OK- any issues with destroying the CATS using E-85. I am slowly being informed of things that could go wrong from various sources that are not 100% sure....!

 

Just run the tank close to empty and fill up with 93 octane before storing her for the winter.

 

With the Tune being for E-85 (105 Octane) How would that work?

 

It'll run rich, but thats fine as you will be storing it and the 93 will run thru it removing the Ethanol, making it safe to store for the winter months.

 

I do not know enough about Gas vs E-85. BUT If E-85 burns faster then regular gas (reduced mileage and injectors need to cycle much faster with E-85) and the octane rating is much lower (93 vs 105), I would assume the motor would run LEAN if I filled it with 93 Octane. Or is the idea that the injectors are cycling so fast (since tuned for E-85) it runs rich? Could you please elaborate? Have you personally dealt with E-85 tuning? Is it possible to use a handheld tuner to switch back to a standard 91 octane tune maybe? That would make pre-winter storage easy. ? Thanks for all of the help and info.!!

 

I ran E85 on my old Evo 8 and loved every min. The Mitsubishi's were easier to tune and there was actually a guy that figured out how to store two different maps in the ecu. You could toggle between the E85 and 93 oct tune with the intercooler spray button, really cool stuff.

As far as i know you would probably have to re-flash it with hp tunners or whatever software you or your tunner uses for extended use. A tank for storage would probably be fine.

It will run rich on 93 octane because you need roughly 30% more E-85 than gas. The energy expelled per volume is lower than gas.

 

As is usually the case, there is lots from the rumor mill.

Concerning post #13: Name names sir. GM has ALL vericles after 1999 ethanol compliant since the fuel most are running contains 10% ethanol. Are all these vehicles going to fail? Toyota had a recall due to this very issue and you can bet the farm GM took preventive steps on their vehicles and the same system components claimed to have issues are the exact same parts on GM flex-fuel vehicle. You think they use different seats on the heads??

Toyota recall (there are 100 articles on this):
http://www.autoobserver.com/2009/01/...y-ethanol.html

I have exhausted myself reading through countless posts from people who ran their GM vehicles from day 1 to the day they did a tear down to document the test.

This video (one of plenty) has a real guy who ran E85 in his 2000 tahoe with 5.7L not sold as a flex fuel vehicle. The truck with its non-E82 fuel lines, valve seats, fuel pump, ect was run 95% of the time on E85 (unless he was not able to find it by location) and a tear down was done (pictures shown) and from pump to bottom end there was ZERO issues. In fact, the engine was found to be unusually clean without corosion, wear, or any other issue. Keep in mind that todays GM flex fuel vehicles have the same parts numbers as non flex-fuel GM vehicles. The striking part of the video is when it shows parts from the 105K E85 2000 Tahoe looked new without wear while the 85K gasoline vehicles with the exact same parts numbers showed significant wear and waaaaay more corrosion. E85 fuel lines were not brittle.

http://www.ethanol.org/video/

E85 makes more HP in your corvette as demonstrated by those who did it including RPM motors and Dallas Performance (for Mr Big's 900rwhp car). If you want 105 octane race fuel, get it. If you are worried about losing a few cents per gallon or less cruising range stay with gasoline with its 10% ethanol which you are burning now and your valve seats are tolerating. People posting its has X% less energy and burns Y% faster ect are missing the point: IT MAKES MORE HP.

E85 corvette conversion:

http://www.vetteweb.com/tech/vemp_08...ion/index.html

 

@SpinMonster:
Thank you for your very informative contribution, which has clarified much of the myths and rumors to me.

My reason to post # 13 was not intended to become known as an expert or as a "wise guy", because I am neither. It was merely an excerpt from this thread, and it always seems wise to me to listen to what GM engineers have to say about various topics (as an aside - I found the remark about what "a GM engineer knows" rather witty ). So, to be honest I won't be able to name any specific names.

I am eager to learn from you, and other fellow members here, about the pros and cons of E85, because I understand the potential benefits of its use for sure. But I am (or maybe I should say was, after reading your post) scared to death that its application could harm my engine in one way or another (I cannot afford a new LS7, once it's ruined).

Referring to your 2000 Tahoe example (yes, I watched the video and found the outcome impressive!), would you say that post #8, here and post # 5, here are just BS? I.e., that it does REALLY not matter whether your car is a flex fuel vehicle or a non-flex fuel vehicle? Your comment on these posts will be highly appreciated.

Ronald

 

i better would like to hear more info about the ECU tune for E85. its not that you change stoch ratio and you good to go. Many tables including starting tables, transient fuel have to be changed, to do it perfectly requares a lot of work.

 

I am interested in such info as well.

 

THANKS FOR POSTING. I posted the same exact video on page one. I love my E85 ride and have zero ill effects. Car rides like a champ!

 

**LS3 E85 Corvette ----- What do you do for extended storage? Anything? I will be using your data/understanding of an e-85 corvette tune to the highest regard because you actually own one. Thanks.

 

So if we have determined it is not detrimental to any part of the fuel system or engine when properly tuned, then the storage question is the only "if", but seems doubtful that any special storage is needed.

 

The alert and intelligent reader cares, LS3_E85_Corvette.
We care about the subsidies. 45 cents per gallon at the federal level. $7 billion in 2010 alone. Every damn taxpayer pays for your frivolous E85 HP hobby.
We care about millions of acres of food crop production turned over to fuel production.
We care about higher prices of food from everything from corn flakes to beef. - (Food prices impact the poor harder.)
We care about ethanol plants consuming water (usually from finite aquifers) during various processes ~4 gallons water withdraw/gallon ethanol produced.

And to top it off, to gain your trumpeted HP increase, you're burning a lot more ethanol than gas. What does a 90% injector duty cycle say? It sez - Wake Up! Poor BTU content fuel! You can't turn the chemistry on its head to claim anything else.

Your >>(who cares)<< is just narcissism spouting about a fuel that impacts everyone from me to the poor person on the WIC or food stamp program.

 

Lighten up?

 

 

Tell your wife to give you a hand job or something... Actually, I would be surprised if you have one sense you talk to people like this. Jesus man... Why don't you go give Indy Car the middle finger because they are doing the same thing I am... Using E85. This is a fun hobby and I'm happy I have alternate fuel choices.

Who cares about a 90% duty cycle? I'm just surprised this is even a point of argument??? If I would using 80% would you like me more? Many people are on pump gas running over a 90% cycle.

Either way.. Have a beer and go see some boobies

 

Well my FAST 57s are on order so I can run some E85 after my cam swap.

Can't wait!

 

Sounds glorious! What are you expecting power wise?

 

wow, i don't care either, but you're nuts, literally.

what about oil? you think buying more gas, in turn fueling the need for more middle eastern oil is a good thing? again, i couldn't give a ****, but look at it that way you fool.


why do you even post at all? please go back to your cave and never post again.


this thread is simple, there are no downsides to E85 unless you care about gas mileage, and again, none of us should.