Who here has a flex-fuel Explorer?

[Beastb15]

You never know what you are going to find when you read the owner's manual. As I was thumbing through, I came to the FFV section. Sure enough, my explorer can run E85, which happens to be $.30 cheaper a gallon. Granted, I'll get some reduced fuel mileage, but when gas jacks up to $4 this summer, this could come in handy

 

[abarkl]

My '03 is FFV but the closest station is 135 miles away!

 

[toocalm]

I have a FFV also...can you use an 89 octane or will that screw us the engine sensors? Right now in NY I can find 87-89-93 octane at the same price at different stations.

 

[Donner]

They say 95% are flex fuel...

 

[BWilliams]

You can indeed run 89 with no adverse effects. I've been running it for almost a year, and I see 2-3MPG highway improved mileage over 87 (18-ish on regular, 21.2 highway tested two weeks ago on 89). This is on a stock engine.. not even an intake yet.

 

[Donner]

Why are you guys running 89? What brand gas do you use? 87 is all you need, unless your brand has an additive at 89.

 

[E.B. Cornburner]

Mine's a FFV. It's the reason I bought it.

Octane rating is irrelevant to the performance of these, just like any other...As long as you run fuel that meets the minimum octane rating (which is 87 on these) running higher octane fuel will accomplish nothing.

To clear the air just because I've been hearing people make this misconception, E85 ethanol fuel is not 85 octane. It's actually 100-105 octane. The "85" means it's 85% ethanol and 15% gasoline.

I don't know about 95% of them being flex-fuel...From what I've observed it's more of a 50/50 split. As most already know, only the 4.0 V6 has the FFV option. The 8th VIN character is a "K" on the FFV, and "E" if it's not.

 

[toocalm]

Not to discount what you say about octane rating and fuel efficiency, but in the past when checking the MPG's on other vehicles that I have owned, the higher the octaine I used the better the gas milage, although not by much, but a little more noticable.

 

[E.B. Cornburner]

On paper, it shouldn't make any difference, but it's possible that if your vehicle is equipped with knock sensors (most newer ones are), that you could gain a couple more degrees of advance, which could equate to better MPG.

 

[Donner]

And I lost the source...

Mine's a FFV. It's the reason I bought it.

Octane rating is irrelevant to the performance of these, just like any other...As long as you run fuel that meets the minimum octane rating (which is 87 on these) running higher octane fuel will accomplish nothing.

To clear the air just because I've been hearing people make this misconception, E85 ethanol fuel is not 85 octane. It's actually 100-105 octane. The "85" means it's 85% ethanol and 15% gasoline.

I don't know about 95% of them being flex-fuel...From what I've observed it's more of a 50/50 split. As most already know, only the 4.0 V6 has the FFV option. The 8th VIN character is a "K" on the FFV, and "E" if it's not.

I'll stick with you on this, I can't find the source on 95%.

 

[E.B. Cornburner]

Well, I determined my conclusion based on the Explorers that were offered for sale. Search for Explorers from '02-'05 in a broad area, and make a note of the 8th VIN. You'll most likely come up with about half of them being a "K".

 

[jpserra]

My hand is raised.

04 XLT/NBX flexfuel

JP

 

[jpserra]

Sorry Cobb, but you are wrong.

Imperical testing (actual mileage testing) has shown me that running the 89 gives me better mileage than the 87. That said, the higher octane rated fuels don't seem to do any better than the 89. It may be the additives used in the 87 that is driving the mileage down. If all things were equal, your assertions would be correct. However, the "crap" that is mandated by the State and local stations mitigate the possible positive benefits of the "common" fuels used. Since the most common variety of fuel used is the 87 octane unleaded, states like Minnesota demand agents added to the fuel to counteract the emissions problems encountered when using this fuel, especially during the winter, when air density keeps exhaust closer to the ground.

Yes, the higher octane fuels will do better on a low compression engine only due to the purity of the fuel, not the octane.

JP

 

[lilbeefy]

my 04 is a flex fuel.

 

[Beastb15]

::wonders have feasible and profitable it would be to manufacture large quantities of E85 and sell it::

 

[Donner]

Okay, it's from AwtoZone

I'll stick with you on this, I can't find the source on 95%.

Well, I determined my conclusion based on the Explorers that were offered for sale. Search for Explorers from '02-'05 in a broad area, and make a note of the 8th VIN. You'll most likely come up with about half of them being a "K".

AutoZone, shows percentages when you search by vehicle for products. It's the 4x that has a high percentage of flex fuel. Awd and 2wd didn't show...

 

[E.B. Cornburner]

Sorry Cobb, but you are wrong.

Imperical testing (actual mileage testing) has shown me that running the 89 gives me better mileage than the 87. That said, the higher octane rated fuels don't seem to do any better than the 89. It may be the additives used in the 87 that is driving the mileage down. If all things were equal, your assertions would be correct. However, the "crap" that is mandated by the State and local stations mitigate the possible positive benefits of the "common" fuels used. Since the most common variety of fuel used is the 87 octane unleaded, states like Minnesota demand agents added to the fuel to counteract the emissions problems encountered when using this fuel, especially during the winter, when air density keeps exhaust closer to the ground.

Yes, the higher octane fuels will do better on a low compression engine only due to the purity of the fuel, not the octane.

JP

Contrary to popular belief, there's nothing special about higher octane fuels, and nothing "crap" about 87 octane regular. All the different octane levels have to meet the same deposit control requirements, and have the same blends in regard to federal and/or local emissions requirements. The only thing you gain in a higher octane fuel is just that...Higher octane. There isn't any more heat energy in high octane fuel than there is in low octane, and the higher octane fuels are no more "pure" or refined than the regular stuff. They all start out as the same base gasoline, but the high octane varieties have more octane improvers such as xylene, toluene, etc. added into them after the fact.

Like I mentioned above, the only reason you might get a little more MPG out of a higher octane fuel is if the low octane fuel is causing a little bit of knock, making the PCM back out a bit of advance, and the engine runs a little less efficiently. 89 octane is probably just enough to keep the knock sensors happy, and you get the full advance curve that was programmed into the PCM.

 

[mikeh44]

mine is flex fuel also

 

[jpserra]

Mike, you are still wrong.

Just because it says 87 octane, does not mean the additives pushed by individual states will allow it to burn the same way. Minnesota and many other states require key additives, that inhibit or modify the burning of that fuel resulting in less efficiency than a "stock" 87 Octane fuel. Sadly, I know, since I watched the mileage on my 2001 Sport decrease practically over night, back in 2003, when the new standards for fuel "composition" were enacted.

I went from 19mpg down to 16mpg using the same gas in the same station. The octane rating is set on the base batch from the refinery, and the modifications are done afterwards. Using a slightly higher octane results in better combustion because the mods were done to the primary fuel; the 87 octane. Using the 91 or 93 is fruitless because to burn these fuels, you would need higher compression engines.

That is fact, not theory.

JP

 

[E.B. Cornburner]

Well, since MN is a 10% ethanol mandated state, and you're still getting 87, 89, and 93 octane fuels, what that tells me is the fuel supplier is selling the stations a sub-octane fuel, and the extra 2-2.5 octane numbers that the ethanol increases the base fuel's octane is still giving them the end-product octane levels they need. If the distribution centers were to inject the 10% ethanol into already 87 octane fuel, they'd end up with 89 octane "regular". Kwik Trip stores here actually capatalize on this, by selling their 89 octane mid-grade fuel (the only one that's E10 where I live) at the same price as their 87. It's the same base gasoline, but the added ethanol bumps the octane up enough that it can be sold as mid-grade. They also can reap the benefits of the blender's credit so in reality, it's more profitable for them to sell their mid-grade than their regular.

So...I said all that to say this. Since the burn characteristics of ethanol and gasoline are so different, by starting out with say 85 octane base fuel and adding the ethanol to it to deliver 87 octane "regular", it probably doesn't have the same burn quality as 87 octane with no ethanol (or 89 octane with 10% ethanol) would.

That theory is probably correct, and should make both of us happy.