Car Forum / Antique and Collectibles / Studebaker / April 2005
Ethanol Gas (E-85)
|
|
Thread rating:  |
Lee Aanderud - 08 Apr 2005 15:39 GMT Anyone running E-85 (85% Ethanol, 15% Gasoline) in their Studebakers? Or is there any danger in running it in these older engines? There's a gas station just down the street from me that is offering it for $1.95/gal. (regular unleaded is $2.13/gal.). I ran two tanks of it in my Toyota two weeks ago while up in ND and didn't notice any difference... if anything I may have gotten better gas mileage on those two tanks.
Lee
oldcarfart - 08 Apr 2005 15:51 GMT it will clean the residue from all fuel system components so any crap, varnish, etc. in tank, lines, etc. will quickly fill filter, so carry spares!
John Poulos - 08 Apr 2005 15:53 GMT It will dissolve many fuel pump diaphragms and older rubber hoses. It's amazing what it does to 40 year old filler neck hoses.
> it will clean the residue from all fuel system components so any crap, > varnish, etc. in tank, lines, etc. will quickly fill filter, so carry > spares!
 Signature JP/Maryland Studebaker On the Net http://stude.com My Ebay items:http://www.stude.com/EBAY/ 64 Challenger (Green Wrapper) 63 R2 4 speed GT Hawk 55 Speedster 50 2R 10 truck
John Poulos - 08 Apr 2005 15:51 GMT "Many U.S. automobiles manufactured since 1998 have been equipped to enable them to run on either gasoline or E85, a mixture of 85% ethanol and 15% gasoline. E85, however, is not yet widely available."
I would not use it in a older car, you may burn a valve or at least destroy some rubber bits in the fuel system. Also, ethanol does not produce as much power so you'll probably spend more than the small savings in price because of the government subsidies.
> Anyone running E-85 (85% Ethanol, 15% Gasoline) in their Studebakers? Or is > there any danger in running it in these older engines? There's a gas [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Lee
 Signature JP/Maryland Studebaker On the Net http://stude.com My Ebay items:http://www.stude.com/EBAY/ 64 Challenger (Green Wrapper) 63 R2 4 speed GT Hawk 55 Speedster 50 2R 10 truck
John Poulos - 08 Apr 2005 15:59 GMT Lee Found this on converting your engine to run on the stuff. You'll loose 10% in fuel economy unless you do major mods, but you can convert.
http://www.alcohol4fuel.com/id26.html
> Anyone running E-85 (85% Ethanol, 15% Gasoline) in their Studebakers? Or is > there any danger in running it in these older engines? There's a gas [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Lee
 Signature JP/Maryland Studebaker On the Net http://stude.com My Ebay items:http://www.stude.com/EBAY/ 64 Challenger (Green Wrapper) 63 R2 4 speed GT Hawk 55 Speedster 50 2R 10 truck
Richard Lawler - 08 Apr 2005 16:59 GMT Neat website. <g> Richard Lawler
'57 1/2 ton Transtar '51 2dr Champion
N8N - 08 Apr 2005 16:15 GMT > Anyone running E-85 (85% Ethanol, 15% Gasoline) in their Studebakers? Or is
> there any danger in running it in these older engines? There's a gas
> station just down the street from me that is offering it for $1.95/gal. > (regular unleaded is $2.13/gal.). I ran two tanks of it in my Toyota two > weeks ago while up in ND and didn't notice any difference... if anything I > may have gotten better gas mileage on those two tanks. > > Lee I don't think it's that good a deal, fuel economy will drop as ethanol doesn't have as many H or C atoms per unit volume as does regular gasoline. I know our "winter gas" has some kind of oxygen bearing hydrocarbons in it and my gas mileage in the Porsche goes from low 20s to 18 or 19 during the winter months.
nate
Lee Aanderud - 08 Apr 2005 16:30 GMT That's strange because I swear my mileage actually went up a little during those two tanks... not much but I know it didn't go down. It was rated at 89 octane vs. 87 for regular unleaded and was the same price at the pump.
Lee
> I don't think it's that good a deal, fuel economy will drop as ethanol > doesn't have as many H or C atoms per unit volume as does regular [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > nate John Poulos - 08 Apr 2005 16:44 GMT They claim it's possible to get the same or even slightly better mileage on the blend 'if' your car is set up to run the stuff, as your newer car may be.
> That's strange because I swear my mileage actually went up a little during > those two tanks... not much but I know it didn't go down. It was rated at [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >> >>nate
 Signature JP/Maryland Studebaker On the Net http://stude.com My Ebay items:http://www.stude.com/EBAY/ 64 Challenger (Green Wrapper) 63 R2 4 speed GT Hawk 55 Speedster 50 2R 10 truck
Mike Williams - 08 Apr 2005 17:09 GMT In the Chicago area we can not get anything but the 10% ethanol blend gas. I run it in all my old cars and have not had a problem yet. You do have to keep an eye on the fuel filters for the first several tankfuls. It will remove any varnish that has built up. This translates into some clogged fuel inlets and filters. Here its run that or push the car. I do check the rubber parts periodically, but so far all seems good. I don't see much change in MPG in my newer cars. But this is the 10% blend not the 15%.
> They claim it's possible to get the same or even slightly better mileage > on the blend 'if' your car is set up to run the stuff, as your newer car [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >>> >>>nate John Poulos - 08 Apr 2005 18:43 GMT Lee is talking about a 85 % blend, not just 10 % added. Your Studebaker would not even start in cold weather on the 85% stuff.
> In the Chicago area we can not get anything but the 10% ethanol blend gas. I > run it in all my old cars and have not had a problem yet. You do have to [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] >>>> >>>>nate
 Signature JP/Maryland Studebaker On the Net http://stude.com My Ebay items:http://www.stude.com/EBAY/ 64 Challenger (Green Wrapper) 63 R2 4 speed GT Hawk 55 Speedster 50 2R 10 truck
Lee Aanderud - 08 Apr 2005 18:51 GMT Is this Ethanol (E-85) different than the stuff I used up in ND? I don't remember any special signs on the pumps... it was just in line between regular and premium, higher octane than regular but the same price.
Lee
> Lee is talking about a 85 % blend, not just 10 % added. Your Studebaker > would not even start in cold weather on the 85% stuff. John Poulos - 08 Apr 2005 19:37 GMT You said you used E-85, so I assumed that's what you used, it's 85 % ethanol and not to be used in a old car not set to run on it. The 10-15 % blends may cause some fuel system harm, but a Studebaker will run OK on it. The E 85 should have a warning on the pump. I found this:
Can I Use E-85 in My Vehicle? E-85 fuel can be used in flexible fuel vehicles (FFVs). A flexible fuel vehicle is able to operate on any combination of gasoline and ethanol up to 85 percent ethanol. The FFV system allows the driver to use any combination of gasoline or ethanol - from 100 percent unleaded gasoline to 85 percent ethanol. E85 partners, GMC, DaimlerChrysler and Ford all produce vehicles that can run on E85 or gasoline when E85 is unavailable. Ask for an FFV at your favorite showroom - it costs nothing extra and may just save you a bundle...since your engine may last longer.
> Is this Ethanol (E-85) different than the stuff I used up in ND? I don't > remember any special signs on the pumps... it was just in line between [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >>Lee is talking about a 85 % blend, not just 10 % added. Your Studebaker >>would not even start in cold weather on the 85% stuff.
 Signature JP/Maryland Studebaker On the Net http://stude.com My Ebay items:http://www.stude.com/EBAY/ 64 Challenger (Green Wrapper) 63 R2 4 speed GT Hawk 55 Speedster 50 2R 10 truck
Lee Aanderud - 08 Apr 2005 19:50 GMT I think I was using a 10% blend up in ND. So I'm comparing apples to oranges with the E-85. Probably need to read the owner's manual to see what it says... not exactly a benefit if it's cheaper but going to drop my MPG by 10-20% and reduce the HP.
Lee
> You said you used E-85, so I assumed that's what you used, it's 85 % > ethanol and not to be used in a old car not set to run on it. The 10-15 % [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] >>>Lee is talking about a 85 % blend, not just 10 % added. Your Studebaker >>>would not even start in cold weather on the 85% stuff. Richard Lawler - 08 Apr 2005 20:32 GMT As E-85 has an octane rating of 100-105 you would not experience a HP loss. Actually you could get up to a 5% gain. Here is a website with good info in regards to E-85, granted it is an Iowa Ag. website, but it still has good info in this area.
Richard Lawler
'57 1/2 ton Transtar '51 2dr Champion
N8N - 08 Apr 2005 20:46 GMT > As E-85 has an octane rating of 100-105 you would not experience a HP > loss. Actually you could get up to a 5% gain. Here is a website with [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > '57 1/2 ton Transtar > '51 2dr Champion this is true, however you would need to have an engine that can take advantage of the increased octane. The carb would have to be jetted much richer as well (or appropriate adjustments made to the FI system) to not run lean as ethanol is an oxygenated fuel, and its energy density is less as well (as you don't need the oxygen that it carries with it, you can just get it out of the air as needed) so mileage as measured in MPG would suffer even if efficiency remained the same. I believe that the energy density of pure ethanol is roughly half that of pump gas but that's going off memory.
I'm not saying that ethanol is a BAD fuel - just that it has drawbacks. Were it cheap enough (i.e. half the cost of gasoline) it could catch on in a big way, because cleaner burning and increased octane are Good Things. (there's a reason dragsters use methanol, after all.) The only really insurmountable drawback is the decreased cruising range when used in older vehicles without extra-large fuel tanks to compensate.
nate
John Poulos - 08 Apr 2005 20:53 GMT Not true, it is higher octane, but delivers less energy when burned.
"Ethanol has a 34 percent lower heating value than gasoline and tends to mix with any water collected at the bottom of the tank. Thus 1.5 gallons of ethanol are required to replace the energy in one gallon of gasoline."
You can make more power with ethanol by increasing the compression ratio, and burning more of it per mile, but less HP/gallon burned compared to gasoline. The whole thing is a subsidy to the farm states and not much more. Someday we can produce a gallon of ethanol without a net energy loss, but not yet.
> As E-85 has an octane rating of 100-105 you would not experience a HP > loss. Actually you could get up to a 5% gain. Here is a website with [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > '57 1/2 ton Transtar > '51 2dr Champion
 Signature JP/Maryland Studebaker On the Net http://stude.com My Ebay items:http://www.stude.com/EBAY/ 64 Challenger (Green Wrapper) 63 R2 4 speed GT Hawk 55 Speedster 50 2R 10 truck
Richard Lawler - 08 Apr 2005 20:56 GMT That will come as news to the USDA.....
http://www.alcohol4fuel.com/id18.html
If I showed you a report from 20 years ago that showed that Studebakers had never run 200 mph and concluded that they never would (or that they hadn't yet) would my logic be faulty?
Richard Lawler
'57 1/2 ton Transtar '51 2dr Champion
N8N - 08 Apr 2005 21:07 GMT > That will come as news to the USDA..... > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > '57 1/2 ton Transtar > '51 2dr Champion There's a difference between peak HP and lowest BSFC. Ethanol *may* give higher peak HP in a properly tuned engine than the same engine set up to run gasoline, but BSFC will by necessity be higher unless you can figure out how to kick effeciency up into the 40% range.
nate
John Poulos - 08 Apr 2005 21:22 GMT Now there's a unbiased source. <g> If it's profitable and energy efficient why pay tax payer money to subsidize it ? I'll drop this part of thread because we are drifting way O.T.
> That will come as news to the USDA..... > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > '57 1/2 ton Transtar > '51 2dr Champion
 Signature JP/Maryland Studebaker On the Net http://stude.com My Ebay items:http://www.stude.com/EBAY/ 64 Challenger (Green Wrapper) 63 R2 4 speed GT Hawk 55 Speedster 50 2R 10 truck
--Shiva-- - 09 Apr 2005 00:36 GMT On Fri, 08 Apr 2005 15:53:32 -0400, you wrote:
local fire marshall has a duel fuel vehicle..
he has tried the 85% and straight gas.. must be a car problem, cause it gets FAR better milage on straight gas than the alchy mix.. he has records to back this up, and his boss is rather ticked over it.. cause it DOES DO so poorely
--Shiva--
Nate Nagel - 09 Apr 2005 00:46 GMT > On Fri, 08 Apr 2005 15:53:32 -0400, you wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > --Shiva-- > There is no problem, that's the nature of the beast. Ethanol just doesn't have as much energy per unit volume as gasoline. It's probably working correctly.
nate
 Signature replace "fly" with "com" to reply. http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel
Studedude - 10 Apr 2005 06:32 GMT Here it is. E-85 does have less BTUs than Gasoline so you will not get the same fuel economy, it will be less. For it to make economic sense to use E-85 it would need to be roughly $.46/gallon cheaper than gas.
Can you make more power off of E-85 than you can off of gasoline? Yes, ethanol contains oxygen which means you bring oxygen in with the fuel and as we all know more air equals more power. However, if your engine is not set up to run on ethanol then you run the chance of leaning out your engine in scorching a piston or burning a valve or two.
Nick
Mike Williams - 08 Apr 2005 20:36 GMT E-85 is a different enity altogether. I have a Grand Caravan and a Taurus both of which will run on the E-85 but there are only about 4 stations in the whole State that sell it. I certainly would not try it in an old car. Like John says, the car would probably only run till what was in the bowl and lines ran out. I understood that Lee was uncertain as to whether he had used E-85 or the ethanol 10 -15% BLENDS.
>I think I was using a 10% blend up in ND. So I'm comparing apples to >oranges with the E-85. Probably need to read the owner's manual to see [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] >>>>Lee is talking about a 85 % blend, not just 10 % added. Your Studebaker >>>>would not even start in cold weather on the 85% stuff. Mike - 08 Apr 2005 21:53 GMT I have a copy of The "Ford Speed Manual", by Bill Fisher, from 1952. There's a chapter about using alcohol in hot rods, mostly flathead V8's, for competition. The idea was to use it at the track or "lakes" for the extra power, (substantial, even without nitro-methane); and convert back to gas for daily use. Edelbrock sold "Alky-Conversion" kits for Stromberg "48" or "97" carbs, @ $4.50 each. The recommended way to spare the fuel pump diaphragm was to use the pump to pressurize the fuel tank. It pumped air into the tank to force fuel out. A small hand pump was used to supplement it. Fisher said a lot of the power increase was because the intake charge was cooler than with gas. It was common to have frost form on the outside of the intake manifold. Mike M.
|
|
|