E-85 Experiment After 6 months

Topics Last Day Last Week Tree View    Getting Started Formatting Troubleshooting Program Credits    New Messages Keyword Search Contact Moderators Edit Profile Administration
Model T Ford Forum: Forum 2011: E-85 Experiment After 6 months
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Hal Davis - SE Georgia on Wednesday, December 28, 2011 - 06:37 pm:

Well guys, it's been a little over 6 months since I began running my TT exclusively on E-85. So far, so good. I took a fuel sample from the carburetor bowl which looked fine. I took a fuel sample from the sediment bowl and found there to be some 'sediment' in it. There were some darker particles which fell out immediately, and also some lighter particles which took several seconds to settle out. I strained the sediment through a coffee filter, let the filter dry, and placed a magnet into the particles, but it did not attract anything. I don't know what all it is, but it does not appear to contain any iron. Some of it is probably just dirt. The carburetor body and bowl do not appear to have any rust or corrosion other than the light discoloration you see in the bowl. It was there at my 3 month check as well. I see no sign of it getting any worse and was probably there before I started this experiment. The brass drain valve also appears to be unaffected by 6 months exposure to E-85. The float appears to have a film on it, which it had at 3 mos as well. I did not try to wipe it off, but it is shiny in a couple of spots. I assume that is where the float has touched the bowl. The tank does not appear to have any corrosion inside.

Carb Bowl Fuel Sample

Seiment Bowl Fuel Sample

Sediment from Sediment Bowl

Carb Bowl

Carb Drain Valve

Carb Body


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Hal Davis - SE Georgia on Wednesday, December 28, 2011 - 06:38 pm:

Float

Tank


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Brian Holcomb on Wednesday, December 28, 2011 - 07:07 pm:

So, what are the results for performance, mileage, starting, etc., etc.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Hal Davis - SE Georgia on Wednesday, December 28, 2011 - 07:53 pm:

I have not done any performance testing, but I hope to do so in the future. As for starting....it does not like cold weather, but I knew that when I started.:-)


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Roger Karlsson, southern Sweden on Wednesday, December 28, 2011 - 08:04 pm:

Approximately how many tanks have you run through?


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Hal Davis - SE Georgia on Wednesday, December 28, 2011 - 08:07 pm:

Maybe 5?


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Eric Hylen- Central Minnesota on Wednesday, December 28, 2011 - 09:48 pm:

Five tanks in six months? I guess you weren't kidding about not doing any performance testing.:-) The only time I can make a tank of fuel last more than a week is in the dead of a Minnesota winter.

BTW- I ran about thirty tanks of E85 through one of my Ts back in '05. It worked out just fine with no adverse reactions. I noticed no difference in speed or hill climbing ability. My fuel economy may have dropped a bit, but I had no odometer to measure it anyway.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Brian Holcomb on Wednesday, December 28, 2011 - 09:59 pm:

Eric,
How does it work as far as carb adjustment? Do you need to open up the needle further? I've also heard that it goes sour quicker than non-ethanol fuels. any truth to that that you've noticed?
I don't have any problems with using it if it doesn't create a hassle.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Mack J. Cole on Wednesday, December 28, 2011 - 10:09 pm:

Hal,what type needle valve are you useing?


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Hal Davis - SE Georgia on Thursday, December 29, 2011 - 06:30 am:

I'm just guessing on the number of tanks, but that's not far off. Since we got the Touring, I have to admit I don't drive the truck as much as I used to.

As for the carb setting, I'd say I run it about 1/4 turn richer than on gasoline.

Going sour? Never heard it put that way, but no, I've not had any problem with bad fuel, unless you want to count it smelling like cheap tequila.

Which needle valve? I'm not sure. I believe the previous owner told me it had a Grose Jet in it, but I've never needed to pull it apart, so I can't swear that it does.

Someone mentioned trying it if wasn't causing problems. Do as you wish, but there is really no reason to run the stuff. I had run it a couple of times before just to prove it could be done. I'm running it this time to attempt to debunk what I consider to be a myth. That is that it will supposedly corrode your fuel system beyond repair in no time flat. I never bought into that and so far, my results support my theory. However, there is no advantage to running it. The math would show your mileage will suffer.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Hal Davis - SE Georgia on Thursday, December 29, 2011 - 06:35 am:

I meant to add that starting in cold weather can be a pain, but in warmer weather, no problem.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Royce Peterson on Thursday, December 29, 2011 - 03:26 pm:

The tank is going to corrode on the underside of the top first, where it is not constantly submerged in fuel.

I don't see what the point is, since the major auto manufacturers have already proved repeatedly (and inarguably) that E85 does indeed cause major corrosion on non ferrous and ferrous metal surfaces enough to not be able to meet EPA longevity testing requirements and enough to not make warranty period successfully.

Not saying it isn't interesting to see just when damage becomes severe in your Model T, but it may be akin to watching paint dry until it is too late.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Royce Peterson on Thursday, December 29, 2011 - 03:38 pm:

For reference here is a study on the problems that I have posted in the past:

Two general problems are associated with using E85 as a replacement to standard gasohol (E10). First, materials that would not normally be affected by gasohol may degrade in the presence of alcohols. Second, alcohols are more conductive than gasohol, which promotes galvanic
corrosion by acting as an electrolyte. Materials that degrade in the presence of ethanol blends with highalcohol concentrations include brass, zinc, lead, and luminum. Corrosion products from material degradation can damage and plug fuel system components.

Plastics and rubber components degrade in the presence of ethanol as well. These parts need to be replaced with an alcohol-resistant elastomer. Viton is a flurohydrocarbon elastomer with the highest continuous heat resistance and outstanding resistance to swelling. Viton has high resistance to permeation when in contact
with aggressive alcohol fuels, such as E85. The corrosion behavior of various commonly used materials in the presence of pure ethanol is detailed in Table 1.

Table 1 -Corrosion of materials in the presence of
100% ethanol[4]
Material Compatibility Issue
(Penetration level of)
Aluminum < 2 Mils/year up to 180F
Brass < 20 Mils/year up to 210F
Bronze < 20 Mils/year up to 400F
Carbon Steel < 20 Mils/year up to 230F
Copper < 20 Mils/year up to 110F
Nickel < 20 Mils/year up to 200F
Type 304 S.S. < 20 Mils/year up to 210F
Type 316 S.S. < 20 Mils/year up to 420F
Titanium < 2 Mils/year up to 200F

However, the penetration of materials in contact
with ethanol is only half of the problem. Ethanol is most corrosive acting as an electrolyte in a galvanic corrosion environment. A galvanic series table should be consulted
in conjunction with Table 1. For example, aluminum exhibits low penetration levels up to 180F. However, aluminum is anodic to most materials and will corrode in a
galvanic corrosion environment when in contact with a second dissimilar metal.
Currently, there is no galvanic series table indicating the activity/passivity of materials in a pure ethanol or E85 environment. It is thus necessary to make an assumption about the anodic/cathodic nature of various materials in an ethanol environment based on a known galvanic series in an environment such as seawater.

More:
http://www.engr.unl.edu/~ethanol/unl-sae2.pdf


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Kerry van Ekeren. (Australia) on Friday, December 30, 2011 - 12:11 am:

It's been over 3 mths since I put 3 vented tins aside with bits and pieces in them, 1x E10, 1x E85 and the other with ethanol 97%, parts in each
brass float
brass fittings
rubber fuel line
plastic fuel line
steel fuel line
copper fuel line
a piece of clean new steel
a rusty piece of steel
a piece of gal steel
a piece of pot metal
a NH fuel bowl
and a cork.
todays check, all the corks have doubled in size but still all floating, the ethanol has changed color to a lightish gray, like the pot metal, other than that all looks the same way it went in.
Royce,
going by the table you have posted the brass float being only 15Mil thick, should be all gone within several mths in the ethanol, it still weighs in 2 grams heavier than the other 2 at the moment.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Hal Davis - SE Georgia on Friday, December 30, 2011 - 04:23 am:

Interesting Kerry. I was thinking of doing something similar, but will leave this one up to you, since you have already begun.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Royce Peterson on Friday, December 30, 2011 - 07:01 am:

Kerry,

The brass floats are more like 10 thousandths thick, .010". I believe the chart is saying that you lose .0002" per year in E-100.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Mack J. Cole on Friday, December 30, 2011 - 09:21 am:

Werll i just read the front page of the paper this morning.It appears us in NC will get socked with some more gas tax,and the ethonol tax break that somebody gets is not continueing.SO maby if they dont save money messing with it,maby they will let us eat our corn.I know the frozen corn my dad buys for his parrot has went up well over a 1.00 in just the past year.it is over 2 bucks for a small pack.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Hal Davis - SE Georgia on Friday, December 30, 2011 - 03:14 pm:

20 mils would mean .020 to me. See http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/mil


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Kerry van Ekeren. (Australia) on Friday, December 30, 2011 - 03:35 pm:

No good guessing Royce, I cut one in half and mic'd it, thats why I said it was 15 thou thick and yes 20 mil is 20 thou.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Hal Davis - SE Georgia on Friday, December 30, 2011 - 05:01 pm:

It is interesting that the corrosion rates in the chart above for brass, bronze, carbon steel, copper and nickel is the same as it is for 304 and 316 stainless steel.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Royce Peterson on Friday, December 30, 2011 - 05:50 pm:

The corrosion table is referenced to Ailor, W., H., Handbook on Corrosion Testing and
Evaluation, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1971.

It is an ASTM text book and is beyond reproach. Unless you believe that throwing a bunch of crap in some jars out in the garage is a superior test method.....:-)

Link:

http://books.google.com/books?id=tHIubs9OrOQC&pg=PA285&lpg=PA285&dq=Ailor+WH&sou rce=bl&ots=C7lRHGcpgk&sig=I3FVm5kk4j_dOEmo0vsp_qyHFjo&hl=en&sa=X&ei=iT_-TviPK6eQ sQLmvfThAg&ved=0CCYQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=Ailor%20WH&f=false


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Hal Davis - SE Georgia on Friday, December 30, 2011 - 07:28 pm:

On the contrary. It appears to support my theory that ethanol is not going to do anything to my steel, brass, and cast iron fuel system that it won't do to stainless steel.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Hal Davis - SE Georgia on Friday, December 30, 2011 - 07:29 pm:

It would be interesting to see a chart on corrosion rates of the same items in contact with gasoline.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Craig Anderson on Saturday, December 31, 2011 - 02:12 pm:

I'll take the real world "crap in some jars" results over those of a bunch of cloistered eggheads in a lab any day......... <whistle>


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Mattthew G California on Saturday, December 31, 2011 - 09:22 pm:

Royce,
I appreciate how your responses to using Ethanol in the past have caused some people to put their money where their mouth is and help us all learn some things. Also, I am a bit surprised that you quoted an article that seems downplay concerns with E10 as if I recall this was the original concern and discussion. If I read the chart correctly the corrosion rate should be read as less than. This means that we should expect any result less than 20 Mils per year, leaving testing to see how much less than. On the other hand the following statement seems to extreme: It is thus necessary to make an assumption about the anodic/cathodic nature of various materials in an ethanol environment based on a known galvanic series in an environment such as seawater. I dont think that we should assume that distilled alcohol and distilled water should be compared to sea water. IF that were true, why would the Ford manual have this put ethanol and water into the radiator as antifreeze coolant?

Karry,
I look forward to any results you find.

Hal,
Thanks for your work on this. It seems to me that you have lowered the concern that we should have in regard to using E10 and even E85.

Have a great new year! Have fun and be safe T'ing

Matthew


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Royce Peterson on Sunday, January 01, 2012 - 10:59 am:

Matthew,

I will place my faith in the Society of Automotive Engineers.

How long until Hal's parts are corroded beyond economic repair is the only question to be answered.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message  By Michael Deichmann, Blistrup, Denmark on Sunday, January 01, 2012 - 11:16 am:

Ouch!! I just realised that i DRANK some fluid yesterday that contained 45% Ethanol!!!
I wonder how they handle this stuff in the processing? It can't all be glass?


Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.
Topics Last Day Last Week Tree View    Getting Started Formatting Troubleshooting Program Credits    New Messages Keyword Search Contact Moderators Edit Profile Administration