Flex fuels in older engines
01-29-2019, 11:26 AM
#11
Senior Member
Interesting. I might start monitoring that on my SCT or Forscan and see what it shows.
Everywhere I remember seeing it (again, mostly at Sheetz stations while traveling) it stated for use in 2001 and newer vehicles. My Ecoboost says only E0 to E10. I'll have to double check, but I think the ring around the fuel filler specifically says no E15 to E85. So I wonder what this switch would mean for all the Ecoboosts running around. Maybe it would require a different tune, or maybe it just hasn't been tested, idk, but something to keep an eye on I think. That extra 5% of ethanol doesn't sound like much, but that's actually a 50% increase in the concentration of alcohol in the fuel. Also, I wonder what it would mean for older vehicles?
Everywhere I remember seeing it (again, mostly at Sheetz stations while traveling) it stated for use in 2001 and newer vehicles. My Ecoboost says only E0 to E10. I'll have to double check, but I think the ring around the fuel filler specifically says no E15 to E85. So I wonder what this switch would mean for all the Ecoboosts running around. Maybe it would require a different tune, or maybe it just hasn't been tested, idk, but something to keep an eye on I think. That extra 5% of ethanol doesn't sound like much, but that's actually a 50% increase in the concentration of alcohol in the fuel. Also, I wonder what it would mean for older vehicles?
01-29-2019, 11:55 AM
#12
Interesting. I might start monitoring that on my SCT or Forscan and see what it shows.
Everywhere I remember seeing it (again, mostly at Sheetz stations while traveling) it stated for use in 2001 and newer vehicles. My Ecoboost says only E0 to E10. I'll have to double check, but I think the ring around the fuel filler specifically says no E15 to E85. So I wonder what this switch would mean for all the Ecoboosts running around. Maybe it would require a different tune, or maybe it just hasn't been tested, idk, but something to keep an eye on I think. That extra 5% of ethanol doesn't sound like much, but that's actually a 50% increase in the concentration of alcohol in the fuel. Also, I wonder what it would mean for older vehicles?
Everywhere I remember seeing it (again, mostly at Sheetz stations while traveling) it stated for use in 2001 and newer vehicles. My Ecoboost says only E0 to E10. I'll have to double check, but I think the ring around the fuel filler specifically says no E15 to E85. So I wonder what this switch would mean for all the Ecoboosts running around. Maybe it would require a different tune, or maybe it just hasn't been tested, idk, but something to keep an eye on I think. That extra 5% of ethanol doesn't sound like much, but that's actually a 50% increase in the concentration of alcohol in the fuel. Also, I wonder what it would mean for older vehicles?
For those that run E-10, but not Flex Fuel, there are a couple companies that make component packages that will convert to Flex Fuel. They include an Ethanol sensor, and larger injectors if needed, along with programming or a PCM that has the ignition tables, and sensors if needed. If doing it to be a green whacko, pretty expensive, but if looking to add performance, might be worth it.
01-29-2019, 01:13 PM
#13
Senior Member
It will work, E15 wasn't in the works when the EB first came out and E10 was the standard so that is what is on the ring and manuals. Where the added content will hurt is in vehicles and equipment that have the old hoses and gaskets that aren't compatible with Ethanol, they will degrade faster. If it can handle E10, they should be able to handle E15 as well.
01-29-2019, 01:31 PM
#14
Senior Member
Two thoughts.
1) It's a 5 point increase in ethanol, not a 5% increase in ethanol. A 5% increase in ethanol would be from 10 to 10.5.
2) It's a 50% increase in ethanol, going from 10% to 15%.
So your E10 gas is around $2.23, and your E15 gas is around $1.83. That's roughly an 18% lower cost. Let's assume 15%. If your MPG drops by more than 15% (12.1 drops to below 10.3), then it's not a good decision, absent whether it does more damage than E10.
1) It's a 5 point increase in ethanol, not a 5% increase in ethanol. A 5% increase in ethanol would be from 10 to 10.5.
2) It's a 50% increase in ethanol, going from 10% to 15%.
So your E10 gas is around $2.23, and your E15 gas is around $1.83. That's roughly an 18% lower cost. Let's assume 15%. If your MPG drops by more than 15% (12.1 drops to below 10.3), then it's not a good decision, absent whether it does more damage than E10.
01-29-2019, 01:59 PM
#15
Administrator
Thread Starter
Two thoughts.
1) It's a 5 point increase in ethanol, not a 5% increase in ethanol. A 5% increase in ethanol would be from 10 to 10.5.
2) It's a 50% increase in ethanol, going from 10% to 15%.
So your E10 gas is around $2.23, and your E15 gas is around $1.83. That's roughly an 18% lower cost. Let's assume 15%. If your MPG drops by more than 15% (12.1 drops to below 10.3), then it's not a good decision, absent whether it does more damage than E10.
1) It's a 5 point increase in ethanol, not a 5% increase in ethanol. A 5% increase in ethanol would be from 10 to 10.5.
2) It's a 50% increase in ethanol, going from 10% to 15%.
So your E10 gas is around $2.23, and your E15 gas is around $1.83. That's roughly an 18% lower cost. Let's assume 15%. If your MPG drops by more than 15% (12.1 drops to below 10.3), then it's not a good decision, absent whether it does more damage than E10.
01-29-2019, 04:08 PM
#16
Senior Member
A) I have also heard that there is a push to phase out E10 for E15
B) Running my OBD Fusion app I have also seen 12-14% ethanol (despite the pumps stating max 10%). Hard to say if the truck sensor is wrong or the pump is wrong but typically it runs at 9.8% (almost all my tanks).
C) Hard to say what the octane equivalent is supposed to be, if it is still supposed to be equivalent to 87-91 then there shouldn't be an issue with the timing, and doubtful that the extra 5% ethanol would be any impact to engine/fuel parts.
B) Running my OBD Fusion app I have also seen 12-14% ethanol (despite the pumps stating max 10%). Hard to say if the truck sensor is wrong or the pump is wrong but typically it runs at 9.8% (almost all my tanks).
C) Hard to say what the octane equivalent is supposed to be, if it is still supposed to be equivalent to 87-91 then there shouldn't be an issue with the timing, and doubtful that the extra 5% ethanol would be any impact to engine/fuel parts.
01-29-2019, 04:17 PM
#17
01-29-2019, 05:00 PM
#18
Senior Member
Then why do it? I don't see any reason to take the chance to damage something myself, because if you do damage something, you could probably buy a lot of gas for what the repair would cost.
01-29-2019, 05:30 PM
#19
Was just looking thru the 2004 owners manual http://www.fordservicecontent.com/Fo.../04f12og5e.pdf It specifically states to not use fuel with methanol in it as it can harm critical fuel system components, methanol is one of the first types of alcohol that comes out during the distillation process when making ethanol.
Typically separated or thrown out depending on if making fuel alcohol or food grade. I can't say whether or not that extra bit of ethanol would do any damage. What I can say is if it were my truck. I wouldn't use it.
.
Typically separated or thrown out depending on if making fuel alcohol or food grade. I can't say whether or not that extra bit of ethanol would do any damage. What I can say is if it were my truck. I wouldn't use it.
.
The following users liked this post:
JCR 56 (01-29-2019)
01-29-2019, 05:46 PM
#20
Administrator
Thread Starter
1) I said that cost savings wasn’t my concern at the moment, not that it wasn’t a concern at all. I prioritized what I’m worried about. Damage being primary to cost benefit.
2) Why do it? Isn’t the point of these forums to share information, ask questions, give answers? The point here in this thread for me wasn’t solely for my benefit, it was for the benefit of others. Wouldn’t it have been nice if the smarter collective heads here got together and the common consensus was “well yeah, the fuel is rare but I can’t see any damage being caused” followed by me attempting a few tanks of it... only to report a decent fuel cost benefit and minimal mileage loss? That would have been a win for everyone involved, no? I wouldn’t have known without asking.
3) If someone was considering it and didn’t know any better, maybe this thread will help make their decision.
Anyway, I appreciate all the input guys. I don’t think I’ll take any risks with my old girl, but maybe one day when I have another new truck already.
Last edited by Lenn; 01-29-2019 at 05:52 PM.
The following 2 users liked this post by Lenn:
Old Grey Mule (01-30-2019),
Ryan_2020 (01-30-2019)