I am going to give you all some data on E-85 verses using Premium gasoline. This will be geared to being pro E-85, please READ THE ENTIRE POST before screaming NO at the top of your lungs. I am aware Ethanol has negative effects on hoses, gaskets, and has a possibility of corrosion on our original equipment. This will be viewed in terms of analysis, of ACTUAL fuel specifications, NOT how much it would cost to retrofit or continued maintenance. That being said:
E-85 has about 73-83% of the BTU content of straight Gasoline.
E-85 get around a 25% reduction mileage per gallon.
E-85 has 100-105 octane rating compared to 91-94 for premium.
Stoichiometry A/F Ratio: E-100 is 9:1, Gasoline is 14.6:1 E-85 should be approximately 9.84:1 (based on ratios)
In Ames, IA as of 5/24/2017: E-85 has a cost of $1.799, Premium (93) has a cost of $2.899.
Analysis:
You can purchase approximately 1.61 gallons of E-85 for the same price as a gallon of (93) Premium.
With a 25% mileage reduction- 1.61 gallons would actually equal 1.21 gallons for equal distance of travel for Premium. This means you would be able to move 21% further for the same money at the pump.
With naturally aspirated engines at 14.6:1 burn ration E-85 to burn would only require 67% to burn an equivalent liquid volume. That means you can increase the fuel volume into the cylinder by around 33% at the same air ratio. With evaluating a BTU decrease of the lowest end of 73% compared to Premium. In the same cylinder during combustion you could actual produce a 6% increase of BTU's over Premium fuel.
Now to examine safe compression ratios. Most agreed upon limits for TRUE E-85 would be around 16:1 compression without detonation (I realize this ignores all design differences and real world issues). Premium (93) would be around 12:1.
Boosting applications: My 351C has a compression ratio of around 9.5:1 ignoring ALOT of variables. I would be able to supercharge or turbocharge my engine safely on Premium by 4 PSI. On E-85 I would be able to pump in 10 PSI of pressure. Generally for every 15 PSI of boost you add you about double your current engines potential. As an example is my engine produces around 435 naturally aspirated. Premium @ 4 (12.1) = 553.40 E-85 @ 10 (16:1) = 731.00. (Yes I know these are theoretical calculations)
Summary:
E-85 at current cost will boost mileage by 21% compared to Premium. E-85 will allow you to increase compression ratios by internal or boosting applications. You would receive a slight increase of BTU potential in the same static environment.
:chin:
I feel as a community we tend to look at something new and hack it off because how it was before was "better" or "just as good". Also I have noticed if you need to do anything out of "normal" maintenance every few decades its a problem.
***All of these benefits from getting some difference fuel lines (rubber and metal), carburetor (or EFI retune), and replacing a fuel take and sending unit periodically. With as low of gas mileage as we get a 21% boost would pay for itself.***
Love to hear some thoughts.
E-85 has about 73-83% of the BTU content of straight Gasoline.
E-85 get around a 25% reduction mileage per gallon.
E-85 has 100-105 octane rating compared to 91-94 for premium.
Stoichiometry A/F Ratio: E-100 is 9:1, Gasoline is 14.6:1 E-85 should be approximately 9.84:1 (based on ratios)
In Ames, IA as of 5/24/2017: E-85 has a cost of $1.799, Premium (93) has a cost of $2.899.
Analysis:
You can purchase approximately 1.61 gallons of E-85 for the same price as a gallon of (93) Premium.
With a 25% mileage reduction- 1.61 gallons would actually equal 1.21 gallons for equal distance of travel for Premium. This means you would be able to move 21% further for the same money at the pump.
With naturally aspirated engines at 14.6:1 burn ration E-85 to burn would only require 67% to burn an equivalent liquid volume. That means you can increase the fuel volume into the cylinder by around 33% at the same air ratio. With evaluating a BTU decrease of the lowest end of 73% compared to Premium. In the same cylinder during combustion you could actual produce a 6% increase of BTU's over Premium fuel.
Now to examine safe compression ratios. Most agreed upon limits for TRUE E-85 would be around 16:1 compression without detonation (I realize this ignores all design differences and real world issues). Premium (93) would be around 12:1.
Boosting applications: My 351C has a compression ratio of around 9.5:1 ignoring ALOT of variables. I would be able to supercharge or turbocharge my engine safely on Premium by 4 PSI. On E-85 I would be able to pump in 10 PSI of pressure. Generally for every 15 PSI of boost you add you about double your current engines potential. As an example is my engine produces around 435 naturally aspirated. Premium @ 4 (12.1) = 553.40 E-85 @ 10 (16:1) = 731.00. (Yes I know these are theoretical calculations)
Summary:
E-85 at current cost will boost mileage by 21% compared to Premium. E-85 will allow you to increase compression ratios by internal or boosting applications. You would receive a slight increase of BTU potential in the same static environment.
:chin:
I feel as a community we tend to look at something new and hack it off because how it was before was "better" or "just as good". Also I have noticed if you need to do anything out of "normal" maintenance every few decades its a problem.
***All of these benefits from getting some difference fuel lines (rubber and metal), carburetor (or EFI retune), and replacing a fuel take and sending unit periodically. With as low of gas mileage as we get a 21% boost would pay for itself.***
Love to hear some thoughts.