Subaru Forester Owners Forum banner
1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
Registered
2001 S Premium
Joined
·
228 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Anyone ever try E85 in there forester?

Anything more than 50% of a tank of 85 would make my 92 corolla flip out but it would run very clean and without pre-det under hard acceleration if i stayed in the 30% range.
 

·
Registered
2006 Forester XT
Joined
·
657 Posts
That's a dangerous game - E85 is a lot less dense and you need to inject a lot more volume to avoid a lean condition.

By mixing it with normal gas, you automatically run leaner than ever designed......

(I'm surprised the fans of Methanol injection aren't all over E85 - why pay the price of MEOH when this stuff is subsidized down to the price of gasoline, and virtually identical in terms of combustion?)
 

·
Registered
2001 S Premium
Joined
·
228 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
I mentioned that about using e85 instead of methanol in another forum and people kinda shrugged it off im glad im not the only one who realizes the similarity between methenol and ethenol besides the name
 

·
Registered
2004 Subaru FXT MT
Joined
·
1,841 Posts
I mentioned that about using e85 instead of methanol in another forum and people kinda shrugged it off im glad im not the only one who realizes the similarity between methenol and ethenol besides the name
Both are alcohols, oxygenated fuels. But I prefer ethanol mainly because methanol is corrosive and carcenogenic.
 

·
Registered
2004 Subaru FXT MT
Joined
·
1,841 Posts
The only thing you'll gain from E85 is an engine that runs less efficiently and rougher over time. It's a gimmick. You're not saving the planet running on corn.
You clearly have no idea what you are talking about...a gimmick it is not.

I won't have a pissing contest about the whole "environment" deal, as I really don't care. But if you insist, there are 2 scientists that are responsible for the majority of published research against ethanol, and then there is the rest of the scientific community on the other side.

What is very clear is the performance gains over pump gas. Again, ethanol burns more cleanly and efficiently than gasoline. Take the same engine, and you will see the thermodynamic efficiency rise from 35% to 40%, just switching from pump gas to ethanol.

Go dig up some real research that has been done on ethanol. Don't propigate false information that some random person relayed to you...
 

·
Registered
2004 Subaru FXT MT
Joined
·
1,841 Posts
That's a dangerous game - E85 is a lot less dense and you need to inject a lot more volume to avoid a lean condition.

By mixing it with normal gas, you automatically run leaner than ever designed......
Sorry I missed this earlier. This is the beauty of closed loop systems. Your AFR's will trim to compensate, given the ECU doesn't run out of range. If you have a properly tuned ECU, you can run ~40% E85 without running out of range.

If you do experience a "lean" condition at high load, since the factory ECU (speaking to turbo models) is programmed to run ultra rich anyhow (as low as 10:1 at high loads), so now you are running 11:1 or 12:1, on a more knock proof mixture. I'm failing to see the danger. I've run as high as 12.5:1 AFR (gas eqv.) on E85, pushing 21 psi on my VF43. No knock, at all, ever. I would venture to guess I wouldn't see it if I ran stoich at peak load.
 

·
Registered
2001 S Premium
Joined
·
228 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
no fighting up there.

There is some amazing potential that is yet to be unleased from E85. I swear people who knock E85 either were paid off by the oil companies or just havent really looked into it.

E85 does burn at a higher thermal efficiency then gasoline hence the "knock-proof" mentioned above. The only draw back is that the energy contained within a fixed volume of ethanol is slightly less then that of gasoline hence a reduction in overall fuel economy.

But just as the oil companies have purchased and squashed high tech battery research they also try to spread propoganda about the vegetable based fuels.

But in the long term future, would you rather drive a prius or a snarling turbocharged internal combustion engine that will have less of an impact on the enviroment during its lifetime then the creation/replacement/disposal of your prius' batteries.

I'm no green freak as i get 10mpg at the most on my worked wrx without cats, but imagine if we didnt need cats, egr valves, and emissions air pumps because the NOX emmissions were removed solely by the use of 100% ethenol, reverting us back to the days of simple engines w mega horsepower(60's era).

Maybe this post will be viewed as a bit abstract but its just an educated opinion as I have done a bunch of research as far as converting cars and whats involved, drawbacks etc.

Sole use of ethanol in the US would allow farmers to grow their crops without being subsidized by the goverment to not grow(allowing the control of corn prices) and would make us self sufficient with a little bit cleaner of a fuel.

Just my opinion.
 

·
Registered
04 Forester X, MT
Joined
·
1,039 Posts
i for one would gladly keep sending my money to arab nations if required to get 100% gas without alcohols in it, if for no other reason than not having to fill up as much.

why not allow choice at the pumps? if alcohol is so great then enough people will realize it and/or the price-value will be better that people will choose it voluntarily!
 

·
Registered
none none
Joined
·
8,844 Posts
no fighting up there.

There is some amazing potential that is yet to be unleased from E85. I swear people who knock E85 either were paid off by the oil companies or just havent really looked into it.

E85 does burn at a higher thermal efficiency then gasoline hence the "knock-proof" mentioned above. The only draw back is that the energy contained within a fixed volume of ethanol is slightly less then that of gasoline hence a reduction in overall fuel economy.

But just as the oil companies have purchased and squashed high tech battery research they also try to spread propoganda about the vegetable based fuels.

But in the long term future, would you rather drive a prius or a snarling turbocharged internal combustion engine that will have less of an impact on the enviroment during its lifetime then the creation/replacement/disposal of your prius' batteries.

I'm no green freak as i get 10mpg at the most on my worked wrx without cats, but imagine if we didnt need cats, egr valves, and emissions air pumps because the NOX emmissions were removed solely by the use of 100% ethenol, reverting us back to the days of simple engines w mega horsepower(60's era).

Maybe this post will be viewed as a bit abstract but its just an educated opinion as I have done a bunch of research as far as converting cars and whats involved, drawbacks etc.

Sole use of ethanol in the US would allow farmers to grow their crops without being subsidized by the goverment to not grow(allowing the control of corn prices) and would make us self sufficient with a little bit cleaner of a fuel.

Just my opinion.
The problem is that corn based ethanol production is, in short, stupid. IF all corn production in the us was used for ethanol, we could cover less than 30% of the country's fuel needs. Also ethanol uses tons of fossil fuels in the production/distribution anyway. So its not exactly the green solution everyone claims it is.

However, it is a very good fuel, and it has great potential in turbocharged vehicles. Definitely something that should become popular in motorsports as its basically "green" race fuel.

I'm all for green stuff (I am an environmental science major lol), but I prefer things being designed efficiently in the first place rather than gadgets (for example, the 40mpg of an early lotus elise is much more impressive than the 40-50mpg of our prius).
 

·
Registered
2004 Subaru FXT MT
Joined
·
1,841 Posts
The problem is that corn based ethanol production is, in short, stupid. IF all corn production in the us was used for ethanol, we could cover less than 30% of the country's fuel needs. Also ethanol uses tons of fossil fuels in the production/distribution anyway. So its not exactly the green solution everyone claims it is.

However, it is a very good fuel, and it has great potential in turbocharged vehicles. Definitely something that should become popular in motorsports as its basically "green" race fuel.

I'm all for green stuff (I am an environmental science major lol), but I prefer things being designed efficiently in the first place rather than gadgets (for example, the 40mpg of an early lotus elise is much more impressive than the 40-50mpg of our prius).
I didn't really want to steer the conversation this way, but yes, corn isn't an ideal fuel crop. Too hard on the ground, not to mention the supply issues.

But, there are many other options, folks just need to think out of the box. Cereal manufacturers flush out sugar water out of there plants in large volumes. Drainage ditches can be lined with cattails. Saw dust. Jerusalem artichokes. Sugarcane in the south. There are so many options its not funny, and we wouldn't have to tap into food production....

Solar and wind could drive vacuum distilleries.

For every concern about food supply and environmentalism, there are so many solutions...
 

·
Registered
2001 S Premium
Joined
·
228 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
^^

Agreed its not the best idea as far as the vegetable is concerned or the antique distilling methods we currently have, but it is still better to keep the money spent on the refinement in the US rather than in the middle east.

At least if it trickles down, it will trickle down here.
 

·
Registered
2001 S Premium
Joined
·
228 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
The problem is that corn based ethanol production is, in short, stupid. IF all corn production in the us was used for ethanol, we could cover less than 30% of the country's fuel needs. Also ethanol uses tons of fossil fuels in the production/distribution anyway. So its not exactly the green solution everyone claims it is.

QUOTE]

THe current corn production isnt even close to what it could be though, the government has been paying farmers for years to not grow crops so the bottom of the crop prices didnt drop out. There is an unfathomable amount of land just sitting unused and highly out of crop-rotation that could be used for growing things. In essence The plant is the worlds most efficient solar panel and we need to realize that.
 

·
Registered
none none
Joined
·
8,844 Posts
I didn't really want to steer the conversation this way, but yes, corn isn't an ideal fuel crop. Too hard on the ground, not to mention the supply issues.

But, there are many other options, folks just need to think out of the box. Cereal manufacturers flush out sugar water out of there plants in large volumes. Drainage ditches can be lined with cattails. Saw dust. Jerusalem artichokes. Sugarcane in the south. There are so many options its not funny, and we wouldn't have to tap into food production....

Solar and wind could drive vacuum distilleries.

For every concern about food supply and environmentalism, there are so many solutions...

Yeah, I'm hoping that people start trying different ideas. The biggest problem is really the political issues, especially with big businesses holding a ton of political power, especially the oil companies at this point. I'd really like to see biodiesel as I think that has more uses for the typical driver, ethanol seems like it may have more use in the performance car market.

I'm surprised there hasn't been more done with different types of gas. Around here the landfill captures methane and has a powerplant that powers a few thousand homes here. I want to run my car on garbage, back to the future style.
 
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
Top