The possibility of '09 Camaro available with Flex Fuel

[The_Stache]

Originally Posted by sterlingnotes

Why someone wouldn't buy a flex fuel car doesn't make any sense to me. They can still use regular gasoline, even when it will cost more to do so. I just see it as having more options when I go to the pump, and that is a great choice to have.

But everyone misses one point, and its that one point that makes me refuse to buy a Flex fuel vehicle.

To run E85 you must put more fuel into the combustion chamber, for arguments sake lets say 2 grams of E85. A flex fuel vehicle is programed to do this. BUT when you put in regular gas the computer cant tell (same when you put in E85) so it STILL puts in 2 grams into the combustion chamber when you really only need 1 gram (due to energy density). Long story short Flex fuel engines get LESS MPG than regular gas engines, REGARDLESS of fuel type.

Oh and 1 other small point. There are NO E85 fuel stations in Arizona, why would I buy a car with features I can't use?

PS. It takes roughly $200,000.00 for a gas station to convert or install the equipment necessary to dispense E85. Thats why they aren't popping up everywhere. Not because there is a lack of production, America is number 8 n the world for ethanol production.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by diarmadhi

But everyone misses one point, and its that one point that makes me refuse to buy a Flex fuel vehicle.
..................Long story short Flex fuel engines get LESS MPG than regular gas

True...But if it costs less...say, 1.00 a gallon (which it does) , and (eventually) that efficiency goes up - more mpg with ethanol than currently...why not?

I guess I see it as better than nothing.

[stovt001]

Yeah flex fuel does not do Ethanol justice. A dedicated ethanol engine can be just as efficient if not more so than a pure gasoline engine. Allowing an ethanol compatible engine run on gasoline requires compromises that don't take full advantage of all of ethanol's benefits.

Now the problem with ethanol is that it takes a lot of resources to produce it. Farmers will also say that it competes with the livestock feed supply and that is why food is more expensive now, but that has been proven to be a distortion. Still, there are a number of barriers to using ethanol (namely the water and energy required to produce it) that must be addressed before it can really catch on. If it can be produced more efficiently (which I'm sure it will be in the future if we invest in it) then it is a good solution.

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by diarmadhi

But everyone misses one point, and its that one point that makes me refuse to buy a Flex fuel vehicle.

To run E85 you must put more fuel into the combustion chamber, for arguments sake lets say 2 grams of E85. A flex fuel vehicle is programed to do this. BUT when you put in regular gas the computer cant tell (same when you put in E85) so it STILL puts in 2 grams into the combustion chamber when you really only need 1 gram (due to energy density). Long story short Flex fuel engines get LESS MPG than regular gas engines, REGARDLESS of fuel type.

Oh and 1 other small point. There are NO E85 fuel stations in Arizona, why would I buy a car with features I can't use?

PS. It takes roughly $200,000.00 for a gas station to convert or install the equipment necessary to dispense E85. Thats why they aren't popping up everywhere. Not because there is a lack of production, America is number 8 n the world for ethanol production.

1) I do believe that it is possible for the car to detect what blend it is running on, is it happening right now? I don't know. But I know that it can't be a very difficult operation to undertake.

2) Thats very nice that the US is #8 in terms of total ethanol production, makes you look relatively good. But in absolute terms there is about 5 billion liters (~1.25 gal) of ethanol produced for fuel in the US each year. Sounds great until you realize that there is around 850 billion liters (~225 gal) of gasoline consumed in the US each year. That production gap is another reason why the situation I described in my other post isn't going to happen soon.

[VTXrider]

I almost hate to get into this issue here because it is such a heated topic but I have done quite a bit of study into it related to my work.

There are really alot of issues with ethenol in this country but first to lay out some fact.
>This country is either number one or two in production with Brazil depending on the specific year but it looks like we may be moving into the lead.
>Ethenol is, on a per gallon basis, cheaper or more expensive than gas depening on where you live. This is not due to production costs but rather mainly to tax issues. Ethenol is currently heavily subsidized by the federal government and also in some areas by state governments. Gasoline on the otherhand is heavily taxed by federal, state, county, and municiple governments. This is the main reason that gas has different costs in different parts of the mainland US. The other factor is transportation costs, ethonal must be transported and stored differently than gas then mixed soon before delivery to the retail station and has a short shelf life. If you store a vehicle over the winter it is probably not good to have a high ethenol mix. Ethenol is currently relativly expensive to transport while gas is very cheap.
>The next problem is the current production capacity. It is estimated that if all, ALL not most ALL, the US corn production was turned into ethenol it would replace 4-5% of out oil use. The price issue is not a myth, contract price for corn in the last two years since the ethenol boom have gone from the low $2 per bussel to about $4.
>Ethenol can not be made economically self-sustainalble in this country with current technology meaning with out government subsidies they can not be sold for the cost of production. This has mainly to due with the efficiency of corn as the base material, sugar is much better as used in Brazil, it takes 1 unit of energy mainly natural gas to make 1.3 units of energy from corn while sugar makes 1.65 units on average. This is energy units not gallons.

So with all of these problems for ethenol would I be willing to pay alittle extra for a flex fuel car? Yeah, I probably would depending on howmuch extra. I know alot more on the ethenol side of the equation than the engine and vehicle specific side but if the cost was not high I would like to have it.

>From my understanding it does not really effect the engines performance. They do have sensors which adjust fuel delivery depending on the mix of ethenol although I am sure they are not as good as they will eventually be at determining the blend of pure gas and E85. I do not know about the effect on weight of the car.
>There are alot of technologies under development that I assume one will eventually make ethenol a real energy source, it is currently not for the reasons above. There is also alot of genetic engineering with the goal of creating a crop for the sole purpose of being a perfect source to make ethenol not to mention using waste products or cellulosic ethenol.
>The logistics industry in this country is second to none in solving transportation problems so that will be solved.

I think ethenol will be one of the things that combine with many other to reduce the dependancy on oil and eventually replace oil as the world will soon run out, not in a decade but soon. The price of oil is going up because all of the easy oil has been found and pumped.

Wow that was a long post by my standard and I am sure I left out alot I wanted to say but those are some of the important points.

[VTXrider]

I wonder why it has been ignored here, in this tread, that one of the best ways to improve efficiency of a car is to reduce the weight. Weight is a huge factor in city economy where you car constantly starting and stoping the heft of the vehicle. On the highway it is not as important as aerodynamics but I would rather the designers shape the car than the windtunnel, i.e. I am not driving a Prius or Yaris shaped car.
The board has talked alot about weight in other threads but in regards to the effect on performance mainly in handleing and power to weight. these are very important to having fun with the car but it will be a daily driver to me so I will see this as an economy issue 80% of the time and a performance issue 20% of the time. Hopfully the car will be in the area of 3500 pounds, the current Vette is about 3200 and the CTS is almost 3900 so this seems reasonable to me. It is a four passenger car so it will be more than the vette but it should be more spartin than the CTS and smaller in general.

[Mr. Wyndham]

I, too, have been following Ethanol () very closely. And this is what I've uncovered to date, needless to say - I am very comfortable with Ethanol's outlook:

Flex fuel vehicles (at least GM's) DO detect what blend you're running on, and the computers adjust different things to take advantage of that. (timing, etc.)

Engines have the potential to INCREASE in performance, because Ethanol has an "octane" rating of about 105-108.

And with the proper adjustments, engines can be made to take full advantage of Ethanol, and become nearly as efficient as current gas-only engines (i.e. mpg's). However, Ethanol, by nature, has less energy per gallon than gasoline (but not by much); so two identical engines - one designed to run on ethanol, and the other gas - will never have the same mpg ratings. The gas engine will be slightly higher.

We need to remember that Ethanol is just starting to catch on. And that such large shifts like this take time. There is still at least a decade untill it falls into mainstream use - and even then, it CAN NOT replace gasoline. It's almost impossible to make enough to do so. With time, estimates are that Cellulosic and Sugar Ethanol, together can displace ~35% of our current fuel needs. "Current" is an important part of this, because by the time ethanol displaces that much gas, the fuel arena will have changed dramatically. Bio-diesel, gas-electric hybrids, and cars such as the Volt will have dramatically reduced our fuel usage as it is, so the amount of fuel that Ethanol would need to displace will have shrunk.

You will find no disagreements from me, that Ethanol from corn (sugar) is not practical, nor efficient in the least. We don't have the land to make any big impact. But I think the folks in the last few posts have forgotten about Switchgrass...and more importantly, Coskata. General Motors has partnered with a relatively young Biofuel company, Coskata. This company has developed a revolutionary process of turning anything that contains Carbon into Ethanol. That means garbage, guys. This practice, if put into commercial use (which it is...again, these things take time) can amplify current predictions about ethanol's displacement of gasoline. (I would venture a guess of 45%-55% of current use)

Corn ethanol only yields a 1:.85 energy ratio. That is, for every unit of energy put into Ethanol, it only yields approx. .85 units. Gasoline has something like a 1:.9, to a 1:1 ratio. HOWEVER, again, cellulosic ethanol, and coskata's process yields near 1:7!!!!!!! That's incredible!

Also, I think that current corn ethanol requires something like 3-5 gallons of water to produce 1 gallon of ethanol. Well (see a pattern here?) Coskata's process uses less than one gallon of water, to produce a gallon of ethanol.

Finally - GM has addressed this directly, and I happen to agree with them, too (will wonders never cease?) That Ethanol is NOT widely enough available. There are no incentives to convert pumps to ethanol at stations. That needs to change, and I believe part of the CAFE bill calls for more pumps, providing tax rebates to stations who do so. (I'm not very sure about that, though. So don't quote me on it.)

So...bottom line is, The technology(increased efficiency via Coskata) and the product(switchgrass, corn, garbage) is there. It just needs time to start happening. Give it ten to fifteen years, and I can guarantee that Ethanol and other fuels will have equal, or more influence than gasoline does today. You watch.

I hope that was informative, and put some concerns to rest. Feel free to ask questions. There seem to be plenty of people around here that can answer with some knowledge behind them.

[DGthe3]

I was just waiting for you to bring up COskata and cellulose, I gotta leave you with something to say.

[09'Z28]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

Engines have the potential to INCREASE in performance, because Ethanol has an "octane" rating of about 105-108.

that octane is why it completely destroys engines they aren't set up for E85 just like racing fuel would to a regular engine if you put to much in the tank. also it increases the performance of the Koenigsegg CCX buy about 100 horsepower taking it up to about 900 horsepower

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by 09'Z28

that octane is why it completely destroys engines they aren't set up for E85 just like racing fuel would to a regular engine if you put to much in the tank.

mmm...I hadn't heard that. Care to elaborate?

[09'Z28]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

mmm...I hadn't heard that. Care to elaborate?

Longer-term use of E85 in gasoline-only vehicles may cause damage because of the incompatibility of the alcohol fuel with the parts in gasoline-only engines.

(http://www.iowacorn.org/ethanol/ethanol_5a.html) it is somewhat the same with racing fuel, when you put a couple gallons in every now-and-then(provided it has regular gas in there to mix with) it is good for your engine because it cleans out most of the build up in the engine, but to much of a good thing can be a bad thing, when you use it regularly it won't have anything to clean out so it will start to eat way at the inside of your engine slowly eating away at any thing it comes in contact with which is about the same thing that will happen with E85, if its not setup to run that way which is why there is a bit of work to be done to a engine in order to run it on E85
well if any of what I just said you can understand there you go and i think it was an episode of motor week that showed the inside of an engine not set up for E85

[HotRodEwe]

i dont understand the sence of buying a flex fuel car if you cant even get the e85, no were around me even has it...

[09'Z28]

Originally Posted by HotRodEwe

i dont understand the sence of buying a flex fuel car if you cant even get the e85, no were around me even has it...

we have that same problem i think our closest one is 50+ miles away

[munkee drummer]

Originally Posted by athenssmile

I hope they will. With global warming finally being taken seriously and with gas prices again so high, Chevy would be stupid not to offer this. So many other brands have been successful with their hybrids, etc., Chevy would really be behind the competition if they don't.

This will be a huge factor in whether or not I buy this car. And I have wanted a Camaro (ideally a 1968) for over 20 years now.

"Seriously" There are so many holes in that theory that it looks like swiss cheese. Al Gore used you people and your not informed enough to know it.