| Author | Message | ||
     Indybuell |
Has anyone had any luck converting their blast to run on e85? I know that there are quite a few kits out there for running e85 in Fuel Injected bikes, but I haven't seen anything for a carbuerated bike. Ethanol in Indy is super cheap, and made by my neighbors. My suburban runs great on the stuff, but didn't know what kind of conversion kits were out there, or if anyone has tried it. | ||
| Cgent |
I'm still not sold on the merits of E85 even though I live in the middle of farm country ... just 85 miles north-west of you. I'm told that ethanol has just 80% of the energy (power) that gasoline has ... therefore E85 would have to be priced at $3.20 or less to compare to $4.00 gas to be interesting. How would the BLAST! fuel tank (plastic) work with the ethanol ??? Your idea is interesting though ......... | ||
| Indybuell |
In my suburban it's only about a 10% loss of MPG. With gas at 4.29 down the street from me, the ethanol at 3.17 was a steal. But my interest isn't really MPG, it's more about giving my cash for fuel over to farmers, rather than crazy people that want us dead. | ||
| Cgent |
EGAD !!! A person with morals ... a person who cares ... what next ??? Seriously ... I appreciate your good intentions !!! I found this interesting ... http://middleeast.about.com/od/oilenergy/a/me07090 5e.htm | ||
| Syonyk |
Hm... I'd rather give my cash to farmers for food. Or biodiesel. Not ethanol generated in the current methods that are roughly energy neutral. But that's another thread. I haven't looked at doing this with the Blast, but I considered it with an old CX500 I ran years ago. The considerations and problems: - You need a good bit more E85 through the carb than gasoline. At a minimum, you're looking at rejetting the carbs, and you may need a new needle as well. The downside here is that after these changes, you are an E85-only bike - you can't run gasoline anymore as you'll be *stupid* rich - not by just a little bit. - E85 has lower energy density than gasoline. If you don't make other alterations, your ~150 miles to pushing will be closer to 100-120 miles. Without other engine modifications, you'll also be making a bit less power. - E85 is not compatible with all fuel system components. The Blast is new enough that you'd *probably* be OK, but I'd want to verify that the tank and lines are happy with it before running anything beyond E10. However, if you want to do it properly, and can always get E85, there are a few things you can do that will really help out: - Raise the compression ratio. Gasoline is difficult to deal with above about a 10:1 static compression ratio. E85, with it's 105 octane rating, can run 14:1 or 15:1 with no problems. You'd need a new head or piston to manage this. - Alter the timing. I'm not sure exactly what you'd need to do, but I believe you can advance the timing a bit and improve power without having detonation issues. If you do these things, then you'll have a vehicle that will run quite well on E85, and should generate similar power/range to a gasoline version. However, if you do these, you CANNOT run straight gasoline - if the engine even starts (being so rich), it will likely suffer heavy detonation under power, which usually leads to preignition and holes in pistons. Hopefully that helps! | ||
| Packnrat |
e85 fuel should be banned world wide. why take land that was growing food for humans and then grow something to eat up a lot of energy just to turn it into a cheeper fuel for a motor? less octane, less ump out of a gallon, and higher food prices. | ||
| Gearheaderiko |
Well, to think long term, it is a renewable energy source where oil is finite. The answer, no, but perhaps a step to it. Unless we cut the shackles of "Big Oil" on us, we are doomed to bow down to them. My guess is if we start to starve because the demand for 'bio fuel' is too great, then we will make a change. Farm subsidies is also a poor answer to a problem. Maybe when we start paying for things by what they are worth, we'll realize what their value really is. Though I dont come to Badweb for political discussion, and I will stop there. | ||
| Johnk |
I have to admit I am confused a little by this thread. In addition I am not even close to knowledgeable on E85. But there seems to be some conflicts I am reading. I see 105 octane but then I see less Octane then standard fuel stated, I am assuming it was a standard fuel and not racing fuel that was meant. I have some friends who are interested in running E85 in their turbo cars but of course those are Fuel Injected and will be tuned for the E85 with larger injectors and proper mapping. They want to do this because of the 105 octane and less risk of detonation. So would it not be of a little interest to increase jetting and maybe needles especially if going with different cams/pistons/heads setup? While yes you will be getting less miles from your standard tank of gas shouldn't your power be increased? And of course it is my understanding that it can be problematic in colder climates as well... | ||
| Indybuell |
Octane doesn't equal power. It's a rating on the fuel's ability to resist knock, or pre-ignition. Race fuel is higher octane because the compression is typically high enough that standard lower octane fuel would ignite way before spark even occurs. E85 is higher octane because it is less dense, and it also unrelated to octane rating has less power chemically by volume. | ||
| Johnk |
So with E85 could you run higher compression and have more power when you upgrade your setup with less chance of knock as you would normal petrol? We have several places to get E85 here locally but this is purely out of curiosity and a desire to understand since I don't plan on doing anything to the engine for a while. | ||
| Indybuell |
Yes, but you would need the injectors to spray more E85 per intake cycle to get more power. Plus if you up the compression enough, you couldn't run 87 octane without serious detonation. |
