| Author |
Message |
PerformanceWithEconomy
|
|
Post subject:
 Posted: Nov 11, 2009 - 05:48 AM
|
|
Moderator
Joined: Dec 23, 2007
Posts: 1107
Location: South Suburbs of Chicago
Status: Offline
|
|
ALL of our fuel in the Chicagoland area has been E10 since the early 80's. I do remember that Amoco was the last to switch over from pure gasoline over to the E10 blend. Back then i had multiple different "muscle cars" that were all carbureted and they all ran best on Amoco, probably because it was strictly gas.
With my Tempo's, i've been doing a LOT of experimentation with fuels. I'm finding that they provide me the best overall performance with very reasonable mpg's at a level appr equivalent to E30 up to about E35 at most. To achieve this, i'm mixing E85 with E10 to achieve these appr ratios. Going above this level i.e. E40+ starts to show a marked decline in mpg's. I've also noticed lean surge conditions at various throttle positions, which isn't good for the motor or performance.
So far, i've shown the most consistent results blending E85 with BP ( Amoco to you old timers  87 octane. I've also used Mobil 87 in place of the BP and that seems to work just about as good. Substituting other brands seems to lower my mpg's noticeably and the car doesn't run as smoothly at idle. Obviously, your results may vary depending on the local refinery, the state of tune that your car is in and one's driving habits.
As a side note, i've been visiting another car forum doing research on a motor swap that i'm going to do on my girlfriend's Neon. In that forum, guys have come to pretty much the same conclusions. That is, about 30% - 35% alcohol is giving them the best overall blend of performance and economy. Some are recommending running as much as 50% alcohol. Doesn't work good on my Tempo, but it may work better on the Neon's, many of which are turbocharged. Since the alcohol jacks up the octane level of the fuel, i can see why they might have better luck going with a higher percentage when turbo'd. Haven't tried doing any of this on my girlfriend's normally aspirated Neon, as it has been down for the count for quite some time.
Out of curiosity, what is the price difference between E85 and 87 octane where you guys live? In Iowa, i think folks were mentioning that E85 was anywhere from $0.30 - $0.45 a gallon cheaper. Around Chicago, where they like to hijack us at the pump, there's only $0.10 a gallon difference. Not much of a savings, but the car definitely has more "pep" this way. Sean
< |
_________________
92 White / Red 2.3 MTX 130K miles, 93 Cayman Green / Grey 2.3 MTX 140K miles, 94 White / Grey 2.3 MTX 196K miles, 94 Red / Grey 2.3 ATX 70K miles, SouthSide Chicago
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
Hermie
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Dec 05, 2009 - 04:57 AM
|
|
Posting Freak
Joined: Jul 11, 2009
Posts: 722
Location: Lebanon, OR
Status: Offline
|
|
Finally got the coroplast! After figuring out how to fit the 4'X8' sheets in the car, I ended up just strapping them to the roof. Took off a little paint, though.. Maybe I'll look for some aerosol spray and redo the whole car sometime.
I'll be looking into a design for the belly pan tomorrow. I'm thinking about doing a complete underside cover now, with metal strips and fiberglass insulation around the exhaust so I don't ruin the plastic sheet. |
_________________
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
PerformanceWithEconomy
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Dec 05, 2009 - 03:56 PM
|
|
Moderator
Joined: Dec 23, 2007
Posts: 1107
Location: South Suburbs of Chicago
Status: Offline
|
|
Before you do ANYTHING like this, you better make sure that your exhaust system is 100% leak free. Otherwise, you're going to be trapping exhaust fumes under the "belly of the beast". They WILL find a way up into the interior.
Start looking at changing your front bumper before you start messing around with the underside of your car. Reducing the air-flow up front leaves less to block off underneath the vehicle. This will not only lower your Cd, improve fuel mileage and potentially help the car to accelerate better, it will also make any other work that you do under the car less critical to fine tuning. Sean
< |
_________________
92 White / Red 2.3 MTX 130K miles, 93 Cayman Green / Grey 2.3 MTX 140K miles, 94 White / Grey 2.3 MTX 196K miles, 94 Red / Grey 2.3 ATX 70K miles, SouthSide Chicago
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Hermie
|
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Dec 05, 2009 - 05:26 PM
|
|
Posting Freak
Joined: Jul 11, 2009
Posts: 722
Location: Lebanon, OR
Status: Offline
|
|
Thanks for bringing that up, I didn't really think about that. Looks like I'll just go with a partial pan then, leaving the exhaust open. It'll just be safer that way.
I have looked into things like air dams and such, but I'm also thinking about total frontal area, as well as this Autospeed article: http://autospeed.com/cms/A_2456/article.html |
_________________
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Register
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
