Flex fuel faulted?
- Thread starter juneau92
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
E
Even Steven
Guest
I haven't heard any horror stories about them. You do know that they've been around for more than 10 years now, right? A friend of mine had a flex fuel Ford Ranger that was a 1995 if I remember correctly.
Muffin-Man
New member
I have never heard of that before, however I do know that the flex fuel engines get worse gas mileage than regular gasoline engines, I dont know why. Also, you can only get the flex fuel at select few gas stations. There is one near my house, but its not open to civilian vehicles, which is wierd.
E
Even Steven
Guest
juneau92 said:
Well, I do think they are more popular now than they were 10 years ago, but I still haven't heard anything bad about them when it comes to mechanical troubles.
Jeff Kleb
New member
It is not that flex-fuel engines get inherently worse mileage, but that using larger percentages of ethanol results in fewer miles per gallon. This is because alcohol contains less energy content (fewer BTUs) than gasoline, thus requring more of it to move a car the same distance at the same speed.
Ain't no such thing as a free lunch, huh? On a positive note, ethanol has a much, much higher octane rating than gasoline -- so knocking & pre-ignition is not a problem. (This is why so many dragsters and other such cars sometimes run on alcohol fuels.)
TheBlueWave
New member
Muffin-Man said:
In the upper midwest around here its available at lots of places. But you really don't save much money. The fuel is cheaper, yes, but the mileage is weak in comparison. Most people I know of with flex fuel vehicles don't go out of the way for a flex fuel station, they just use it when they come across it.
I haven't heard of people having problems mechanically with them, though. All that's different is the fuel system has different materials that are alcohol corrosion resistant.
Ethanol is all a scam, anyway. There are better ways to go but that's not the topic of this thread.
Ethanol is one of the biggest scams to come from the combo of government and agribusiness ever!
Here's a product that is subsidized by the Feds and our taxpayer money to an average of $2.00 a gallon at current price levels.
Factor in the problematic fact that ethanol provides only 75% of the amount of mpg of a regular gallon of gasoline.
Plus the U.S. Gov't will NOT allow the rather inexpensive import of Brazilian ethanol into the U.S. in order to 'protect' U.S. agribusiness!
Corn fructose syrup, the so-called replacement for sugar, has seen its price jump to high levels, thus increasing the prices of all products who use this 'diabetes-obesity-producing' raw material.
With corn (and other) fields awash in new crops and the future's prices of corn and all agribusiness commodities at record levels, the ethanol and flex fuel problem in the United States is a pure waste of taxpayer's money.
Ethanol is a very bad 'alternative'.
Here's a product that is subsidized by the Feds and our taxpayer money to an average of $2.00 a gallon at current price levels.
Factor in the problematic fact that ethanol provides only 75% of the amount of mpg of a regular gallon of gasoline.
Plus the U.S. Gov't will NOT allow the rather inexpensive import of Brazilian ethanol into the U.S. in order to 'protect' U.S. agribusiness!
Corn fructose syrup, the so-called replacement for sugar, has seen its price jump to high levels, thus increasing the prices of all products who use this 'diabetes-obesity-producing' raw material.
With corn (and other) fields awash in new crops and the future's prices of corn and all agribusiness commodities at record levels, the ethanol and flex fuel problem in the United States is a pure waste of taxpayer's money.
Ethanol is a very bad 'alternative'.
GM is big into that . My last Tahoe 04Z71 had it. Half the price of gas , yet half the mileage .... never could figure out that marketing gimmick.
This is what I was told on the Z71 board . Thought I would say that before someone pipes up and say it's actually 40% less. We have no E85 stations here is I was never able to test myself.
This is what I was told on the Z71 board . Thought I would say that before someone pipes up and say it's actually 40% less. We have no E85 stations here is I was never able to test myself.
boston_kevin
New member
There are two sides to the ethanol story...
Ethanol is less efficient, but more environmentally friendly. Ethanol is cheaper to produce (when produced by sugar or tree by-products) than mining for oil and refining, but corn is one of the least efficient sources for ethanol.
Several countries are striving to become entirely petrol free, including Sweden and Brazil. Government regulations of both Brazil and US do not allow export/import of Brazilian ethanol for use in the US. Last I read, 75% of all commercial vehicles in Brazil were ethanol based. 80% of all vehicles in Sweden are ethanol based.
Ethanol is corrosive than gasoline, but not much more than gasoline with additives. Some engines (like Toyota) are not designed with ethanol in mind, so perhaps this is one of the issues. People filling up their cars which state "DO NOT USE E85" with E85 which will cause issues.
Ethanol is less efficient, but more environmentally friendly. Ethanol is cheaper to produce (when produced by sugar or tree by-products) than mining for oil and refining, but corn is one of the least efficient sources for ethanol.
Several countries are striving to become entirely petrol free, including Sweden and Brazil. Government regulations of both Brazil and US do not allow export/import of Brazilian ethanol for use in the US. Last I read, 75% of all commercial vehicles in Brazil were ethanol based. 80% of all vehicles in Sweden are ethanol based.
Ethanol is corrosive than gasoline, but not much more than gasoline with additives. Some engines (like Toyota) are not designed with ethanol in mind, so perhaps this is one of the issues. People filling up their cars which state "DO NOT USE E85" with E85 which will cause issues.
Climb14er said:
Absolutely! It seems people are finally catching on to this corrupt nonsense.
boston_kevin said:
Not really. There is more and more evidence showing that this is not true. Even Time magazine is reporting it.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1725975-1,00.html
Climb14er said:
Yeah, I agree. Why don't they give up on corn and use some vegetable that won't be affected like that? Like, oh... beets. NO ONE eats beets. They are totally useless. I don't know if they have any energy value at all, unless they're stewed into borscht or something, and we don't want to talk about that.
Beets is the answer.
I see the humor here, but that wouldn't work either. Part of the reason the prices for other crops (wheat and rice for example) have increased so dramatically is that farmers are planting corn INSTEAD, because the price is higher. The decrease in supply of those crops causes their price to increase too. There is also the substitution effect which drives up demand for the non-fuel foods. For example, when corn tortillas skyrocket in price, people buy flour tortillas instead, increasing demand. So you have a decrease in supply AND an increase in demand for non-fuel foods.
Price should serve as a mechanism for ensuring the efficient allocation of resources. Because of ill-conceived government mandates, we are FORCED to pay for ethanol. This artificially tilts allocation of arable land toward corn. The price increases in response to this artificially inflated demand. When the price of something goes up, people produce more of it, so we get less of other crops and their prices increase. These increased costs are felt elsewhere- feed is more expensive, so meat, milk, cheese, etc all get more expensive.
So the government mandates screw us. Not so bad for those of use who have to pay an extra buck for our pizza, but people who can barely afford to feed their families starve. Great policy.
Price should serve as a mechanism for ensuring the efficient allocation of resources. Because of ill-conceived government mandates, we are FORCED to pay for ethanol. This artificially tilts allocation of arable land toward corn. The price increases in response to this artificially inflated demand. When the price of something goes up, people produce more of it, so we get less of other crops and their prices increase. These increased costs are felt elsewhere- feed is more expensive, so meat, milk, cheese, etc all get more expensive.
So the government mandates screw us. Not so bad for those of use who have to pay an extra buck for our pizza, but people who can barely afford to feed their families starve. Great policy.
lockerc18 said:
magnumfan
New member
I agree, with almost everything you said
Except the last thing you said. I think Ethanol is a good idea, its just that here in the US - Its been poorly implemented (or its just a scam, like you said). In Brazil (I worked there back in the mid 90s) Ethanol is the primary auto fuel, its available everywhere (they call it Alcohol) and its based on Sugar cane and they do it very well. Here in the states, Ive heard, but dont know if this is true, that Arthur Daniels Midland (ADM) has a 100% lock on the market, they are the only company ALLOWED to produce corn for the production of Ethanol.
Sounds like a monopoloy to me - just like OPEC, just like DeBeers (diamonds) and probably a few others
I think were just being ripped off (again)
I wish we could drill and use more of our own domestic oil, but that will never happen. thanks greenies. lets pay the arabs $125 or more per barrel - they are only gazzillionaires now, a few more trillion to them will not be missed by us...
joe
Climb14er said:
Except the last thing you said. I think Ethanol is a good idea, its just that here in the US - Its been poorly implemented (or its just a scam, like you said). In Brazil (I worked there back in the mid 90s) Ethanol is the primary auto fuel, its available everywhere (they call it Alcohol) and its based on Sugar cane and they do it very well. Here in the states, Ive heard, but dont know if this is true, that Arthur Daniels Midland (ADM) has a 100% lock on the market, they are the only company ALLOWED to produce corn for the production of Ethanol.
Sounds like a monopoloy to me - just like OPEC, just like DeBeers (diamonds) and probably a few others
I think were just being ripped off (again)
I wish we could drill and use more of our own domestic oil, but that will never happen. thanks greenies. lets pay the arabs $125 or more per barrel - they are only gazzillionaires now, a few more trillion to them will not be missed by us...
joe
97hb
New member
Much much misinformation about ethanol on this thread. It is not corrossive at all to your engine. Not even the rubber in the fuel systems. I run it in a car that was not designed to run e85. All I changed was the fuel pump (only cause mine couldn't pump what I needed) and the injectors (only cause mine couldn't pump what I needed). Meth is what is corrosive to your fuel system. My mileage went down from about 30mpg to about 24ish, and that is with a heavy foot and 400+hp I have had the head off maybe 3 times now, rings are perfect, piston tops are clean and the oil pump looks clean with no gumming. Where is the corrosion??? I'd like to know. As soon as I can, the runner will be running it
I have had the head off maybe 3 times now, rings are perfect, piston tops are clean and the oil pump looks clean with no gumming. Where is the corrosion??? I'd like to know. As soon as I can, the runner will be running it 
Mtneer001
New member
let us know how your 4 runner does running e85.
i would be interested in knowing how it does with the changes you suggest.
granted running ethanol may not be personally cost-effective, but from a global stand point it would be advantageous to the country to use e85 until electric hybrids can be put in to full production......
i would rather pay farmers in the midwest for their corn than sheiks for their oil in the mid-east.
i would be interested in knowing how it does with the changes you suggest.
granted running ethanol may not be personally cost-effective, but from a global stand point it would be advantageous to the country to use e85 until electric hybrids can be put in to full production......
i would rather pay farmers in the midwest for their corn than sheiks for their oil in the mid-east.
CannondaleMan
New member
Mtneer001 said:
But see, here is the problem......The growing, manufacturing, and distribution of ethanol negates any perceived environemntal benefit. Especially from corn.
As mentioned in Brazil, it is much more efficient because it comes from sugar plants which produce much more ethanol.
There is also growing concern for the Mississippi River dead zone as it flows into the Gulf of Mexico. There is already a massive dead zone that is directly attributed to fertilizer use "upriver" and since corn is one of the most fertilizer intense crops due to its nutrient depletion of the soil, the fear is this will likely worsen tremendously.
So much for it being better for the environement.
As for Archer Daniels Midland - don't forget that in these farm bills passed every year or so, there are farm subsidies and ADM gets HUGE money from the feds (that means us, the taxpayer) so we are paying through the nose on both ends - taxes and at the gas pump.
