Did MotorWeek's Pat Goss make up a type of metal to discredit E85 conversions?
Recently, I told you MotorWeek's Pat Goss said ethanol conversions are impractical. Drive Flex Fuel put a video on YouTube countering everything Pat said. You can read everything they wrote below but the one thing that struck me was they seem to accuse Pat of making up a metal. The text in the video says "TURN METAL? Much like the Unicorn, we have not been able to find any sign of its existance. After extensive internet research, we still have not found any information on 'turn metal.'"
I found it. I think it's Terne not Turn and according to this .ppt file (Power Point Presentation) "Terne metal material (typical metal tank) is not compatible with ethanol without special coatings." I am not taking MotorWeek's side because they are a little wrong too: Pat could have mentioned the government has certified an ethanol conversion kit. I contacted Drive Flex Fuel as well as MotorWeek and I hope this is settled nicely. I saw the host of MotorWeek at the Washington Auto Show recently and I watch the show every week.
I also think the growing body of studies say, at the very least, regular cars can probably handle higher blends of ethanol. When I was at Washington Auto Show, someone on a panel told me that in Brazil, twenty percent ethanol (or E20) and even higher percentage blends, is the "standard gasoline" and gas cars in the country are doing just fine.
Related:
- Can any car use E85?
- Video: Hillary Clinton says she changed position on ethanol because transportation cost is no longer a factor
- McCain drinks a glass of ethanol every day
- EXCLUSIVE: Does president Bush know how many flex-fuel cars are on the road?
Are you really being taken?
Additional Information Supplied by
www.DriveFlexFuel.com
Please keep in mind
Mr. Goss is providing information
supplied by General Motors Corp.
GM would like to sell you a
NEW Flex Fuel Vehicle.
Gas Cap:
We would like to add that the gas cap on a factory
FFV is yellow.
Hoses:
Are the standard ones really inferior?
Wire Connections:
HUH?
Flame Arrestor / Anti-siphon Valve:
It is my understanding that these are standard
safety devices on all filler tubes.
Fuel Pump:
Yes a different pump is installed. However, test
vehicles have run E85 for over 100,000 miles on a
standard fuel pump.
Fuel Gauge:
A factory FFV can not have a gauge that states
"Unleaded Fuel Only"
Fuel Tank:
A different tank is installed. However, standard tanks have been used in excess of 100,000 miles with no problems reported.
TURN METAL?
Much like the Unicorn, we have not been
able to find any sign of its existance.
After extensive internet research, we still have not
found any information on "turn metal."
If any knows what this is please contact us at
Customerservice@driveflexfuel.com
Fuel Rail:
Of course stainless steel is better.
Injectors:
They do not have to be bigger. The injector pulse
needs to be longer to flow the needed fuel. Again,
test vehicles have run for hundreds of thousands
of miles on standard injectors.
ECM/Computer/Fuel Identifier:
The conversion kits work along with the factory
computer to make the needed adjustments
depending on what mixture of fuel is being used.
Again hundreds of thousands of miles
have been driven on E85 with no
reports of valve or head problems.
Ethanol is moonshine.....not ACID.
For those of you who are still skeptical:
Please view our companion to this video,
"Effects of E85 on Non-FlexFuel Vehicle"
an independent study performed by the
Lake Area Technical Institute.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Bill 3:12PM (2/08/2008)
Wikipedia says E20 "will be mandated by the U.S. state of Minnesota by 2013"
Looks like there will be some involuntary conversions there.
Reply
Tony Belding 3:22PM (2/08/2008)
I seem to recall a while back Pat Goss also gave a stern warning about using biodiesel in ordinary diesel engines, claiming it would somehow ruin them. "Don't do it!"
His opinion ran contrary to everything else I've read on the subject.
Reply
Whopper 4:12PM (2/08/2008)
The material in question has always been referred to as "terne plate" as I recall. Steel with a tin/lead coating to protect it from gasoline, it has been used to make fuel tanks for automotive and motorcycle applications, among others.
Would it be too much to ask for the "experts" who are selling flex fuel conversion kits to be familiar with the details of the fuel systems they are converting? When the coating begins to speparate from the steel and clog injectors, would they warrantee their design?
Reply
Wise Golden 4:34PM (2/08/2008)
I am very sure he is wrong. My brother now has an Ethanol Plant near his home and he and I have played around with the idea of using e42.5 mixed in the tank. Basicly, our theory is to fill the tank each time it gets to 1/2 every other time with e85 and then regular gas the next time and then back to e85. We figured he'd have no problem over the remaining life of his car.
After watching this, I'm going to tell him to just go ahead and use e85.
I also have heard that there is a push going on to get the auto makers to just fess up and allow e20. I did not know that minasota had already mandated that.
Reply
Smith 5:39PM (2/08/2008)
That Pat guy doesn't know anything. I'd never watch that show.
Reply
kballs 6:23PM (2/08/2008)
WTF, no car built in the last 20 years has used a metal fuel tank! They're all plastic!
Actually in 10 year old or less cars, the hardest part of E85 conversion is the ECU since the original wasn't made to handle or sense high oxygen content in the fuel... the conversion kits I've seen use piggyback ECUs (along with new O2 sensors), which isn't going to work in all cases (such as where you have some basic engine mods and modified ECU programming already).
I think while the conversions are definitely not technically impractical, they ARE logistically impractical in most geographical areas just because e85 fuel is so hard to find. You're better off doing an electric/plug-in hybrid conversion... while the up-front cost is much higher, at least the "fuel" is readily available.
Reply
mrbell321 8:19PM (2/08/2008)
Uhm... maybe some cars use plastic tanks. I know of many cars made in the last 8 years with metal tanks.
Reply
L.WOOD 1:36PM (2/11/2008)
The question is not so much whether or not current vehicles will accept hight levels of ethanol, but why would I want to use more of a fuel that will give me reduced miles per gallon? Ethanol is a bad idea being propped up by our worthless government that does not have the guts to tackle the issue of foreign oil head-on. We have enough oil reserves to eliminate the need to purchase any oil from anyone but ourselves, and expanded reserves are being discovered all of the time.
Reply
Ray 5:39PM (2/13/2008)
@L.wood:
The mention of E20 (as opposed to E85) is the answer to your question. As taken from a study noted in this earlier post:
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2007/12/06/study-non-flex-fuel-cars-get-better-fuel-economy-on-ethanol/
...un-modified vehicles not only can run fine on ethanol blends between E20 and E30, but actually get the same (or one case better) mileage on E20-E30 than on regular unleaded. Not that E20-E30 is exactly a widely available commodity or anything, but let's see what happens in Minnesota.
Reply