Why the aversion to E85?
- Thread starter RSI
- Start date
maybe you guys should go vintage racing with Sovren....where all the motorsports technology is 20-30 years old....
sounds like a bunch of folks resistant to any changes. I guess my question was really, "why not E85?" Injectors was a GREAT point.
If someone wants to go to the "apparent" trouble of running E85 why would we not let them.
on NA cars I think the performance increase is negligible at this point. It's cooler burning, but burns slower..etc.
In theory you could substitute fuel pressure regulators for injectors....kind of a bandaid to be able to run it, but a possibility.
so the new question is, "if someone is willing to do the work to run E85.(and its not a performance benefit where guys running in the back of the pack are now challenging the middle or front)...why would IT not allow that to happen?"
sounds like a bunch of folks resistant to any changes. I guess my question was really, "why not E85?" Injectors was a GREAT point.
If someone wants to go to the "apparent" trouble of running E85 why would we not let them.
on NA cars I think the performance increase is negligible at this point. It's cooler burning, but burns slower..etc.
In theory you could substitute fuel pressure regulators for injectors....kind of a bandaid to be able to run it, but a possibility.
so the new question is, "if someone is willing to do the work to run E85.(and its not a performance benefit where guys running in the back of the pack are now challenging the middle or front)...why would IT not allow that to happen?"
Thank you for adding to the discussion. No really I did not mean to come off that way. I have run my personal daily driver on E85 for 5 years now and absolutely love it as a fuel source. I would race on it in a second if it were legal. The effort in tuning it is no more work that optimizing a race or pump gas car.
Last edited:
What "rubber" parts in your carburetor are there other than the o-rings around the idle jet holders ? The O-rings would be easy to match up with ones of compatible material if the existing ones swell or deteriorate when tested in E85. The accelerator pump is not rubber any more and the paper gaskets are not an issue.
shwah
New member
The only question was in your title: Why the aversion to E85?
I don't have an aversion per say, I just don't use it because it is inconsistent as provided at the pump, has lower energy content per pound and requires higher injector flow for proper tuning.
My earlier response was solely in relation to the suggestion that E85 is green. The way we do it in the US, it is not as green as Plain Old Gas. I see it more as a subsidy program for the farming industry.
If the reason to do it is that it 'is perceived as green' (which it is by some), rather than it 'is green' (which it isn't) then I simply disagree with the need to accomodate it. I'm not opposed, just don't think we HAVE to allow it.
IMO a stronger argument would be to require no-lead fuels across the board.
Maybe gather data on the amount / type of fuel consumed and emission produced at a race weekend so we can know whether the environmental impact matches the PR 'hit' that the sport is taking.
shwah
New member
While it is not applicable to my race engine, with shorter oil change intervals, could you point me towards some data on the 'virtually no pollutants deposited in the engine oil' part? I had not heard that before.
My understanding of the E85 spec is that it has a pretty wide tolerance for actual percentage of ethanol, which will impact the octane rating. Is 105 on the high, or low side of that tolerance?
E85 may be 'renewable', so is hydrogen, but both are energy negative when the whole process is taken into account. It consumes more fuel/energy to manufacture/distribute than you can get out of it, and more than comparable energy content gasoline. Changing the source of organic matter could improve that, but corn -> fuel is not the best approach.
To take your point a step further we should be racing all electric 'zero emission' cars, which would actually be displaced emission cars that have a much larger carbon footprint dedicated to battery manufacture and disposal, and a smaller carbon footprint moved from the car to the power plant for the energy used. I'm not interested in 'appearing' to be green.
Yes most, but not all, retail pumps have ethanol in them, there should not be a material compatibility problem in any car 30yrs or younger.
I don't care if people run E85, but don't build a faulty case for why we all should.
From a Mustang drag race article:
Ethanol is especially hard on vintage Mustangs with their rubber fuel hoses (my car has those), carburetor float needle valves (my Weber has those), die-cast carburetor bodies (my webers are die-cast), galvanized fuel tanks and lines (my car has those), and related components. Some owners have reported problems with phenolic carburetor floats (big concern).
Because ethanol accelerates the deterioration of vintage fuel system
components, you must take care of regular preventative maintenance more often. All fuel system rubber parts should be replaced annually and inspected frequently. Because ethanol tends to be hard on die-cast carburetor bodies, this also calls for close inspection because ethanol and zinc don't get along well. Although ethanol probably won't harm your carburetor's metal parts, there's always some element of risk (depending on your carburetor's metallurgy).
Stainless steel needle and seat is a partial solution--not exactly sure if available--stainlee fuel lines (expensive); and rubber hoses can be swapped for something more E-85 tolerant.
I have spoken with GM Powertrain engineers who state that there would be a lot of work in the conversion.
I'll pass.
Ethanol is especially hard on vintage Mustangs with their rubber fuel hoses (my car has those), carburetor float needle valves (my Weber has those), die-cast carburetor bodies (my webers are die-cast), galvanized fuel tanks and lines (my car has those), and related components. Some owners have reported problems with phenolic carburetor floats (big concern).
Because ethanol accelerates the deterioration of vintage fuel system
components, you must take care of regular preventative maintenance more often. All fuel system rubber parts should be replaced annually and inspected frequently. Because ethanol tends to be hard on die-cast carburetor bodies, this also calls for close inspection because ethanol and zinc don't get along well. Although ethanol probably won't harm your carburetor's metal parts, there's always some element of risk (depending on your carburetor's metallurgy).Stainless steel needle and seat is a partial solution--not exactly sure if available--stainlee fuel lines (expensive); and rubber hoses can be swapped for something more E-85 tolerant.
I have spoken with GM Powertrain engineers who state that there would be a lot of work in the conversion.
I'll pass.
europeanspec
New member
If you are looking for "intelligent responses," the internet is the wrong place to look. Regardless, here are a couple of responses. Rebuke correctly or I'll make fun of you.
Why would you need 105 Octane in IT unless you were running high-compression, which is illegal?
I change my oil often enough that I don't worry about pollutants. I'm looking for metal in my oil.
You have to burn 40% more so you would have to carry 40% more. Weight is bad.
E85 is also harder to extinguish than straight gasoline. It takes different chemicals. How will the safety crew differentiate what you have when you are on fire?
Alcohol is for drinking, gasoline is for racing.
our volvo's run 10.8:1 and 11.0:1 compression. I didnt think that was high.. 
..but it sure likes 97-100 octane. At least that is the octane at which MBT with the most power.
as for your 40% number..is that from your experience of driving a car that has been converted or something you read on the internet, where all posts are intelligent and well thought out?
as for alcohol for drinking and gasoline for racing.....I sure hope gasoline isnt for drinking
..but it sure likes 97-100 octane. At least that is the octane at which MBT with the most power.as for your 40% number..is that from your experience of driving a car that has been converted or something you read on the internet, where all posts are intelligent and well thought out?
as for alcohol for drinking and gasoline for racing.....I sure hope gasoline isnt for drinking
btw...I've gotten two intelligent items through this thread.
One E85 would require larger injectors..ie it would require another change of the rules. That's key.
Next, I got a PM regarding the E85 possibly failing the dielectric constant test used by scca.
Thanks for those who have provided insight as to why the governing body wouldnt allow E85.
Jonathan
One E85 would require larger injectors..ie it would require another change of the rules. That's key.
Next, I got a PM regarding the E85 possibly failing the dielectric constant test used by scca.
Thanks for those who have provided insight as to why the governing body wouldnt allow E85.
Jonathan
europeanspec
New member
I didn't read it on the internet. I learned it in College Chemistry. Just the same, your car on the interstate can run just fine at Stoich, but during race conditions you want a fatter mix. Have you ever run your Volvo in race conditions on Ethanol?our volvo's run 10.8:1 and 11.0:1 compression. I didnt think that was high..
as for your 40% number..is that from your experience of driving a car that has been converted or something you read on the internet, where all posts are intelligent and well thought out?
as for alcohol for drinking and gasoline for racing.....I sure hope gasoline isnt for drinking
Here in the South, we are adverse to new ideas such as birth control and women's sufferage. E85 is nowhere on the horizon.
dickita15
New member
From a research and marketing point of view I can see SCCA approving alternate fuels in the future as long as the safety implications are well researched, but I certainly do not see it starting in Improved Touring. Too many exceptions would have to be made to our ruleset. This type of experipentation would be better suited to production, Gt and even C or D sportsracer where the alterations needed are already permitted.
steve b
New member
europeanspec
New member
Be careful what you wish for. I'll be at Barber in September, but I'm not sure if I'm driving yet. My car is back burner and my buddy's rentals may be full.