So all the Ford Service Centers across the country are going to be replacing fuel injectors, fuel pumps, fuel lines, fuel tanks with the non FFV products in the FFV Trucks or is it vice versa.

 

I would like to talk with that owner. I have been running it now for 6K and everything is fine.

 

1 & 2. In 2004 & up F150s, the PCM will adjust 25%. Except under heavy load, this is sufficient to handle E85.
3. Ethanol is not acidic. The mfgr process removes all water. Ethyl Alcohol will not blend with Gas if more than 5% water is present. Acid is only formed when water becomes part of the mix.
4. Already done. See the E10 discussion. It is on the money.
5. You are correct; however, 1% water is tolerable. My tests have shown that the E85 I have been using contains less than 1% water.
6. Wow. You are absolutely speaking in the face of the scientific community who have resoundly stated that emissions are reduced with E85. Did I forget to tell you that the cats are the same between the 2006 FFV and the 2006 non FFV F150. Also, within a couple of weeks I will have my truck emissions tested against the allowable standards.
7. Cool. Let's go back through the comparison of components starting with the 2004 F150 and proceeding through the 2006 F150 FFV.

The only difference I have found to date and my research continues is the programming. That's it. Now, does that mean there is no difference... absolutely not. I haven't compared all parts. I focused only on fuel delivery to start. I have spent considerable time reviewing each step of the journey with a Ford Master Tech. His position and comments are very different than the "experts" on this site which to date have not shown one stich of factual evidence supporting their claims. He firmly believes I am on the right track and my truck will last longer while running E85 when compared to the carbon depositing gasoline.

 

tschaid,
if the ffv vehicles have a conductivity meter (or whatever they use to determine ethanol content), how are you going to adjust your programming? are you going to have leave your ethanol program on full time? and then switch if you have to go back to regular gasoline?

 

The O2 sensors determine the ethanol content based upon the oxygen present in the fuel. Ford increased the adjustment of the PCM based upon the O2 sensors from 25% in the 2004+ non-FFVs to nearly 29% in the FFVs. I examined a 2006 F150 FFV and saw nothing of a conductivity meter. I reviewed my findings with a local Ford Master Tech and he said nothing of a conductivity meter. I have serious doubts about this.

Now... in my case. I won't ever go back to regular gasoline without reprogramming so it really doesn't matter.

 

I looked on the motorcraft parts site, and found no evidence of extra sensors on the ffv trucks.......

 

Chester,

If you bet that your 1997 would be able to handle E85 without ill effects on the fuel delivery system then you would loose. Read the owner's manual. Max 10% Ethanol, 15% MTBE and max 5% methanol. Should be around page 192 of your manual.

JMC

 

JMC,

So you share in the belief that Ford, GM, Chrysler Engineers, somehow limited their engineering to only 10% and not 20, 30, 40, etc. This would seem to indicate they took the time to test their components against higher percentages of Ethanol and found it to be too corrosive. Wouldn't it make more sense from a warranty standpoint, for the engineering groups, to research and understand the effects on metals and rubbers from alcohol and implement components that didn't experience this negative effect. Especially considering the wide use of 10% Ethanol in gasoline.

Minnesota will soon require 20% Ethanol in it's gasoline. Will vehicles across Minnesota begin to fail after this law is implemented ? Studies have been done concerning this and while it is certainly too earlier to tell. Not one of the vehicles tested showed any negative signs when up to 30% Ethanol was utilized. Yes. Without reprogramming, fuel economy did suffer; but, of the vehciles tested, not one threw a CEL even at 30%.

 

tschaid,

I own my own business. I give the customer what he wants. I don't sell him a product that will meet a higher spec than what he needs because it costs more to get that product. Why should I pay for more spec and sell it at the lower spec price? If I have that philosophy why wouldn't Ford also have it. In 2004 when the new body style came out they were selling like hot cakes. 1 million trucks a year times (the extra cost of E85 components) equals a lot of money. Now that everybody and their dog is scrambling to produce ethanol the car companies are scrambling to be able to use it. So now it would make sense for Ford to jump on the band wagon. It is most likely cheaper at this point to have a common fuel injector, fuel pump, etc capable of withstanding the rigours of E85. All I am saying before you generalize about parts is to find out for sure that the built in 2004 models have the exact same injector etc. as the E85 2006 models. If you are correct then fantastic! Those who wish can go out and load up on E85 without a care. But if you are wrong then some people may very well screw up their vehicle. I am not concerned about the tune I an concerned about the compatibility of the parts and the potential devastation it may have on one's truck.

JMC

 

I completey agree and have seen this. Ford does release updated service manuals constantly for Parts Managers and Directors to utilize. I have not generalized that I know of. That is why I put up the post. This is very good dialogue and I certainly appreciate all input. To your point. My real interest is learning why, if Ford uses the same part numbers indicating the same parts, I can damage a non FFV "advertised" vehicle as some have said. Actually, I was told (yeh right) by a Master Tech that Ford began prep for this in the late 90s. I dunno. True or False. And, let's not forget. The 2006 F150 is the latest FFV, Ford did release FFVs on other vehicles in 2004 and 2005.

I will post data very soon.

 

This is from an article from the autochannel. I dont know if it will change anyones opinions on this or not. Who know? I dont think that the evidence of corrosion would show within 2 years.


http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2...15/006792.html



"An FFV needs some special upgrades to avoid corrosion and wear," Seiter said. "The fuel tank, for example, is either plastic or has a special coating. Fuel lines are nylon 6 or stainless steel, the fuel injector is alcohol-tolerant, valves and seats are harder, and in some cases the head gasket must be more robust because combustion pressures increase more rapidly with ethanol."

Second, the engine controls need to know what fuel mix is entering the combustion chambers.

"A sensor detects a refill event, in other words when the customer puts fuel into the tank," Seiter said. "The electronics in the system are basically a rapid learning center. Usually within a mile or two of the vehicle being driven away, the system learns what fuel is being used by the way the vehicle operates and adjusts the air/fuel mixture accordingly."

 

Yes. I have seen this. It is the common mechanic's take on the situation. It is a very safe and do nothing position to take since nobody would go to that length to convert a vehicle. The data found during the National Ethanol Vehicle Challenge in 1998, 1999, and 2000 by 20 Universities utilizing Chevrolet Pickups don't include a lot of those mods. If fact, not one of the writeups I have read from those challenges included a fuel delivery modification at all. They could be there and I missed it. Who knows. Additionally, the parts comparison done on today's newer vehicles apparently illustrate those mods were built in long ago or today's FFVs will simply wear out before the warranty expires. The later is unlikely because E85 is becoming more and more popular and the number of FFV vehicles made increases with each day. Their popularity is exploding in the midwest and the acceptance is very high. More likely is.. The changes were already built in by the mfgrs several years ago with programming being the only change now required for at least some of the non FFVs.

I saw my truck adapt to E30 and then E85 without changing the tuning and I was monitoring Air/Fuel and EGT. The only thing I did experience was a leaning trend under WOT which I have now corrected.

Please understand. I am not advocating or encouraging anybody to do the same I have. This change or converion should not be taken lightly. Significant research is required. Who knows. I could have the only 2004 F150 in America capable of running both gasoline and E85. Or. My truck could die on the side of the road tomorrow. Based upon the research I have done, both of these cases are extremely unlikely. Still, I will not convert my son's 1998 F150 or my wife's 2006 F150 until I am absolutely sure I have dotted the i's and crossed the t's on this project.

All I am really trying to accomplish is to convince the experts that perhaps they need to rethink their position and dig deeper. As the price of gasoline continues to sky rocket, the experts will have fewer and fewer customers when truck owners trade in their F150s for higher mileage sedans. We have seen it before and we will see it again. Being able to offer a lower cost alternative seems to me to be good business practice.

 

tschaid,
Don't forget that Ford is in the business of selling vehicles. What ever bull shìt they can spread that sells them more cars and doesn't cost them a dime they will use. So if the price of using e85 components is the same as not they will surely use the e85 ones. That is a no brainer. They can then brag about being e85 compatible. But don't forget that Ford is run by mere mortals. They make mistakes. The bean counters are forever pulling the quality down when ever they can get away from it. In the 1997 to 1999 model year F-150 there was a little pocket by the driver's right knee. In 2000 it disappeared. Why? The panel that it was attached to was made of metal but in 00 it was now plastic. Did that keep me from buying my truck? No but it surely saved Ford a bunch of cash. Don't you think that if Ford was sure that the 1997-2004 heritage and even the 04-05 models were e85 compatible that Ford would shouting up a storm bragging about it? So again I caution about generalized statements based upon part numbers.

JMC

 

All good points; but, without proper tuning advertising would not be a good idea and until the price of gas really exploded beyond the $3.00 mark, how strong was the impetus. I dunno. Is E85 more corrosive than E10? Can an engineer implement components to withstand 10% Ethyl Alcohol; but, not 85% ? Maybe. Would it be cost effective for a mfgr to make this a requirement. Unlikely. Isn't it more likely that way back in 2000 and before, engineers began planning and implementing when the MTBE shock wave hit? Is the proverbial planned obsolesence part of the equation. Likely. To what degree... Who knows.

 

Obviously Ford has the tuning for the 06. A simple update to the PCM and presto, it is tuned. So why doesn't Ford do this and offer all the 04-5 owners a chance to upgrade? Most likely that the parts are not compatable. Lets say for argument sake that you are wrong about the compatabality of E85 and the 04-05 non FF vehicles. Some poor SOB tries it and casuses damage to his vehicle. You get sued but becasue you can't get water from a stone it goes away. You carry on with life and continue working at your day job and so on and so on. Now a new scenario. Mike Troyer decides to jump on your band wagon and confirms your limited research. Hundreds of people get into trouble. Mike, Troyer Performance, the janitor, and the guy who installed the telephone at the shop all get sued. The plantifs win and Troyer Performace is no longer around. Mike looses his livelyhood becasue he does tuning for a living. After all who is going to hire him to tune after such a monumental loss. Becasue Mike gains his livelyhood from tuning, why would he share his tuning secrets? It is commendable in itself that he shares what he does by offering free advice and tips and tricks. I keep my trade secrets to myself. Ggranted I will throw out a bone or two but only if I think it will benifit me in the long run. Sometimes I make a mistake and throw out too big a bone and I pay dearly. Lost income!

WTF |!"/$%?&()_?&*()_
I just fell of the soap box!

JMC