E85 RESULTS:

Flex-fuel fans beware
Consumer Reports says mileage takes a hit with ethanol blend
Last Update: 6:25 PM ET Aug 31, 2006


SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) -- Sport-utility loyalists may be four-wheeling through the wrong mud bog if they think ethanol-friendly SUVs will cut gas costs and help the U.S. curb its dependence on foreign oil, according to a Consumer Reports study released Thursday.
The consumer watchdog publication ran a battery of tests on the 2007 Chevy Tahoe flexible-fuel vehicle, which can run on either E85 -- a mixture consisting of 85% ethanol -- or gasoline, and found that the SUV's mileage dropped from 14 mpg to 10 mpg on E85.
The decline could be expected in any flex-fuel vehicle, the report said, because ethanol has a lower energy content than gasoline.
Data from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration show that ethanol has 75,670 BTUs per gallon instead of 115,400 for gasoline, which means that you would have to burn more fuel to generate the same amount of energy.
So the already expensive fill-up gets even more painful. With E85 costing an average of $2.91 in August, the fuel-economy penalty means drivers are essentially paying almost $4 for the equivalent of a gallon of gasoline, the report said.
Another way of looking at it: Consumer Reports found that the Tahoe's driving range decreased to 300 miles on a full tank from 440 on gasoline -- more trips to the pump, if drivers can even find a pump.
The two-wheel drive version of the Tahoe used in the study would normally be rated at 21 mpg. But because it can run on E85, it earns a 35 mpg credit.

 

thanks for posting this i read that as well its got a lot of info. bottom line save your money

http://videos.streetfire.net/video/1...2a000683f3.htm

 

Flex-fuel fans beware
Consumer Reports says mileage takes a hit with ethanol blend

Thats a given and been discussed here.

So the already expensive fill-up gets even more painful. With E85 costing an average of $2.91 in August, the fuel-economy penalty means drivers are essentially paying almost $4 for the equivalent of a gallon of gasoline, the report said.


My understanding from other posts was the E-85 was cheaper at the pump and it was about a wash as to cost in the long run. Not taking into account the E-85 being a cleaner and more domestic fuel. Any one feel free to correct me on this!

 

Something else to factor in is that fact that the production of Ethanol is subsidized by the government which hides the true cost...I'm sure theres some study out there that show the true cost.

 

Just do the math. Multiply the E85 price per gallon by 1.3. If this is lower/same as the regular gas per gallon then buy it.

 

I think E85 here in WI is $1.79/gallon.
ERIC

 

Well TOMHONE,

I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish, posting negative E85 information on a Ford site, that isn't even about a Ford. I see two problems: 1. It's from San Francisco, where E85 is going to cost more. 2. It's a GM vehicle they're using for the comparison, which they assume the results will reflect on all flex fuel vehicles.

Here in Iowa, the last I saw E85 at was $1.839. From the mileage results I've seen with the Flex Fuel F150, it's definately worth it. 14mpg gasoline, and 12mpg on E85 in town, 17mpg gasoline and 15.5mpg E85 on the highway. This is a 2006 F150 Super Crew XLT 4x4 5.4L. On a cost per mile basis, it comes out to a wash in most cases. I'm just glad the money is not going to some oil company executive's boat fund.

On an off-topic note, I'm building a high compression 4.0L V6 specifically for E85. See the V6 forum.

It's not the energy content in the fuel. It's how it's used. Things like flame front speed, thermal efficiency, etc... are never discussed. Neither are the recent massive efficiency improvements in ethanol production, or the byproducts of production, like distillers grain. For more information there, see the alternative fuels forum.

 

Who is posting negative E85 info? The article was found on a Ford message board for shareholders. Regarding this article not being about Ford? What? This article deals with EVERY vehicle that uses E85 INCLUDING Ford owners. And who cares what State we're talking about? Why do so many of you people take issue with every little tidbit of info in life?

 

TOMHONE, Thats just the way people are. I thought your post was informative, and I agree it doesn't matter what state or make of vehicle it is. E85 is E85 and the only thing it's going to provide is cleaner air.

 

You know it Bill. Just added a little input to the subject of automobiles (whether one agrees or not with the article was irrelevant) and what do I read? Someone telling me I'm negative? I didn't even write the article. E85, I'm all for the stuff. And if someone has it selling for $1.79 in their local vicinity that equates to a normal gas price of about $2.33. The rest is up to them. Just my informative $.02 as always. Man oh man, give it a break..............

 

No, you're not being negative. The article you posted may be. There's just so much information floating around about Ethanol and E85 that is either misinterpreted or just plain wrong.

I'm sorry if I came across as a bit harsh. I guess the point I was trying to make was, they looked at the mileage results with one GM vehicle, and extrapolated it to all flex fuel vehicles.

Because so many of them are wrong! If I didn't care, do you think I'd be posting on an internet message board?

Here's a good source of information on E85:
http://www.newrules.org/agri/netenergyresponse.pdf

Again, I'm not saying you're negative, misguided, or any of that. In fact, I appreciate the opportunity to respond to this article. It just seems like the negative aspects of E85 are blown out of proportion and repeated more often than the positive. And when someone (again, not you) writes an article with a test sample of exactly one vehicle, it just kind of trips a trigger, so to speak.

 

Oh that will fix things, having a politically designed car.

 

There are some things about E85 that have been politicized beyond rational thought. For instance the cost has always been based on the cost to produce ethanol from corn - not the best source, but its how they do it in the midwest. Ethanol is one of the most common and useful substances in nature, so for the automotive community to shun it right from the get-go is a bad idea. Anything to encourage alternate fuel sources should be encouraged and promoted. Those alternate sources of ethanol will come into play once the technology and market takes off - assuming a monopoly or cartel isn't formed beforehand.

 

You all may like to spend some time reading in the alternative fuels forum. This stuff has been gone over and over. I learned a lot there and I was amazed at the things some of the FTE poineers are doing, both with ethanol and biodiesel.

My interest is twofold. One is cleaner air but I guess my main motivation is political. I really believe that it is essential that we make a national concerted effort to build the biofuel infrastructure. Most members of OPEC hate us as a nation. Even though we are their best customers. Today they announced that they are cutting production by 1.5 million barrels per day in response to the recent drop in oil prices. They arbitrarily increase their profits and increase the pain at the pump for us. We need to become energy independent.

(Last I heard, the US has a $.45 per gallon tax on imported ethanol. What is that all about?)

There are dozens of different crops that can be used to produce biofuels.
We could create a massive boom in the US farming industry. As a byproduct, we would create many thousands of good jobs for Americans if we could kick the oil habit and grow our own fuel.

Once we get busy and do this, the demand for oil drops and the prices go down.

 

I agree that people with questions about E85 move to the Alternative Fuels forum for an education, pro and con. I use E85 all the time, and find that as long as there is a $.30 difference, it is worth the price. My mileage went from 17mpg in town to 14 mpg in town (minivan) and 24 hwy to 21 hwy.

Remember, when you look at supposed studies on E85 Energy balance and oil energy balance that Ethanol is scrutinized down to the last drop of energy used. Oil is given free range to use all of the energy outside of actual production without being factored in.

When was the last time you heard about the energy used in pumping and searching for oil? Yet ethanol is always scrutinized for the amount of energy used to harvest the material.

There is excellent work being done looking into using garbage and any other plant material out there. Ethanol has a future in the U.S.