Hey guys/gals,

I've been wondering this for a while about the differences in actual cost per mile between E85 & Gasoline. Well I finally got around to doing a test and this is what I found for my 2007 F150 5.4 3v.

E85 - total miles to a tank 350 - used 27.5 gallons - 12.7mpg - e85 price $2.26 - tank cost $62.15 - cost per mile $.18

Gas 87 Octane - total miles to a tank 400 - used 27.5 gallons - 14.5mpg - 87 Gas price $2.86 - tank cost $78.65 - cost per mile $.20

So with my truck and my driving style/conditions e85 is about $.02 cheaper a mile to drive. Which over the course of 100,000 miles a person could save about $2,000 using e85.

Hope I'm not waisting anybodys time by having to read this. But i was starting to get sick and tired of people asking me why I use e85 and get 2-3 less mpg. My excuse was always I like keeping the money in our country and not giving it to the towel heads. Even if it's more to drive the truck.

Well I guess now I know it actually is true to say e85 will save you more money and were not buying a towel head another Rolls Royce/Bentley. But will be buying a farmer a new John Deere Combine.

 

thanks for the info. I run E-85 pretty often with my truck, but have never done the breakdown that you did.

Robbie

 

So there's really no "benefit". Nice breakdown though!

 

The benefit is using 85% less gasoline compared to regular unleaded. Over time that will lower the demand of gas and potentially lower the price. If you use E85 you are using 85% less gas, which over the course of a year is very substantial.

EX: 15,000 miles driven a year at 15mpg = 1,000 gal of gas used per year
15,000 miles driven a year at 13mpg on E85 = 173 gallons of gas used per year and 980 gallons of ethanol

 

Ok, just so I understand correctly, our vehicles can use E85 although they are not considered FlexFuel or anything? I drive a Screw with a 4.6. Will my engine be able to consume this type of fuel as well? If so, could somone provide me with a breakdown on how this alternative fuel works? Thanks

 

No, your truck MUST have the Flex Fuel engine in order to use E-85.

 

Repost
https://www.f150online.com/forums/sh...d.php?t=288939

 

I always use the 10% blend. If we used more renewable fuel, we wouldn't have to import so much oil. I've heard of people trying E85 in vehicles not approved for it but I'm not ready to make that step. A lot of news reports/articles on ethanol are confusing because the reporter doesn't always clarify (or know) the difference between E85 and a 10% blend.

 

they need to realize ethanol is not the way to go.

 

To: JBMX928
So do you have a reason why ethonal is not the way to go?

 

a few.


1: a lot is proving it to get worse gas mileage.
2: it's having the same economic effect as gasoline where high demand makes its price almost the same, plus other crop fields are being converted to corn so corn price is going up
3: some tests are proving it to put off equally dangerous gases.


maybe ethanol is a little better if someone proves it to me, but IMO we need a LOT better, not just little.

so i say hydrogen.

one guy on here in cali said his area got a hydrogen bus that runs on water and emits oxygen. Can't get any better eh?

 

Using E85 drops my mileage from 13.5 to 11.2 for a 17% decrease in mileage, just city driving.

Regular unleaded is selling for $3/gal this week in Tucson with E85 at $2.65/gal, making E85 only 11.7% less expensive.

I need E85 to be about $2.47/gal to reach a break even point of the fuel cost being 17% less than unleaded to match the 17% mileage loss per gallon, assuming unleaded stayed at $3/gal.

I have one station a few miles down the street, and only four places in Tucson to purchase E85, plus the shorter driving miles per tank means more stops to refuel.

My window sticker states that my truck should get 14mpg city unleaded and 10mpg on E85 for city driving, so that is pretty accurate so far.

On E85 it seems to accelerate a little better from a stop, otherwise I can't tell a difference in day to day driving.

To me it is just an alternative fuel source, but the numbers need to be right before I use E85 exclusively. I'm glad to read that we are planting the most corn since the 40's. I would rather see more farms survive than have more planned communities with golf courses, no offense intended with regard to you golfers!

Steve

 

Doesn't ethanol take more energy to produce that what it yields?

In that sense, you are saving energy/oil at the consumer (in theory), but to manufacturer, it is using more energy to produce, offsetting its energy effectiveness.

 

I was in Aberdeen, SD last week and they had E85 at almost $1 less per gallon. If I lived there, I would be using it all the time. Unfortunately, we do not have E85 here where I live, so that is not even an option at this time.

I can hope it arrives soon.

Later.....

 

If this country had put as much effort into developing ethanol (which can come from more than one source) as it has into drilling and/or shipping oil we could be talking about how efficient ethanol had become and how great it is to not be dependent on foreign oil.

As for higher corn prices, those could just as easily collapse in a year or two. I'd much rather see a farmer in this country have the opportunity to make a decent living on a consistent basis than to continue supporting wealthy oil (companies & countries).

As for hydrogen, it may someday be viable but it just doesn't do much for those of us who drive vehicles that can't use it.