E85 Compatible – Anyone got one??

So I see the new F150 commercial for the E85 compatible this weekend and it’s got me thinking.

1. What kind of mileage does this truck get compared to the “normal” F150?? Assume 5.4L.
2. Is E85 hard to come by in MN? I’ve noticed it at a few stations in SD, but never here.
3. Anyone else considering this vehicle as your “next truck”??

Thanks for the opinions!!!!

E85 vehicles get about 15-20% less milage using E85 than when using regular gas. E85 requires a richer air fuel mixture. So Cheaper gas(E85)and less milage compared to regular gas and better milage its close to a wash and yes E85 stations are not always close by but you can run either in those vehicles

Kooty,

Because I put 30K on my vehicle each year, I checked into these along with the hybrids. I found that on average, the E85 vehicles get up to 30% less mileage than a “normal” vehicle. That means that E85 needs to be 30% less than regular fuel to have your fuel costs be equal. I hope its a supply/demand issue, but there’s no way that E85 is 30% less than regular, and we have many E85 sources here in my area. In other words, burning E85 will end up costing you more.

From what I’ve heard it works better in some car or truck than others, some people on some cars can come out ahead from the claims I’ve heard. Most Holiday stations in the metro carry e85. http://www.e85fuel.com/index.php http://www.ethanol.org/e85.html

No I don’t run it, nothing I have is compatable, afaik.

My wife runs a Dodge van that is a flex fuel vehicle…its our second one. There is a reduction in mileage, although it was in the 15-20 percent range. Where I’m at it’s about 50 cents a gallon cheaper, plus it burns cleaner. Most of the ethanol is produced by Minnesota farmers, so it’s worth it to me to support a local enterprise and economy. If you start out with a new vehicle, you’ll have no problems. Ethanol acts as a detergent, so it will clean out gunk from the tank and fuel lines, but to me it’s a good deal.

I don’t own an E-85 vehicle but I have a bit of experience with those that do from working at a service department. It is true that the E-85 fuel isn’t as effiecient as regular gas is. Technically speaking the thermo effieciency is lower meaning it takes more to E to create the same power as gas does. That said most people I talk to say you don’t notice the difference unless your one to really watch and figure your mileage, these days who isn’t.

We also have E readily available here, I live six miles from a major production plant, and it runs 30-40 cents cheaper than dino gas. The single biggest complaint has, by far, been hard starting in colder weather. We did a rouge experiment at work and found that a small sample of E (spilled out) will not snap into flames like gas will. Instead it half lazily lights. I assume it is similar in a cold combustion chamber.

From an economics standpoint spending the same for E (versus reg gas) is much further ahead than supporting the ragheads over yonder. The AMERICAN farmers growing the corn for use in E are not stockpiling their profits to, one day, use against us by flying planes into our skyscrapers. What I’m getting at is don’t think short term, think long term. If your going to buy a new vehicle anytime soon I’d be so bold as to say your foolish not to look into an E-85 compatible one. It’s just simple economic sense, and it’s the way of the future.

I have a flex fuel Chrysler mini-van and a station about 15 miles away. In fact its the only station I know of and its part of a new ethanol plant. Normally get right at 23mpg and with E-85 about 19.5. I believe it was 60-80cents cheaper but unless I’m driving by it I’m not going to bother. I’m sure its better for the enviroment though but economically I doubt it.

I’ve got a 2003 E85 Suburban with a 5.3. I’ve run numerous comparisons and always come out with the same rsults. The E85 mileage is about 1/3 less than regular 87 octane unleaded. This is winter/summer and towing or running empty. I noticed no difference in power. Disregarding all political and environmental hoopla, to me the break point was 70cents. That means if E85 is 70 cents less than 87 regular it is break even economics. You don’t see that big a difference
around this area unless it is a new station opening or some other media stunt promoting E85. Will I use it? Yes but not to cost me more money.

From what I’ve read, you won’t be saving any fuel by running E85 regardless what the car makers are saying on TV. Yes, it comes from corn, and you can grow more corn, but when you consider how much fuel is used to produce the corn, and then how much fuel is used to produce E85 from that corn, you will use less fuel by just running regular gasoline in your vehicles.

The last time I checked, gas doesn’t come out of the ground ready to go into my truck.

Gas has to be refined.

Doesn’t that take energy?

What about the pollution from refineries? More or less than where they produce E85?

I say give the money to the farmers and to hell with the middle east countries.

What about long term studies on the life of the motor?

Are there any long term adverse effects by using this fuel?

Reason I ask this is due to the fact that the engine has to “work harder” to produce the same amount of energy. If the burning isn’t as efficient as dino fuels, where is the unspent fuel going? Is it contaminating the oil faster?

Most people who say their “car doesn’t burn oil” are technically wrong…….All cars burn oil to some degree or another. It is the unspent fuel that adds to the oil and contaminates it.

So, with that said……An E-85 vehicle that is hard starting in the winter/cold due to the fuel being hard to ignite is dumping that unspent fuel past the pistons/cylinder walls and into the oil reservoir…….THAT cannot be healthy!

I don’t pretend to be an expert on this at all. But my observations when you look at what it costs to refine oil into gas, you have to spread it across the spectrum of products that come out of it. You get motor oil, Gas, LP and Propane, CO2 and sulfuric acid and ammonia. You end up with “Coke” (SP?) which is the end result of the crude refining process which is burned in the coal fired electricity plants. Probably more than I mentioned. With refining corn mash into ethanol, you get ethanol. ANd maybe some chicken feed out of what is left. I would guess the cost per gallon to refine ethanol would be higher per gallon than gas. I have no facts to back this up. Maybe some of you have an idea or some facts.
Tuck

If you are burning E85 you are giving more money to oil companies. The fuel it takes to make the ethanol exceeds the amount of ethanol created.

Also, you all do know that most US oil comes from the US, Canada, Mexico and Norway. Not much (under 20%) comes from the Middle East.

Dave, doesn’t it take electricity to refine Ethanol and Oil?
Darn Arab/Canadian/Norwegian electric companies!

I owned a 1995 e-85 Dodge Intrrepid for 11 years. (Just sold it) Never ran e-85 but it burned regular gas just fine. So, mechanically it was a good motor. With the current 20% blend and probably going up, not a bad choice to have the e-85 option.

-J.

Here is a website from the National Corn Growers Association. I’m sure the information is biased, but there is a lot of info about ethanol. Might be worth a read if for nothing more than to at least see one side and make it easier to find information on the other side. NCGA – Ethanol

Here is a list of all stations that currently carry E85
E-85 Stations

You may be right Dave, but why is it every time an oil producing Arab country sneezes, oil prices go up?

I’m guessing the more E85 or similar fuels are available, the cost of producing it will get cheaper.

I’d guess the same goes for engine technology. This country has the funds and ingenuity to develop an engine that would run efficiently on something other than oil. Manufacturers aren’t going to put any effort into it until we as consumers start to demand it. The time is now to start down that road.

Why are we allies with Saudi Arabia? It’s not because there a bastion of democracy.

How many Saudi’s were involved in the 911 attacks?

They can pound sand for all I care.

Because of supply and demand. If oil is cut off from the Mid East, then Asian and Europe need to buy more oil from North America. More buyers, higher prices.

Yes Tuck, refineries use electricity, but that has to come from somewhere too. When coal is cheap they use that, if oil is cheap, they will use oil. See supply and demand above.

IMO, I just think we should find a more efficient way of producing alternative fuels before jumping in too far. If we are wasting resources to make us feel better, then that probably isnt the best road to follow.

We need fuel cells and cars that run on water. Cold fusion would be nice too.

MN refineries use Nuke and coal power. Not oil. In fact Koch (Now Flint Hills)told Excel Energy that if they did not come to an electricity price agreement, that Koch was going to make power, and charge Excel to by the overage! They came to an agreement pretty darn quick from what I remember! Plus, the King Plant uses the spent product generated by the refinery to suppliment the coal. It burns quite hot from what I hear.

Cough…cough….Yep, bring on more of that clean ethanol!

The castle-like brick building of the old Schmitz Brewery towers over the surrounding houses on the flats of the Mississippi River. For generations, neighbors coexisted peacefully with the smell of beer-making. But in April 2000, the financially troubled brewery — now called the Minnesota Brewing Company — began making a new product: ethanol.

Darren Wolfson, who lives five blocks away, noticed the change in the air immediately. “The second they flipped the switch, it was like a smack in the face, he says.

Emissions from the plant’s 200-foot-tall stack soon began drifting into gardens of the stately homes in St. Paul’s Crocus Hill neighborhood, which overlooks the river flats.

Resident Andy Driscoll says he was flooded with the odor, which he describes “rubbing alcohol mixed with burning corn.”

Prodded by hundreds of complaints, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency began testing emissions from the plant. They found high levels of carbon monoxide, as well as what are known as Volatile Organic Compounds or VOCs. VOCs included formaldehyde and acetaldehyde, both of which are known to cause cancer in animals.

The vast majority of the nation’s ethanol plants are located in rural countryside outside small towns and cities. There, they have not generated anything like the outcry heard in St. Paul. But given the test results at Gopher State, the EPA began sampling emissions of rural plants as well, and found problems just as severe.

The EPA concluded that “most if not all” ethanol plants are emitting air pollutants at many times the rate allowed by their permits.

Looks like there is a little work to do before I get on that bandwagon. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t plan on hoofing it over to Flint Hills and start snorting from their stacks…But if we are going to put our eggs in this basket, let’s make sure we get it right. They have done wonders with coal!

When ethanol was first being produced it took 29% more energy to make ethanol than the actual output produced. Now however, new technology has enabled ethanol production to create 34% more energy than it takes to produce it, so they are making progress.
The only reason that ethanol E85 is cheaper is cause there is a .54$ subsidy. Corn is not very efficient as a source for ethanol I recently took a energy/transportation class at college and these were the comparisons of other crops to corn, very interesting actually.

corn: 250 gal/acre
beet: 100 gal/acre
cane: 1200 gal/acre
manioc: 1500 gal/acre
jerusalem artichokes: 1500 g/a
cattails: 2500 g/a

Something to think about, or atleast some useless info.

Welcome to IDA! And thanks! That is pretty interesting stuff!
If any of you have been around any of the beet refineries out in western MN, you know that they can be pretty darn bad too! Kinda like an old diaper pail!

I figuire when the ethanol plants start using their own product to produce ethanol, in other words, become self sufficient, then I might consider using the end product in my vehicles.
You not only pay for the .54 subsidy through your taxes but there are also other subsidies being paid out.
One other thought, with all these new ethanol and biodiesel plants being built, does it stand to reason we won’t be needing the lock expansion on the river that the COE is trying so hard to push through?
Or could it be that with all these plants coming on line in the near future, the price and demand for the crops will increase so that more CRP, buffer strips, and such we are paying for now will go back into production?
Just wondering.

I live out here in ethanol plant country. I think the ADM plant in Marshall, MN is actually one of the biggest. When we catch that NW wind, it starts to stink all over town. I would compare it to a sort of bacon cooking smell. I guess I don’t think it smells too bad, but it is noticable. I have heard there are actually many outputs from the plants: ethanol, corn starch, chicken feed, alcohol, and some other stuff. Look in your cupboards and see how many things use corn starch. As for the alcohol, I believe it can be refined into Vodka. I think it is Shakers Vodka that originates from the plant in Benson, MN. Ethanol production is just getting rolling here in MN and so are the gas stations. Ethanol will continue to grow. It is our responsibility to do something for the environment and quit being so dependent on oil.

With that said, I don’t know if I would buy an E85 vehicle quite yet. My uncle is a well-educated corn grower who is looking into buying an E85 car for his other business. He told me that the cars are not good enough yet. What I got out of our conversation is that Ford is redesigning some of their E85 cars to be a lot better. I am looking forward to the new advances, and I plan on buying one in the next few years.

I live near an ethanol plant.Some complain about the smell,but it’s never bothered me.I suppose if we built new nuke plants and used ethanol we could become independent.Lately I’ve heard it takes large quantities of water to produce ethanol.So much so they can’t build anymore in SW MN.

I read an article last night that said if our whole country switched from oil to ethanol that last years crop of corn would be used up in 55days.

What an interesting thread. I just read it again top to bottom and came to some conclusions. One, people are plain bull headed. Two, there are many misconceptions about ethanol.

Everyday I hear people belly ache about $2.33/gallon gas. I wish cars got better milegae, I wish there was something else for fuel, I wish we didn’t have to support the middle east. Along comes an alternative fuel that supports AMERICA and people thumb their noses at it because what, the productions plants stink, there are subsidies, the vehicle gets a little poorer MPG, cars ain’t good enough (FWIW E-85 cars have been around and running strong since 1994).

Having questions and concerns is natural. But be realistic. The chances that anyone is going to come out with a miracle fuel anytime soon that is 100% environmentaly friendly, non odorous, renewable, readily available, and FREE is NIL! Anyone think the oil refineries smell like spring flowers? Anyone think there are government subsidies in oil somewhere? How about that electric car market? Doesn’t it take fossil fuel to make electricity?

I’d rather send AMERICAN farmer John an extra few nickels over the cost of dino gas than to send all the money to Afrim Fraheed Hussien Jabbar Kulwinke (Who is likely planning to kill us anyhow) anyday. Makes sense to me. It is obvious GWB was right about Americans being addicted to oil, but he missed the part about America as a GROUP being dope addicts. That is they are addicted to being stupid! No offense to any one person here.