If this is true, how is it that most all cars on the road today except the ones older than mid 80's are 10% capable? I rarely have had any problems from running 10%, actually generally have fewer problems running 10% than running regular gasoline. I have run 10% for nearly 20 years and it hasn't caused any damage yet... I know of too many vehicles the same way that rarely have fuel system problems let alone seal problems...

 

Guys, we need to keep in mind this about the fourth time this 'study' has been released. It helps if we have a litttle background on the men, David Pimental and Tad Patzek, who are the authors of this socalled study. Dave Pimental is an Entomologist, yes, thats right, he is an expert on bugs. What makes Dave or anyone else think a bug guy knows anything about distilling power alcohol ? Why would Cornell allow him to put out such nonsense ? Could it just be that this 'study' came from Cornell's new campus ? Where is that new campus, you might ask ? why, it is in Qatar. Yeah, thats right, the little oil-soaked place. 3 guesses on what industry's money paid for this 'study', your first two don't count. But what about Mr Patzek, what is his connection to this study ? What Tad does for Berkely I don't know, but he is also a 'consultant ' for Shell oil company. Do a little searching on these men and you'll find the same as I did, the are not really reaserchers of any kind, but merely oil company shills. Of course they are going to say ethanol is a bad deal, they are part of the American Petroleum Institute. The API is currently terrified that their house of cards is about to collapse. Yes, they are making profits beyond obscenity right now. But the real story on ethanol and biodiesel is starting to come out. The API has manged to smother it for almost 100 years, but the internet has made more information available to more people, and the API can't control what you or anyone else can learn anymore. These fake studies are the desparate attemps by oil companies to maintain a lock on the market for transportation fuels. I hope they fail, and I think they will. Our Citizens and our farmers deserve better. If you want some unbiased information, not paid for by either the corn or oil industries, how about searching out some of the government's own tests ? They have tested this kind of thing extensively, and they make ethanol and soybean diesel sound like they are vrey workable. The latest USDA study was by Sharpoui, IIRC. Look him up and see what you think. Honestly, I am surprized anyone even prints Pimental and Patzek stuff anymore, as they have been widely discredited. DinosaurFan

 

The seal materials most commonly used in vehicles up thru the 80's will withstand alcohol at up to 10% at room temperature. Unfortunately the blenders push the alcohol content up and the fuel system is not at room temperature. If you examine the elastomeric seals used in many fuel systems they all show signs of erosion from the effects of the alcohol. It is only a matter of time before they fail. I have seen this failure many times. Unfortunately not many people are trained to detect the erosion of the seals so most failures are assigned to unknown causes or components are replaced for other reasons. Fortunately seal materials have improved and some seals are now made out of more costly materials that will withstand the alcohol better. The problems have been greatly reduced in the ~90 and up models. If congress had limited alcohol content to 5% it would have left some fudge room for all vehicles. Unfortunately they heard the 10% number and ignored the rest of the data when they legislated. -Typical...

 

I just found that interesting knowing that there are a number of vehicles my family has owned that ran over 200,000 on 10% that never really had any fuel system maintenance problems that weren't about the normal for the mileage. (fuel pumps were the main problem, at 100,000, GM). It sounds to me that it is a higher than 10% problem that you refer. It also is a blender problem, rather than just the mix proportion itself. Room temprature is also just what the room happens to be, unless you have an actual established temp as base standard, that can mean anything. I'm sure the blenders aren't in a constant temperature, but are subject to weather changes. I also have reason to believe that the oil companies would love to mess around like that to discredit ethanol so as to be able to make their profits unhindered.

 

Some are saying we should limit the alcohol to 5 percent? I have burned 10 percent for at least 15 years. Never had a engine problem of ANY kind.

What about E85? 85 percent alcohol? I'd like to hear from those who use it.
I haven't tried it yet. My Caravan is E85 ready. I haven't had a chance to try it. I don't know if Ford approves of it in my SD V10 ?

 

you have not tried it yet? does'nt your state have half of the E85 stations in the entire country?Oh well I'm not here to judge just put in my .02. I have been reading up on the E85 and it does sound interesting. I do know that we will be putting in a new 5.4L E85 as an option on the 06 F-150's. We should be running them by the end of the year.

 

Non in this immedite area. Have passed stations with it when I didn't need gas.
One of these days. Will have to look for it. Many towns don't have it. Smaller towns may have one station selling it but you have to be on the lookout. There is a brochure out listing them all in the state. Will have to get one.

 

check out this site to see where the stations are, addresses, phone numbers and everything. Fueling station map

 

Well at least you do have a number of them there, we only have 2 in the entire state of Michigan!

 

There are some stations that have it where we have been traveling trough. But our travels at this time are with the SD V10 and I don't think E-85 is approved for it.

Short trips around home with the Caravan but don't see any E-85 available here. There may be some that are not on the list. Did see it at a station in New Ulm MN just after I'd filled the SD with gas accross the street. And the price on the E-85 was a dollar and eighty some cents.! While 87 octane was $2.18.

 

$1.80??!!! Good God I can't even remember any gas below $2.00!!!

Sounds like I should invest in an E85 engine.Yeah, and gas is about $2.28 avg. here, but I can get it for $2.19 near the plant.

 

I finally done it. Was down a quarter tank by the gauge and I filled up my caravan with E-85. That is a little over 6 gallons. It was a place about 30 miles from home and the price was, $1.89.9 per gallon. With the rest of the gas in the tank being 10% I suppose I now have 20-25 percent alcohol in the tank. ? The '03 Caravan has a sticker on the gas door ok ing E-85. I'm going to be useing some from now on and see if I can tell any difference. Supposedly I'll get less mpg and less power. Will it be enough to notice? Be fun to find out. The Caravan "book" says if you use E-85 go by maint. plan "B" which is 3000 mile oil change etc. I do that anyway. BTW Caravan has just over 40,000 miles on it. Ave mpg in Summer is approx 26-27, in Winter it is approx 22-23.

I'd try it in my SD if I thought Ford would ok it.

 

Go to http://www.ethanolrfa.org/leg_position_energybalance.shtml for a rebuttal to the study by Pimental and Patzek. The website belongs to the Renewable Fuels Assoc., so they're not unbiased. However, they cite studies from others (like USDA) who presumably are neutral.

I don't want to get into this debate, because I think, finally, the forces for change are too strong for the oil industry to stop. This is largely because of energy independence and other big companies (Cargill, ADM) having a big stake in renewable fuel.

One thing I'd like to point out that a quick search suggested wasn't posted before. This relates to whether ethanol can be used in cars made today without harming them. The Ford Crown Victoria and the Lincoln Town Car (last big RWD cars made in the US) are both "dual fuel vehicles" (DFVs). Yes, right now, as they come off the showroom floor in every dealer. This was done because DFVs are exempt from C.A.F.E. standards and those 4.6 and 5.4 V8s guzzle fuel. So when SUVs and pickups come under C.A.F.E., you can bet that Excursions, Expeditions, F-150s, etc. will also, overnight, become DFVs.

The truth is that all modern spark-ignition vehicles could run on E85 (85/15 ratio of ethanol to gasoline), without any risk of damage. All the parts of the engine and fuel system can withstand long-term exposure to ethanol. The problem is that ethanol produces only about 2/3 of the energy per gallon of gasoline, and the chips can't adjust for this big a difference. All Ford did w/ the Crown Vic/Town Car was to put in a chip that can, within a few seconds, figure out the heat value of the fuel it's burning and adjust accordingly. This is about a $200 deal for Ford. You can run one of these cars on 100% gasoline, empty the tank, and fill-up with E85, and the worst that will happen is a rough idle and stumble for 30 sec. while the chip adjusts.

Nobody makes an aftermarket chip like this, because of EPA regs that impose huge liability for doing so, if something gets screwed up (go figure). But this will change, no doubt.

One historical note. The Model T was a DFV, if only because the compression was low (4.5:1) the carb was easy to adjust, and there was no rubber in the fuel system. Henry Ford is reported to have said (in ~1909) he wanted the car to be able to run on ethanol (which contained 5% water in those days). This was because, he supposedly said, "there are more stills than gas stations."

Bill

 

FYI- Room temperature is defined in the Scientific and Engineering community as: 22 °C (72 °F). Somebody did not listen in science class.

 

fellro86,

The proper term for that is ambient temperature.