Main Menu
Advertisement
Affiliates
Advertisement
Newest Members
Krumfishing, Fishing is the best, rnger518, stcow, jrb50
104792 Registered Users
Top Posters
TexDawg 84869
hopalong 77235
Pilothawk 74604
JDavis7873® 67382
John175 ® 63085
FattyMcButterpants 60665
Derek 🐝 57550
Tritonman 57447
SkeeterRonnie 52884
LoneStarSon® 52769
facebook
Forum Stats
104792 Members
60 Forums
840987 Topics
11999060 Posts

Max Online: 36273 @ 01/23/13 02:34 PM
Topic Options
#11164385 - 10/14/15 04:03 PM E-85 Fuel
BassSAT Offline
Extreme Angler

Registered: 05/21/02
Posts: 1571
Loc: San Antonio, Texas
What are the pro's and con's on this fuel?

Top
#11164438 - 10/14/15 04:23 PM Re: E-85 Fuel [Re: BassSAT]
redchevy Online   content
TFF Celebrity

Registered: 01/25/05
Posts: 6495
Loc: texas
I vote no pro's.


Edited by redchevy (10/14/15 04:23 PM)

Top
#11165275 - 10/14/15 08:04 PM Re: E-85 Fuel [Re: BassSAT]
Shadetree Offline
Angler

Registered: 09/01/05
Posts: 405
Loc: Port Neches Texas
If your vehicle is not designed to use it it can do lots of damage. As far as I know there are no advantages except it costs less per gallon but that is offset by the fact that it will get less miles per gallon than the regular at the pumps now with 10% ethanol. b


Edited by Shadetree (10/14/15 08:08 PM)
_________________________
If I'm not fishing or hunting I'm hunting a place to fish or hunt.

Top
#11165359 - 10/14/15 08:42 PM Re: E-85 Fuel [Re: BassSAT]
Allison1 Online   sleepy
TFF Guru

Registered: 12/14/03
Posts: 17329
Loc: Grand Prairie, Tx
Like said its got no real advantages. It may even be less clean burning than E10.

Most of the pumps selling it are in the corn belt.

Top
#11165880 - 10/15/15 06:39 AM Re: E-85 Fuel [Re: BassSAT]
Ambassador84 Offline
TFF Team Angler

Registered: 02/03/11
Posts: 3070
Loc: San Antonio
Sucks and was a govt boondoggle.
_________________________
Man up. Fight the GOOD fight.




Top
#11166653 - 10/15/15 12:12 PM Re: E-85 Fuel [Re: BassSAT]
Stump jumper Online   content
TFF Celebrity

Registered: 04/19/04
Posts: 7242
Loc: Rockwall
Dual purpose? You can put it in both tanks. None unless you just want to support Obama and the ethanol manufacturers.

Top
#11167271 - 10/15/15 05:06 PM Re: E-85 Fuel [Re: BassSAT]
Allison1 Online   sleepy
TFF Guru

Registered: 12/14/03
Posts: 17329
Loc: Grand Prairie, Tx
If only you knew rather than spoke. Ethanol subsidies done in the early part of this century (2004) that were designed to jumpstart production have all gone away. In 2012 I believe. Ethanol is lower than gas but right now its not enough to make the difference between the low cost of E10. When it was in the mid 3 dollar range and above E85 made sense even with its 20 something percent loss in mpg. Now it does not since its price is less than 10 percent below gasoline.



Top
#11167335 - 10/15/15 05:46 PM Re: E-85 Fuel [Re: redchevy]
gander Offline
Pro Angler

Registered: 12/04/05
Posts: 858
Loc: Ellis county
Originally Posted By: redchevy
I vote no pro's.
THIS

Top
#11177140 - 10/21/15 02:35 PM Re: E-85 Fuel [Re: BassSAT]
texasbass1 Offline
TFF Celebrity

Registered: 02/12/05
Posts: 5386
Loc: The Colony, TX
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/economic-i...hanol-subsidies

Subsidies seem to have reappeared.

I also vote no pro's to any ethanol infused fuels.
_________________________
Pat Leach



USAF MSgt Retired

Top
#11208206 - 11/05/15 07:24 PM Re: E-85 Fuel [Re: BassSAT]
dago-red Offline
Green Horn

Registered: 11/04/15
Posts: 14
No power 1/4 less the fuel mileage JOKE !!!!

Top
#11208732 - 11/05/15 11:24 PM Re: E-85 Fuel [Re: BassSAT]
msg_f91 Offline
Outdoorsman

Registered: 05/01/12
Posts: 187
For regular passenger vehicles there is no pro's. But for high performance turbo cars E85 is like 97 Octane, requires a higher temp spark to ignite, and burns cooler. So it equals to being able to boost the crud out of your turbo car without worrying about knock or pre detonation. Only down side is it requires more fuel per combustion event meaning huge injectors and about 3/4 the mileage

Top
#11209230 - 11/06/15 10:19 AM Re: E-85 Fuel [Re: dago-red]
redchevy Online   content
TFF Celebrity

Registered: 01/25/05
Posts: 6495
Loc: texas
Originally Posted By: dago-red
No power 1/4 less the fuel mileage JOKE !!!!


The worse mileage is true, but the no power is wrong.

It can generate a lot of power, but is best utilized in higher compression applications than a lot of street cars run. GM actually published different performance figures for their new direct injection motors for E-10 and E-85. There was a pretty significant performance difference, but yes the mpg's suck compared to regular.

GM rates the current 5.3 at
E-10 355 HP and 380 TQ
E-85 383 HP and 416 TQ

That's a gain of 28 HP and 36 TQ, it will get worse mpg's on E-85 though. Performance wise it will turn your GM 5.3 into a Toyota 5.7

Top



© 1998-2017 OUTDOOR SITES NETWORK all rights reserved USA and Worldwide