Anybody interisted in running E85?

[Worlds Fastest Comanche]

I sent a request into to the SCTA requesting a rule change to allow the use of E85 in production classes,   A copy of the request i sent is below, along with the response as well as my response.    The basic question or concern in the reply is that there is no interest from anyone other than myself that would like to run E85.   I would like to run it because it is cheap, can probably produce more power especially in boosted applications than gasoline, and is readily available.   The green thing is nice too.   So am I a lone voice in the woods?  

What do you think?

Peter Lechtanski









Peter Lechtanski Wrote:

Well first of all, how do you know I'm the only person interested in E85?   Maybe  the subject deserves some discussion.   I always thought that land speed racing was about pushing the envelope, innovation, developing new technology.   In some classes you are not allowed to use specific technology because it did not exist at the time the vehicle was produced.   for example you might be limited to carburetor because EFi did not exist when the car was produced.    But in the current production class rules you are limiting the use of a fuel that a vehicle was designed to run.    E85 has the potential to produce allot of power, especially in boosted applications.   I guess I am in a small group that run the production category.   I can run 118 octane gasoline, which to me is s specialty fuel, but i can't run something that is available at the local gas station.   Does this seem right?   The production class should represent the production vehicles on the road in 2010, not 1998.

I must admit that i am not concerned about how this will affect your fuel supplier, I am sure you can find a supplier someplace  to provide to provide the fuel you want for your event.    Maybe the guys at ERC could go down to the local gas station, fill up a couple of 55 gallon drums,  and haul them to Bonneville.

To limit innovation or the use of new technology because it may be inconvenient for your supplier does not seem to go to the heart of what racing is all about.

I paid my BNI dues, and I race at Bonneville,  I just ask the the subject be discussed and not dismissed out of hand.


Thank you
Peter Lechtanski
#1985






On 10/27/2010 9:27 PM, Michael Manghelli wrote:
> Peter,
>
> We require you to run our event gas at Speedweek. Our fuel supplier does not provide E85... if you are the only one that wants to be green, how much do you think E85 will cost?  What exactly are you looking for here?
>
> Mike Manghelli
> Rulebook Coordinator
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pete@jpr.net [mailto:pete@jpr.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2010 12:05 PM
> To: rulebookinfo@scta-bni.org
> Subject: Rule Chg Request
>
> Here is the information submitted to www.scta-bni.org/Forms/rulechg2010.asp from 63.210.99.10 on Wednesday, October 27, 2010 at 12:05:19 PM
> ------------------------
> Name: Peter Lechtanski
>
> Address:
>
> City: Woodstock
>
> State: Illinois
>
> Zip Code: 60098
>
>
>
> BNI Membership - BNI: checked
>
> Issue: Gasoline classes, such as production cars only allow the use of gasoline or gasoline with 10% methenol.  Although very high octane racing fuel is allowed, E85 is not.   Since E85 is a comonly avialable pump gas, it should be allowed in the production catagory.
>
> Rulebook Section: 2B
>
> Rulebook Page No: 17
>
> Desired Outcome: Allow the use of E85 or Gasoline in the production catagory
>
> Reason for Chg: The world is changing, and racers are perceived as not very "green"  Such a move would help the image of land speed racing to be a more green sport.   The other reason is that it (like gasoline) is a widley available pump fuel that runs with standard production vehicles.  It seems crazy not to allow a racer to run a fuel that a car was designed to run.
>
> Side Effects: The cost of fuel for the racer would be reduced,  Probably some records will fall, but when the OHV v8 came into racing, many flathead records fell as well.  Do you not allow the use of modern technology because people will break records?
>
> Desired Rulebook Wording: Gasoline classes also allow the use of E85 Ethanol
>
>
>
>

[dw230]

Which gas station in Wemdover sells E85? I am not too sure as to how many of your Production class brothers are interested, did you do a survey?

DW

[Dean Los Angeles]

You would have to put out a rule book with asterisks on the records, before E85 and after. E85 provides far more energy than gasoline. Or just throw out the old records.

Green? No interest here.

[Milwaukee Midget]

Hey, Pete -

My opinion here.  Trying to speak in general terms without becoming political.   

Personally, I like E-85 for blown street cars.

I guess I'd argue as to how green it is.  If ADM would make ethanol out of sugar cane instead of corn, the green factor might increase.  Corn is still pretty fuel intensive to produce.

I kind of doubt that any positive spin E-85 would have on the general population would burnish the reputation racers have with non racers.  I seem to recall efforts to ban the Indy 500 during the oil embargo of the 1970's until it was pointed out that the only vehicles running on gasoline were the safety vehicles and the pace car. 

But will E-85 even be around in five years?  Currently the feds are looking to permit the increase of the amount of ethanol in regularly formulated gasoline - I believe they're talking 20%.  Will ADM and the refineries have the capacity to continue to offer E-85 if the ethanol needs to be diverted to standard fuel production? 

A lot of co-ops that started to build their own ethanol plants got kicked in the slats when the price of corn went up.  You can make cheap ethanol with two-buck corn.  You can make expensive E-85 with December corn at 577. 

Lets face it, most vehicles that run on E-85 are flex fuel.  An increase in demand for ethanol in regular blends will only drive the price of E-85 up, and given E-85's lower milage, for all but the performance oriented consumers, E-85 is likely to become another failed fuel.

And then the SCTA would have a number of records for a fuel that nobody uses anymore?

I just don't see it happening.

Chris Conrad

[racergeo]

  If you need to save money on say 5 or 10 gal. of race fuel, maybe you need a new hobby. I'm thinking how much would you save, $50 to basically create a huge problem.

[LSR Mike]

I queried last year about using E85. Yes it's great in boosted applications. as it stands, E85 is Fuel, i.e. NOT Gasoline.
I'm not interested in any "Green" factor. That's Marketing.

As far as records go, It would just be making more classes by adding a Fuel category where none exixts. There are plenty of Blown Fuel classes for roadsters and such, none in Production categories and Pickups (Big GRIN) I'd love to have a F/BFMMP Class to run in, in addition to the F/BMMP, then I could do class changes and get 2 records.

But that would be a different change request.

[Worlds Fastest Comanche]

You would have to put out a rule book with asterisks on the records, before E85 and after. E85 provides far more energy than gasoline. Or just throw out the old records.

Green? No interest here.

Why would you need an asterisk?  Records are falling every year because of new technology.  Should Direct injected engines be banned because they will probably perform better than an engine with a carb? or port injection?  Maybe there should be pushrod classes and OHC classes.  2 valve per cylinder and 4 valve per cylinder classes.  Is it fair to put a 2 valve per cylinder pushrod engine up against a DOHC motor with 4 valves per cylinder?   Maybe they should put an asterisk when somebody runs in the production class and puts a set of Nascar heads on their motor, but the guy who previously held the record did not have these heads available to him because they did not exist at the time.  Maybe if somebody sets a record in a Studebaker you should put an asterisk because the car is too aerodynamic and it in not fair to the other people in the class who have less aerodynamic cars.    technology will always improve, record will always fall.

The basic question is, in a production class, do you make rules that do not allow you to use all of the technology that comes on a production vehicle?   I thought the whole idea of a production class was to represent the current production cars.    Vintage engine and vintage vehicle classes exist that limit the use of technology.   I don't think such restrictions have any place in a production class.   Their are only 6 categories in the production Class, the majority of the records are less than 10 years old, and allot are less than 5 years old.  If you have a production record you will probably not have it for very long

[javajoe79]

 Aside from E85 falling under the fuel category, I think it should be allowed in production as gas, since it is available from the pump. Don't make another class, just allow it to be run as gas. Seems pretty easy.

[Stan Back]

In SCTA, production is more of a body class than an engine class -- at least when it comes to modifications.

Allowing "fuel" to be used would call for an asterisk or another set of classes.  Why not just compete within the rules already set up -- and hopefully what you built for?

[hotrod]

The basic question or concern in the reply is that there is no interest from anyone other than myself that would like to run E85.   I would like to run it because it is cheap, can probably produce more power especially in boosted applications than gasoline, and is readily available.   The green thing is nice too.   So am I a lone voice in the woods?  

The only reason the assumption is no one is interested in running E85, is in the past, discussions of it have been dismissed out of hand, as being covered under the fuel regulations.

It is the only fuel I would even consider using at Bonneville.
There have already been records set running E85 by General Motors in their Ecotech car.

http://www.greencar.com/articles/e85-chevy-cobalt-sets-land-speed-records-bonneville.php

It is available nearly everywhere (except for a few states that insist on staying in the dark ages), it is much easier on the engine than other fuels, less toxic than methanol, and allows the 1960's vintage cars to get the performance they were designed to give on the street, at a price people can afford.

It is the most popular performance fuel for supercharged/turbocharged cars, even having been featured in Hotrod magazine.

http://www.hotrod.com/techarticles/hrdp_0801_e85_ethanol_alternative_fuel/index.html

I agree it should be allowed in production since it can be purchased at the pump in every state in the country and is a DOT approved street fuel.
In many modern cars it is the fuel the car was designed to run on.

It is silly to prohibit a fuel in production classes that people drive on the street with every day.

Larry

[jb2]

E85?  A mixture of Gasoline and an additive = Fuel.

Probably produce more HP?  Of course it will.

Silly not to allow it?  Then why limit production to gasoline, just allow anything because E85 is not gas regardless of where you can buy it and what you can use it in and who approves it for usage. 

[landracing]

Hey, Pete -

My opinion here.  Trying to speak in general terms without becoming political.   

But will E-85 even be around in five years?  Currently the feds are looking to permit the increase of the amount of ethanol in regularly formulated gasoline - I believe they're talking 20%.  Will ADM and the refineries have the capacity to continue to offer E-85 if the ethanol needs to be diverted to standard fuel production? 

A lot of co-ops that started to build their own ethanol plants got kicked in the slats when the price of corn went up.  You can make cheap ethanol with two-buck corn.  You can make expensive E-85 with December corn at 577. 

Lets face it, most vehicles that run on E-85 are flex fuel.  An increase in demand for ethanol in regular blends will only drive the price of E-85 up, and given E-85's lower milage, for all but the performance oriented consumers, E-85 is likely to become another failed fuel.

Chris Conrad

Here is some information from the Manufacturing side from my  Gates where I work.

Recently, the EPA has announced that they have approved the use of unleaded gasoline with up to 15% Ethanol content (E15).    Currently, ethanol can go up to 10% levels (E10) in standard unleaded fuel.   Here are some facts.

1)   Higher levels of ethanol use in gasoline will be necessary for the U.S. to achieve the congressionally-mandated goals for biofuels in autos by the year 2022.
2)   E15 is only approved for use in 2007 and newer vehicles, which represent only 15% of all cars and light trucks registered in the U.S. currently.   The EPA is waiting for the results of DOE tests, due in November, to determine if E15 can be extended for approval in 2001-2006 model year vehicles as well.   This would add another 36% of the vehicles on the road as capable of utilizing E15.
3)   The reason for these limits on model years is that E15 is chemically much more aggressive to rubber products and fuel tanks it comes in contact with than the current E10.   It can cause corrosion in engines not designed for it.   There is also concern that E15 can harm some catalytic converters.
4)   E15 is allowed, but not required to be offered by retail gas stations.   There is controversy about whether many stations will convert any of their dispensing capacity to E15 as it requires unique systems and equipment which can cost up to $25,000.   E10 is used in 80% of all gasoline sold in the U.S. currently.
5)   E15 cannot be used in any small engine equipment.
6)   Ethanol provides only 66% as much energy as standard gasoline, yet it burns hotter – causing catalytic converters to break down faster.   A car that gets 25mpg on traditional unleaded gasoline only gets 24.1mpg on E10 and 23.7mpg on E15.


Jon

[hotrod]

Silly not to allow it?  Then why limit production to gasoline, just allow anything because E85 is not gas regardless of where you can buy it and what you can use it in and who approves it for usage.  

The intent of having classes such as production, is to group cars so that they have limited modifications to the engine comparable to typical street cars. Right now production classes allow 2 fuels , diesel and gasoline, both are DOT approved fuels. The fuel provided by ERC out of the trailer is not even remotely comparable to pump gasoline but it is an "approved fuel", there is no rational reason why ERC could not provide an "approved" E85 blend like they did for General Motors for production cars that wished to run on a fuel they can buy on the street.

The last tally I saw, was that there are 2,302 E85 retail outlets in the country. The number of E85 stations has been almost doubling every year recently. In the not too distant future it will be the primary performance fuel for street cars.There are currently over 5 million flexible fuel vehicles on the road, which were designed to run on E85, and should be allowed to compete with the fuel they were designed for.

Would E85 make more power? Yes definitely more than pump premium gasoline but so will ERC's "approved" high octane racing gasoline so that is a strawman argument.

The whole point of racing at Bonneville is to test limits and improve the breed, setting an artificial barrier so folks are limited to an inferior fuel choice is counter to the entire culture that came to Bonneville in the first place.

If E85 comes to dominate the production class ?  Who cares! Everyone in production class would simply switch to the superior fuel, and records would go up.
Times change and so does technology, an LS1 engine is a far cry from a 1950's vintage 283, but it is still a production engine.
The same evolution in technology should be allowed in fuel technology.

All of ERC's leaded racing fuels  (110K, A-8C,  A-19A, A-19K) have higher rated octane than E85 which is rated at 105 octane.

If an E85 standard approved blend was provided by ERC it would be no different than any of their other highly specialized fuels which are perfectly legal in production class, just another fuel option for people to try.

Larry

[jb2]

The whole point of racing at Bonneville is to test limits and improve the breed, setting an artificial barrier so folks are limited to an inferior fuel choice is counter to the entire culture that came to Bonneville in the first place.


Thank you for making my "strawman" argument.  Fuel choice is not gas choice.  Gasoline does not have additives.  Everyone should switch to the superior fuel?  why not switch to nitro, why not add nitrous?  Available, makes more horsepower.  If you can use 85% ethanol and call it gas why cant I add these?


The intent of having classes such as production, is to group cars so that they have limited modifications to the engine comparable to typical street cars.

Really???  Take a look at the fast production cars.  Limited modifications is not a part of this group.  see D/PS. The engine is not very close to production, the car meets all the rules. 

[Stan Back]

"In SCTA, production is more of a body class than an engine class -- at least when it comes to modifications." -- Oh, I said that already.

Anyone can already run E85 in the Production classes.  Just don't go to Impound, as you're competing unfairly against the rules.  There are rules, you know.  And relating "Production" engines to production engines is foolhearty.  Like believing NASCAR has someting to do with stock cars.

Stan