Ethanol/Methanol compatibility?

[Dr_Snooz]

I've been reading about methanol/ethanol fuel lately and am wondering how they would work in our cars. Some of what I've read says that alcohol fuels are very corrosive and can eat up seals and orings and possibly even metal parts, like aluminum carbs. Other things I've read say that only minor changes are required for most cars. As an example, this guy here (http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/284560/methanol-wins-robert-zubrin) only had to change one seal in his fuel pump to run straight methanol.

I'm wondering if anyone has any real world experience with this. What kinds of changes (if any) would be required to allow us to run up to E100 or M100? How badly will these fuels eat up my car if I decide to try them? Are there any buffering additives one can use to reduce corrosion?

[gp02a0083]

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CDsQFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.vpracingfuels.com%2Fdownload% 2FMethanol_Myth_10-5x12-5_ND.pdf&ei=-IzLU7LwMomxyAS-3ILgCA&usg=AFQjCNEoqeaHYqF4EXWXXyoPCjhSxbCX2A&bvm=bv.71198958,d.aWw

[Dr_Snooz]

Good info. Thanks!

[conozo]

Not that i would run Methonal but i have wondered about engines that were rebuilt. They have new seals which may possibly have a different chemical compound than the original stock seals. So would ethonal effect new seals as much as old and are those seals actually made differently?

[cygnus x-1]

To run much more than 10% ethanol or methanol you would need to do two things. First would be to go through the entire fuel system and make sure all of the components are compatible with the chosen fuel. In practice this would probably mean replacing many of the metal parts with plastic (lines and tanks) and replacing the seals with compatible material types. Then would be the fuel metering equipment (carb or fuel injection) and ignition system. They would need to be tuned for the particular fuel used. Given the vastly lower energy content by volume of alcohol fuels, none of the stock systems would work very well (if at all) with 100% alcohol fuel. And since neither system is really tunable, that would mean installing something else. A Megasquirt would work for fuel injection. For carbs I'm not really sure. You would need something that has jet sizes large enough to deal with the higher fuel volume required. I don't know if any of the Webers do or not. And then there is also the corrosion issue. Supposedly you can have the carb castings nickel coated (zinc) or anodized (if they're aluminum) to counter corrosion. You might end up having to run a carb specifically designed for alcohol fuel.

Unfortunately most gasoline engines also have fairly low compression, which is not so great for alcohol fuel. They will work but efficiency is not as good as it could be, like with something in the 12:1 or 13:1 compression ratio range.

C|

[Dr_Snooz]

In practice this would probably mean replacing the seals with compatible material types.

This is really the question I'm asking. Short of blowing out those seals on the road, how does one determine which are not compatible? I'm not a particular fan of the run-it-till-it-blows-then-fix-it school.


Then would be the fuel metering equipment (carb or fuel injection) and ignition system. ...that would mean installing something else.

I figured a Megasquirt would be required. And if you're going to get a Megasquirt, well heck, may as well do an EDIS conversion too. That would be the perfect setup for me.

Do you think higher volume injectors would be needed?


You might end up having to run a carb specifically designed for alcohol fuel.

Yeah, a new Flex Fuel Vehicle would be cheaper.


Unfortunately most gasoline engines also have fairly low compression, which is not so great for alcohol fuel.

As I understand it, alcohol allows you to advance timing, which somewhat makes up for the lost efficiency. Not that power is my goal. I'm looking for a free source of fuel. I sit here looking out at my creek which throws off a tremendous amount of biomass. I can run a generator off of woodgas, taking me off-grid, but it's somewhat awkward with cars because of all the ungainly hardware needed to make it. I can distill methanol from wood or buy culls from one of the packing sheds around here to make ethanol. It would be a lot of work, but I'd still like to try it.

The thing I can't understand is that people were converting their cars to run on ethanol (and methanol to a lesser extent) back in the '70s and nobody was changing seals or tanks or anything. They were drilling out their carb jets, changing plugs, advancing timing and driving. Now the only way we can use ethanol is to spend a fortune on an FFV? Something doesn't add up.

[HLW]

This is really the question I'm asking. Short of blowing out those seals on the road, how does one determine which are not compatible? I'm not a particular fan of the run-it-till-it-blows-then-fix-it school.



I figured a Megasquirt would be required. And if you're going to get a Megasquirt, well heck, may as well do an EDIS conversion too. That would be the perfect setup for me.

Do you think higher volume injectors would be needed?



Yeah, a new Flex Fuel Vehicle would be cheaper.



As I understand it, alcohol allows you to advance timing, which somewhat makes up for the lost efficiency. Not that power is my goal. I'm looking for a free source of fuel. I sit here looking out at my creek which throws off a tremendous amount of biomass. I can run a generator off of woodgas, taking me off-grid, but it's somewhat awkward with cars because of all the ungainly hardware needed to make it. I can distill methanol from wood or buy culls from one of the packing sheds around here to make ethanol. It would be a lot of work, but I'd still like to try it.

The thing I can't understand is that people were converting their cars to run on ethanol (and methanol to a lesser extent) back in the '70s and nobody was changing seals or tanks or anything. They were drilling out their carb jets, changing plugs, advancing timing and driving. Now the only way we can use ethanol is to spend a fortune on an FFV? Something doesn't add up.
To determine what's compatible with the chosen fuel, soak the seals and lines in the fuel.

If the seals or flexible lines get soft after sitting in the fuel for a week, they are not compatible.

For the hard lines, if they start to corrode, they are not compatible.

The biggest issue for thehard lines, tank, fuel rail, carb and injectors is that alcohol is hygroscopic so you need something that is lined with something that won't corrode or made of something that won't corrode.

Stainless steel hard lines should be good.

The tank can be lined with something like POR.

[gp02a0083]

Given the vastly lower energy content by volume of alcohol fuels|
6438
6439

There is the data from the experiments i did a few years back

[Accordtheory]

here's a thread on honda-tech about e85, if anyone's interested. ** The E85 Thread ** - Honda-Tech (http://honda-tech.com/showthread.php?t=1812349)

[Oldblueaccord]

here's a thread on honda-tech about e85, if anyone's interested. ** The E85 Thread ** - Honda-Tech (http://honda-tech.com/showthread.php?t=1812349)

Man your still quoting HT? :uh:

[gfrg88]

Man your still quoting HT? :uh:

That's actually a very very good read ;)

[Dr_Snooz]

Man your still quoting HT? :uh:

Alright Walt. Now that you've posted, what has your experience been running E85? Has your car disintegrated out from under you yet?



There is the data from the experiments i did a few years back

I'm having a hard time reading those graphs. Can you give me the quick and dirty?

[gp02a0083]

I'm having a hard time reading those graphs. Can you give me the quick and dirty?

No problem, this was an experiment that my lab partner and I did for a class. The goal was to see various %'s of ethanol / gas mixtures and see what effects it may have on performance. What was used is a parr bomb calorimeter to contain the combustion. We had to use iso-octane to "model" gas ( not exactly correct being gas is a blended mixture) being ethanol free gas at the same octane rating was not available. To sum it up we found where the favorable energy output limit was around 10%, any more and the energy per unit drops. The lower the ethanol content the better when talking about gasoline

[Oldblueaccord]

Alright Walt. Now that you've posted, what has your experience been running E85? Has your car disintegrated out from under you yet?




I'm having a hard time reading those graphs. Can you give me the quick and dirty?

Well snooze its a horrible story filled with dreams of black goo and purple jelly......but in my case my old Honda is still running. I don't run more than 30% at any one time but have considered changing it over to 100% but that project is pretty far off. Its only fuel related change I have made is I run 240cc RC injectors due to leaking bodies of the originals.

The Scout I run 50%. I modified the Quadrajet secondaries ,rods and jets. Thoughts of going 100% with this using and standard Holley double pumper and a Quickfuel conversion kit maybe this fall. I got it set up for a wideband this spring. The Scout sits for extended lengths maybe a month at a time and several months in the winter.

That is just my limited experience.

My personal opinion is about the same. its and AMERICAN made fuel, not China,Saudia Arabia,Iran,Iraq that we all fill up with every week. its renewable. And in your case you can make your own.

Well too I do drink a little from time to time...:rolleyes: I have been enjoying a Pimms and ginger ale my wife brought back from London this summer.

Like I said its a horrible, horrible tail.

also have been looking at one of these do hickeys a little.

E85 Conversion Kits (http://www.ez85.us/)

[gp02a0083]

very nice blue, tackling those rochester carb's. Now those things are not for novices :rockon:

[Dr_Snooz]

I was digging around in the archives last night and found a link to another "conversion kit (http://www.change2e85.com/servlet/StoreFront)." It's interesting that these guys are selling an ECU and nothing more. If ethanol were so dangerous, I'd expect them to be selling giant kits for big dollars.

Better yet, they have this page (http://www.change2e85.com/servlet/Page?template=Myths) busting myths about ethanol. They are saying that the corrosiveness of ethanol is a myth. And here's video proof:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuOs1yap8mU

Ethanol is nothing more than Everclear and that doesn't eat holes in the people who drink it. Gasoline certainly will though. So for me, I think the corrosiveness of ethanol is an urban legend.

Methanol is an argubaly different animal, however, and I need to do more research to feel good about filling up with it.

[cygnus x-1]

You found that video from a site that has an interest in selling something related to E85, so of course they would link to a video with a positive result.

The video is an interesting testimonial but it's not very scientific. We don't know that the control vehicle that was run with regular gas was operated under the same conditions as the vehicle that ran E85 most of the time. There is also only one sample of each, so we have no idea of the variability of the claimed "normal wear". They also didn't cut open the fuel tank (it may be plastic in fact) or any of the hard fuel lines to look for corrosion. I wouldn't really suspect any issues with those given that this vehicle is from 2000, when E85 was already in use for some fleet vehicles, and E10 had been around for 15 or more years. But they should have at least talked about the tank and the lines more since those are the primary areas of concern.

Having said that, I would expect any vehicle from the mid 90s on to have few if any compatibility issues from E85 use. For late 80s vehicles I think it's a little more iffy. Those were still early days for ethanol use so they may not have understood all the effects yet. Given Honda's high engineering standards at the time my guess is that a 3g Accord would not have any major issues with E85 use as far as fuel system goes.

My bigger concern would be whether E85 is economically viable given its lower efficiency. I did the math on this a few years ago, considering whether to convert my 2g Prelude to E85. At the time there wasn't enough of a price break to make it worthwhile, since you have to buy more fuel. Ethanol production is also massively subsidized right now, which I would rather not support honestly. If you have your own ethanol supply however, that's a different story.

Of course distilling your own ethanol is not legal unless you pay either the liquor tax or the fuel tax. (not that it would bother me in the least)


C|

[Dr_Snooz]

I Googled "methanol engine damage" last night. Aside from a good number of people who blew up their diesels with methanol injection (one joker blew big chunks out of his block), I couldn't find any pictures or documented cases of methanol engine damage. I did find an article from NBC that quoted some mechanics grousing about ethanol, but that had more to do with the crap being dissolved from gas station underground tanks than from the ethanol. Not saying there wouldn't be a problem, just that I'm having a hard time finding any real proof, photos, videos, etc. I mean, if it were so bad, the ethanol we already have in the fuel should be causing a lot more problems than we're seeing.

They changed the laws back in the last oil crisis to allow home distilling of ethanol. You have to fill out a couple page form (http://www.ttb.gov/forms/f511074.pdf) and promise to denature your stuff, but aside from that, it's all legit.

[gp02a0083]

I could understand rubber parts and various rubber seals needing to be replaced, both alcohols ethyl and methyl do have a good habit of destroying rubber parts over time. I think the really important issue is how well the fuel management can cope with a change in the fuel. No doubt it would change O2 sensor for instance being the combustion reaction is slightly different. Never really looked too deep into these issues as I will never run a street car on alcohols. Methanol is a little bit of a safety hazard being it "burns clear" and you cant see it, IIRC this is why decades ago they evaluated using fuels like that or introduced additives i think in indy racing. But i think that was to cut down on the smoke so other drivers could safely get out of the way of a wreck

[cygnus x-1]

I Googled "methanol engine damage" last night. Aside from a good number of people who blew up their diesels with methanol injection (one joker blew big chunks out of his block), I couldn't find any pictures or documented cases of methanol engine damage. I did find an article from NBC that quoted some mechanics grousing about ethanol, but that had more to do with the crap being dissolved from gas station underground tanks than from the ethanol. Not saying there wouldn't be a problem, just that I'm having a hard time finding any real proof, photos, videos, etc. I mean, if it were so bad, the ethanol we already have in the fuel should be causing a lot more problems than we're seeing.


I don't think you'll ever find any definitive proof, because it depends on the vehicle and how the fuel system is designed. I think you'll just have to try it.

What I would worry about most is any bare steel or aluminum that has prolonged contact with the fuel (manifolds and heads don't count). Aluminum should be anodized and steel should be coated, or use stainless steel instead.




They changed the laws back in the last oil crisis to allow home distilling of ethanol. You have to fill out a couple page form (http://www.ttb.gov/forms/f511074.pdf) and promise to denature your stuff, but aside from that, it's all legit.

Well that gets you registered with the feds. Now you just have to figure out how to deal with state fuel taxes. I'm sure it can be done but by the time you get it all running, I doubt it will be worth the effort. It wouldn't be to me anyway.

Back in 2008 I really wanted to try running my diesel on used veg oil. But getting the vehicle modified, setting up the processing, and finding a stable supply of oil turned out to be much more difficult to do (correctly) than I had the time for. If I had more time on my hands I might still try it, but for now I have other things I would rather work on with my spare time.

If you do try this keep us updated on how it goes.

C|

[Dr_Snooz]

Now you just have to figure out how to deal with state fuel taxes.

Oh, I'm pretty sure I know how to deal with those. LOL

Right now, I'm still in the research stages with all of this. I'm tired of petroleum for a lot of reasons, financial, political and environmental. I've been looking for solutions for a few years now and while I've come up with a few, they all involve a lot more R&D. I'm definitely going to build a woodgas generator for the house electric. I'll probably try alcohol for the car as well. I'm well aware, however, that there is often a big gap between theory and practice.

I'll definitely keep you posted if I move forward.

[gp02a0083]

just be careful when doing stuff like that Snooz. Make sure its all sealed up properly, i've seen bad things happen even on the lab bench top due to interconnects being cruddy and add a heat source wooooo

[Oldblueaccord]

http://www.3geez.com/forum/efi-tech/66262-e85-conversion-kit.html

I found one of the original threads on this. time flies.

http://www.3geez.com/forum/performance/75931-e85-regular-pump-gas-my-accord.html

My gas is very,very low(light on) when I parked 6am this morning I might try and put in straight e-85 this week and see what it does. My wideband needs a computer hook up and my laptop battery is shot so live wideband readings wont be happening anytime soon.


EDIT:

ORNL study on one conversion kit.

http://www.flexfuelus.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/ORNL-FlexUS-Report-April-20121.pdf

[Dr_Snooz]

My bet is that you won't even notice the difference. Maybe you'll get a little lean misfire, but I'm doubtful.



Edit: you won't notice a thing. Fill Your Tank With Freedom: Can You Put E85 in a Regular Gas-Only Car? (http://www.fillyourtankwithfreedom.com/2013/03/can-you-put-e85-in-regular-gas-only-car.html)

If you want dozens more testimonials, just type "i put e85 in my car" into Google and enjoy the reading.

FWIW, the only real problems I could find with ethanol fuel was the tendency for cars in the '70s to develop leaky rubber hoses and seals after using ethanol for a few weeks or months. Additionally, ethanol will cause cork-based gaskets to fail and some natural rubbers. However, these haven't been used in most cars since about the '30s. I'm fairly well convinced that there is no reason not to run E100 in any car made since the '80s. I need to do some more reading to feel safe using methanol, but my suspicion is that it is fine too.

[cygnus x-1]

Well, damnit. I might have to try E85 now. Around here in corn country it's usually about a dollar cheaper per gallon. I normally fill with around 16 gallons, so even at 50/50 that an $8 savings.

C|

[niles]

My two cents: my friend bought a 2012 or 2013 Ducati street bike. The ethanol in the gas he was using caused his gas tank (plastic) to swell to the point that it broke the outer sheath that goes around it. The expansion was enough for the crack in the sheath to be about 1/4" wide.

This is a known issue with Ducati because they are warranty replacing the tank and sheath.

I keep thinking to myself about the plastic in my fuel system that might be impacted. Since I do not know what kind of plastic Ducati is using in their gas tanks, I would rather not play around with more than 10% ethanol. Just like the Honda manual says.

[Dr_Snooz]

But that almost proves my thesis even more. If ethanol is going to cause problems, then it will cause problems at any percentage, like your friend discovered. He blew out his gas tank with E10 probably. He didn't have to go up to E85 to find out his gas tank wasn't compatible. To put it another way, how much non-Honda power steering fluid is safe to use in your system? Absolutely none. It will cause problems at any percentage. Thus, if E10 isn't causing you problems, I doubt E85 will either.

[niles]

You make a good point Dr_Snooz.

And it was most likely regular pump gas e10 that caused the gas tank issue. He's an avid motocross rider so he pumps ethanol-free whenever possible. Which is surprisingly hard to come by in the Portland area.

[cygnus x-1]

But that almost proves my thesis even more. If ethanol is going to cause problems, then it will cause problems at any percentage, like your friend discovered. He blew out his gas tank with E10 probably. He didn't have to go up to E85 to find out his gas tank wasn't compatible. To put it another way, how much non-Honda power steering fluid is safe to use in your system? Absolutely none. It will cause problems at any percentage. Thus, if E10 isn't causing you problems, I doubt E85 will either.


This may be true for materials that are totally incompatible, but for marginally compatible materials I think what you will find is that they break down faster with increased exposure. So for example, with E0 a fuel hose might last 25 years. With E10 maybe it lasts 20 years. But with E85 only 6 months. The difference between 20 and 25 years is not really significant because you expect to have problems anyway after that long. But if a part degrades in 6 months you notice right away.

Material compatibility is not an exact science by any means. So ultimately the only way to know if you will really have a problem is to try it.


Anyway, I put 4 gallons of E85 in my truck (2000 Nissan Frontier) yesterday, with the balance being E10. That brings it up to E25. I can't tell any difference in the way the engine runs and I'm not expecting anything to happen except for a small decrease in mileage. This time of year I generally get a little over 18MPG. The price of E85 wasn't as favorable as I was hoping. It was $2.80 vs. $3.40 for E10. Gas prices are pretty low right now so it won't take much decrease in mileage to negate the savings. We'll see what happens next week.

C|

[cygnus x-1]

You make a good point Dr_Snooz.

And it was most likely regular pump gas e10 that caused the gas tank issue. He's an avid motocross rider so he pumps ethanol-free whenever possible. Which is surprisingly hard to come by in the Portland area.

Here in the midwest we've had mostly E10 for a long time. Even back when I first started driving in the early '90s I remember most pumps had ethanol stickers.

C|

[Oldblueaccord]

http://www.3geez.com/forum/efi-tech/66262-e85-conversion-kit.html

I found one of the original threads on this. time flies.

http://www.3geez.com/forum/performance/75931-e85-regular-pump-gas-my-accord.html

My gas is very,very low(light on) when I parked 6am this morning I might try and put in straight e-85 this week and see what it does. My wideband needs a computer hook up and my laptop battery is shot so live wideband readings wont be happening anytime soon.


EDIT:

ORNL study on one conversion kit.

http://www.flexfuelus.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/ORNL-FlexUS-Report-April-20121.pdf

OK well put in about 3 gallons of E-85 on a very very low tank and put more than 30 plus miles on it this week with no problems. For what ever reason it even idles about another 100 rpms higher. Didnt do alot of WOT stuff with it but it pulled good at full throttle. I'm going to keep putting in about 5 gallons at a time to run out any regular gas in it and then get some wideband readings. Only problem is work is only 6 miles away so I don't put the miles on it like I used too.

As far as failures gonna be hard to tell because the fuel pump is original and so are the lines. if the pump quits tomorrow it might be age it might be e 85. The only thing I can think of I changed is the injectors.

[Dr_Snooz]

I can't wait to see what you learn. If you're serious about running on E85, you might consider advancing the timing. The computer should handle the mixture fairly well, but the timing is mechanically controlled and doesn't know what you're doing. Check the link for more info.

Convert Your Car To Alcohol (http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel_library/ethanol_drane.html)

[Oldblueaccord]

I can't wait to see what you learn. If you're serious about running on E85, you might consider advancing the timing. The computer should handle the mixture fairly well, but the timing is mechanically controlled and doesn't know what you're doing. Check the link for more info.

Convert Your Car To Alcohol (http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel_library/ethanol_drane.html)

I ran the timing up some when I went to 30%. I think that's were I got back some lost gas mileage. Since there is NO PING at all in the motor you can go as high as you want. Not saying that is the best for power or mileage but you can.

Its just the WOT fuel trim I worry about since it ignores the O2 sensor I got to think how I can modify it. I know it runs about 11.5 on the wideband so its rich in stock form so I think I have some cushion.

It was 2.99$ a gallon this morning. 87 octane I think was 3.19$


They only thing mention that anyone might be wary about is carberated cars just wont tolerate much over 20% with out carb modifications. It wont leave you flat but the tip in will have a dead spot and it just gets worse with the percentage. More than that you will be "pumping" the gas to take off from stop lights etc just to get enough fuel to move the vehicle. Trustme I have tried it. :thumbup:

Other thing more off topic is I run the E-10 in the 10 year old husqvarne riding lawn mower, 8 year old stihl backpack leaf blower and my 2 year old stihl weedeater. No problems but i do try and use fresh gas.

[Hauntd ca3]

It was 2.99$ a gallon this morning. 87 octane I think was 3.19$



.


A whole $3 a gallon! would love gas to be that cheap here, we're bout $8 per US gallon roughly

[cygnus x-1]

I'm down to about half a tank on the E25. Still can't tell any difference at all. The mileage seems to be the same just going by the gauge and odometer, not that that's accurate. Next time I'll bump it up to E40.

C|

[cygnus x-1]

I'm down to about half a tank on the E25. Still can't tell any difference at all. The mileage seems to be the same just going by the gauge and odometer, not that that's accurate. Next time I'll bump it up to E40.

C|


Well, I needed to fill the tank but there wasn't a station with E85 nearby, so I went back to E10. Seems like there used to be more around with E85, but now not so much. The closest station to me dropped E85 in favor of diesel.

The results with E25 weren't especially great. Current E10 price is $3.40 and I get 18MPG, which works out to 5.29 miles per dollar. With 15.79 gallons of E25 I went 270 miles and got 17 MPG. At today's prices, 15.79 gallons of E25 would cost $9.28 (E85) + 42.84 (E10) = 52.12. That works out to 5.18 miles per dollar.

So bottom line is that at today's prices I'm better off with E10 than E25. I still want to try a higher percentage like e40 or E50 to see if maybe the number will work out. I don't think they will but I want to try it to be sure.

C|

[Oldblueaccord]

Im under standing your carbed? Im surpirsed it will run really. No tip in miss?

Only thing I can add is my cold idle is hunting a lot. Now cold these last few weeks is like 70F at 5:30 am. Still don't have 200 miles on it yet.

[cygnus x-1]

Im under standing your carbed? Im surpirsed it will run really. No tip in miss?

Only thing I can add is my cold idle is hunting a lot. Now cold these last few weeks is like 70F at 5:30 am. Still don't have 200 miles on it yet.


No this is on my 2000 Frontier. FI 3.3L V6. On this thing I can't tell the difference between E10 and E25. Next I think I'll try E40.

C|

[cygnus x-1]

E40 experiment started yesterday. I put in 7.5 gallons of E85 and the balance E10. So far I still can't tell the difference in how the engine runs. No complaints from the ECU either.

This will probably be the last time I mess with E85 though, unless the price difference and availability increase significantly from what they are now. It just doesn't make sense economically.

I really need to get my diesel back on the road.

C|

[gp02a0083]

chris, im very curious that you have not seen any changes when going over an E10 rating. so you have been monitoring mpg only? im curious with the various fuel blends you are using if there is a difference in knock characteristics. it would be interesting to listen using a measurement tool to hear the audible variations when using different blends of fuels and the ignition timing associated with all of that. wonder if the ecu and fi system was jsut able to adjust itself that well you couldn't detect differences?

[cygnus x-1]

chris, im very curious that you have not seen any changes when going over an E10 rating. so you have been monitoring mpg only? im curious with the various fuel blends you are using if there is a difference in knock characteristics. it would be interesting to listen using a measurement tool to hear the audible variations when using different blends of fuels and the ignition timing associated with all of that. wonder if the ecu and fi system was jsut able to adjust itself that well you couldn't detect differences?


I highly doubt the timing has adjusted at all based on the fuel. From what I understand the ignition timing map is setup for safe operation with any grade of fuel better than 87 octane. It does have a knock sensor to reduce timing if knock occurs, but that should never happen in normal operation. Since ethanol has a higher octane rating than low grade unleaded gasoline, any amount of ethanol will be safe as far as spark knock.

Even though I haven't noticed any difference in how the engine runs, that doesn't mean it's exactly the same. I would assume if you put it on a dyno it would be down on power at full throttle, when using higher ethanol content fuel. But I normally drive pretty slow so I haven't noticed any power loss.

Fuel mileage is the only thing I'm really concerned with on this truck so that's what I've been measuring. I'm not doing any materials compatibility checking since it's relatively modern (2000) and shouldn't have any issues there. I'm also not intending to run high levels of ethanol for any significant length of time (seeing how the economy is not working out), so I'm not concerned about it.


C|

[gp02a0083]

mabye i'm thinking too far in terms of what an aftermarket ecu can do for fuel and ignition tables. I forget standard systems are open / closed loop operation. I do agree that the knock sensor should reduce or for a generalized term, adjust the timing if knock is encountered. Reason I ask is as you mentioned the ethanol is a bit higher octane ( RON, MON, AKI ratings may be different) but IIRC its in the upper 80's lower 100's for E100 for RON / MON depending on who's reporting the values, but i'm more curious in auto-combustion point. Not sure exactly the auto-combustion value, but i know with compressed ignition engines this causes a larger issue rather than in our spark ignition systems. Like you mentioned your operating this at relatively low engine speeds and loads so even the VE of the engine is going to be low and may never encounter knock as readily. IT may be in forced inductions systems an at higher engines loads and RPM's that this may play more of a part. Yah you shouldn't have many if any at all material compatibility issues regarding the %'age of EtOH your using.

BTW i found an article you may like reading if you can access it :
Impact of alcohol–gasoline fuel blends on the performance and combustion characteristics of an SI engine
Impact of alcohol–gasoline fuel blends on the performance and combustion characteristics of an SI engine (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016236110000402)

[cygnus x-1]

The auto-ignition temperature for ethanol is much higher than for gasoline. This is why people like it for boost applications.

Autoignition temperature - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autoignition_temperature)


For compression ignition it would be bad, since it will be harder to ignite. Although this could be compensated for by raising the static compression. There is some interesting stuff out there (google) about running CI engines on ethanol. Apparently it's being done in South America already.

C|

[cygnus x-1]

E40 experiment concluded. Nothing significant to report aside from lousy fuel mileage.

I went 256 miles on 16.58 gallons, which is 15.44 MPG. Cost of the E40 was $3.22/gal, so that works out to 4.8 miles per dollar.

To recap end miles per dollar:

E10: 5.29
E25: 5.18
E40: 4.8


It's interesting to note that the jump from E25 to E40 had a much larger impact on mileage than the jump from E10 to E25, even though it's the same increase of 15%. I don't think I drove any differently so it must be something with how the engine runs with the ethanol.

Looks like I won't be using E85 any time soon.

C|

[Dr_Snooz]

It would take time for the ECU to adjust its existing closed loop tables to the new fuel. I think you proved the point that there isn't any reason a modern car can't run on ethanol without changes or conversion of any kind. The ECU will adjust the spark timing and fuel mix to keep the engine running just fine. If it can't, it will give you a check engine light.

Speaking of which, did you ever get a check engine light? That's supposed to happen when you run high ethanol content. As I understand it, the O2 sensor detects too much oxygen in the exhaust stream and richens the mixture to compensate. Ergo, crappy mileage. If it becomes unable to richen the mixture any more, it flashes the CEL.

If you're planning to run ethanol more regularly, it might be well to look into fooling the O2 sensor in some way to keep it from over-richening the mixture. Not sure what that would do to a catalytic converter though. Caveat emptor.

[Oldblueaccord]

OK filled up this morning at 2.89$ a gallon.. 8.54 gallons 180 miles for a 21.6 mpg. about a 27% decrease.

I did remove the vacuum line to the fuel pressure reg and plug the line to get the cold idle to smooth out which did work. The car did start, run, idle at 57 degrees F this morning.

Thats about all to report for now.

[Dr_Snooz]

What concentration are you running now, Blue?

[Oldblueaccord]

What concentration are you running now, Blue?

E-85.


maybe about my 4th full tank. I don't put the 300 miles a week on the car like I used too.

[cygnus x-1]

It would take time for the ECU to adjust its existing closed loop tables to the new fuel. I think you proved the point that there isn't any reason a modern car can't run on ethanol without changes or conversion of any kind. The ECU will adjust the spark timing and fuel mix to keep the engine running just fine. If it can't, it will give you a check engine light.

Speaking of which, did you ever get a check engine light? That's supposed to happen when you run high ethanol content. As I understand it, the O2 sensor detects too much oxygen in the exhaust stream and richens the mixture to compensate. Ergo, crappy mileage. If it becomes unable to richen the mixture any more, it flashes the CEL.

If you're planning to run ethanol more regularly, it might be well to look into fooling the O2 sensor in some way to keep it from over-richening the mixture. Not sure what that would do to a catalytic converter though. Caveat emptor.


Except that the stoichimetric ratio for ethanol is much higher than for straight gasoline (more ethanol is needed for a complete burn), so if anything it would run too lean. But that's not exactly what happens.

What Oxygen sensors actually read is free oxygen (lean) or unburnt hydrocarbons (rich). The sensor doesn't know what the fuel is; it only knows there is too much or too little. OEM engine computers (the non-flex fuel type) are also calibrated based on this. The computer doesn't know or care what the fuel is as long as the O2 sensor says everything is ok. The computer has the ability to add or subtract fuel based on what the O2 sensor says but it can only adjust so far, because if it needs to go outside of that range there is probably something wrong.

So this means that non-flex fuel computers can deal with some percentage of ethanol, but how much they can handle depends on how they were programmed. And as long as the MIL is not on, the injected fuel amount IS still correct and the engine should run ok. If the ethanol content is high enough that the computer runs out of adjustment range, that's where it starts running too lean. There is no way it can run too rich unless the O2 sensor is malfunctioning. The catalytic converter will also function normally as long as the computer is still operating within it's programmed adjustment range.

I didn't get the MIL running E40 but my guess is that it would have come on if I went much higher than that.


Spark timing is different. The computer (non flex fuel type) will only adjust the timing if it detects knock, in which case is will reduce it temporarily. Ethanol has a higher octane rating and a higher auto-ignition point so if the engine doesn't knock with straight gasoline, it won't knock with any level of Ethanol. Therefore the ignition timing will always be the same. Unfortunately this is a bad thing for ethanol because it needs MORE timing advance than regular gasoline. It will work with less timing advance but the engine won't be as efficient as it could be. This is where the flex fuel enabled computers come in. They can detect the amount of ethanol in the fuel and adjust the ignition timing as required. They will also allow for a greater range of fuel adjustment when higher levels of ethanol are detected.


But even flex fuel engines aren't really all that great when running E85, because they also have to be able to run straight gasoline. Because of the higher octane rating and higher auto-ignition point, an engine designed to run on only E85 could have a much higher compression ratio, or with a turbo a much higher boost pressure. These allow for higher efficiency and power output (with ethanol) than can be achieved with an engine that must also be able to run on gasoline.


C|

[Oldblueaccord]

Except that the stoichimetric ratio for ethanol is much higher than for straight gasoline (more ethanol is needed for a complete burn), so if anything it would run too lean. But that's not exactly what happens.

What Oxygen sensors actually read is free oxygen (lean) or unburnt hydrocarbons (rich). The sensor doesn't know what the fuel is; it only knows there is too much or too little. OEM engine computers (the non-flex fuel type) are also calibrated based on this. The computer doesn't know or care what the fuel is as long as the O2 sensor says everything is ok. The computer has the ability to add or subtract fuel based on what the O2 sensor says but it can only adjust so far, because if it needs to go outside of that range there is probably something wrong.

So this means that non-flex fuel computers can deal with some percentage of ethanol, but how much they can handle depends on how they were programmed. And as long as the MIL is not on, the injected fuel amount IS still correct and the engine should run ok. If the ethanol content is high enough that the computer runs out of adjustment range, that's where it starts running too lean. There is no way it can run too rich unless the O2 sensor is malfunctioning. The catalytic converter will also function normally as long as the computer is still operating within it's programmed adjustment range.

I didn't get the MIL running E40 but my guess is that it would have come on if I went much higher than that.


Spark timing is different. The computer (non flex fuel type) will only adjust the timing if it detects knock, in which case is will reduce it temporarily. Ethanol has a higher octane rating and a higher auto-ignition point so if the engine doesn't knock with straight gasoline, it won't knock with any level of Ethanol. Therefore the ignition timing will always be the same. Unfortunately this is a bad thing for ethanol because it needs MORE timing advance than regular gasoline. It will work with less timing advance but the engine won't be as efficient as it could be. This is where the flex fuel enabled computers come in. They can detect the amount of ethanol in the fuel and adjust the ignition timing as required. They will also allow for a greater range of fuel adjustment when higher levels of ethanol are detected.


But even flex fuel engines aren't really all that great when running E85, because they also have to be able to run straight gasoline. Because of the higher octane rating and higher auto-ignition point, an engine designed to run on only E85 could have a much higher compression ratio, or with a turbo a much higher boost pressure. These allow for higher efficiency and power output (with ethanol) than can be achieved with an engine that must also be able to run on gasoline.


C|

Yep. Im going on your second thread. O2 sensor just knows lambada doesnt care about the fuel.

Cold idle and wot (open loop) is where my car is stuggling. If i could fix up the wot i would be happy. Working on that.

[Dr_Snooz]

Blue, do you expect any starting troubles with winter approaching? Here in Cali, we took a vote and decided not to have winter anymore. We may get a few days where the pipes freeze, just enough to wreck your garden, but all the rest of the time it's in the high 60's, low 70's. We certainly don't get rain anymore. Maybe things are different where you are.

Cygnus, thanks for correcting me on the ethanol mixture issue. Bottom line, though you can run ethanol on a non-flex fuel car, some additional tweaking is needed to take full advantage of it.

[Oldblueaccord]

Yes I suspect its going to harder and harder to start. Even in the 50's it needs about 15 secs of cranking to get going.

But like with my Scout I got it to start last year with a 50/50 mix on a carb at about 20 degrees.

As far as the OBD2 comments I would say yes reseting the computer will reset the longterm LT and shortterm ST knock tables and some of the O2 tables.

I might try a ECU reset on mine but I don't think it does much. I loose my hot idle after that for about 30 miles just gets on my nerves.

[Oldblueaccord]

Honda e85 cold start 27 degrees - YouTube (http://youtu.be/GT67CRjcOPc)


put this up 27 degree start up. Wideband says its pretty lean maybe 1.3-1.35 lambda with the fuel pressure reg. line plugged. Car takes about 2 mins to settle in to a regular idle. it always does those 2 dips in the idle in the first minute of cold start.

[Dr_Snooz]

I've owned gas powered Hondas that started worse in the same conditions. That's pretty sweet. Thanks for sharing.

[Oldblueaccord]

Thinking maybe go full e85 by spring.

Trying to come up with a way to test the pulse width modulation of my 250cc injectors. Seems like a Fluke 88v is the way to go.

[Dr_Snooz]

Just in time for the big crash in oil prices. LOL.

Good luck with the experiment, keep us posted on how it goes.

[Oldblueaccord]

Just in time for the big crash in oil prices. LOL.

Good luck with the experiment, keep us posted on how it goes.


I cant believe we might be off Arab oil in my lifetime. I never thought it happen.

Proposed Energy Policy . Jimmy Carter . WGBH American Experience | PBS (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/primary-resources/carter-energy)



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-tPePpMxJaA

[Oldblueaccord]

Honda e85 cold start 27 degrees - YouTube (http://youtu.be/GT67CRjcOPc)


put this up 27 degree start up. Wideband says its pretty lean maybe 1.3-1.35 lambda with the fuel pressure reg. line plugged. Car takes about 2 mins to settle in to a regular idle. it always does those 2 dips in the idle in the first minute of cold start.

Cold idle 70 percent gas - YouTube (http://youtu.be/1ciMr_2D9ig)

[Dr_Snooz]

I cant believe we might be off Arab oil in my lifetime. I never thought it happen.

Proposed Energy Policy . Jimmy Carter . WGBH American Experience | PBS (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/primary-resources/carter-energy)



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-tPePpMxJaA

What, from shale oil? We might get free of Saudi oil for a few weeks before 2025. Then it's all going to fall apart. The shale "miracle" is greatly exaggerated. Most of those guys are already hurting with oil down to $60/bbl. They are highly leveraged. The bankers are waiting in the wings to run in and grab all the hard assets and mineral rights after they go belly-up. The Saudis run the oil market and they can push the price down to starve out all their competition. Remember that in Saudi Arabia, you can hammer a pipe into the ground in your back yard and oil will come out of it. Nobody else in the world can produce oil as cheaply. The same thing happened in the '90s. The Saudis were having trouble controlling OPEC, so they drove the price down until everyone else hit the skids. They kept their control and we got a decade to enjoy driving around in gas-guzzling SUVs.

Everybody wins, right? At least until our tap water catches fire.

[Hauntd ca3]

What, from shale oil? We might get free of Saudi oil for a few weeks before 2025. Then it's all going to fall apart. The shale "miracle" is greatly exaggerated. Most of those guys are already hurting with oil down to $60/bbl. They are highly leveraged. The bankers are waiting in the wings to run in and grab all the hard assets and mineral rights after they go belly-up. The Saudis run the oil market and they can push the price down to starve out all their competition. Remember that in Saudi Arabia, you can hammer a pipe into the ground in your back yard and oil will come out of it. Nobody else in the world can produce oil as cheaply. The same thing happened in the '90s. The Saudis were having trouble controlling OPEC, so they drove the price down until everyone else hit the skids. They kept their control and we got a decade to enjoy driving around in gas-guzzling SUVs.

Everybody wins, right? At least until our tap water catches fire.


a mate in Canada has relatives in the oil business, and from various talks with him, I've come to the conclusion that even at current rate of growth, there is enough easy oil to keep the world going for another 100 odd years before they have to start into the oil sand which is good for another 100 odd years.
New Zealand has enough oil reserves to supply the world for best part of the next century, the problem is there are no oil rigs that can handle the sea conditions to drill it.
every one thinks the north sea is rough, that's a mill pond compared to the conditions down here.
there is plenty of oil out there for at least 200 years.
screw hybrids and electric cars, gimme nasty fuel guzzling monsters

[Oldblueaccord]

What, from shale oil? We might get free of Saudi oil for a few weeks before 2025. Then it's all going to fall apart. The shale "miracle" is greatly exaggerated. Most of those guys are already hurting with oil down to $60/bbl. They are highly leveraged. The bankers are waiting in the wings to run in and grab all the hard assets and mineral rights after they go belly-up. The Saudis run the oil market and they can push the price down to starve out all their competition. Remember that in Saudi Arabia, you can hammer a pipe into the ground in your back yard and oil will come out of it. Nobody else in the world can produce oil as cheaply. The same thing happened in the '90s. The Saudis were having trouble controlling OPEC, so they drove the price down until everyone else hit the skids. They kept their control and we got a decade to enjoy driving around in gas-guzzling SUVs.

Everybody wins, right? At least until our tap water catches fire.

Really I think its mostly just from low usage on our part. We can pull oil out of the ground conventional here in the US at about 40$ barrel. Saudis are trying to squeeze out some of the suppliers but i really think this is it. OPEC meets today :blah:

Buying from Mexico and Canada doesn't bother me.

The shale, oil tar sands is done at about 70-72$ a barrel. So the Keystone pipeline is done.

For the USA our back pocket JIC fuel is coal. Prolly still have 1000 years left of that stuff.

[Dr_Snooz]

Really I think its mostly just from low usage on our part. We can pull oil out of the ground conventional here in the US at about 40$ barrel. Saudis are trying to squeeze out some of the suppliers but i really think this is it. OPEC meets today :blah:

Buying from Mexico and Canada doesn't bother me.

The shale, oil tar sands is done at about 70-72$ a barrel. So the Keystone pipeline is done.

For the USA our back pocket JIC fuel is coal. Prolly still have 1000 years left of that stuff.

The low usage is China's. Their economy is in full collapse from what I'm reading.

The Saudis can pump oil for $1/bbl. from what I've heard, so it's 1/40th the cost of what we can do here. There really isn't any competition for them. They sent oil prices to $15/bbl. in the '90s, so there's lots more downside ahead. What's more, the Saudis are pumping "light, sweet crude" whereas everyone else is pumping something much less desirable. The tar sands oil doesn't come close to the quality of Saudi oil and sells at a big discount.

The supply of oil has never been in question. There's plenty of it. It's just a question of how much we'll pay to get it. As oil prices rise, they choke off economic activity. Thus, when the price of extraction is high, it makes more sense to leave it in the ground, especially when you don't have any assurance that the Saudis won't swoop in and wreck your market.

The larger question for me is this: why do we tolerate a monopoly on oil by the oil majors? Why are there all these stories about innovators who develop fuel-saving/alternative fuel technologies, only to see some oil major show up, buy it from them and then deep-six it? Why do the innovators who refuse to sell often die under mysterious circumstances? Why are there all these stories about people who bought big, gas-guzzling V8s off the showroom floor in the '70s that mystifyingly got 100 MPG? After they bragged to all their friends about it, the automaker showed up to replace their carburetor, after which they got the same mileage as everyone else. How is it that there have been no advances in fuel technology since the 19th century? Why is 19th century, internal combustion technology still at the heart of every automobile? These are the issues that lie at the core of the peak oil/global warming/climate change problem and no one ever asks them. This frustrates me. We spend our time arguing about irrelevancies.

I have to ask: is oil the ONLY way to fuel civilization? Of course not. There are all kinds of other fuel sources. Tesla was patenting free-energy technologies in the early 20th century. He was working on free, green, wireless electricity for everyone before JP Morgan destroyed him. Somehow that has all been forgotten. No further research has been done. The media never asks about it. Every time there is an oil price spike, there follows a flurry of "research" into all kinds of so-called alternative technologies; solar, wind, geothermal and a bunch of other flawed and useless crap. After that, we get a bunch of propaganda about how none of it is viable. A little bit of the most unworkable stuff gets released to the public, amid great fanfare, then everything goes back to the way it was.

For my part, I don't want any more dirty, destructive fuels. I refuse to believe that we can't make advances in fuel technology, when every other technology has leapt ahead. I call BS on all of it.

[Oldblueaccord]

Cold idle 70 percent gas - YouTube (http://youtu.be/1ciMr_2D9ig)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AdfEVCTELfY&feature=youtu.be

Added this one also. Just shows the wideband numbers at idle with and with out the FPR hooked up.