[Lethal6SS]

Originally Posted by bishopts

Calculating miles per gallon on e85 will make you think it's crap.
Drivable distance on e85 is much lower than 93.
Money removed from your bank account on a tank of e85 if lower than 93.
So to truly compare apples to apples, calculate miles per dollar between the 2.

I run 93 pretty much all the time. If i have a plan to go to the track i will run my tank out and fill it with e85. But for me, my car is mostly a daily driver. So trying to get the extra power from e85 just incase i need to win a street race would be me trying to hard. And I'm not going to try hard for a street race.

E85 doesn't lube the injectors like gas does. That's probably the worst downside to it. It's not something that is a guaranteed failure, just something to be aware of. People run strictly e85 for years with no problems.

Thanks for the info. I want the added hp for daily spirited driving as I don't care about gas mileage when I want to have fun. Not trying to win a street race either, but I have nice open roads close to me and will be fun to go out and open her up. Im getting a flex fuel kit installed and getting a tune soon and just trying to understand the pros and cons of running ethanol.

[ZLRob]

I gained 149.6 RWHP and 141.5 RWTQ changing out from 91 to full pump E85.

[bishopts]

Originally Posted by ZLRob

I gained 122 RWHP and 122.8 RWTQ changing out from 91 to full pump E85.

Forced air and e85 are definitely different gains than us peasants with N/A e85 cars lol

[Lethal6SS]

^^^ No kidding huh! LOL!

[ZLRob]

Originally Posted by bishopts

Forced air and e85 are definitely different gains than us peasants with N/A e85 cars lol

Lol. Yeah, that's super true.


I would assume the upper tier on NA would be 40-50 HP at most.

[FlukeSS]

Originally Posted by bishopts

Forced air and e85 are definitely different gains than us peasants with N/A e85 cars lol

[SOCAL.M6.ZLE]

Originally Posted by Lethal6SS

Thanks for the info. I want the added hp for daily spirited driving as I don't care about gas mileage when I want to have fun. Not trying to win a street race either, but I have nice open roads close to me and will be fun to go out and open her up. Im getting a flex fuel kit installed and getting a tune soon and just trying to understand the pros and cons of running ethanol.

One of the best bang for bucks mods you can do assuming you have access to pump E85.

So bummed GM did not give us factory E85 capability.

[bishopts]

Originally Posted by SOCAL.M6.ZLE

One of the best bang for bucks mods you can do assuming you have access to pump E85.

So bummed GM did not give us factory E85 capability.

I thought that was kind of strange. Pretty much all of the fuel system is ready for it and it's a good selling point for EPA/CARB requirements. Selling a car that flex fuel capable is just a benifit with no drawbacks in the sales market.

[arpad_m]

Doesn't true E85 (not the 65-75% typically sold in most places) stretch LT1/LGX fuel pumps a bit too far? Then again, they could've used the LT4 setup (assuming it was ready in 2015), so flex fueling could've been made an option at least.

[ZLRob]

Originally Posted by SOCAL.M6.ZLE

One of the best bang for bucks mods you can do assuming you have access to pump E85.

So bummed GM did not give us factory E85 capability.

Originally Posted by bishopts

I thought that was kind of strange. Pretty much all of the fuel system is ready for it and it's a good selling point for EPA/CARB requirements. Selling a car that flex fuel capable is just a benifit with no drawbacks in the sales market.

Originally Posted by arpad_m

Doesn't true E85 (not the 65-75% typically sold in most places) stretch LT1/LGX fuel pumps a bit too far? Then again, they could've used the LT4 setup (assuming it was ready in 2015), so flex fueling could've been made an option at least.

The lack of flex fuel on these cars was my first question mark when I got it. I couldn't understand for the life of me that why, if all of the hardware minus the sensor is in place they wouldn't just enable things, given that E85 functionality is native within the PCM.


It's one of the cleanest burning fuels around, and there has and was at the time a large push for alternative fuels. Even well before these cars were a reality so... I guess that still begs the question "WHY NOT?" GM totally missed the mark there.

[bishopts]

Originally Posted by arpad_m

Doesn't true E85 (not the 65-75% typically sold in most places) stretch LT1/LGX fuel pumps a bit too far? Then again, they could've used the LT4 setup (assuming it was ready in 2015), so flex fueling could've been made an option at least.

I haven't looked at my fuel pump command in a while but i feel like it was around 60 percent. I would think. There is a lot of room to expand on with the stock fuel system.

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by ZLRob

... I guess that still begs the question "WHY NOT?" GM totally missed the mark there.

Because GM's E85 strategy at the time was to maximize allowable E85 credits and not build one more vehicle than necessary to do that. Pickups and Tahoe / Yukon / Suburban covered the Truck fleet. Malibu / Impala and a few Buicks covered the Car fleet. Done and done. Everything else was added per unit cost.

[KingLT1]

Originally Posted by arpad_m

Doesn't true E85 (not the 65-75% typically sold in most places) stretch LT1/LGX fuel pumps a bit too far? Then again, they could've used the LT4 setup (assuming it was ready in 2015), so flex fueling could've been made an option at least.

No, Naturally aspirated LT1 cars can run true E85 with stock fueling. I have even seen heads/cam cars around 525-550whp run E80 with stock fueling. More aggressive NA setups pushing 600+ whp upgrade to the LT4 fueling. There is a huge difference in fuel demand on these DI engines when commanding .90 lambda (NA), vs .82 (FI). It's about a 100whp difference in fuel system headroom from the AFR difference.

[arpad_m]

Originally Posted by KingLT1

No, Naturally aspirated LT1 cars can run true E85 with stock fueling. I have even seen heads/cam cars around 525-550whp run E80 with stock fueling. More aggressive NA setups pushing 600+ whp upgrade to the LT4 fueling. There is a huge difference in fuel demand on these DI engines when commanding .90 lambda (NA), vs .82 (FI). It's about a 100whp difference in fuel system headroom from the AFR difference.

Thank you, Sir