flexible fuel?

Hi...

Reading Chilton, which makes reference to "flexible" fuel, and
suggest different oils to use if burning it.

Never heard of flexible fuel... maybe just a different expression
usa<>canada? Possible they're referring to what we might
call gasohol? (which I do use)

Thanks, and take care.

Ken

On Fri, 21 Oct 2005, Ken Weitzel wrote:

> Reading Chilton

Great way to misinform yourself. Chilton manuals -- like Haynes manuals --
are full of factual and procedural errors.

> which makes reference to "flexible" fuel, and suggest different oils to
> use if burning it.

Yes. If you have a FFV (Flexible-Fuel Vehicle) you need to use engine oil
that is formulated for use in such engines.

> Never heard of flexible fuel

The term refers to vehicles capable of running on up to 85% methanol
blended with gasoline (M85). There are many changes made to the vehicle's
engine, fuel system and engine management system to permit the use of this
highly corrosive fuel, which contains significantly less energy per unit
volume than gasoline. All vehicle components that come into contact with
fuel liquid or vapor must be made of significantly upgraded materials
compared to standard gasoline cars. This affects the fuel tank, fuel pump,
fuel lines, fuel filter, fuel injectors, fuel rail, evaporative emission
control canister, vacuum lines, fuel gauge sender, all system seals, all
engine upper seals, and other parts. There is a fuel specific-gravity
sensor that detects the proportion of gasoline vs. methanol and sends that
information to the engine control computer, which adjusts spark and fuel
curves to suit. There are internal engine materials differences, as well.

M85 is unavailable in most locations across North America.

> Possible they're referring to what we might call gasohol?

No, gasohol contains up to 10% *ethanol*, which is different and
considerably less corrosive than methanol. Not the same thing at all.

> gasohol (which I do use)

If you have the choice to use plain gasoline or gasohol, and you use
gasohol, you are costing yourself money.

DS

Daniel J. Stern wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Oct 2005, Ken Weitzel wrote:
>
>> Reading Chilton
>
>
> Great way to misinform yourself. Chilton manuals -- like Haynes manuals
> -- are full of factual and procedural errors.
>
>> which makes reference to "flexible" fuel, and suggest different oils
>> to use if burning it.
>
>
> Yes. If you have a FFV (Flexible-Fuel Vehicle) you need to use engine
> oil that is formulated for use in such engines.
>
>> Never heard of flexible fuel
>
>
> The term refers to vehicles capable of running on up to 85% methanol
> blended with gasoline (M85). There are many changes made to the
> vehicle's engine, fuel system and engine management system to permit the
> use of this highly corrosive fuel, which contains significantly less
> energy per unit volume than gasoline. All vehicle components that come
> into contact with fuel liquid or vapor must be made of significantly
> upgraded materials compared to standard gasoline cars. This affects the
> fuel tank, fuel pump, fuel lines, fuel filter, fuel injectors, fuel
> rail, evaporative emission control canister, vacuum lines, fuel gauge
> sender, all system seals, all engine upper seals, and other parts. There
> is a fuel specific-gravity sensor that detects the proportion of
> gasoline vs. methanol and sends that information to the engine control
> computer, which adjusts spark and fuel curves to suit. There are
> internal engine materials differences, as well.
>
> M85 is unavailable in most locations across North America.
>
>> Possible they're referring to what we might call gasohol?
>
>
> No, gasohol contains up to 10% *ethanol*, which is different and
> considerably less corrosive than methanol. Not the same thing at all.
>
>> gasohol (which I do use)
>
>
> If you have the choice to use plain gasoline or gasohol, and you use
> gasohol, you are costing yourself money.

Hi Daniel... (got it right this time

Thanks for the explanation; appreciate it.

Should it happen to interest you or anyone, the reasons behind
my preference for gasohol are several.

Being long retired, for six months of the year I go almost nowhere.
The bank, Doctor, and grocery store once makes a 2 mile trip
every week or two... so a tank lasts a very, very long time
I'm pretty well convinced that gasohol is much more stable than
plain gas. I also think it keeps fuel system components a little
cleaner. Right?

If the cost is entered into it, our price for gasohol is virtually
the same as gas. (I think government subsidized). And I needn't
add gas anti-freeze, so I save the cost of a dollar or two per
tankful.

Most important... I'd far, far sooner contribute to the work and
income of our farmers than add to the strife going on over oil.

Finally, even though ten percent is miniscule, a lot of 10%'s add up.
Better to burn up renewable resources than waste any at all of the
non-renewable stuff. Our great great grandkids might appreciate it

Thanks again, and take care.

Ken

On Sat, 22 Oct 2005, Ken Weitzel wrote:

> Being long retired, for six months of the year I go almost nowhere. The
> bank, Doctor, and grocery store once makes a 2 mile trip every week or
> two... so a tank lasts a very, very long time I'm pretty well
> convinced that gasohol is much more stable than plain gas. I also think
> it keeps fuel system components a little cleaner. Right?

Wrong. Gasohol is considerably *LESS* stable than plain gasoline, in
several ways. It has a shorter "shelf" life before it begins to
deteriorate. The deterioration takes place at a faster rate. And, there
are several situations in which the alcohol can fall out of solution with
the gasoline, at which point not only have you got that direct problem to
deal with, but you've got extremely hygroscopic (absorbs water) alcohol
doin' its thing in your fuel system.

> If the cost is entered into it, our price for gasohol is virtually
> the same as gas.

That's grand, but because gasohol contains less energy per unit volume
than gasoline, you burn more of it to go any given distance. The effect
upon fuel economy is larger than would be predicted by calculations
showing that the energy content difference is approximately 3-1/2 percent.

> I needn't add gas anti-freeze

You needn't do that anyhow.

DS

Not METHANOL but ETHANOL it's one of the reasons it's being promoted as a
"renewable" resource as it's made from corn and other "biomass" which
produces ETHANOL. Methanol comes from petroleum resources. Otherwise the
description is correct and only cars made for flex fuel can use it safely.
FWIW Ethanol is far less problematic than methanol.
Larry
"Daniel J. Stern" > wrote in message
n.umich.edu...
> On Fri, 21 Oct 2005, Ken Weitzel wrote:
>
>> Reading Chilton
>
> Great way to misinform yourself. Chilton manuals -- like Haynes manuals --
> are full of factual and procedural errors.
>
>> which makes reference to "flexible" fuel, and suggest different oils to
>> use if burning it.
>
> Yes. If you have a FFV (Flexible-Fuel Vehicle) you need to use engine oil
> that is formulated for use in such engines.
>
>> Never heard of flexible fuel
>
> The term refers to vehicles capable of running on up to 85% methanol
> blended with gasoline (M85). There are many changes made to the vehicle's
> engine, fuel system and engine management system to permit the use of this
> highly corrosive fuel, which contains significantly less energy per unit
> volume than gasoline. All vehicle components that come into contact with
> fuel liquid or vapor must be made of significantly upgraded materials
> compared to standard gasoline cars. This affects the fuel tank, fuel pump,
> fuel lines, fuel filter, fuel injectors, fuel rail, evaporative emission
> control canister, vacuum lines, fuel gauge sender, all system seals, all
> engine upper seals, and other parts. There is a fuel specific-gravity
> sensor that detects the proportion of gasoline vs. methanol and sends that
> information to the engine control computer, which adjusts spark and fuel
> curves to suit. There are internal engine materials differences, as well.
>
> M85 is unavailable in most locations across North America.
>
>> Possible they're referring to what we might call gasohol?
>
> No, gasohol contains up to 10% *ethanol*, which is different and
> considerably less corrosive than methanol. Not the same thing at all.
>
>> gasohol (which I do use)
>
> If you have the choice to use plain gasoline or gasohol, and you use
> gasohol, you are costing yourself money.
>
> DS

On Sat, 22 Oct 2005, jdoe wrote:

> Not METHANOL but ETHANOL

No, Flexible-Fuel Vehicles are those which are specially prepared to run
on METHANOL blends.

Do some research and educate yourself before making an ass of yourself
with guesses and assumptions.

On Sat, 22 Oct 2005, jdoe wrote:

> Not METHANOL but ETHANOL it's one of the reasons it's being promoted as a
> "renewable" resource

<snip other misinformed stuff>

He

http://www.thedodgegarage.com/na_efi_ffv.html (Be sure to read the story
linked at the bottom of the page)

http://www.nrel.gov/vehiclesandfuels...fs/sae_m85.pdf

http://www.ee.ualberta.ca/~sellat/methanol.html

There *are* Ethanol-fueled vehicles, lots of them, especially in Brazil.
But, the original poster asked about the "Flexible Fuel Vehicle" term in
the context of '90s Chrysler products, and that means Methanol.

>> Not METHANOL but ETHANOL
>
> No, Flexible-Fuel Vehicles are those which are specially prepared to run
> on METHANOL blends.
>

I beg to disagree, sir. My guess is that FFV can refer both to E85 and M85
vehicles.

http://www.ethanol.org/e85.html

http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy03osti/33058.pdf

http://www.ford.com/en/vehicles/spec...al/ethanol.htm

"Ken Weitzel" > wrote in message
news:tRa6f.260970$tl2.123628@pd7tw3no...
>
> Hi...
>
> Reading Chilton, which makes reference to "flexible" fuel, and
> suggest different oils to use if burning it.
>
> Never heard of flexible fuel... maybe just a different expression
> usa<>canada? Possible they're referring to what we might
> call gasohol? (which I do use)
>
> Thanks, and take care.
>
> Ken
>
If your vehicle is not designed to burn flex fuel don't use it. It could
cause drivability problems, hard starts and can cause the check engine lite
to come on. Also those vehicles were designed differently to prevent
corrosion of the fuel system and the sensors to determine the amount of
methanol. And as Mr. lite Bulb Stern said, it does require a special oil in
the engine.

Glenn Beasley
Chrysler Tech

Glenn Beasley
Chrysler Tech

On Sat, 22 Oct 2005, Peter wrote:

>>> Not METHANOL but ETHANOL
>>
>> No, Flexible-Fuel Vehicles are those which are specially prepared to
>> run on METHANOL blends.
>>
>
> I beg to disagree, sir. My guess is that FFV can refer both to E85 and
> M85 vehicles.

Yes, it *can*, but in the case we're talking about in this thread
(mid-'90s Chrysler FFVs), the referent alcohol is *methanol*.