View Single Post
  #14  
Old 10-01-2012, 11:43 AM
cgaengineer's Avatar
cgaengineer cgaengineer is offline
LawnSite Fanatic
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Winder, GA
Posts: 15,782
Quote:
Originally Posted by 32vld View Post
To just say gasoline has more energy per gallon and then walk away leaves out a lot of important information.

If gasoline is the more powerful fuel then when are the alcohol and nitromethane users going to start losing races to gasoline running cars instead of having the fastest times?

Gasoline A/F ratio is 14.7:1.

Gasoline engines need 14.7 parts of air to burn all of that 1 part of gas up during combustion. Putting in more fuel will just be wasting it.

Alcohol has less energy though more fuel gets into each cylinder. Because it needs less air to completely burn so some of the air's volume is replaced with fuel. A/F ratio is around 6:1 with alcohol.

That means that alcohol fueled engines get 2.45 more times the fuel into the cylinder.

Alcohol has 2/3 the energy of gasoline. But 2.45 times more alcohol gets into the cylinder. So multiply .667 x 2.45 = 1.63 more energy.

Alcohol fuel has it's advantages and disadvantages. Where I live you only can buy 10% blend alcohol and gas at the pump.

When manufacturers refuse to build there equipment to be able to run with alcohol blended fuels they are refusing to face reality and giving their customers a big FU with every piece of equipment that they sell to their customers, or should replace the words sell to their customers with stick it to their customers.

Years ago when alcohol was introduced into gas by federal mandate I was a GM dealer mechanic. At the factory GM school their instructor said that GM told the gov. that it's cars can run on alcohol up to 10%.
That the ethanol should be the alcohol of choice. It is less harmful to the cars parts.

That methanol would need to be run at a 5% blend and would be more harmful to the cars parts.

Well our elected representatives in the capital let the methanol lobbist's buy their votes instead of listening to the automotive manufacturing experts.

So we had more alcohol related problems as a result. Then as happens eventually station tanks leak and the MTBE, which the added methanol was named began to poison our waters. This is when the Fed Gov prohibited MTBE as a fuel additive with replaced it with ethanol.

Common sense is when engine manufactures say ethanol is a better fuel additive then methanol. When ethanol is non poisonous (it is in our favorite adult beverages) so if it was to leak into the ground waters the environment would not be harmed. That methanol/MTBE use as a fuel additive would of been rejected by both houses of congress.

The question that needs to be asked: Why does the American public continually vote in people that are that dumb, that corrupt, or both, every election?

Maybe congress feared an ethanol shortage and the end of the three martini lunches, and all business in Washington DC would come to a stand still for they would not have the fuel and lubrication so necessary to govern.


You backed my statement. Pound for pound, less energy. It takes more alcohol to equal the same btu as gasoline. And unless the engine is designed to run on alcohol the performance vs gasoline will be less.
Posted via Mobile Device
Reply With Quote
 
Page generated in 0.05706 seconds with 7 queries