Ethanol (E85) & service engine soon light??
Thread Starter
|
Member
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
From: Jonesborough, Tennessee
Ethanol (E85) & service engine soon light??
2002 F150 S-crew, 5.4L
Ok, I experimented.. From close to an empty tank, I put in 1/2 tank E85. Within a mile, my service engine soon light came on. Engine ran absolutely great for the next 175 miles of that tank. Filled up with 87 octane unleaded, no change to performance. Owners manual says that if bad fuel or loose gas cap, light would go out in 2-3 run cycles. It's still on. A few questions.
Did I damage anything? Like a sensor?
How do I reset whatever I need to reset?
I like being eco-friendly. Truck ran great. Can I upgrade my stock setup to accept E85 for everyday driving? What parts do I need to replace?
Thanks for the help.
Ok, I experimented.. From close to an empty tank, I put in 1/2 tank E85. Within a mile, my service engine soon light came on. Engine ran absolutely great for the next 175 miles of that tank. Filled up with 87 octane unleaded, no change to performance. Owners manual says that if bad fuel or loose gas cap, light would go out in 2-3 run cycles. It's still on. A few questions.
Did I damage anything? Like a sensor?
How do I reset whatever I need to reset?
I like being eco-friendly. Truck ran great. Can I upgrade my stock setup to accept E85 for everyday driving? What parts do I need to replace?
Thanks for the help.
Technical Article Contributor
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 2,804
Likes: 9
From: Wisconsin
ethanol high enough to cause the MIL to illuminate risks severe damage to the vehicle
Good question, here is what Wikipedia says.
"Operating fuel-injected non-FFVs on more than 50% ethanol will generally cause the Malfunction Indicator Lamp (MIL) to illuminate, indicating that the electronic control unit (ECU) believes that it can no longer maintain closed-loop control of the internal combustion process not due to the presence of more oxygen in E85, but rather the fact that E85 has less carbon per volume, thus requiring more than the injectors can deliver, than gasoline. Once the MIL illuminates, adding more ethanol to the fuel tank becomes rather inefficient. For example, running 90% ethanol in a non-FFV (Flexible Fuel Vehicle) will reduce fuel economy by 33% or more relative to what would be achieved running 100% gasoline. Even more importantly, continuing to operate the non-FFV with the Malfunction Indicator Lamp (MIL) illuminated may also cause damage to the catalytic converter as well as to the engine pistons if allowed to persist. To run a non-FFV with amounts of ethanol high enough to cause the MIL to illuminate risks severe damage to the vehicle, that may outweigh any economic benefit of E85.
Under stoichiometric combustion conditions, ideal combustion occurs for burning pure gasoline as well as for various mixes of gasoline and ethanol (at least until the MIL illuminates in the non-FFV) such that there is no significant amount of uncombined oxygen or unburned fuel being emitted in the exhaust. This means that no change in the exhaust manifold oxygen sensor is required for either FFVs or non-FFVs when burning higher percentages of ethanol. This also means that the catalytic converter on the non-FFV burning ethanol mixed with gasoline is not being stressed by the presence of too much oxygen in the exhaust, which would otherwise reduce catalytic converter operating life.
Nonetheless, even when the MIL does not illuminate on the non-FFV burning an ethanol-gasoline mixture, proper catalytic operation of the catalytic converter for a non-FFV burning higher percentages of ethanol may not be achieved as soon as necessary to prevent the emission of some pollution products resulting from burning the gasoline contained in the mixture, especially upon initial cold engine start. This is because the catalytic converter needs to rise to an internal temperature of approximately 300 °C before it can 'fire off' and commence its intended catalytic function operation. When burning large concentrations of ethanol in a non-FFV, the cooler burning characteristics of ethanol fuel than gasoline fuel may delay reaching the 'fire-off' temperature in a non-FFV as quickly as when burning gasoline. Any additional pollution, however, is only going to be emitted for a very short distance when burning E85 in a non-FFV, as the catalytic converter will nonetheless still 'fire off' quite quickly and commence catalytic operation shortly. It is not known whether the small amount of pollution emitted prior to catalytic converter 'fire off' may actually be reduced even during the cold startup phase, as well as once catalytic operation commences, when burning E85 in a non-FFV. Likewise, even once the catalytic converter 'fires off', operation with the MIL illuminated will still result in excess amounts of nitrous oxide being released, greater than when operating the engine on gasoline. The solution is simply to add gasoline, and extinguish the Malfunction Indicator Lamp (MIL), at which time exhaust pollutants will return to within normal limits.
For non-FFVs burning E85 once the MIL illuminates, it is the lessened amount of fuel injection than what is needed that causes the air fuel mixture to become too lean; that is, there is not enough fuel being injected into the combustion process, with the result that the oxygen content in the exhaust rises out of limits, and perfect (i.e., stoichiometric) combustion is lost if the percentage of ethanol in the fuel tank becomes too high. It is the loss of near-stoichiometric combustion that causes the excessive loss of fuel economy in non-FFVs burning too high a percentage of ethanol versus gasoline in their fuel mix."
"Operating fuel-injected non-FFVs on more than 50% ethanol will generally cause the Malfunction Indicator Lamp (MIL) to illuminate, indicating that the electronic control unit (ECU) believes that it can no longer maintain closed-loop control of the internal combustion process not due to the presence of more oxygen in E85, but rather the fact that E85 has less carbon per volume, thus requiring more than the injectors can deliver, than gasoline. Once the MIL illuminates, adding more ethanol to the fuel tank becomes rather inefficient. For example, running 90% ethanol in a non-FFV (Flexible Fuel Vehicle) will reduce fuel economy by 33% or more relative to what would be achieved running 100% gasoline. Even more importantly, continuing to operate the non-FFV with the Malfunction Indicator Lamp (MIL) illuminated may also cause damage to the catalytic converter as well as to the engine pistons if allowed to persist. To run a non-FFV with amounts of ethanol high enough to cause the MIL to illuminate risks severe damage to the vehicle, that may outweigh any economic benefit of E85.
Under stoichiometric combustion conditions, ideal combustion occurs for burning pure gasoline as well as for various mixes of gasoline and ethanol (at least until the MIL illuminates in the non-FFV) such that there is no significant amount of uncombined oxygen or unburned fuel being emitted in the exhaust. This means that no change in the exhaust manifold oxygen sensor is required for either FFVs or non-FFVs when burning higher percentages of ethanol. This also means that the catalytic converter on the non-FFV burning ethanol mixed with gasoline is not being stressed by the presence of too much oxygen in the exhaust, which would otherwise reduce catalytic converter operating life.
Nonetheless, even when the MIL does not illuminate on the non-FFV burning an ethanol-gasoline mixture, proper catalytic operation of the catalytic converter for a non-FFV burning higher percentages of ethanol may not be achieved as soon as necessary to prevent the emission of some pollution products resulting from burning the gasoline contained in the mixture, especially upon initial cold engine start. This is because the catalytic converter needs to rise to an internal temperature of approximately 300 °C before it can 'fire off' and commence its intended catalytic function operation. When burning large concentrations of ethanol in a non-FFV, the cooler burning characteristics of ethanol fuel than gasoline fuel may delay reaching the 'fire-off' temperature in a non-FFV as quickly as when burning gasoline. Any additional pollution, however, is only going to be emitted for a very short distance when burning E85 in a non-FFV, as the catalytic converter will nonetheless still 'fire off' quite quickly and commence catalytic operation shortly. It is not known whether the small amount of pollution emitted prior to catalytic converter 'fire off' may actually be reduced even during the cold startup phase, as well as once catalytic operation commences, when burning E85 in a non-FFV. Likewise, even once the catalytic converter 'fires off', operation with the MIL illuminated will still result in excess amounts of nitrous oxide being released, greater than when operating the engine on gasoline. The solution is simply to add gasoline, and extinguish the Malfunction Indicator Lamp (MIL), at which time exhaust pollutants will return to within normal limits.
For non-FFVs burning E85 once the MIL illuminates, it is the lessened amount of fuel injection than what is needed that causes the air fuel mixture to become too lean; that is, there is not enough fuel being injected into the combustion process, with the result that the oxygen content in the exhaust rises out of limits, and perfect (i.e., stoichiometric) combustion is lost if the percentage of ethanol in the fuel tank becomes too high. It is the loss of near-stoichiometric combustion that causes the excessive loss of fuel economy in non-FFVs burning too high a percentage of ethanol versus gasoline in their fuel mix."
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 43,531
Likes: 817
From: Joplin MO
In brief, you are risking severe engine damage running E85 in a non-FFV. A proper conversion can be done, it costs around $2000.
To get the light to go off, you need to run that tank all the way down and fill with the closest thing you can get to pure gas. I have heard that any ethanol over around 35% will trip the light. If it still won't go off, disconnect the battery for about 15 minutes. If it comes on again, go over to Autozone and get the codes read.
To get the light to go off, you need to run that tank all the way down and fill with the closest thing you can get to pure gas. I have heard that any ethanol over around 35% will trip the light. If it still won't go off, disconnect the battery for about 15 minutes. If it comes on again, go over to Autozone and get the codes read.
Junior Member
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
My wife called me (of course, these things always happen when I cannot respond) and told me the CEL came on in her '97 Expy (5.4L).
I directed her to Autozone. She called, saying the does was a Lean Condition, both banks.
She puts the Autozonian on the phone. He says he's seen a bunch of cars lately with the same problem. His 'solution' is to put a 'heavy' dose of either Gum-out or Lucas engine treatment in the fuel tank.
It seems to me that getting some fresh (and hopefully 'better') fuel in the tank would be the more appropriate fix.
What's the scoop?
I directed her to Autozone. She called, saying the does was a Lean Condition, both banks.
She puts the Autozonian on the phone. He says he's seen a bunch of cars lately with the same problem. His 'solution' is to put a 'heavy' dose of either Gum-out or Lucas engine treatment in the fuel tank.
It seems to me that getting some fresh (and hopefully 'better') fuel in the tank would be the more appropriate fix.
What's the scoop?
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 354
Likes: 0
From: Manassas, VA
Trending Topics
Junior Member
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Ding-Ding-Ding! A winner!
Anyhow, the problem was indeed a cracked elbow. However, the elbow is no longer available by itself; Ford is now selling a PCV hose assembly for a bit over $30.
So, ethanol had little, if nothing to do with the problem.
The lesson here, folks - if you've got a vintage 5.4 (4.6 too?), you may want to replace the elbow before it fails. 'Cause, apparently, it will.
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
From: Arizona
The other lesson is to use the fuel recommended for your truck! You may have gotten lucky. Just as you need to use high octane fuel when you run a tuner with a performance tune, don't use E85 for a non-FFV. It IS possible to do damage to your engine; the timing & PCM is set for 87 octane fuel.
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 5,522
Likes: 6
From: Utah
Ethanal while a higher octane fuel it has less thermal energy so the Engine needs more of it to run right. an engine not programed to detect and then run the correct tune can be damaged from running lean. I learned along time ago not to screw around with ethanol. Tried it in my Dads 73 chevy back in the 80's and spent the next several days replacing fuel filters..
Member
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
From: Houston, TX
Quick question, I have a 2006 5.4 F150 that is running rough. Got a code for P0430. My question is this, when you run E85 in a FFV does it burn hotter in the converter? Would it be a wise decision or not to run a tank of E85 once a year or so? Thanks.
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
From: Arizona
did this happen after running E85? did you read the posts in this thread? The answers are there...
Interesting note about E85 is that in most studies, MPG is LOWER than gasoline; anywhere from 6% to 28%. Why are people putting it in their non-FFV rated gasoline trucks?!
Simply put, if your vehicle/engine is not FFV DO NOT USE E85 fuel! EVER!
More interesting info from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E85
Comparisons to regular gasoline
E85 has an octane rating higher than that of regular gasoline's typical rating of 87, or premium gasoline's 91-93. This allows it to be used in higher compression engines which tend to produce more power per unit of displacement than their gasoline counterparts. The Renewable Fuels Foundation states in it's Changes in Gasloine IV manual, "There is no requirement to post octane on an E85 dispenser. If a retailer chooses to post octane, they should be aware that the often cited 105 octane is incorrect. This number was derived by using ethanol’s blending octane value in gasoline. This is not the proper way to calculate the octane of E85. Ethanol’s true octane value should be used to calculate E85’s octane value. This results in an octane range of 94-96 (R+M)/2. These calculations have been confirmed by actual octane engine tests." [12]
One complication is that use of gasoline in an engine with a high enough compression ratio to use E85 efficiently would likely result in catastrophic failure due to engine detonation, as the octane rating of gasoline is not high enough to withstand the greater compression ratios in use in an engine specifically designed to run on E85. Use of E85 in an engine designed specifically for gasoline would result in a loss of the potential efficiency that it is possible to gain with this fuel. Using E85 in a gasoline engine has the drawback of achieving lower fuel economy as more fuel is needed per unit air (stoichiometric fuel ratio) to run the engine in comparison with gasoline. This corresponds to a lower heating value (units of energy per unit mass) for E85 than gasoline.
E85 consumes more fuel in flex fuel type vehicles when the vehicle uses the same compression for both E85 and gasoline because of its lower stoichiometric fuel ratio and lower heating value. European car maker Saab currently produces a flex fuel version of their 9-5 sedan which consumes the same amount of fuel whether running e85 or gasoline,[13] though it is not available in the United States. So in order to save money at the pump with current flex fuel vehicles available in the United States the price of E85 must be much lower than gasoline. Currently E85 is about 15% less expensive in most areas.[14] More than 20 fueling stations across the Midwest are selling E85 at the same price as gasoline.[15] E85 also gets less MPG, at least in flex fuel vehicles. In one test, a Chevy Tahoe flex-fuel vehicle averaged 18 MPG [U.S. gallons] for gasoline, and 13 MPG for E85, or 28% fewer MPG than gasoline. In that test, the cost of gas averaged $3.42, while the cost for E85 averaged $3.09, or 90% the cost of gasoline.[16][17] In another test, however, a fleet of Ford Tauruses averaged only about 6% fewer miles per gallon in the ethanol-based vehicles as compared to traditional, gas-powered Tauruses.[18] (Please note this is questionable as the reference provided is non-existent on NREL's website.)
Interesting note about E85 is that in most studies, MPG is LOWER than gasoline; anywhere from 6% to 28%. Why are people putting it in their non-FFV rated gasoline trucks?!
Simply put, if your vehicle/engine is not FFV DO NOT USE E85 fuel! EVER!
More interesting info from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E85
Comparisons to regular gasoline
E85 has an octane rating higher than that of regular gasoline's typical rating of 87, or premium gasoline's 91-93. This allows it to be used in higher compression engines which tend to produce more power per unit of displacement than their gasoline counterparts. The Renewable Fuels Foundation states in it's Changes in Gasloine IV manual, "There is no requirement to post octane on an E85 dispenser. If a retailer chooses to post octane, they should be aware that the often cited 105 octane is incorrect. This number was derived by using ethanol’s blending octane value in gasoline. This is not the proper way to calculate the octane of E85. Ethanol’s true octane value should be used to calculate E85’s octane value. This results in an octane range of 94-96 (R+M)/2. These calculations have been confirmed by actual octane engine tests." [12]
One complication is that use of gasoline in an engine with a high enough compression ratio to use E85 efficiently would likely result in catastrophic failure due to engine detonation, as the octane rating of gasoline is not high enough to withstand the greater compression ratios in use in an engine specifically designed to run on E85. Use of E85 in an engine designed specifically for gasoline would result in a loss of the potential efficiency that it is possible to gain with this fuel. Using E85 in a gasoline engine has the drawback of achieving lower fuel economy as more fuel is needed per unit air (stoichiometric fuel ratio) to run the engine in comparison with gasoline. This corresponds to a lower heating value (units of energy per unit mass) for E85 than gasoline.
E85 consumes more fuel in flex fuel type vehicles when the vehicle uses the same compression for both E85 and gasoline because of its lower stoichiometric fuel ratio and lower heating value. European car maker Saab currently produces a flex fuel version of their 9-5 sedan which consumes the same amount of fuel whether running e85 or gasoline,[13] though it is not available in the United States. So in order to save money at the pump with current flex fuel vehicles available in the United States the price of E85 must be much lower than gasoline. Currently E85 is about 15% less expensive in most areas.[14] More than 20 fueling stations across the Midwest are selling E85 at the same price as gasoline.[15] E85 also gets less MPG, at least in flex fuel vehicles. In one test, a Chevy Tahoe flex-fuel vehicle averaged 18 MPG [U.S. gallons] for gasoline, and 13 MPG for E85, or 28% fewer MPG than gasoline. In that test, the cost of gas averaged $3.42, while the cost for E85 averaged $3.09, or 90% the cost of gasoline.[16][17] In another test, however, a fleet of Ford Tauruses averaged only about 6% fewer miles per gallon in the ethanol-based vehicles as compared to traditional, gas-powered Tauruses.[18] (Please note this is questionable as the reference provided is non-existent on NREL's website.)
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 43,531
Likes: 817
From: Joplin MO
AZ, it's not totally clear, but I'm reading that mw's engine may be FFV.
mw - your converters should be on warranty. If you do in fact have a FFV engine, use of E85 should not cook the converters. If it's NOT FFV, it may - due to the excessive lean condition. Excessive rich will cook them too.
mw - your converters should be on warranty. If you do in fact have a FFV engine, use of E85 should not cook the converters. If it's NOT FFV, it may - due to the excessive lean condition. Excessive rich will cook them too.
Member
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
From: Houston, TX
GLC, I do have a FFV. That I guess is where I was not clear. Truck was running rough and threw a P0430 - Bank 2. Filled up with E85 and no change. Then today on the way back from doing some yard work truck lost ALL power. Running super rough. Managed to get Autozone to pull the code. Misfire in 5, 6, 7 & 8. Plus the P0430. Guy told me sounds like converter broke apart inside and clogged the converter. Said to pull the O2 (before the cat) sensor and see if it will run a bit better. I did that and it did. I have 80,434 miles on it. I am sure Frd will not do anything for me right?