Jasonb1982

iTrader: (3)

I've been searching around and wondering if I can run my 03 Max off of E85. From what I saw I think all I may need is an adjustable fuel regulator and turn up fuel pressure 20% when running ethanol. Now I realize the 20% approx fuel economy loss associated with it however the local E85 pump is only $2.40 a gal. compared to the $3.85 I filled up with the other day; still results in savings. I tried searching and didn't come up with much. Thanks.

SilverMax_04

Bad idea.

Ethanol is more corrosive than gasoline and is a much stronger solvent. If your car was not designed to handle E-85 (the Maxima was not), you will very soon damage your fuel delivery system. And the highly solvent nature of ethanol could also damage your engine (which was also not designed to burn E-85). The damage to the engine could well result from insufficient lubrication of the cylinder walls after the highly solvent E-85 is continually burned in this engine.

I have recently done the calculations and find that gasoline contains 113.1 K BTUs per gallon (net) and ethanol contains 79.3 K BTUs per gallon (net). Thus, a blend of 15% gasoline and 85% ethanol will contain about 84.4 K BTUs per gallon (net). At $2.40 per gallon for E85, you are paying 2.84 cents per 1 K BTU (net). At $3.85 per gallon for gasoline, you are paying 3.40 cents per 1 K BTU (net). So there is a slight saving by buying E-85 -- until you have to get your fuel delivery system repaired. The two would be a "wash" on a BTU cost basis if gasoline costs only $3.21 per gallon. But remember that there are government subsidies that get the E-85 ethanol cost as low is $2.40 -- without those subsidies, it would be more expensive than that.

On the basis of these net heating values, E-85 has 25.4% less energy than gasoline with no ethanol.

If anyone cares, I can go through the calculations I made to get those net BTU numbers, starting with gross heating values from Wikipedia expressed in BTU per pound for both gasoline and ethanol. No one wants to know gross BTUs per pound but rather net BTUs per gallon.

Jasonb1982

iTrader: (3)

Yes, I'm well aware of the BTU rating difference between e85 and gasoline. gasoline does burn hotter and produce more power hence the mpg loss associated with e85. My only question is what exactly makes my car available to run on e85 then? From the research I've done all these new flexfuel chevys and dodges have these things done to them to make them "flexfuel": stainless steel fuel lines, tweaked ecu, different fuel regulator/injectors. Nothing has been done to engine.

SilverMax_04

I'm not certain what your exact question is. But I will raise a few issues about ethanol.

Back in the late 1980s when 10% ethanol was first mandated in Colorado for "air pollution purposes," there were a number of older vehicles that developed problems because their fuel delivery system had been designed for gasoline only and could not withstand the more corrosive and solvent nature of even 10% ethanol. Rubber fuel lines failed, deposits were loosened and then plugged different parts of the fuel delivery systems in these older vehicles. By the early 1990s most of these older vehicles had been replaced with vehicles designed to handle 10% ethanol.

Now you want to run 85% ethanol in a vehicle that was only designed to handle 10%. Not a good idea. There are fuel lines and gaskets in your fuel system that will not stand up to 85% ethanol. Stainless steel fuel lines are only one issue.

I was simply speculating on possible engine damage due to lack of lubrication when burning E-85. I don't know if Dodge or Chevy do anything more to their engines to handle the extreme solvent nature of ethanol being burned inside of the cylinders. I suspect that they do something, but do not know for certain.

Don't get sucked into the ethanol political boondoggle. Soon the fact that ethanol does not make economic sense will become more apparent and, hopefully, many of the government subsidies (paid by taxpayers) will be eliminated. If ethanol had to stand on its own merits, without sibsidies or government mandates, it would soon dry up.

20V6

I do, in my '95 - for the last 13000km... (8100 miles)
Abcesso Flex Fuel Kit.
No issues at all!
Power output and torque is up.
No knocking or pinging. E85 has 104-105 octane.
Consumption +29%
Prior to installing the kit I was using 50/50 in the Max for at least 8000km.
Pollution check done this september: CO=0.01, HC=12, CO2=15.3, O2=0.1, Lambda=1.00 (E85 only in the tank)

I do the same with my 01' Ford Focus, and use 50/50 mix in my '71 Volvo 142 and '73 Porsche 914.

Works like a charm in all of them!

grey99max

iTrader: (12)

So what's your opinion of using race fuel in a '99 Maxima? Will it damage your fuel delivery system? Will it damage your engine?

I sure hope not - but I probably would have noticed after three years of the stuff.....

SilverMax_04

{See some of my comments in these brackets} -- and then below.

You need to do a calculation of cost per mile (or per kilometer) to determine if you are ahead using E-85 versus E-10 -- or if available E-0 or undiluted gasoline. My suspision is that your cost per mile (KM) using E-85 is higher than it would be burning gasoline. The price break here in the states is generally not enough to offset the loss in miles per gallon with the higher (85%) concentration of ethanol. That is why so few stations here have converted to offer this fuel -- people have found that it is generally not economic -- even with the tax breaks that some states offer to get people to burn it.

But most E-85 users feel that they are "making a difference" for the planet -- even though they would be hard pressed to scientifically prove that they are when the ethanol is produced from corn.

SilverMax_04

This racing fuel likely has a higher concentration of Toluene and other high-octane aromatics (xylene). If that is the case, there should be no damage to your fuel delivery system. It also should not damage your engine.

However, if this fuel is not lead-free, it will damage your cat-converter. I've been told that racing fuel is now all lead-free. But in years past, this fuel had a reasonably high concentration of TEL (Tetra-Ethly Lead). Suspect this is no longer the case, but don't know for certain. You should be able to ask your supplier if the fuel is lead-free.

20V6

Torque and power - only personal perception. However burning Ethanol in a piston engine is known to increase torque slightly because it's burning slower (longer) than gasoline.

Octane - I know I can't utilise 104 octane. Not an issue for me, I never get pinging or knocking anyway with 95 RON. However, you guys running 87 (RON+MON)/2 might get knocking and decreased performance because the ECU adjust timing less agressively.

Consumption - up by 29%. Still profitable for me because of a high price break: NOK 8.59 vs. 12.95. E85 corrected for 30% consumption increase: 8.59x1.3=11.17 Still quite a saving.
Of course you will have to do the math with your own figures.

For the record: When (if) gasoline drops to 11.17 (my break-even point) I'm back on gasoline.

BTW: 12.95/liter = $8.36/USgal

20V6

I'm not going to comment on this because I don't know the longterm effects on my vehicles yet either.
However I'm just going to put in this link for people to make up their own mind: http://www.convertanycar2e85.com/faqs.htm

SilverMax_04

- Torque & Power: As I suspected, this is only your opinion. For the same amount of power, you will need about 30% more volume of E-85 to generate the energy that gasoline would provide. At WOT (Wide Open Throttle), can your fuel system deliver that much added volume? I don't know, but suspect not. I tend to doubt if you can feel any torque difference because of ethanol's slightly slower burn rate. As I pointed out in earlier post, you need a dino test to actually prove your perceptions.

- As I pointed out in my long discussion on octane and what it means, RON (Research Octane Number) is the octane measure used to advertise octane in the rest of the world --other than the US and Canada that use by law (R+M)/2 octane and which is posted on the gas pump. A rough approximation of the (R+M)/2 octane for 95 RON gasoline would be about 90 octane number. Because octane is not a very linear measurement, it would require actual measurement of both R and M octane of ethanol to convert the 104 RON for Ethanol to this measurement system.

If you want to read the details in my earlier post on octane, go here:
http://forums.maxima.org/fluids-lubr...hat-means.html

- Looks like you have done the calculations to determine that you are getting a better value out of E-85 than out of gasoline. I don't have the time to check your calculations, so will accept them as valid. I do know that many here in the states have tried E-85 and done the calculations and gone back to gasoline -- because of better economics for it.

20V6

WOT returns a duty-cycle of 90% on the injectors. I have a LED that's measuring this for me.
BTW you don't need to enrichen that much at WOT when you're using E85 vs. gasoline. E85 burns at far lower temperature than gasoline, hence less need for the rich mixture which only purpose is to cool the engine sufficiently.

Silver, if you would read that again you would notice I was pretty active in that discussion...
Different measurements set aside, you can't dispute that ethanol is a great octane-booster. And after all our cars are japanese. The japs use RON. The Maxima requires 95 RON to operate as it's supposed to - at sea level that is. It says so in the owner's manual and every other document I've seen. However due to the knock sensor you CAN use fuel with a minimum of 91 RON (which would be approx. your 87), with a loss in performance and milage.

Like I said, do the math! It's reducing my fuel cost, it might not reduce yours.
Jasonb1982 wanted to know if someone was running straight E85 in a Max. I am, that's why I replied. And there's a lot of myths out there about ethanol, some of them are maybe true, but most of them are not.
BTW I'm in posession of a TSB that describes the differences between the gasoline-only Ford Focus and the FFV Ford Focus. If you're interested PM me your e-mail address and I'll send it to you.

Oh, and again I'll point out: I DON'T know the long-term effects this will have on my car(s). However I still refer to the link in one of my previous posts about the 2000 Chevy...

SilverMax_04

You may well be correct on E-85 -- but I will not believe it until I see the proof from dino testing. The rest is mere speculation and conjecture.

I don't dispute the octane boost effect of ethanol. What I dispute is the belief that corn based ethanol will "save the planet" from having to use petroleum based fuels. When you do an energy balance around corn-based ethanol it comes out break even to slightly negative depending on who does the calculation. And it usually takes petroleum fuels to plant, fertilize and harvest the corn. To move it to the ethanol plant and sometimes even to run the ethanol plant. In the end when you balance the energy produced versus the energy expended producing this fuel, corn-based ethanol is not a good deal. Only government subsidies and mandates make it economic for the end user here in the USA.

As for the best octane booster, I much prefer either Toluene or Xylene to ethanol because both contain no oxygen molecules and thus more energy.

Your RON quotes can confuse some here who are used to seeing only pump-posted (R+M)/2 octanes, called Octane in my examples, below. So I will do an approximate conversion for them using essentially quotes from my 2004 Maxima Owner's Manual:
- Recommends 91 Octane (96 RON) for maximum performance.
- Says that 87 Octane (92 RON) will work adequately so long as you don't expect maximum performance.
- Says that 85 Octane (90 RON) will work adequately at elevations above about 4,000 feet. This is the fuel I use here in Colorado at between 6,000 and 7,000 feet elevation.

Most octane-obsessed owners on this site believe that their Maxima (which recommends 91 Octane) works even better burning 93 Octane (98 RON). Many try to obtain racing fuel with even more octane in the belief that they get even better performance with Octane over 93. I should point out that many using racing fuel are in California where that state's pollution control laws prevents production of street-grade premium gasoline more than 91 Octane (96 RON).

In fact, so long as their engine and fuel system are free from deposits, their Maxima should provide maximum performance (provided there have been no engine modifications) burning 91 Octane (you say that European versions only recommend 95 RON which would be only 90 Octane.).

When my 2004 was new I tried to prove that I could get better mileage burning Premium gasoline rather than Regular gasoline. I only did a few tests and the results were not necessarily difinitive. But my results actually came out with slightly better mileage burning Regular gasoline. At that time I communicated with a Maxima owner on this site (StevTec) who is an engine expert and who I have not seen here for some time. It was his opinion that Regular gasoline burned for highway cruising (where you don't call for maximum performance) should produce better mileage than Premium gasoline. My very limited highway testing tended to agree with this position. Ever since I have not put a drop of Premium gasoline in my 2004.

I'd be more curious about the "ethanol myths that are not true." As you can probably tell by now, I am not a fan of corn-based ethanol. It is a political boon-doggle in this country that has only succeeded in raising gasoline prices (due to ethanol mandates) and the retail price of corn (due to reduced supply).

CreativeSkillz

I want to run e85 in my '01 Maxima.

What do I need to do? Did you have to do any modifications? I've read that most cars only need bigger injectors and maybe a better fuel pump to deliver the extra fuel needed to run E85 vs Gasoline.

I've also read that most rubbers these days (such as those used on newer cars fuel systems) are designed to withstand Ethanol. Since it's not pure Ethanol, there is still some gasoline in the mix to help lubricate the rubber anyway. Hence why it's called E85 (being 85% Ethanol).

Just a bit curious, we have a gas station close by the sells it and I'm thinking about picking up a 55 gallon drum w/ pump to store it for my car. (The gas station that sells it is around 10 miles away)

SilverMax_04

Why would you want to do that? E-85 is a dumb fuel with much less energy than gasoline per gallon. A 10% ethanol blend contains about 3 to 3.5% less energy than pure gasoline. At 85% ethanol this means there is between 25% and 30% less energy than in pure gasoline -- and about 22% to 26.5% less energy than in a 10% ethanol blend. I have a Business Week article from 2006 that states: "USA Today recently reported that the Energy Dept. estimated the drop in mileage at 40%" from burning E-85. If the mileage loss is only 25%, then E-85 would need to be priced at $2.03 if premium gasoline was selling for $2.70 (the price here). If the mileage loss is in the 35% range, then E-85 would need to be priced at $1.76 to equate to $2.70 a gallon premium. Around here, E-85 is only about 20 cents cheaper than regular and about 40 cents cheaper than premium.

You need a larger volume of fuel because of the reduced energy content.

The rubbers and plastics you discuss in fuel systems are designed to withstand gasoline with 10% ethanol blended into it. For the higher concentrations (85%) of ethanol you need fuel lines that are much more resistant than these rubbers or plastics. Many flex-fuel vehicles that are built by the factory use stainless steel for much of their fuel system.

Do the math (cost of the fuel vs the cost of gasoline) (also the cost of converting your fuel system) and you will stop dreaming about a boon-doggel fuel = E-85.

99custom

I wouldn't run E-85

aic96max

iTrader: (12)

my two cents, i dont run it on my maxima, 3.5 na, but i am switching on the grand natinal because its alot cheaper than race gas and the only thing you need to worry about is 30% more injector size that you will need and a bigger fuel pump as you will use more fuel. yes, it may hurt rubber over time, but there are plenty of guys running this on evos, and turbo regals. **** works, and alot of people mix it as well. well worth it for a performace car, not sure about a stocker without any fuel control, car may run lean. replace your fuel injection hoses with new one and im sure you will not have the car anymore by the time the alcohol creates any noticeable affect. 20 plus year old cars are using in it.

why would anyone want to use it, lets see, its cheap, very good octane numbers which will allow for an awsome tune......i dont know im in

bigleman

iTrader: (4)

if it were my car, i'd def replace everything from the fuel pump to the injectors

aic96max

iTrader: (12)

2nd that ...Bigle, id replace all that too

bigleman

iTrader: (4)

here is a lot of GOOD info on E85

http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/fuelin...r-ls1-e85.html

liqidvenom

iTrader: (6)

most new cars sold world wide would have the plumbing to run e85 it might just not have the ecu ability to tune for it

Bobo

I run 90 octance gas with 10% ethanol. It is available at Husky and Mohawk stations in British Columbia at the same price as 87 octane. I have no performance or fuel consumption issues with this gasoline and have been using it for over 4 years.

Hatmanafro

iTrader: (1)

im kinda interested in running e85 since its cheaper.. i drive an 89 maxima.. is it too old to run it without worriying about it?
like.. will it **** sumthin up?

SilverMax_04

Big Time ***-up. Your Max is not designed to run highly corrosive ethanol.

In addition, while the cost per gallon is cheaper for E-85, the cost per mile driven is often higher due to the much poorer mileage that you will get with the lower energy-content ethanol.

Bottom Line - forget E-85 - it is a looser for most vehiches.

Hatmanafro

iTrader: (1)

ok man. ive read the thread and read all of ur rants against E85. lol.. i want sumbody elses opinion that has actually done it

Nismo87SE

I've ran e85 in my se-r several times. It helped my car pass emissions, while it failed on gas. Also my engine runs around 5*F cooler and part throttle is more responsive. To properly run E85 u need to change all fuel hoses + lines to ethanol safe parts as well as inj, o-rings, fuel pump. A custom tune would allow more power as well. My mpg went from 27-29 on gas to 23-25 on E85.

SilverMax_04

Correct. You need to change out the whole fuel system to handle this more corrosive ethanol blend. And E-85 is much more corrosive than the 10% ethanol blend that you are now forced to buy -- because that is the only gasoline available in much of the country. Your existing Maxima is designed for E-10 and not for E-85.

I rant against E-85 because it exists because of a political decision that supports its existance and not because it is a good-value fuel for vehicles.

To help keep its price down, most states waive the highway tax that we pay when we buy gasoline. So this fuel does not support the building and maintenance of our roads. A government subsidy to support the ethanol industry -- not good fuels.

Hatmanafro

iTrader: (1)

gotcha.. im prolly not gonna do it since i gota go out of my way in order to have it run properly..

gizzsdad

I live right in the middle of ethanol country(I have an ethanol plant less than 3 miles from my home) and I agree with this statement.

SilverMax_04

U.S. delays action on more ethanol in gasoline
Staff and Wire reports
Automotive News | December 1, 2009 - 10:16 am EST

The EPA today delayed a decision to increase the ethanol content of gasoline to 15 percent from 10 percent while the agency continues testing engines and fuel systems.

The EPA said it will make a final determination in about six months.

Increasing the ethanol content in gasoline by 5 percentage points likely would not harm newer engines, the EPA said. But it could make it a bit tougher for automakers to meet stricter fuel economy standards.

Because ethanol carries less energy than gasoline, the higher content could slightly lower the fuel economy ratings of new cars. This comes as automakers work to make their fleets meet the 35.5 mpg federal corporate average fuel economy standards required by 2016.

Industry support:
General Motors Co. supports the delay, said spokeswoman Sharon Basel.

“We do agree that further testing and study is needed before we could recommend a safe and reliable increase in cars and trucks,” she said.

Basel said it isn't known how 15 percent ethanol would affect older engines. Most vehicles built after 2001 can safely run on 10 percent ethanol.

But high concentrations of ethanol can degrade rubber components in the fuel pump and fuel injection system as well as some metal fuel lines.

A statement issued today by the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, which represents 11 automakers, also supports the EPA delay.

“Automakers want government testing to prove that increasing the allowable ethanol blend limit will not harm vehicle emissions, performance and durability,” the alliance said in a statement.

“We are pleased that EPA recognizes the importance of making decisions based on sound science,” alliance CEO Dave McCurdy said in the statement. “Any decisions on blends higher than E-10 for the existing fleet should be postponed until adequate testing results are available.”

Still, the EPA appears to be leaning toward approving the higher blend. The agency already is working on fuel pump labels for E-15. The EPA said today that testing is proceeding as quickly as possible.

Creating U.S. jobs:
Boosting the percentage of ethanol, which is produced in the United States, could help reduce the nation's appetite for imported oil. Growth Energy, a coalition of U.S. ethanol supporters, says boosting the ethanol content of gasoline to 15 percent would create 136,000 new U.S. jobs.

Growth Energy said it welcomed the EPA's announcement, claiming it indicates the agency was preparing to approve E15 upon the completion of ongoing tests next year.

"We are confident the ongoing tests will further confirm the data we submitted in the Growth Energy Green Jobs Waiver and silence those critics, allowing more American-produced energy to enter the market," said Tom Buis, CEO of Growth Energy.

Johnny1251

I have a 95' max and I have trouble starting it and sounds like my fuel pump but not sure cause the previous owner was putting in unleaded has instead of premium and when am driving it sounds like there's hardly any fuel and it will start pulling between 2000-3500 RPM any advise will help just so I can get my maxima running back to normal

SilverMax_04

I run regular gasoline in my Max - it has been years since I bought any Premium. Previous use of regular is not necessarily causing your problem. My 04 engine has a higher compression ration than your 95 engine, so the use of regular is not a problem. My owners manual says that regular gasoline is acceptable in my engine, just don't expect maximum engine output when burning regular. Since I don't race my Max at any location, and don't lug my engine when climbing hills (there are many hills here in CO), I don't need to pay the extra price for premium - and don't.

You don't say how many miles you have on your 95, which would help us determine if you are probably correct about the fuel pump causing your problem. But before you pop for that expense, you should try one lower cost option.

Just before you fill your gas tank again, install a bottle of Techron (20 gal tank size) in your tank. Fill up the tank and run the tank down to less than 1/4 tank level (even down to 1/8 tank level if you can). This should clean your fuel system and improve its operation. If you don't see an improvement in engine operation by the time your gas tank is down to this level, you should have a technician check your fuel pump.

My engine pulls much better when the RPMs are kept above 2 K RPMs. So that comment is not surprising, either. Because I have a 6-speed stick, it is my job to keep the engine RPMs in the proper range by selecting the appropriate gear. If you have an automatic, you are somewhat stuck with what the automatic gives you - unless you select a lower gear choice.

Another potential problem could be your spark plugs. My manual says to change plugs at about 105 K miles on the plugs. You should try to determine the miles on your plugs (I replaced mine at 110 K miles).

Good luck.

Johnny1251

My max has 125k miles and it's a 5 speed cause one other thing when I put it in gear my Rpm goes up to 2k with out me pressing the gas pedal I already got new fuel injectors and coil hoping it would go back to normal but nothing I'm gonna give ur advise a try and hope it work thanks for the help

SilverMax_04

At 125 K miles the spark plugs should have also been replaced.
Suspect they were at about 105 K, but you need to be certain.
Bad plugs could also be causing your problem - and they would be if they are the original plugs. Surprised you did not change the plugs when you changed the fuel injectors in each cylinder.

If the RPMs go up to 2 K when you put the auto trannie in gear without stepping on the gas, that may indicate a problem with the trannie. I'm no expert on that trannie, so I will defer to others on that question.

Johnny1251

Thanks I will have them replaced ASAP and also can that cause the smell of fuel

grey99max

iTrader: (12)

Going back to the original thread title, is anyone using E85 today? I'm curious because I'm planning on converting my car to straight E85 for injectors and nitrous.

Looks like I'll need:
1. Larger fuel pump compatible w/E85 - Aeromotive 340
2. Larger fuel filter - Aeromotive SS canister -6AN 100 micron. (already installed)
3. Larger injectors - DW 440cc (for the extra 30% fuel)
4. Stainless fuel lines from tank to engine (1/2" OD)
5. Modified fuel pump carrier with enlarged hoses and return pipe, -8AN adapters
6. PLX A/F switched over to Lamda display.

All fuel lines for rails and nitrous are already teflon AN lines.

This is a spring project and will be completed before I hit the tracks again. It's quite a learning process and also finding a reliable source of E85 is now more difficult, with loss of federal subsidy.

SilverMax_04

"can that cause the smell of fuel?"
They would not cause a fuel smell. You likely have a small fuel leak somewhere. Where do you smell the fuel?


"also finding a reliable source of E85 is now more difficult, with loss of federal subsidy."
The susdidy was the only way that E-85 could be made competative to either pure gasoline or E-10 gasoline (Gasohol) given the cost of making ethanol and the loss of mileage that happens when using E-85. Actually straight gasoline is cheaper than Gasohol when the same two factors are considered. It becomes slightly cheaper with some state subsidies. But ethanol use at 10% is still mandated by federal law.

This is just another example of "Green Energy" being less economic than regular energy. Solyndra needed government subsidies and so does ethanol.

It appears that you have correctly identified all of the parts of the fuel system that need to be replaced so they can stand up to the more agressive nature of ethanol fuel. Not certain why you are doing this, but that is your call.

grey99max

iTrader: (12)

Yeah, yeah, but E85 works very well with nitrous and saves about $11 per gallon over race fuel. That's my motive.

BEJAY1

iTrader: (19)

Yep, that's a big reason - cheap high-octane race gas for aggressive tunes. My Saab is plumbed from the factory for E85 and I hope to convert this spring. (Did use 100Oct+Toulene on the Max but the UPRD/TechSq program couldn't make use of it)

T_Behr904

E85 is around 94-96 octane. How long will it take to cover the cost of converting over to use E85 with the savings of that over 100 octane unleaded race gas?