Flex Fuel Vehicles

Our new-to-us Tahoe is a FFV. I haven’t seen great prices on E85 lately, but on the trek home from the cabin on Sunday, I saw E85 for $1.35/gallon versus $2.25/gallon for regular gas, so I went for it.

Normally, on the 100 mile trip home, I have been averaging 17.0 +/- 0.1 mpg. That trip home, I averaged 15.0 mpg, which is about what I was expecting. So, of course I figured out the cost difference. The E85 trip cost me $9.00 in fuel. The same trip with regular gas would have cost $13.24.

I don’t normally pay much attention to E85 prices, but that seemed like a pretty good differential to me. Do any IDOers routinely run on E85?

I also have a E85 capable vehicle but I have yet to actually run it in my truck to compare. I will probably run a tank through it once just to see, but I have my reservations about ethanol in general.

CaptainMusky wrote:

…but I have my reservations about ethanol in general.

I don’t.

Wow, that’s a big difference in price between the two fuels! Normally they’re $0.40 different, which in your case still would have saved you, about $0.90. That’s not a whole lot but over time that could add up. I’d be curious to hear what difference you see in MPG in city/day to day driving.

The E-85 will burn much more dry so you need to run a tank of regular fuel every now and then, if you consistently run E-85. I’ve always heard that unless there is about a $0.50 difference per gallon it isn’t cost effective to run since your mileage drops.

The prices will fluctuate a little, but generally speaking E85 will be about 25% less than regular. We had a new flex fuel Tahoe from around 2003 – 2007. Your getting better mileage with E85 than we did. We ran E85 a number of times, but some quick math proved E85 to be a loser economically. The fuel price was not enough to offset the terrible mileage.

My wife had bought into the “save the world” claims of E85 and really wanted it to make sense to use, the Tahoe was her vehicle. In the end we learned it cost us more to run E85 than regular. Plus, E85 is not a planet saving fuel due to producing a lot of carbon during the manufacture of the fuel.

We ran regular.

CaptainMusky wrote:

I also have a E85 capable vehicle but I have yet to actually run it in my truck to compare. I will probably run a tank through it once just to see, but I have my reservations about ethanol in general.

Me too, with the exception of I doubt I will ever run ethanol, unless it is a MAJOR savings, like 50%.

Check prices on Gas Buddy http://www.gasbuddy.com

Super America in Chaska 87oct unlead $2.25, E85 @ $1.49
Kwik Trip on 212 & Great Plains Blvd Chanhassen
87oct unlead $2.28, E85 @ $1.69

I recently travelled to Michigan via Iowa & Illinois/Indiana
In Waterloo I filled up, with 87oct @ $2.55 then when full (18.2 gallons) and waiting for receipt I noticed the sign (stick on letters) “No Alcohol” I had got 18.2mpg; next fuel stop filled with 17.1 gallons of 87oct 10% ethanol, rest of trip after that averaged 16.8-17.3 mpg with ave. price of $2.35/gallon.

P.S.: I have a heavy, heavy foot too. Around Town it is all my wife driving

This is a Jeep Grand Cherokee Overland Sport with the Hemi.
Around town ave. of 14.1 mpg.

P.S.: I have yet to try or drive an E-85 or alternative fueled vehicle.

Separating out the political “issues” around ethanol and just looking at it from a mechanical side, I know that the MN state motor pool has been running their fleet primarily on E85 for years. A number of counties have the same mandate.

I just don’t see any issues with it other than what Ralph has already identified: The economics of running it will vary according to cost vs performance.

Currently, the ethanol market is soft. Lower demand, lots of supply, and cheap corn prices make it cheap to produce.

Ralph, an engineer like you has probably already crunched the numbers. There must be a handy-dandy graph that shows where your cost/gallon of E85 “crosses the line” beyond which the mileage deficit makes it cost-ineffective to run?

Please post your answer, showing all work.

Grouse

TheFamousGrouse wrote:

Ralph, an engineer like you has probably already crunched the numbers. There must be a handy-dandy graph that shows where your cost/gallon of E85 “crosses the line” beyond which the mileage deficit makes it cost-ineffective to run?

Ha ha ha! It’s like you read my mind.

The first effort to support ethanol usage is a 51-cent-per-gallon tax credit to “blenders,” the companies who blend ethanol into gasoline. This tax credit is intended to raise the price of ethanol for ethanol producers and corn farmers to encourage production, and to lower the price of ethanol products for consumers. It is strongly supported by farm lobbyists.

Despite the tax credit, however, E85 costs about 70 cents a gallon more than gasoline on an energy equivalent basis on average, according to the Department of Energy.

Second, the government provides significant fuel economy credits to automakers who build flex-fuel vehicles that can run on E85.

Consumers Reports

Woodshed wrote:

The prices will fluctuate a little, but generally speaking E85 will be about 25% less than regular. We had a new flex fuel Tahoe from around 2003 – 2007. Your getting better mileage with E85 than we did. We ran E85 a number of times, but some quick math proved E85 to be a loser economically. The fuel price was not enough to offset the terrible mileage.

My wife had bought into the “save the world” claims of E85 and really wanted it to make sense to use, the Tahoe was her vehicle. In the end we learned it cost us more to run E85 than regular. Plus, E85 is not a planet saving fuel due to producing a lot of carbon during the manufacture of the fuel.

We ran regular.

This is a good summary with my FFV 06 Sierra, my E85 mileage was worse than Ralph’s, similar to Woodshed’s. Main reason I wanted a FFV was just in case the Govt started mandating a higher ethanol blend in regular, like 20% as was talked about 5-6 years ago.

70 cents difference is my break even point but I typically decline to purchase because of the numerous issues in producing ethanol. Only time I buy E85 is when it’s significantly cheaper, like $1 per gallon less than regular, and when it’s exceedingly convenient. Hope this helps, good luck.

Did you factor in the value of the time for extra fill ups and a $3.25 pumpkin latte?

Wasn’t it last year or the year before the price of E85 was manipulated 20 cents then to 40 cents lower in order to make E85 more attractive to consumers.

hl&sinker wrote:

Wasn’t it last year or the year before the price of E85 was manipulated 20 cents then to 40 cents lower in order to make E85 more attractive to consumers.

Like Brain said, its manipulated regularly. Its heavily subsidized. If it wasn’t, it would have two things going against it: more expensive per gallon, reduced fuel efficiency when compared to regular fuel.

DaveB wrote:

Did you factor in the value of the time for extra fill ups and a $3.25 pumpkin latte?

I didn’t

But the damn thing was always on “E” when I wanted to drive it.

Normally you can figure E85 to lower your mpg approx. 30%. Now remember when you fill up the 1st time your tank isn’t completely empty so that tank has to be figured at ??? pecentage of ethanol. All ethanol is subsidized by the Feds and some states. So you have to factor that also into your cost since WE are all helping pay to produce the stuff.

Woodshed,
That consumer report was written in jan of 2011 later that year those tax credits($6 billion) were allowed to run out (expire) and from what I gather no subsidies have been replaced. Please correct me if I’m wrong as I am no fan of ethanol fuel blends.
I did read that Obama backed a $3 billion in subsidies last year after the 2014 farm bill prevented ethonal blenders grabbing a chunck of subsidies from the wind and turbine market. I cant seem to find anything saying that $3 billion in subsidies for ethonol passed or not.

mxskeeter wrote:

So you have to factor that also into your cost since WE are all helping pay to produce the stuff.

Then, you are paying for it whether you use it or not, right? So why not use it? How did I know that this thread would go political?

Ralph, out!

I am a fan, it’s tax payer subsidized racing fuel. we used to pay through the nose for this stuff, granted we used to run 100%. 85% alcohol still makes for good race fuel with minor adjustments on the old engines.

All ethanol is subsidized by the Feds and some states. So you have to factor that also into your cost since WE are all helping pay to produce the stuff.

Then, you are paying for it whether you use it or not, right? So why not use it?

Nothing personal but thinking like this, if we all stopped using it, the government would add more money to subsidize the fuel making it less expensive.

It’s hard to keep this from being political when it’s artificially priced.

…and for that reason, I’m out.

Ralph Wiggum wrote:

<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>mxskeeter wrote:</div>
So you have to factor that also into your cost since WE are all helping pay to produce the stuff.

Then, you are paying for it whether you use it or not, right? So why not use it? How did I know that this thread would go political?

Ralph, out!

I was not running anyone down for using it. My beef is we brag up all the positives but all the negatives get swept under the rug and forgotten about. Just like all political rhetoric. No one has been able to explain to me how it keeps us from being so dependent on foreign oil. That was the initial reason for ethanol. If you add 10% ethanol and loose 10% in mpg where are you using less oil? That is the ????

Politics everywhere…I ran it for a couple months in my 2006 Monte Carlo back in 2007 or so…the cost at the time wasn’t worth the incredibly terrible mileage I was getting (under 20). Since then, only my most most recent truck is compatible and I will not be going back to it since i’m only getting 16 on a good day to begin with…

E85 is great! You’ll get outstanding mileage! Use it in all your small engines. Let the E85 sit in the tank for 12 months on a piece of equipment you don’t use very often.

There… non-political = not giving honest feedback

Only 17mpg? What year is yours Ryan?

My 2 cents. If you get 17 with your much newer 5.3, and my 05 Tahoe that averages the same tells me they haven’t changed much when it comes to engines. Good thing bc the 5.3 is solid. But the 5.3 was built for regular gas, just for longevity of the motor I’d stick with the fuel it was made for originally. Yeah they may tweak this tweak that, but regular gas proven itself in these motors.

Hope the family is enjoying it! We love ours even if she’s got some age to er.

A buck here a buck there. You need gas either way. So saving a couple bucks is nothing. I would not run e85 I have heard it runs hotter and can cause some harm to the motor. That being said that’s just what I have heard from a mechanic. But if it’s 5.00 bucks a gallon and I want to go to the cabin than it looks like I’m paying 5.00 bucks a gallon.

I had a 2010 1500 Silverado. One winter I ran only E85 and documented the mileage. Did the same the next winter on reg unleaded w/10 pct ethanol. The cost/mile was not even close to the unleaded. I ran some unleaded/nonethanol periodically after that. I got maybe .5 mpg average better, but not worth the price diff…..jerr

jerry b wrote:

I had a 2010 1500 Silverado. One winter I ran only E85 and documented the mileage. Did the same the next winter on reg unleaded w/10 pct ethanol. The cost/mile was not even close to the unleaded. I ran some unleaded/nonethanol periodically after that. I got maybe .5 mpg average better, but not worth the price diff…..jerr

curious as to why you only did it in the winter? I know mileage is worse in the winter regardless of which fuel you run but I really wonder how much difference it makes in the winter. 10% of 15mpg is 1.5mpg. 10% of 20 is 2mpg.
I’m thinking it would make a more significant difference in the summer.

E85 sucks.If it was so great everything would be made to burn it.Quick question why have so many ethanol plants closed shop? Government money ran out?Its not the cure all fore the ag industry or the long term fuel issues. Corn is meant to eat and make whiskey not run your car or boat.