Can the hemi run on e15?

[Ninety-9 SE-L]

So what your saying is "I'm an engineer. I only look at things at a miniscule technical level that will make absolutely no difference whatsoever in the real world, just on paper."

Ok. Got it.

What I'm saying is: "Don't blow smoke up my ***." Miniscule (technical) losses are still losses, especially when you're marketing them as Tremendous Gains! Don't tell me I'm going to save money at the pump when I'll be visiting the pump more often.

I'd rather sit on the couch picking lint out of my belly button for free than be breaking my back for the same price.

He says that his truck is getting the same fuel economy on E15. The physics says otherwise.
He says that the pinging on 88 is less than 87, well no ****, but if you're STILL pinging, you should be using 89 or 90 until the pinging stops.
I wouldn't exactly swear by a fuel that is slowly tearing up my pistons and cylinder walls.

...and while I think Ethanol is a decent, clean, and (somewhat) renewable fuel, it's not that great in a gasoline engine. Flex Fuel owners can tell you that E85 doesn't always justify the price. Most owners report about 15-25% less fuel economy on E85, so the price of E85 better damn well be discounted steep enough to justify the yearly cost, as well as the cost of your time. If I have to go to the gas station 25% more often, that's a hidden cost, because time = money.

 

[TNRamGuy]

Not sure. I haven’t seen JB yet

Also, I searched before I posted my thread. No results found.

Did another search since there are two threads.
No results found.

Crap, you know what happens if you say "Beetlejuice....Beetle...... ......"

 

[Cajun_]

Hello stupid electrical engineer here. Can Smart other engineer explain pinging. Thank you

 

[devildodge]

I am no scientist. Not an engineer. Got no big words to describe it.

But I have been using the Unleaded 88, 88 OCT, E15, exclusively in my 392 HEMI for 2 years and the year before that when I could find it.

We camp every weekend. Road trip to events. Haul wood and tow vehicles quite often. My truck is a truck that does truck things. It never has the same fuel in it very long.

My fuel sensor level failed 60 some thousand miles ago...so I have to track my fuel usage by miles. I calculate every tank. It is absolutely a savings.

I will never buy 87 again. (Started using E15/88 in our Jeep too) It is 60 to 80 cents cheaper than 89 and performs exactly the same...the angle of my right foot bearing more than any other factor.

162000 miles on my ole 392 HEMI... These trucks love to work and drink fuel...might as well go with the cheapest alternative.

But, E15 is always available all times of the year...so very confused by the announcement from the Rulers. I just want someone to make sense of any one thing that has come from them...no...actually, I do not. I am over opinions...just wanted to give mine. Ha.

Disappearing to the wilderness...it is cheaper to walk in God's Country.

But, to answer the real question.

It will not hurt to use E15 in any RAM truck.

 

[ferraiolo1]

What I'm saying is: "Don't blow smoke up my ***." Miniscule (technical) losses are still losses, especially when you're marketing them as Tremendous Gains! Don't tell me I'm going to save money at the pump when I'll be visiting the pump more often.

I'd rather sit on the couch picking lint out of my belly button for free than be breaking my back for the same price.

He says that his truck is getting the same fuel economy on E15. The physics says otherwise.
He says that the pinging on 88 is less than 87, well no ****, but if you're STILL pinging, you should be using 89 or 90 until the pinging stops.
I wouldn't exactly swear by a fuel that is slowly tearing up my pistons and cylinder walls.

...and while I think Ethanol is a decent, clean, and (somewhat) renewable fuel, it's not that great in a gasoline engine. Flex Fuel owners can tell you that E85 doesn't always justify the price. Most owners report about 15-25% less fuel economy on E85, so the price of E85 better damn well be discounted steep enough to justify the yearly cost, as well as the cost of your time. If I have to go to the gas station 25% more often, that's a hidden cost, because time = money.

That’s the problem you’re over thinking it. It’s only adding 5% more e content than your normal fuel. There aren’t noticeable losses. And I said it DOESNT ping on 88 under load. It DOES ping with 87 under load. So why spend $0.65 more a gallon for 89 when 88 doesn’t same thing??

I drive 30k a year in my company car, that I use e15 and 87 depending where I can fill up, there is never a difference in my average mpg.

Like I said, almost everyone who has something negative to say about it hasn’t been using it. Which sounds like you’re one of those people

And we aren’t talking about e85, but while on the subject you brought up, yes with e85 you loose mpg. But you also gain around 30hp simply
By adding e85 it to a flex fuel vehicle. So the price difference and power gain is worth the drop in mpg for most.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[jimothy]

That’s the problem you’re over thinking it. It’s only adding 5% more e content than your normal fuel.

E15 contains 50% more ethanol than E10. About 5.6% less gasoline, however.

 

[ferraiolo1]

Explaining it that way makes it seem like it’s a big difference. When it’s not.

Sure would be a lot easier if people would just go try it instead of copy pasting google data sheets about it.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Ninety-9 SE-L]

That’s the problem you’re over thinking it. It’s only adding 5% more e content than your normal fuel. There aren’t noticeable losses. And I said it DOESNT ping on 88 under load. It DOES ping with 87 under load. So why spend $0.65 more a gallon for 89 when 88 doesn’t same thing??

I drive 30k a year in my company car, that I use e15 and 87 depending where I can fill up, there is never a difference in my average mpg.

Like I said, almost everyone who has something negative to say about it hasn’t been using it. Which sounds like you’re one of those people

And we aren’t talking about e85, but while on the subject you brought up, yes with e85 you loose mpg. But you also gain around 30hp simply
By adding e85 it to a flex fuel vehicle. So the price difference and power gain is worth the drop in mpg for most.

I'll just say to each their own. If it works, it works. 5% more ethanol is on top of 10% ethanol that's already mixed in and we know that as we add more Ethanol to the mixture, we lower the energy value. E85 is no different.

E0 has about 116,000 BTU/gal, E100 has about 76,000 BTU/gal. You lose about 35% of the power output as you go down that scale.
E0 = 0% loss
E10 = 3.5% loss
E15 = 5.25% loss
E20 = 7% loss
E50 = 17.5% loss
E85 = 29% loss
E100 = 35% loss.

Granted, as vehicles are adapted to run on ethanol, some of those losses are returned with higher compression ratios, more boost, more aggressive timing, and lower EGT. That's why many Flex Fuel vehicles only report 15-25% loss and not the full 29%. Ethanol IS a cleaner-burning, cooler burning fuel, and it's a natural octane booster....but less energy is less energy, you're only mitigating some of that loss.

E15 has been approved for use since 2010, and some manufacturers started making their vehicles E15-compatible starting around 2011. I know that Hemi Rams are now approved to run on E15. I'm not sure if my 2015 Frontier is approved for anything above E10, as mine isn't Flex Fuel and I think only the Flex Fuel models can run E15-E85.


E0 became too expensive, so the US switched to E10. Now E10 is becoming expensive, so E15 is being pushed. Soon that will be expensive and we'll be pushing for higher blends to cut the cost down a few cents, here and there. Overall, we're just chasing our tails and we're not saving anything at all.

It's buying a 50% smaller steak at 50% of the price and then saying "Wow, this steak is super cheap...but I'm still hungry, I better run to the store for another steak"

 

[ferraiolo1]

Oh I’ll 100% agree about the politics and policies about it. It’s all bs. But it’s what we are stuck with.

E85 is now almost as expensive as e15 around me which is why I’m not buying the flex fuel kit for my truck. When it was less than $2 it would have been justifiable.

In a perfect world we would have e free fuel of all levels and just e85.

But in the spirit of the ops question, it’s not about that. Just simply can it be ran, and yes it can be with no noticeable changes from 89.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[HSKR R/T]

I'll just say to each their own. If it works, it works. 5% more ethanol is on top of 10% ethanol that's already mixed in and we know that as we add more Ethanol to the mixture, we lower the energy value. E85 is no different.

E0 has about 116,000 BTU/gal, E100 has about 76,000 BTU/gal. You lose about 35% of the power output as you go down that scale.
E0 = 0% loss
E10 = 3.5% loss
E15 = 5.25% loss
E20 = 7% loss
E50 = 17.5% loss
E85 = 29% loss
E100 = 35% loss.

Granted, as vehicles are adapted to run on ethanol, some of those losses are returned with higher compression ratios, more boost, more aggressive timing, and lower EGT. That's why many Flex Fuel vehicles only report 15-25% loss and not the full 29%. Ethanol IS a cleaner-burning, cooler burning fuel, and it's a natural octane booster....but less energy is less energy, you're only mitigating some of that loss.

E15 has been approved for use since 2010, and some manufacturers started making their vehicles E15-compatible starting around 2011. I know that Hemi Rams are now approved to run on E15. I'm not sure if my 2015 Frontier is approved for anything above E10, as mine isn't Flex Fuel and I think only the Flex Fuel models can run E15-E85.
View attachment 126326

E0 became too expensive, so the US switched to E10. Now E10 is becoming expensive, so E15 is being pushed. Soon that will be expensive and we'll be pushing for higher blends to cut the cost down a few cents, here and there. Overall, we're just chasing our tails and we're not saving anything at all.

It's buying a 50% smaller steak at 50% of the price and then saying "Wow, this steak is super cheap...but I'm still hungry, I better run to the store for another steak"

The only reason ethanol blended fuel are cheaper is because the federal government subsidizes ethanol production, and the farmers growing the corn. The process, when using corn, is actually more expensive than refining oil. You want to really see a drop in prices, have the federal government change to better sources for ethanol that are cheaper to grow, cheaper to refine, and can get multiple harvests in a year. But they won't do it.

 

[GKIII]

Wow, apparently some people get really riled up about a ~2% loss in energy content vs E10 (which is what most gas in the USA is nowadays anyway).

I will fit into the stereotype and also announce I'm an engineer. I run E15 in my truck 95% of the time since it's cheaper than regular 87 octane AND has a higher octane rating. It's fine. Is there a small fuel economy hit? Sure. Do I actually notice it? No.

 

[GKIII]

The only reason ethanol blended fuel are cheaper is because the federal government subsidizes ethanol production, and the farmers growing the corn. The process, when using corn, is actually more expensive than refining oil. You want to really see a drop in prices, have the federal government change to better sources for ethanol that are cheaper to grow, cheaper to refine, and can get multiple harvests in a year. But they won't do it.

Switchgrass would be ideal, but that would require corn farmers to completely change their operations.

There are even GMO variants of the stuff that produce PHB plastics.

 

[HSKR R/T]

Switchgrass would be ideal, but that would require corn farmers to completely change their operations.

There are even GMO variants of the stuff that produce PHB plastics.

Switch grass and sugar beats are both far better options. Both already grown in the US. Most farmers have already changed their operations going from 3-4 crop rotation with Milo and wheat, to just flipping back and forth between corn and soy beans year to year. At least in my area.

 

[djevox]

I’m with Ninety on this one. All we do is argue details here, So it’s funny to see people rejecting that in saying “nah, it’s good enough.”

 

[ferraiolo1]

You drink up sweetie.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[jl13]

Isn’t California supposed to break off, right at its borders, in a major earthquake, then sink into the Pacific Ocean? That’s what cartoons, and later Tool, taught me.

Costa Rica is supposed to be a nice place to retire.

I keep hearing Costa Rica is top choice, very low in crime and peaceful is what I hear

 

[HSKR R/T]

I keep hearing Costa Rica is top choice, very low in crime and peaceful is what I hear

That is until everyone moves there.

 

[jl13]

I suppose based on my experience I might agree with both sides of the argument and I would end up deciding based on how my truck actually handles a lower octane.
Not all trucks/vehicles seems to handle things the same
I once had a "luxury car" that required 91 but it would handle 87 and 89 without me noticing anything off
on the other hand 2 of my previous vehicles one used and one new that required 87 would both hated it. crazy pinging, check engine would come on on the new vehicle and dirty fuel systems - so I had to keep them on 89
Here I see very few gas stations that carry anything other than 87,89,91
I have only noticed a handful with e85

 

[jl13]

I think you’re misunderstanding something.

E15 also called E88 is NOT the same as E85

E85 is mostly ethanol and is the yellow handle at the pump, and you need a flex fuel vehicle or a conversion kit to run it.

E15 is 15% ethanol and pretty much any modern vehicle can run it. It’s 88 octane. It will do your vehicle zero harm, as your manual states you can run it. In some areas it’s much cheaper than 89 mid grade and runs similar.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

well I think California does not use e15, I have only noticed the e85 and not many gas stations around me with it plus like you said needing the conversation kit.
which could it void the warranty?
I think I will juts stick with 89 - have been thinking of trying 87 but never end up going thru

 

[Mountain Whiskey]

What I'm saying is: "Don't blow smoke up my ***." Miniscule (technical) losses are still losses, especially when you're marketing them as Tremendous Gains! Don't tell me I'm going to save money at the pump when I'll be visiting the pump more often.

I'd rather sit on the couch picking lint out of my belly button for free than be breaking my back for the same price.

He says that his truck is getting the same fuel economy on E15. The physics says otherwise.
He says that the pinging on 88 is less than 87, well no ****, but if you're STILL pinging, you should be using 89 or 90 until the pinging stops.
I wouldn't exactly swear by a fuel that is slowly tearing up my pistons and cylinder walls.

...and while I think Ethanol is a decent, clean, and (somewhat) renewable fuel, it's not that great in a gasoline engine. Flex Fuel owners can tell you that E85 doesn't always justify the price. Most owners report about 15-25% less fuel economy on E85, so the price of E85 better damn well be discounted steep enough to justify the yearly cost, as well as the cost of your time. If I have to go to the gas station 25% more often, that's a hidden cost, because time = money.

Yea, slowly eating up your pistons. So slowly that you will be able to tell when the truck is beat up junk and ready for the scrap yard. Then you can pull the pistons, break out the magnifying glass and have proof! Right there! Not that it mattered the whole life of the truck.

And yes, you will surely be wasting valuable time that you will never get back in your life ( not nearly as much as is lost on this forum ) by having to get an extra fill-up every few years or so.

I don't think that the thread titled "Can I run my Hemi on e15" had much to do with e85 that was established cannot be run in these trucks as is. We're back to that miniscule part again with e15.