E85 Fuel used in wrong application

[DustyS]

My friend and I know a nice single gal who was given an Aurora 4.0 from her parents. It's a fine vehicle. She is a great person, with limited knowledge of automotive subjects. A few weeks ago, she was conversing about the check engine light being on in her Aurora. She described some minor drivability issues, but didn't seem too concerned. We presumed a possible EGR issue, but never did check the car. In a recent discussion, she explained how she was using E85 fuel for quite some time, and switching back to 'normal' gasoline has stopped the slight drivability problems and the check engine light is off. From the way she explains, there are no noticable after-effects to the car. All is well, and she just won't use the E85 any longer for its lower cost.

Now, we assumed using E85 where it is not applicable may harm engine and fuel systems quite seriously! Should she be watching for problems to arise? What happens when a NON-FFV engine is given E85?..Guru? Is it hard on injectors, cat-con, EGR, pistons....etc? Are there no side effects, except rough drivability? Even when using E85 in her Ford Ranger FFV 3.0, my friend complains of lost power and reduced mpg. I am going to try some in my dad's Taurus, for personal experimentation. He hasn't used it, to my knowledge, or if he has he hasn't complained of issues. If the effects are null, it may be interesting to experiment with some in the Stratus, for fun; of course it's PCM may be too stupid to deal with the change, LOL. Ideas?

PS-I did a search but retreived nothing, so sorry if repetitive.

[JasonA]

Our 2003 Dodge Grand Caravan is a FFV, and you can use E85 in it. However, it says in the manual that you are REQUIRED to use special E85 motor oil when using that fuel, and that casually switching back and forth is not recommended. I'm not sure what the reprocussions are of using E85 with regular motor oil, but I understand that E85 doesn't have the same lubricity as gasoline does, and that special motor oil is required because of it? I don't know...I've heard that somewhere, but that shouldn't be taken as fact. Either way, our Dodge manual says in no uncertain terms that the 7/70 powertrain warranty is VOID if the proper motor oil isn't used when you're using E85. I certainly wouldn't use E85 unless the vehicle specifically allows it, and I wouldn't use it without first changing the oil to motor oil that's specifically formulated to compliment the fuel, if that is indeed required like our Dodge manual says. What does your Ranger/Taurus manuals say, if those are FFVs? Does Ford require you to use special motor oil?

[Ranger]

Ok, I hate to sound stupid but...... what is E85? Never heard of it. Also FFV?

[JasonA]

Ok, I hate to sound stupid but...... what is E85? Never heard of it. Also FFV?

E85 stands for Ethanol 85, or a fuel mixture that is 15% gasoline, 85% ethanol. Basically, a fuel designed to use less petroleum. Same goes for something called Bxx, which is Biodiesel. B20 = 20% bio (usually soy oil I think), and 80% diesel fuel.

In general, I think you're supposed to lose 10-20% of your fuel mileage on E85, but you're also using 85% less petroleum. 600 miles @ 30 mpg on gasoline equals 20 gallons of petrol. 600 miles @ 27 mpg on E85 equals 3.33 gallons of petrol (and 18.9 gallons of ethanol mixture). But you are putting MORE total pollutants into the air (because of the reduced mileage). Where do you draw the compromise line? (I don't know the answer.)

FFV stands for Flexible Fuel Vehicle. These are vehicles designed with the capability to use E85 fuel. Tends to run in the family...for example, I think all modern versions of the 3.0L Ford V6 are flexfuel. A lot of Tauruses and Rangers have that little green leaf emblem on the car, but I think even the ones that don't are still flexfuel if it's the 3.0L Vulcan V6. Similarly, I think almost all 3.3L Chrysler V6 engines (at least in the minivans) are flexfuel. Some fans have an FFV emblem on the tailgate, but ours doesn't. It does have a small E85 decal on the inside of the fuel door, indicating that it is a FFV.

Interestingly, GSA (General Services Administration) has to make sure that X% of their vehicle purchases are FFVs...I think it's like 30%. The mandate doesn't require that you actually USE E85...just that the car has to be E85 capable. Fort Bragg is one of the largest Army installations in the world, and is teeming with gov't Tauri and Rangers, but nary an E85 pump to be found!

[danbuc]

Just googled E85 Fuel (didn't know what it was..hehe) and the first site to come up was the National Ethanol Vehicle Coalition. I went to their FAQ section to read about the E85, and it said it's around 105 octane. This seems kind of high. Since the cost is offset by the amount needed to run the car every week, why not put in some CAM 2 and have a little fun? It's still gasoline, albeit it 104 octane. It's "only" $4.00 a gallon near me. I wonder how that Aurora would handle CAM 2 fuel? I bet it would probably break something. What do you think Guru?

Almost forgot, here's that website- http://www.e85fuel.com/

[JasonA]

The use of twice as much alcohol does not mean that the pollutants are higher....fuel comsumption has nothing directly to do with the HC, CO and NOx output.

Bbobynski, do you know any particulars about E85's pollutants? I understand that biodiesels for instance virtually eliminate HCs, but produce marginally higher NOx. Do you know any of these figures regarding E85....whether certain pollutants are higher or lower than gasoline? Thanks,

[DustyS]

WOW! What a nice load of information from the posts. I will tell her to change the oil and filter ASAP. She said it sputtered and was a little hesitant...yeah, lol I guess the driving expectations weren't too high. My friend and I were questioning if E85 was OK in my dad's Taurus, but thankfully it won't get any...it has a 3.0L V6, but a Duratec, not a Vulcan. I am certain of that, so thanks for the clarification! He wouldn't have been too happy, lol. E85 use, and just 10%ethanol gas for that matter, are incredibly pushed in this area because of the farming community and the way it pushes legislation around to make the mandatory use of ethanol a law! The basic benefits I've seen are to the farmers (who generally wreak of immense government subsidies anyway) and then there are the extra jobs created from the corn&soybean ethanol plants. I've been told ethanol helps with keeping a gas line from freezing in cold temps and the cumbustion chambers supposedly stay cleaner. I am uncertain of these claims, because I think engines are cleaner due to modern designs, and I have experienced gas-line freeze up with ethanol gas. At any rate, I should lightly tread the politics of the issue. In MN, all gas must have 10% ethanol; law. Some premium gas does not have it, but a sticker on the pump states if it's used where ethanol can be used, a sheriff is to be notified for an arrest of the customer, lol! In SD, midgrade and some premium gas have 10% ethanol, but for a reduced price. That's great-reduced price for reduced performance. Personally, I've religiously noticed a decrease in MPG and power with ethanol. And until recently, it was blamed for injector problems on numerous engines and did a number on drying out small engine fuel system seals, etc. A 'greener' earth is a great thing, and naturally I'm for a better environment, but experience with ethanol/oxygenated gas hasn't proven itself very effective from various standpoints. I still use it, to abide by the law and support the ethanol producers (oh joy). Hopefully, newer seals and fuel system components will tolerate ethanol, and certainly improvements have already been incorporated. With all that considered, ethanol still can't produce near the BTU's or heat energy of gas, as stated. So, in the long run, how beneficial is 10%, or 85%, ethanol in a mixture with gas? What are the extra costs for engine oils meeting the FFV requirements? (I didn't know such oil was produced) What is different about them?-Jason. The 85% alcohol must seriously dry out the cylinder linings! I wonder if engine wear rises?

Thanks for the help!

[RalPh]

You've had gas-line freeze ups with 10% ethanol?

I've always assumed, because 10% means almost 2 gals/tankfull, that this wouldn't be possible (considering the 1pint/tankfull recomended by "gas line antifreeze" companies)

Could the ethanol have been already contaminated, even saturated, with water?

[JasonA]

What are the extra costs for engine oils meeting the FFV requirements? (I didn't know such oil was produced) What is different about them?-Jason. The 85% alcohol must seriously dry out the cylinder linings! I wonder if engine wear rises?

I don't know the particulars. Here's some information from our Dodge owners manual that I thought I'd pass along. The following is taken from the manual...

For best performance and protection of your vehicle, use only crankcase engine oils that meet the following requirements:

If you operate the vehicle on E-85 fuel either full or part-time, use ONLY Mopar Flexible Fuel 5W-30 engine oil or an equivalent that meets DaimlerChrysler Standard MS-9214. Equivalent comercial Flexible Fuel engine oils may be labeled as Flexible Fuel (FFV) or Alternate Fuel (AFV). These engine oils may be satisfactory if they meet the DaimlerChrysler Standard.

CAUTION: If Flexible Fuel engine oil is not used when using E-85, engine wear may be increased significantly. This may void your warranty.

[in addition, the manual also says:]

For best results, a refueling pattern that alternates between E-85 and unleaded gasoline should be avoided. When you do switch fuels, it is recommended that:

- you do not switch when the fuel gauge indicates less than 1/4 full

- you do not add less than 5 gallons when refueling

- you operate the vehicle immediately after refueling for a period of at least 5 minutes

Observing these precautions will avoid possible hard starting and/or significant deterioration in drivability during warm up.

Because E-85 fuel contains less energy per gallon than gasoline, you will experience an increase in fuel consumption. You can expect your MPG and your driving range to decrease by about 30% compared to gasoline operation.

[Ranger]

You've had gas-line freeze ups with 10% ethanol?

I've always assumed, because 10% means almost 2 gals/tankfull, that this wouldn't be possible (considering the 1pint/tankfull recomended by "gas line antifreeze" companies)

Could the ethanol have been already contaminated, even saturated, with water?

I agree with Ralph. With 10% ethanol you should be able to dump a pint of water in the tank in below zero weather and not freeze up. In Chicago and the collar counties we have had 10% ethanol for years and I can't recall the last time I even heard of somone with a gas line freeze much less expirienced it myself. I also have to say that I have not noticed any difference in performance or milage. I am headed up to northern Wisconsin this Saturday to go snow mobiling so I'll keep a close watch and see if I can spot any difference on the way home with a tank full of non-ethanol gas.

[JasonA]

Good points. The other side of the politics is the argument that we shouldn't be using our valuable farm land to produce fuel when we could be feeding people. I don't necessarily subscribe to that, but it's one of the arguments floating around the environmental circles. You'll never make everyone happy at once.

[Ranger]

Good points. The other side of the politics is the argument that we shouldn't be using our valuable farm land to produce fuel when we could be feeding people. I don't necessarily subscribe to that, but it's one of the arguments floating around the environmental circles. You'll never make everyone happy at once.

I don't subscribe to that either. If the farm lands were so "precious" they would be planting corn or soy beans instead of subdevisions.

[JasonA]

I don't subscribe to that either. If the farm lands were so "precious" they would be planting corn or soy beans instead of subdevisions.

Great point!

[growe3]

Not a rant, just commenting.

I fly from Sacramento, CA to the UP of MI each year, to our vacation home. When flying across country you can see there are enormous areas of open land. But.....is it farmable? … on a large practical scale. Much is very arid, desert like and/or just rock. Other areas are subject to extreme temperature changes and other weather conditions that reduce their value for farming or raising livestock.

I see on a daily basis some of the most valuable farm and rangeland in the world being paved over, to make millions of dollars for the developers.

A side product is increased population, extremely heavy demands on our transportation system, increased air pollution, and of course increased demands for food; a viscous cycle. The main gain is to the developers, getting incredibly rich at the general populations expense and reducing, unnecessarily, our valuable crop and rangeland.

California provides food to all of the US, and exports food to many parts of the world. With our great soil and weather conditions this part of the country is truly blessed with wonderful soil, and general regional climate conditions to grow nearly anything.

The idea that we have unlimited agriculture resources is shortsighted, particularly with the population increases that are inevitable from our current population, and of course from those immigrating to our country.

The fact that we are getting forced to use alcohol with our gas, even though it is more expensive to do so, and you get less power per fuel gallon than other options available, just shows the power of the farmer’s lobbying and big business profiteering.

-George