to throw E85 into a car with 100k on it and a fuel filter from 1996.

If you go WOT, you will go lean immediately. Thats a given. However if you kept your foot off the gas and the vehicle still had enough power you would probably be near the same fuel mileage as E10. I have charts around here somewhere but if the vehicle is running around 14.7:1 I believe that its right at the lean end of E85. When you go WOT, a vehicle not setup for E85 will drop to about ~13.5:1 while E85 wants ~9.5:1, 13.5:1 is way to lean for E85 at WOT.


This was after a 3 minute shakedown run on E85.

Someone mentioned E85 runs cooler, does thet result in more carbon buildup? Especially if you are then taking it easy to try not to rev high and fast?

quote Originally posted by 2.5: Someone mentioned E85 runs cooler, does thet result in more carbon buildup? Especially if you are then taking it easy to try not to rev high and fast?

Depending on where you are in the heat range of the plug you're using, yes, absolutely.

If you're near the upper end, you'd never notice it. If you're near the lower end, you'll have fouling trouble.

------------------
Nick www.naskie18.com GoogleTalk: naskie18 AIM: naskie18

Well, the experiment has gone well. I like about 6 gallons of E85 to prevent pinging in my 64 Fairlane and still have a good idle with no adjustment from straight California gas. My gripe is the the Federal subsidies ended up pricing E85 at $3.69 and now gas has gone down to the same price I am better off burning gas. At almost $5 a gallon for gas, the numbers worked for me to use E85. With the grain shortage expected soon, I wonder if they will be able to hold the E85 prices at the same levels?

quote Originally posted by FriendGregory: At almost $5 a gallon for gas, the numbers worked for me to use E85.

Did you factor in the reduction in gas mileage?
You're saving about 26% per gallon on your fuel. According to E85 Vehicles:

quote This is an issue that many need to strongly consider , E85 contains less energy than gasoline , it has roughly 80% the energy as gasoline. You can lose anywhere from 2% to 30% in fuel economy.

You could end up spending more on E85 even at the lower per gallon price. Even if your mileage doesn't decrease that much and you save money, how much are you saving? How much do you spend on gas in your 64 Fairlane a month?