|
|
Post by nelson480 on Jan 31, 2012 18:18:13 GMT -6
Dont EVER try it. The plastic in the fuel systems and injectors in our vehicles will decompose with the use of E85 products
|
|
|
|
Post by nelson480 on Jan 31, 2012 20:20:09 GMT -6
Right you are there too about the rubber, the fuel tanks i believe are different material of plastic also arent they?
|
|
Randy T.
Administrator 
☯ AURORA GXP ☯
Posts: 3,758
Staff Member
|
Post by Randy T. on Feb 1, 2012 22:10:02 GMT -6
You could run a 50/50 mix of normal gas and e85. Do some research on it, all vehicles were switched over to be able to handle ethanol in the 80s. I will try it sometime and let you know what happens, lol. When my ign switch was out I was driving a '96 Grand Am 4cyl, I ran a 50/50 mix with no problems.
|
|
|
|
Post by caleditor on Feb 2, 2012 20:19:30 GMT -6
We have worked with many customers converting to E85. You will need a to change your injectors and the calibration. The fuel lines work just fine.
Mark what year is your car?
|
|
Randy T.
Administrator
☯ AURORA GXP ☯
Posts: 3,758
Staff Member
|
Post by Randy T. on Feb 3, 2012 7:50:41 GMT -6
Randy, wont the 50/50 mix cause my check engine light to come on due to lean conditions? Try it out and see, lol. |
|
|
|
Post by caleditor on Feb 3, 2012 9:58:40 GMT -6
You can not blend the fuels without recalibrating the PCM
|
|
|
|
Post by caleditor on Feb 3, 2012 10:09:55 GMT -6
I am a GM World Class Certified Tech. I have converted countless cars and trucks to run on E85 or Flex Fuel. It take just a little work
In the case on the 1996 the only issue you may have is the FPR, but I am sure it has been changed out by now.
Does everyone know why the FPR were failing at a high rate in years past? E10% would eat the diaphragm .
Anyway the 1996 has a SS fuel rail and plastic lines. The only issue could be the filler neck, but if I remember correctly these are almost all steel and not rubber. The injectors will need to flow more so they will need to get upgraded. E85 has a cuising stoich of 9.7 to 1 instead of 14.7 to 1. This means you will lose 15% to 25% mpg. Yes that is a huge drop.
|
|
|
|
Post by caleditor on Feb 3, 2012 17:12:15 GMT -6
One of the concerns I have about running E85, even with a proper conversion, is that I don't know if there is exposed metals and rubber in the fuel system (1996). Actual flexfuel vehicles are supposedly built without exposed magnesium or rubber. And yes my car had the original fuel rail replaced under a recall back in '04. I noticed a slight drop in mpg just running the 1/4 tank, so I'm not sure it would really be worth it. Not 100% true. Don't run a blend of ethanol with out properly calibrating the PCM. If you would like to find out about owners who have run E85 in a non E85 car look to the 3800pro forum. Those guys have been runing E85 for years on cars that are similar to yours. let me dig up some information on calibrating for E85 |
|
|
|
Post by ntrenn on Feb 3, 2012 21:55:20 GMT -6
Don't waste your time.
1. Naturally aspirated engines don't perform any better on E85 than E10
2. The alcohols are terribly hard on your fuel system
3. Your fuel economy will actually decrease more than it would calculate based on the energy content of the two fuels.
4. The E85 costs more per mile than E10
5. The car won't start in cold weather.
6. The mass balance of the E85 production system (corn to ethanol) has never proven that we get more energy out of the fuel than the energy we spend making it.
If you have a supercharged or turbocharged engine, the ethanol will reduce the combustion temperatures and allow more advance, more fuel, and more boost which equals more GO FAST.
|
|
Randy T.
Administrator
☯ AURORA GXP ☯
Posts: 3,758
Staff Member
|
Post by Randy T. on Feb 3, 2012 22:06:59 GMT -6
When you run e85 you will notice a decrease in gas mileage, and if it was cold you could have harder starts. Most vehicles after 1985 can run a 50/50 blend with no problem, the higher the compression the better. It would be preferred to open the pulse width of the injectors, but it is not necessary to run a 50/50 blend. It will destroy small engine components in weedeaters, chainsaws, mowers, so don't try that.
|
|
|
|
Post by beastboy1976 on Feb 4, 2012 16:43:36 GMT -6
E10 and our engines really dont do well together. Scarlette was throwing a check engine light and all I did was put 100 percent premium gas in her and the light went out. May just be a freak incident, but she hasnt thrown a light since and all I am running is 100 percent premium in her.
|
|
|
|
Post by caleditor on Feb 5, 2012 7:32:07 GMT -6
Don't waste your time. 1. Naturally aspirated engines don't perform any better on E85 than E10 2. The alcohols are terribly hard on your fuel system 3. Your fuel economy will actually decrease more than it would calculate based on the energy content of the two fuels. 4. The E85 costs more per mile than E10 5. The car won't start in cold weather. 6. The mass balance of the E85 production system (corn to ethanol) has never proven that we get more energy out of the fuel than the energy we spend making it. If you have a supercharged or turbocharged engine, the ethanol will reduce the combustion temperatures and allow more advance, more fuel, and more boost which equals more GO FAST. #5 is not correct. The GM Flex Fuel Vehicles start just fine in cold weather. If the parameters are changed to the correct setting per the Ethanol percentage the car will start just fine. |
|
|
|
Post by caleditor on Feb 5, 2012 7:34:10 GMT -6
E10 and our engines really dont do well together. Scarlette was throwing a check engine light and all I did was put 100 percent premium gas in her and the light went out. May just be a freak incident, but she hasnt thrown a light since and all I am running is 100 percent premium in her. Federal law mandates E10, but I am on many forums and I have been told that you can still get E0% and some gas stations even advertise E0 |
|
|
|
Post by caleditor on Feb 5, 2012 7:35:10 GMT -6
Don't waste your time. 1. Naturally aspirated engines don't perform any better on E85 than E10 2. The alcohols are terribly hard on your fuel system 3. Your fuel economy will actually decrease more than it would calculate based on the energy content of the two fuels. 4. The E85 costs more per mile than E10 5. The car won't start in cold weather. 6. The mass balance of the E85 production system (corn to ethanol) has never proven that we get more energy out of the fuel than the energy we spend making it. If you have a supercharged or turbocharged engine, the ethanol will reduce the combustion temperatures and allow more advance, more fuel, and more boost which equals more GO FAST. #2 A long time ago GM stated this as fact. GM no longer states that fact. The gas line will rust from the outside in before E85 could cause that much damage to a steel line. It may take 50 years to rot a steel gas line out Way back when GM had a conversion procedure for R12 to R134A. GM said you needed to replace almost every component that the R12 had come in contact with. Now we only need to replace a few parts. |
|
|
|
Post by ntrenn on Feb 5, 2012 13:38:38 GMT -6
Don't waste your time. 1. Naturally aspirated engines don't perform any better on E85 than E10 2. The alcohols are terribly hard on your fuel system 3. Your fuel economy will actually decrease more than it would calculate based on the energy content of the two fuels. 4. The E85 costs more per mile than E10 5. The car won't start in cold weather. 6. The mass balance of the E85 production system (corn to ethanol) has never proven that we get more energy out of the fuel than the energy we spend making it. If you have a supercharged or turbocharged engine, the ethanol will reduce the combustion temperatures and allow more advance, more fuel, and more boost which equals more GO FAST. #2 A long time ago GM stated this as fact. GM no longer states that fact. The gas line will rust from the outside in before E85 could cause that much damage to a steel line. It may take 50 years to rot a steel gas line out Way back when GM had a conversion procedure for R12 to R134A. GM said you needed to replace almost every component that the R12 had come in contact with. Now we only need to replace a few parts. Cars that are not properly designed to run on E85 will not start correctly in cold weather, nor will their fuel systems withstand the fuel differences. Not one Aurora was made as a flex-fuel vehicle, so doing a conversion will take quite a bit of individual research and then you may still not get it right. Caleditor, I have no doubt you are a certified tech. That still does not change the story about the benefits, or lack thereof in converting a car to run E85 that was never designed for it and that has no obvious economic or performance benefits. The thermodynamic equation of running a fuel with 2/3 the heating value combined with only a 10% reduction in cost will always calculate an unhealthy economic benefit. It would be even worse if we did not encourage the false economy by giving a $1.00/gallon tax credit for the production of ethanol. All E85 vehicles cost more to run than on E10. Most, if not all, have lower performance. so...why would one want to risk damaging their car to spend more money to fuel it and get worse performance? Seems pretty nonsensical. |
|
|
|
Post by caleditor on Feb 5, 2012 15:45:01 GMT -6
lack thereof
+1
|
|
|
|
Post by caleditor on Feb 5, 2012 16:06:24 GMT -6
The fuel system has just a few rubber parts that will get damaged truly by Ethanol.
The rubber fill necks that were used on some vehicles. The rubber seal for the fuel pump module and the fuel pressure regulator.
All replacement parts are Ethanol Compatible.
Way back I saw quite a few fuel pump module seals pop out and cause EVAP leak DTC's. I have seen a lot of FPR go bad also, but that's all old news.
I do not support E85 being run in cars
It takes a good tune and I would run a sensor and a display so that you are 100% sure of the E% on every fill up.
The Stoich changes so dramatically that you cannot just trust the pump.
BTW the Stoich setting is a main setting that many other parameters use to offset from. Almost all of the fuel tables and constants are a multiplication off of the Stoich setting.
Pure gas has a Stoich of 14.68 to 1
The Cold Start offset would be an adder table that is based off of MAP Vacuum and Coolant temp on some cars. So the number in the cell is just a multiplier to the Stoich.
Some FWD cars just use an AFR number and not the multiplier.
Same thing for the Power Enrichment (PE) tables
When you have ethanol you need to multiply the number in the cell by another number to offset the E%
Like I said it takes a good calibrator to make E85 run well. You will have much more power, but less MPG.
The tunes in these Northstar's are soooooooooo bad a good tune will get you more power and better MPG so the gain is minimal for the average guy
|
|
|
|
Post by ntrenn on Feb 5, 2012 22:47:05 GMT -6
Do you have any dyno results or 1/4 mile times to support the more power claim with E85 in otherwise unmodified NA engines?
|
|
|
|
Post by caleditor on Feb 7, 2012 16:27:43 GMT -6
Do you have any dyno results or 1/4 mile times to support the more power claim with E85 in otherwise unmodified NA engines? Yes and we have thousands of hours of data logging on E85 for GM cars and trucks |
|
NinEFivEFourOH
Aurora Passenger
How about me and you, in the back of my Oldsmobile...
|
Post by NinEFivEFourOH on Feb 8, 2012 11:27:20 GMT -6
E85 is a JOKE. One that should've never even been uttered. It's a waste of time and actually more useless than regular gasoline... Makes you use way more gas a lot faster than regular 100% gas or whatever the Federally controlled gas blend is now (which is ALSO a JOKE. stupid politicians...).
Even if it is marginally cheaper, you're still shooting yourself in the foot using that crap.
|
|
