Switch to Flex fuel (E85) or Unleaded 88 (E15)

[DisneyinPA]

Ok pickup truck drivers since gas prices are going through the roof I’m thinking about switching? Anyone have any experience using flex fuel or unleaded 88? I’m driving a Ford F150 3.5L V6 with eco boost.

 

[_19disnA]

Usually they 'recommend' premium fuel (i.e. 93 octane) for those small turbocharged engines. Eco boost is Ford's marketing term for small turbo engines. Check the owner's manual to see if it is required vs recommended. On some vehicles the computer will automatically adjust and just reduce horsepower. However, on some engines low octane fuel can cause issues and/or damage the engine. In some cases if you aren't driving with heavy loads in the truck bed and/or not driving excessively hilly terrain, it might not matter which fuel you use.

Part of the reason E85 fell out of favor was you can only about 2/3 as far on a tank full so the economics aren't there if the price is similar to gasoline.

 

[Dan Murphy]

Ok pickup truck driving since gas prices are going through the roof I’m thinking about switching? Anyone have any experience using flex fuel or unleaded 88? I’m driving a Ford F150 3.5L V6 with eco boost.

I looked, that engine recommends, does not require premium. Not sure the difference there, but here, Chicago area, price differential between premium and regular is 50¢ to a dollar a gallon. I would not recommend E85, but regular, 87 octane, should do you well. Around here, we also have Thornton stations that carry Unleaded 15 which is actually 88 octane, and priced between E85 and regular. As said above, the E85 will give you a fairly large drop in mileage, so even though priced less, you won't go as far.

 

[bcla]

Usually they 'recommend' premium fuel (i.e. 93 octane) for those small turbocharged engines. Eco boost is Ford's marketing term for small turbo engines. Check the owner's manual to see if it is required vs recommended. On some vehicles the computer will automatically adjust and just reduce horsepower. However, on some engines low octane fuel can cause issues and/or damage the engine. In some cases if you aren't driving with heavy loads in the truck bed and/or not driving excessively hilly terrain, it might not matter which fuel you use.

Part of the reason E85 fell out of favor was you can only about 2/3 as far on a tank full so the economics aren't there if the price is similar to gasoline.

The economics are kind of weird though and not necessarily consistent. E85 I believe is actually a maximum of 83% ethanol by volume, but can be as low as 51%. But relative to the energy content, E85 is actually more efficient in most engines that can severely advance timing. Even though it's likely blended with 84 AKI octane gasoline, the AKI octane rating is going to be at least 100 and can be considerably higher if it's near maximum ethanol. Also - many weekend racers hope to get the maximum ethanol for the highest octane rating, but since it could be as low as 51% that's not guaranteed.

With a flex fuel engine that can advance timing, something like 100+ AKI octane racing gas will do great, and will achieve far greater fuel economy to boot because of its higher energy content. But I doubt many many are willing to pay those prices.

But if I had a flex fuel car, with E85 prices around $3.50 a gallon vs $6 a gallon for regular E10 unleaded, it's an easy choice.

 

[PrincessShmoo]

Ok pickup truck driving since gas prices are going through the roof I’m thinking about switching? Anyone have any experience using flex fuel or unleaded 88? I’m driving a Ford F150 3.5L V6 with eco boost.

Both our car and our truck (F250) are flex-fuel vehicles. We didn't really buy them for that reason, but it's sure handy in times like this.

We found that, unless the price difference between gas & E85 was at least 20%, it didn't really save any money, as the mileage was typically 20% less using E85.

Your gas cap will be YELLOW if your vehicle can take E85.

 

[_19disnA]

We found that, unless the price difference between gas & E85 was at least 20%, it didn't really save any money, as the mileage was typically 20% less using E85.

Same here. Used to drive a car that could use E85 and when gas was around $3.00/gallon, E85 needed to be less then $2.00/gallon to make any sense. Most people could do the simple math and found it wasn't economical.

Haven't seen any E85 sold where I live/drive for past few years. It used to be about the same price as regular so people stopped buying it since you can't go as far on a tank. What matters is the cost/mile driven. Stations dropped it when no one was buying and wasn't worth having a dedicated pump. Ethanol also can't be shipped in regular pipelines since it is corrosive. And making it from corn which is a food crop causes a number of others issues. Didn't turn out to be the magical solution it was first promoted to be.

 

[bcla]

Same here. Used to drive a car that could use E85 and when gas was around $3.00/gallon, E85 needed to be less then $2.00/gallon to make any sense. Most people could do the simple math and found it wasn't economical.

Haven't seen any E85 sold where I live/drive for past few years. It used to be about the same price as regular so people stopped buying it since you can't go as far on a tank. What matters is the cost/mile driven. Stations dropped it when no one was buying and wasn't worth having a dedicated pump. Ethanol also can't be shipped in regular pipelines since it is corrosive. And making it from corn which is a food crop causes a number of others issues. Didn't turn out to be the magical solution it was first promoted to be.

Ethanol as a "food crop" is kind of a red herring. It's not sweet corn and the dent corn grown to produce ethanol also produces corn oil and protein feeds for livestock. The only parts of the corn that becomes ethanol are the starches and sugars. And in addition to that, the benefit of ethanol as an octane rating booster means that it would likely be used anyways at least as E10. The alternatives right now are MTBE and methanol (both which have some pretty nasty problems).

https://www.farmprogress.com/livestock/feed-value-ethanol-products-long-underestimated​

Every 56-pound bushel of corn processed by a dry mill ethanol plant generates 2.8 gallons of ethanol and approximately 17.5 pounds of animal feed. In essence, the new ERS report dispels the conventional assumption that every bushel of corn processed by an ethanol plant generates an amount of feed equivalent to just one-third of the original corn bushel.​

I see stations around here that have E85 just on the side, or even sometimes in a multi-fuel pump setup like you see with diesel. This photo appears to be from a Chevron station.

 

[_19disnA]

Never said 'sweet corn'.....but a lot of US corn is grown as animal feed. Diverting it to make ethanol eventually drives up the price of the food we buy. Makes more sense in a place like Brazil where what is basically a waste product from sugar cane is used to make ethanol, but still doesn't transport well due to its corrosive nature. For those who are interested, I would tend to look at objective/independent scientific studies on this whole topic. Clearly those who grow/sell corn have an incentive to seek out researchers who support their position. Have also seen studies that say converting corn to ethanol actually uses more energy then it produces. But all of that is a different topic from what the OP was asking.

 

[bcla]

Never said 'sweet corn'.....but a lot of US corn is grown as animal feed. Diverting it to make ethanol eventually drives up the price of the food we buy. Makes more sense in a place like Brazil where what is basically a waste product from sugar cane is used to make ethanol, but still doesn't transport well due to its corrosive nature. For those who are interested, I would tend to look at objective/independent scientific studies on this whole topic. Clearly those who grow/sell corn have an incentive to seek out researchers who support their position. Have also seen studies that say converting corn to ethanol actually uses more energy then it produces. But all of that is a different topic from what the OP was asking.

Sugar cane ethanol isn't a waste product. It has to be made from the sugar. But they use a lot of the fibers as fuel for processing by burning it.

There's no lack of corn or other types of animal feed, and growing corn for ethanol still makes animal feed. But if the amount of food is really a concern, we should probably be producing more non-animal protein sources since animal feed is an extremely inefficient way to produce food.

As far as the amount of energy produced, that's also a red herring because of the value of ethanol as an octane rating booster. We absolutely need some sort of octane booster because of the high demand for premium unleaded. It might be easier if leaded fuel was still a thing or if MTBE was still considered acceptable.

Of course there are better options being worked on, but they would still be ethanol. There's talk about using other biomass for conversion to ethanol, such as switchgrass. There's nothing really special about corn as an ethanol feedstock other than American farmers in the midwest know how to grow it.

 

[RamblingMad]

Put whatever gas your user's manual says to put into your vehicle.

 

[bcla]

Put whatever gas your user's manual says to put into your vehicle.

With flex fuel it’s not so easy. Plus E15 is usually 88 AKI octane. Theoretically E85 at the maximum ethanol content will result in more power, but at the expense of lower mileage.

 

[tvguy]

I looked, that engine recommends, does not require premium. Not sure the difference there, but here, Chicago area, price differential between premium and regular is 50¢ to a dollar a gallon. I would not recommend E85, but regular, 87 octane, should do you well. Around here, we also have Thornton stations that carry Unleaded 15 which is actually 88 octane, and priced between E85 and regular. As said above, the E85 will give you a fairly large drop in mileage, so even though priced less, you won't go as far.

Best I can tell you can't use E-85 in any Ecoboost eingine.

 

[RamblingMad]

With flex fuel it’s not so easy. Plus E15 is usually 88 AKI octane. Theoretically E85 at the maximum ethanol content will result in more power, but at the expense of lower mileage.

Unless the manual specifically says you can put flex fuel into your vehicle, I wouldn't risk it.

 

[bcla]

Unless the manual specifically says you can put flex fuel into your vehicle, I wouldn't risk it.

Of course. But what I'm getting at is that if the manual specifies that E85 is OK (and by definition E15) then what to select can be a balance between selecting for the best performance or the longest range. Also making estimates of the cost per mile, which can be odd with E85 because of the variability of the ethanol content (51-83%).

https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/ethanol_e85_specs.html​

E85 Flex Fuel Specification​

ASTM International developed a specification for gasoline-ethanol blends containing 51% to 83% ethanol to ensure proper vehicle starting, operation, and safety in varying temperature conditions.​

 

[MIGrandma]

My 2012 Equinox used E85, we used it in the summer months and really didn’t notice much of a difference in mileage. Loved that was usually at least 50cents per gallon cheaper. My 2019 won’t use it

 

[EACarlson]

My Escape won't take any of the larger % blends because it of the turbocharger. Fewer and fewer new vehicles accept E85 due to the government regulations about fuel mileage. You can get much better mileage with small turbocharged engines than you can with larger naturally aspirated engines.
Let's end all the government subsidies for ethanol and see where the prices for it goes, this would also lower prices for all of the other things we use corn for.

 

[dennis99ss]

I had a flex fuel Suburban, and DW still has a flex tahoe. I did use the E85 in the Suburban at times. the 20% price difference is fairly accurate. If the E85 is not at least 20% less than the unleaded your price per mile with E85 is more expensive. My guess, with unleaded at 4.00, E85 needs to be about 3.20. I did experience an increase of mileage after using E85 consistently for a number of fill ups, but not a large amount, maybe 1-2 mpg. I also found that E85 was much better suited on the highway than in the city. I never pulled anything on E85, but, considering my unleaded mileage dropped 10mpg or so while towing, I can't image what it would have been with E85. But, YMMV

 

[bcla]

I had a flex fuel Suburban, and DW still has a flex tahoe. I did use the E85 in the Suburban at times. the 20% price difference is fairly accurate. If the E85 is not at least 20% less than the unleaded your price per mile with E85 is more expensive. My guess, with unleaded at 4.00, E85 needs to be about 3.20. I did experience an increase of mileage after using E85 consistently for a number of fill ups, but not a large amount, maybe 1-2 mpg. I also found that E85 was much better suited on the highway than in the city. I never pulled anything on E85, but, considering my unleaded mileage dropped 10mpg or so while towing, I can't image what it would have been with E85. But, YMMV

The big benefit is supposed to be more power/torque, which may help with towing.