E85 is Ford zigging while everybody is zagging?

[shaker1]

The thing is it would basically be no cost for Ford to support E85 and make their vehicles FFV. Basically if I'm not mistaken all it is on modern vehicles to run E85 is a computer tune. And they already have had it on some of there vehicles so why not make them all FFV.

Actually, I suspect it would require sensors to detect accurately the fuel type, additional programming and possibly computer resources (memory) and fuel system upgrades (as ethanol is corrosive to current fuel system materials).

Not insurmountable, but even if it costs $100 per vehicle times 1,000,000 vehicles produced yearly it would add up considerably for a company having trouble making ends meet. There would have to be the belief that most consumer's would embrace the higher cost for this technology. At this point public acceptance is mixed at best.

 

[E.B. Cornburner]

Ford eliminated the sensors in the fuel system that detect the amount of ethanol. Now they just read O2 activity on a re-fuel and "guesstimate" the percentage.

Ethanol is not "highly corrosive" as you make it sound. It's actually a more benign substance than gasoline. You can drink it before it's "denatured" with other chemicals. It just has properties that are different, but not necessarily worse, than gasoline. Therefore, fuel system components need to be changed to accomodate both fuels.

Try this sometime...Pour a little gasoline in a styrofoam cup and see what happens to it. Now, if you can get a hold of some Everclear (closest thing to pure ethanol you can get over the counter) and pour some of it in the same type of cup. Look at what happens...Nothing!

Ethanol is corrosive to some extent to aluminum and has been shown to cause swelling of some Neoprene seals and O-rings. For this reason, FFVs eliminate aluminum in favor of plastic and/or stainless steel, and Neoprene is replaced with Viton.

 

[shaker1]

I removed the word "highly". It does however require a fuel system upgrade due to incompatibilities and that is the point I was making. It is not simply a software change.

Gasoline is incompatible with styrofoam in much the same (not as dramatic) manner as ethanol with standard fuel system components. Lacquer thinner will eat a plastic cup in seconds, but it is still used in paint without damaging underlying materials. Just a matter of compatibility, not a value judgement.

I concur that ethanol is more benign than gasoline.

 

[E.B. Cornburner]

For a great discussion forum about E85 vehicles, and converting a non-FFV to E85, along with other "hot" topics about the whole industry, visit http://e85vehicles.com/e85/

There are some incredibly knowledgeable people there that are doing more than just sitting back and letting the manufacturers and Big Oil dictate what they can and can't do with their vehicles.

If you read some of the discussions, you'll also be able to see what sort of myths and misconceptions there are floating about in regards to E85 and its use.

 

[baseballX]

I think your professor oversimplified this issue considerably. A market-based consumer-driven economy has a way of seeking it's own level. If you produce a light bulb that lasts 10 times longer and costs more money it will find a limited market because many people will refuse to pay the higher price. And the company's ability to remain in business selling products that never wear out will cause it to raise it's prices or go bankrupt. No free lunch!

I don't think he did, because the production cost to make longer lasting bulbs is virtually the same. Think of the LED example, which are often much cheaper then regular bulbs. You relate it to supply and demand, which is another issue entirely. My point was that companies will choose profitable routes, and will not change their ways until something makes them do so which IMO is one of the issues with E85.