OUCH, gas prices.
02-26-2011, 12:29 PM
#81
Retired Senior Admin
Expert Gearhead
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Sheboygan Wisconsin
Posts: 29,661
Likes: 0
Received 28 Likes
on
24 Posts
Will have to see if there are any other studies that have been done. I hate to base everything on one study. If your trying to make things look better then it is, it'* far to easy to fudge the numbers.
02-26-2011, 12:46 PM
#83
Senior Member
Posts like a Northstar
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Camden, MI
Posts: 615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/sbs.htm
good stuff!
a 2008 impala with the gasoline only 3.5 (LZ4) gets 18/29 ratings.
a 2008 impala with the gas/E85 3.5 (LZE) gets 18/29 on gas and 14/21 on E85.
good stuff!
a 2008 impala with the gasoline only 3.5 (LZ4) gets 18/29 ratings.
a 2008 impala with the gas/E85 3.5 (LZE) gets 18/29 on gas and 14/21 on E85.
02-26-2011, 01:07 PM
#84
Retired Senior Admin
Expert Gearhead
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Sheboygan Wisconsin
Posts: 29,661
Likes: 0
Received 28 Likes
on
24 Posts
Found this on Wiki
As recently as 2007 the Environmental Protection Agency stated on its website that several of the most current American FFVs were still losing 25-30% fuel efficiency when running on E85.
To achieve any short-term operational fuel cost savings, the price of E85 should therefore be 30% or more below the price of gasoline to equalize short term fuel costs for most older pre-2003 FFVs for both winter and summer blends of E85. Life-cycle costs over the life of the FFV engine are theoretically lower for E85, as ethanol is a cooler and cleaner burning fuel than gasoline. Provided that one takes a longterm life-cycle operating cost view, a continuous price discount of only 20% to 25% below the cost of gasoline is probably about the break-even point in terms of vehicle life-cycle operating costs for operating most FFVs on E85 exclusively
As recently as 2007 the Environmental Protection Agency stated on its website that several of the most current American FFVs were still losing 25-30% fuel efficiency when running on E85.
To achieve any short-term operational fuel cost savings, the price of E85 should therefore be 30% or more below the price of gasoline to equalize short term fuel costs for most older pre-2003 FFVs for both winter and summer blends of E85. Life-cycle costs over the life of the FFV engine are theoretically lower for E85, as ethanol is a cooler and cleaner burning fuel than gasoline. Provided that one takes a longterm life-cycle operating cost view, a continuous price discount of only 20% to 25% below the cost of gasoline is probably about the break-even point in terms of vehicle life-cycle operating costs for operating most FFVs on E85 exclusively
02-26-2011, 01:14 PM
#86
Senior Member
Posts like a Northstar
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Camden, MI
Posts: 615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well, duh, the price difference has to be greater than the MPG lost for it to be cost effective. 
simple math there.
using it in place of an equivalent octane gasoline fuel it can't be beat for the price. what'* 100-105 octane gasoline going for these days?
simple math there.
using it in place of an equivalent octane gasoline fuel it can't be beat for the price. what'* 100-105 octane gasoline going for these days?
02-26-2011, 01:24 PM
#88
Senior Member
Posts like a Northstar
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Camden, MI
Posts: 615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
so it'* safe to assume that at current prices/trends:
E85 makes no financial sense to use in a vehicle that doesn't require its rather high octane rating.
but
should you need higher octane fuel than 87, you MAY want to do the math to see if you will benefit from the increased octane at a much lower price than a gasoline equivalent at the expense of MPG.
all of this assuming your fueling system can handle E85 to begin with.
E85 makes no financial sense to use in a vehicle that doesn't require its rather high octane rating.
but
should you need higher octane fuel than 87, you MAY want to do the math to see if you will benefit from the increased octane at a much lower price than a gasoline equivalent at the expense of MPG.
all of this assuming your fueling system can handle E85 to begin with.
02-26-2011, 01:28 PM
#89
Retired Senior Admin
Expert Gearhead
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Sheboygan Wisconsin
Posts: 29,661
Likes: 0
Received 28 Likes
on
24 Posts
It also assumes the prices of gas, and E85 does not close the gap, or even reverse. I looked in to converting my Bonneville over to E85 for the higher rating. But it wasn't cost effective, as well as Sheboygan county has only 3 stations that sell it. So going way out of my way to get it was also figured in. In the end, I was not able to recoup the investment, so the idea was scrapped.
02-26-2011, 01:32 PM
#90
Senior Member
Posts like a Northstar
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Camden, MI
Posts: 615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"that at current prices/trends"
that'* why i included this little snippet... we live in very volatile times for fuel prices, so who knows, tomorrow E85 MAY be the same price as 87 octane gasoline.... or it could plummet(right).
but for the time being, a blanket statement of E85 being a good or bad idea cannot be stated with 100% accuracy, since we will all have different cost/benefit ratios...
that'* why i included this little snippet... we live in very volatile times for fuel prices, so who knows, tomorrow E85 MAY be the same price as 87 octane gasoline.... or it could plummet(right
).but for the time being, a blanket statement of E85 being a good or bad idea cannot be stated with 100% accuracy, since we will all have different cost/benefit ratios...