e85 85% ethanol fuel

  • Sponsors (?)


crewwolfy said:
Will the 05 GT run [well] on 85% ethanol fuel?

Searched this, and learned not to use it for older mustangs. Assuming it's the same for the 05 GT? I ask because it's cheaper and 100% octane.

The owners manual says that the recommended fuel to use is 87 octane.
It never says anything about using gasoline with ethanol or E85 fuel so I'd play it on the safe side and not use it unless Ford says so.
It would be nice to use it since it is cheaper, but we'll have to wait and see.
 
E85 Fuel is acidic and will eat through some of the parts normally used in fuel systems. Vehicles have to be prepared to use E85.

The biggest performance aspect of E85 is that it has an octane rating of about 110. This allows a high level of boost on cars that will usually result in higher power vs boosted Gas cars even with the fact that E85 is less effiecient than Gasoline.

Look Up E85 Ethanol on Google for more info about cars that can run E85.
 
No, E85 only works on vehicles made to run on E85. Your gascap, along with your owner's manual, would say it could use it, if it could. From what I've seen, you wouldn't want to run E85 in a high-performance car anyways. E85 yields lower gas mileage and lower performance.
 
alchohol has 25% less btu per volume. it takes 50% more alchohol to get a proper mixture. extra power can be made from compression high enough to utilize expansion. but you will get 25% less milage from pure alchohol. that's the reason for including 15% gasoline.

if you get 20 mpg with gas, pure alchohol gets 15. e85 gets slightly better. say 16 or 17. if you can compress it to 15:1, loads of power.
 
What about a propane injection system?

You'll get the same milage and octane levels, plus not need to pay as much, just like ethanol.

Its also easier to come by at various gas stations.

I'd love to do this myself, but am not familiar with anyone outside of Canada that actually done it to a Mustang. :shrug:
 
And even if you changed the fuel system components to parts that wouldn't rot, the computer probably won't be able to set the proper A/F ratio so I doubt the engine would run right.
 
If you want a fuel efficient car buy a honda or toyota. This is a mustang and has a 300 hp engine that needs to run on gasoline to get the performance it offers. We dont buy a v8 mustang for fuel economy, if we did we wouldnt be driving it.
 
Ahh, but your missing the point...
It's not neccesarily fuel economy that I'm interested in, it's where my fuel dollar GOES that concerns me.
What I'd like to see is the whole country running on E85, and billions of dollars going towards farmers, back into OUR economy. Can you imagine it? The midwest becoming the richest region in the country, maybe the world? Farmers driving Lamborghinis, lowering thier tractors, 6 wives each, that sort of thing!!! :)
I'm suprised that there isn't a kit for most popular cars (especially an engine as common as the 4.6 V8) that includes the correct parts, and maybe a couple of new sensors, and maybe a new chip for the computer, etc. Maybe if/when E85 becomes common and people understand what it would mean to the country...
 
ramjetlx said:
If you want a fuel efficient car buy a honda or toyota. This is a mustang and has a 300 hp engine that needs to run on gasoline to get the performance it offers. We dont buy a v8 mustang for fuel economy, if we did we wouldnt be driving it.


Speaking of Toyota, there is a movement in the works at TMC to derive a performance hybrid sometime around 2009-2010 (maybe a follow up to the Supra), whereby you'll get a vehicle with 360-380hp with gas milage hovering around 28-30 miles per gallon!

They have been able to derive a concept driveline system that so far is pumping out close to 300hp with milage averaging around 27-29mpg.

Who says you can't get the best of both? :D
 
GusinCA said:
Ahh, but your missing the point...
It's not neccesarily fuel economy that I'm interested in, it's where my fuel dollar GOES that concerns me.
What I'd like to see is the whole country running on E85, and billions of dollars going towards farmers, back into OUR economy. Can you imagine it? The midwest becoming the richest region in the country, maybe the world? Farmers driving Lamborghinis, lowering thier tractors, 6 wives each, that sort of thing!!! :)

You're missing an even more important point.

Ethanol from corn grown in the mid latitudes is only marginally energy positive if at all. If it were not for massive government subsidies and a 53 cent a gallon tax on imported ethanol we would not be making any ethanol from corn in the US. The present US government ethanol policy is little more than a very expensive means to buy farm belt votes.

You've also missed a 2nd point. Massive use of US farmlands to grow corn for ethanol will reduce the amount of farmland used to grow food. This will in turn drive up food prices.

A better use of all those tax subsidies would be to invest in oil from shale and synthetic gasoline from coal. Both of which are far more energy positive than ethanol from corn.
 
torqueIT said:
Speaking of Toyota, there is a movement in the works at TMC to derive a performance hybrid sometime around 2009-2010 (maybe a follow up to the Supra), whereby you'll get a vehicle with 360-380hp with gas milage hovering around 28-30 miles per gallon!

They have been able to derive a concept driveline system that so far is pumping out close to 300hp with milage averaging around 27-29mpg.

Who says you can't get the best of both? :D


Of course that would be great. But how much would that cost? $40, 50, maybe $60,000? Most of us buy the mustang because its very affordable for the performance it delivers. I think we should be very fortunate that our cars can run 87 octane considering how much 91 or 92 octane costs now. I believe most cars with these type of perfomance engines need to run at least 91 octane.
 
ramjetlx said:
Of course that would be great. But how much would that cost? $40, 50, maybe $60,000? Most of us buy the mustang because its very affordable for the performance it delivers. I think we should be very fortunate that our cars can run 87 octane considering how much 91 or 92 octane costs now. I believe most cars with these type of perfomance engines need to run at least 91 octane.

You make a good arguement. The current Hybrid price range for passenger cars is $19-54,000 (54 being a Lexus 450GH), with SUV hybrids hovering in the $27-$46,000 (again a Lexus being the top end). Compression ratios range from 9.5:1 to 12:1, so you could say some would require 91 Octane fuel, but not all (Honda is better than Toyota in this repect).

I cannot get specs on the compression ratio of this engine, nor the price, since right now its just concept based. However I do believe that Hybrid technology is going to get much better in the next 5 years (thanks in large part to high fuel prices).

A turbo-diesel hybrid is being worked on by Mercedes, BMW, and Volkswagon. So a bio-diesel hybrid could be a real reality in 5 years.

But ultimately its price for many people..

Maybe with more Hybrid proliferation, those prices will eventually come down, even for performance based versions. :flag:
 
GusinCA said:
Does anyone think Ford will ever offer a E85 Mustang (either GT or V6)?
Or a retrofit kit?
I sure would rather send my money to farmer bob than shiekh abdullah...

Couple of popular misconceptions here.

Ethanol is made from heavily subsidized corn. Actually it costs far more to grow corn than the selling price on the free market (Agricultural subsidies are huge in the U.S. and Europe) thereby adding to the US national debt.

15% of all crude oil (and the percentage is increasing daily) comes from Canada.

However, most oil companies in Canada are US owned.
 
I stand educated.
I guess I'm reading a lot of different views on E85. The positives, that it would be better for the environment (cleaner burning, less CO2), and that technology is close to being able to use things other than corn to make it (switchgrass, corn stalks, etc?).
Maybe I don't understand the system 100%, but anything besides the current system of billions going overseas has got to be better?