|
|
Post by oldsmobiletw on Mar 19, 2008 23:49:35 GMT -6
Ok today i Drove my parents van a 99 caravan Code G Which means Flex-Fuel. the reason im driving it is because my olds was in layup until i got the tranny situation fixed. But anyway I decided to try e85 for the first time. I looked up the nearest filler station and headed over. It was 2.64 a gallon not bad . I put 30 bucks in as the van vans sucking fumes by then. I started it up and reset the trip to calculate milage. The first thing I noticed is that it was running really really really quiet but as soon as I put in gear it seemed slugish not to bad but something that I would pick up on. After a few minutes the computer figured what was going on and it ran sweet. The things I noticed is that it had better pickup and it was more responsive it did sound different though. After all was said and done the milage was 19 mpg compared to 21 avg. Not too bad. also the octane for that gas is 105. local dealer is offering retrofits for cars and trucks I might look into it tommorow .After reading about it it dosnt seem to bad i know there is alot of bad press about it but it does clean you engine and keep it clean the only thing that is bad is that if you have a metal gas tank you realy cant do it unless its been treated as the fuel would disolve the coating in the tank. But I think the aurora has a plastic tank .
|
|
|
|
Post by Superdemon on Mar 20, 2008 0:05:51 GMT -6
The Aurora was never designed with E85 in mind. It would need bigger fuel injectors among other things to run properly. I wouldn't recommend putting it in an Aurora.
|
|
|
|
Post by oldsmobiletw on Mar 20, 2008 0:08:20 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by Superdemon on Mar 20, 2008 1:34:41 GMT -6
I have several problems with this.
1. They never talked about engine performance. A 5.7 liter engine is a good amount of horsepower for a Tahoe. Especially for a vehicle I bet was never taken off road and likely has never pulled a trailer. The loss of horsepower for an engine of that size wouldn't really matter if all it did was drive down the highway.
2. The Tahoe was donated by a company with vested interests. This is a huge red flag. I don't know of many companies willing to part with a fairly new vehicle without some kind of gain.
3. They spent alot of time going over how everything looked inside the engine but they never talked about how the vehicle was maintained. A well maintained engine will look great no matter what fuel you put in it.
4. They compared a failed fuel pump to the working pump from the Tahoe. I don't understand what they were trying to prove here.
5. They never talked about fuel economy. This should have at least been noted if it didn't completely suck.
Bottom line is it may or may not hurt the Aurora but it isn't going to do it any favors.
|
|
swartzrora
Aurora Groupie
1996 Black Beauty + 1997 White Pearl
|
Post by swartzrora on Mar 20, 2008 6:30:09 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by kaykirk on Mar 20, 2008 7:41:22 GMT -6
I put 30 bucks in as the van vans sucking fumes by then. I started it up and reset the trip to calculate milage...... After all was said and done the milage was 19 mpg compared to 21 avg. Not too bad. also the octane for that gas is 105. I am all for going "green" even if it means I'll have to pay a little more. It would be nice to keep this beautiful earth alive and well for our future grandkids. However, I don't think the way you figured your MPG's is very accurate. You really need to fill it up until the pump stops, reset the tripometer, drive many miles then fill up again until it stops. That will give you the best result. I don't think I will be turning the Aurora "green" anytime soon though. |
|
|
|
Post by aldrichd on Mar 20, 2008 12:43:48 GMT -6
Have you ever driven a vehicle that uses gasoline or propane? I've driven a few military trucks that were converted to use both. When you switched to propane the vehicle just didn't want to perform very well. I guess it's because propane just doesn't have as much energy as gasoline.
|
|
|
|
Post by oldsmobiletw on Mar 20, 2008 20:38:36 GMT -6
hahaha 500.00 to convert over. that wont fly, ill just continue to buy 93 petrol and ill go green some other way
|
|
|
|
Post by alecbeaton on Mar 21, 2008 0:31:28 GMT -6
I've run E85 in my aurora, out of curiosity. I did it when the tank was very low, and only about 5-6 gallons or so. DON'T BOTHER!
When it was cold, it ran TERRIBLY. I had to let it sit and warm up every time i started it, or it would just fall flat on it's face. After it was warm, sure it ran just fine. For the small amount of money it saved, it was a waste.
|
|
|
|
Post by dallas on Mar 23, 2008 22:28:10 GMT -6
Wow.......
|
|
scottydl
Super Moderator 
There's nothin' like an American V-8...
Posts: 7,373
Staff Member
|
Post by scottydl on Mar 24, 2008 8:56:13 GMT -6
I've run E85 in my aurora, out of curiosity. Whubuhmba HUH? People please understand E-85 IS NOT AN ALTERNATIVE FUEL FOR ALL VEHICLES! The maximum ethanol percentage a gasoline engine should have is 10% ... you jump that to 85% and you are talking about a MAJOR risk of fuel system damage. The Auroras were in no way designed for E-85 so it's no wonder that the performance was horrible. |
|
|
|
Post by alecbeaton on Mar 26, 2008 17:09:34 GMT -6
I know, but because of the high octane and the low amount i put in it wasn't that big of a deal. I ran it for maybe two days, and then filled all they way up with premium to dilute everything that was left. Like i said, don't bother and i'll never try it again.
|
|
|
|
Post by intheb0x on May 10, 2008 17:09:34 GMT -6
dude ethanol is pure crap
its dirtier and LESS EFFICENT.
it puts off more pollution then gas and also gets LESS mpg
als has made food prices shoot through the roof.
if it wasnt for government subsidys there wouldnt be ethanol anywhere
by all means DO NOT USE ETHANOL.
|
|
|
|
Post by aldrichd on Jun 3, 2008 9:55:16 GMT -6
I've noticed a trend in several service stations where they are now 10% ethanol. What pisses me off is they still charge full price. It used to be you got about a 10 cent discount with the 10% ethanol fuel. Not any more.
How would you like to go to a fancy restaurant and pay $12 for a Kobe beef hamburger then find out that 10% of the hamburger was oatmeal filler. You wouldn't feel too happy about it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Superdemon on Jun 3, 2008 11:49:09 GMT -6
I've noticed a trend in several service stations where they are now 10% ethanol. What pisses me off is they still charge full price. It used to be you got about a 10 cent discount with the 10% ethanol fuel. Not any more. How would you like to go to a fancy restaurant and pay $12 for a Kobe beef hamburger then find out that 10% of the hamburger was oatmeal filler. You wouldn't feel too happy about it. It is nearly impossible to get anything without ethanol in Minnesota. We just don't have a choice here. |
|
|
|
Post by jmulder79 on Jun 4, 2008 9:05:30 GMT -6
I've noticed a trend in several service stations where they are now 10% ethanol. What pisses me off is they still charge full price. It used to be you got about a 10 cent discount with the 10% ethanol fuel. Not any more. How would you like to go to a fancy restaurant and pay $12 for a Kobe beef hamburger then find out that 10% of the hamburger was oatmeal filler. You wouldn't feel too happy about it. It is nearly impossible to get anything without ethanol in Minnesota. We just don't have a choice here. The situation's the same here in Wisconsin. All regular and mid-grade blends are 10% ethanol. Luckily, they haven't started adding ethanol to the premium blends yet. Some politicians here want to make 10% ethanol gasoline mandatory statewide. It's ridiculous! |
|
|
|
Post by Superdemon on Jun 4, 2008 22:37:16 GMT -6
It is nearly impossible to get anything without ethanol in Minnesota. We just don't have a choice here. The situation's the same here in Wisconsin. All regular and mid-grade blends are 10% ethanol. Luckily, they haven't started adding ethanol to the premium blends yet. Some politicians here want to make 10% ethanol gasoline mandatory statewide. It's ridiculous! I was able to find premium without ethanol once. Though my car hated it. The SES light turned on after about a day. No difference in power or fuel economy. |
|
|
|
Post by aaaauroraaaa on Jun 5, 2008 8:57:48 GMT -6
I was able to find premium without ethanol once. Though my car hated it. The SES light turned on after about a day. No difference in power or fuel economy. lol. did you even scan to see what the code was? "yeah, i used good gas once, but the ses light came on for a loose gas cap and a stuck EGR valve, so i stopped using the good gas" |
|
|
|
Post by Superdemon on Jun 5, 2008 23:23:41 GMT -6
lol. did you even scan to see what the code was? "yeah, i used good gas once, but the ses light came on for a loose gas cap and a stuck EGR valve, so i stopped using the good gas" Nah, I never looked into it. After a few days I was down to less then a half tank. I filled it up with the normal stuff and it when away after about a day. |
|
|
|
Post by intheb0x on Jun 8, 2008 20:56:03 GMT -6
im in wisconsin and did not know premium did not come with ethanol.
in this state you get governement incentives for opening a station with e85
what a joke
|
|
