Mopar’s new – flex fuel – 4.7L V8 - JeepForum.com
Search  
Sign Up   Today's Posts
User: Pass: Remember?
Advertise Here
Jeep Home Jeep Forum Jeep Classifieds Jeep Registry JeepSpace Jeep Reviews Jeep Gallery Jeep Clubs Jeep Groups Jeep Videos Jeep Events Jeep Articles
Go Back JeepForum.com > Models > Jeep Grand Cherokee & Commander Forums > WK Grand Cherokee & XK Commander Forum > Mopar’s new – flex fuel – 4.7L V8

Rockridge 4WD IS Taking Zone Offroad Suspension Lift Kits OPTIC ARMOR WINDOWS all sale now !!!!!!!!2003-2004 Jeep Grand Cherokee Headlight Dark Background wi

Reply
Unread 11-03-2006, 10:33 PM   #1
jeep_on
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Flagstaff, Arizona
Posts: 1,443
Mopar’s new – flex fuel – 4.7L V8

I had nothing better to do this afternoon, so I decided to see my pal at the Jeep dealer. Small city, so not a whole hell of a lot happens at a small dealership. So are BSing for awhile and he says he has some thing to show me.

Brakes out this memo about the new E85 4.7L thats going to appear in the 2007 WK and XK. Seemed interesting enough. I wasn’t able to get a copy of it, so I decided to come home and take a look at Jeep’s website to see if this option has popped up yet, and it seems it as.

Any way, while poking around on Jeep’s website I decided to build my self an XK. Got to the third set of options and it asked my what engine I wanted. So I decided to click on the ‘details’ about each engine. So it seems the new E85 4.7L is not going to be sold in California, Maine, Massachusetts, New York, or Vermont.

Any one have any idea why not? I can see why the communist state of California would get their panties in a twist over it, but the others?

__________________
2006 Dodge RAM Laramie w/ 5.9L I6
2010 Volkswagen Jetta w/ TDI 2.0L I4

Waiting on a 2013 RHD JK Unlimited


Quote:
Originally Posted by PM Thor View Post
Wait, you can't cross creeks up there? What the Hell is up with these Canadians?
jeep_on is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-04-2006, 07:18 PM   #2
SDBaja
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: San Diego
Posts: 16
It doesn't meet emmisions in these states.
__________________
A problem defined is a problem solved
SDBaja is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-04-2006, 09:06 PM   #3
brandoncrone
Registered User
1996 ZJ 
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Saranac Lake, New York
Posts: 614
Maine, Mass, NY and VT have all adopted Californias emission standards. Also in the same point (as SDbaja mentioned) the engine doesn't meet emissions. Some or most people don't know that when a flex-fuel vehicle is running on E85 it has less power and fuel economy due to the fuel being not as potent as regular gas. So I would imagine that throws it out of the strict CA emissions.
__________________
Dodge/Chrysler/Jeep Technician 14 Years
ASE Master Certified
L1 Advanced Engine Performance
brandoncrone is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-05-2006, 01:43 AM   #4
jeep_on
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Flagstaff, Arizona
Posts: 1,443
Quote:
Originally Posted by brandoncrone
Some or most people don't know that when a flex-fuel vehicle is running on E85 it has less power and fuel economy due to the fuel being not as potent as regular gas. So I would imagine that throws it out of the strict CA emissions.
Sure, I've run into this very problem while running BioDiesel in my work trucks. But the HP loss is not noticeable anyhow. And I know it has helped a lot in the emissions my trucks put out, I’ve seen their test results. On the up side the engine runs cooler, quieter, smoother, and the oil stays WAY cleaner.

It would make since these states that have the more strict emission standards would welcome this engine. I wonder how Chevy’s flex fuel trucks / SUVs are battling this issue.

Since the fuel doesn’t burn as hot, you have less HP and maybe what, 1MPG less? Big deal. Not like it matters, 99% of the people who buy this option will end up burning regular gasoline in it anyhow.
__________________
2006 Dodge RAM Laramie w/ 5.9L I6
2010 Volkswagen Jetta w/ TDI 2.0L I4

Waiting on a 2013 RHD JK Unlimited


Quote:
Originally Posted by PM Thor View Post
Wait, you can't cross creeks up there? What the Hell is up with these Canadians?
jeep_on is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-05-2006, 08:23 AM   #5
brandoncrone
Registered User
1996 ZJ 
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Saranac Lake, New York
Posts: 614
Its a lot more than a 1MPG, one of my friends Suburbans ran flex-fuel while out of state and was getting between 10 and 12 on the highway where he was getting about 18 with regular gas. Ive seen a lot of flexfuel vehicles in NY but Ive never seen a fueling station, not even sure where there would be one. You used to be able to buy one here until NY adopted CA standards, just like you could buy a diesel VW Beetle in 99 when they came out, then all of a sudden they disappeared from the dealers shortly after that. I'm a big fan of alternative fuels, but the amount of energy it takes to make the fuel far outweighs its worthiness. I takes something like 3 times the energy to make a gallon of E85 as it does regular gas. The only good thing about it is reducing the dependance on foreign oil.

Sorry, don't mean to turn this thread into something else.
__________________
Dodge/Chrysler/Jeep Technician 14 Years
ASE Master Certified
L1 Advanced Engine Performance
brandoncrone is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-05-2006, 12:46 PM   #6
jeep_on
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Flagstaff, Arizona
Posts: 1,443
Interesting. I know CA is weird about new diesel engines too. I dont think they can get new VW TDIs either. I'm a fan of alternative fuels as well, but I don't think it outweighs its worthiness. It costs me about $1.00 per gallon for B100 vs $2.65 for #2 Diesel. Its saved me a load of money, and probably alot of wear and tear on my trucks engine's.

I didn’t realize E85 got that worse in mileage. Given the opportunity, I’d run it regardless of the less mileage. Its cheaper than regular gasoline so I think it would balance out in the end. I’ve seen a few flex fuel Chevys up here, but I don’t think there is a refueling station here yet. I also see a lot of converted LP vehicles here. But I’m told they get worse mileage as well, and with the price of fuel dropping LP isn’t even worth doing any more either.

NY dose have E85 fill stations. I find it funny that they are all state owned though. I know the 2004 Dodge RAM 1500 came with an E85 compatible engine. I wonder what makes and engine able to burn it correctly. Would be interesting to swap mortars in my WJ.
__________________
2006 Dodge RAM Laramie w/ 5.9L I6
2010 Volkswagen Jetta w/ TDI 2.0L I4

Waiting on a 2013 RHD JK Unlimited


Quote:
Originally Posted by PM Thor View Post
Wait, you can't cross creeks up there? What the Hell is up with these Canadians?

Last edited by jeep_on; 11-05-2006 at 01:00 PM..
jeep_on is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-05-2006, 01:59 PM   #7
brandoncrone
Registered User
1996 ZJ 
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Saranac Lake, New York
Posts: 614
It doesn't really have anything to do with the engine mechanical at all. The entire fuel system is designed to withstand the E85 (which is highly corrosive) different pump, injectors, spark plugs, different computer program and I believe the fuel tank is different material as well.
__________________
Dodge/Chrysler/Jeep Technician 14 Years
ASE Master Certified
L1 Advanced Engine Performance
brandoncrone is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-05-2006, 02:59 PM   #8
jeep_on
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Flagstaff, Arizona
Posts: 1,443
Sounds alot like BD. Had to switch out alot of stuff on a buddy's TD Benz. New pump, fuel lines, bigger injectors. Seems the BD would eat normal rubber and every thing had to be switched over to vitron.
__________________
2006 Dodge RAM Laramie w/ 5.9L I6
2010 Volkswagen Jetta w/ TDI 2.0L I4

Waiting on a 2013 RHD JK Unlimited


Quote:
Originally Posted by PM Thor View Post
Wait, you can't cross creeks up there? What the Hell is up with these Canadians?
jeep_on is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-05-2006, 03:08 PM   #9
mendelmax
Registered User
2004 WJ 
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Poland, Katowice
Posts: 1,748
Anyone knows how fuel management looks like? I mean how exactly computer know if you use normal gas or E85?
__________________
POLISH JEEP OWNERS CLUB #11

Anyway, nothing will beat Suzuki :D
mendelmax is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-05-2006, 05:05 PM   #10
jeep_on
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Flagstaff, Arizona
Posts: 1,443
Quote:
Originally Posted by mendelmax
Anyone knows how fuel management looks like? I mean how exactly computer know if you use normal gas or E85?
E85 when burned has a lot more oxygen in the gases. So I’m going to assume the 02 sensors would pick up on this and the PCM would know what kinda fuel is being burned.
__________________
2006 Dodge RAM Laramie w/ 5.9L I6
2010 Volkswagen Jetta w/ TDI 2.0L I4

Waiting on a 2013 RHD JK Unlimited


Quote:
Originally Posted by PM Thor View Post
Wait, you can't cross creeks up there? What the Hell is up with these Canadians?
jeep_on is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-05-2006, 07:15 PM   #11
brandoncrone
Registered User
1996 ZJ 
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Saranac Lake, New York
Posts: 614
Thats exactly what happens, if you had a Chrysler scan tool you can actually see the percentage calculated by the PCM. In the summer here the fuel is the E15 which is pretty standard everywhere in the summer, and the computer usually shows somewhere around 14 - 16% never exact. The PCM monitors the oxygen sensors and knock sensors to determine the ethanol content.
__________________
Dodge/Chrysler/Jeep Technician 14 Years
ASE Master Certified
L1 Advanced Engine Performance
brandoncrone is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-05-2006, 07:45 PM   #12
Tispco
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 96
I have an '07 E85 4.7L WK. There is one gas station here with E85. I have run a few tanks of E85 and I did not notice any power change, but my fuel mileage went down by about 30% and the price per gallon of E85 is the same as regular gas here.
__________________
94 White Cherokee Country
3" SkyJacker Lift
BFG 30s on TJ Canyon's
Rocky Road Armor

07 RockRed Grand Cherokee Laredo
4.7L V-8
QuadraDrive II
Off-Road Package
Tispco is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-06-2006, 01:08 AM   #13
jeep_on
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Flagstaff, Arizona
Posts: 1,443
Huh. Interesting. From what I've seen and been told E85 is cheaper than gasoline. But I know thats not always true considering ethanol is really dependent on the corn crops and supply and demand. Hopefully the US will get off its lazy *** and get it self into gear on alternative fuels soon.
__________________
2006 Dodge RAM Laramie w/ 5.9L I6
2010 Volkswagen Jetta w/ TDI 2.0L I4

Waiting on a 2013 RHD JK Unlimited


Quote:
Originally Posted by PM Thor View Post
Wait, you can't cross creeks up there? What the Hell is up with these Canadians?
jeep_on is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-06-2006, 09:07 AM   #14
LEDFoot
Registered User
1999 WJ 
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: DFW area, Texas
Posts: 762
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeep_on
Sure, I've run into this very problem while running BioDiesel in my work trucks. But the HP loss is not noticeable anyhow. And I know it has helped a lot in the emissions my trucks put out, I’ve seen their test results. On the up side the engine runs cooler, quieter, smoother, and the oil stays WAY cleaner.

It would make since these states that have the more strict emission standards would welcome this engine. I wonder how Chevy’s flex fuel trucks / SUVs are battling this issue.

Since the fuel doesn’t burn as hot, you have less HP and maybe what, 1MPG less? Big deal. Not like it matters, 99% of the people who buy this option will end up burning regular gasoline in it anyhow.
The energy contents of bio-diesel is much closer to regular dino-diesel than the difference between E85 and regular gasoline. With biodiesel it's not even noticeable, and you get the added benefit that the engine runs smoother, quieter and cleaner.

With E85 the loss in power and fuel economy is significant. There is really no benefit of E85 other than for the corn farmers.
LEDFoot is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-06-2006, 06:22 PM   #15
Intrepidjeep
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Cape Canaveral, Florida
Posts: 355
Consumer Reports ran a damning cover story "The Ethanol Myth" for the October issue.

Their take:
  • E85 is unlikely to fill more than a small percentage of U.S. energy needs.
  • E85 emits less smog-causing pollutants than gasoline, but provides fewer miles per gallon, costs more, and is hard to find outside the Midwest.
  • Government support for flex-fuel vehicles, which can run on E85, is indirectly causing more gasoline consumption rather than less.
  • Most ethanol is being blended in a 10-percent mix to reduce smog-producing emissions and stretch fuel supplies.
Fuel economy with E85 drops about 27% compared to straight gasoline.

At an average E85 price of $2.91 per gallon in August, a 27% penalty in gas mileage means drivers would have paid about $3.99 for the same energy content of a gallon of gasoline. And E85 prices can be expected to flunctuate up and down precisely as gasoline prices fluctuate, since E85 is gasoline replacement.

Fuel economy on CR's Tahoe SUV was 7 city for E85, 9 city for gas; 15 versus 21 highway; 13 versus 18 on a 150-mile trip; and 10 versus 14 overall.

Their acceleration tests showed mostly the same results for either fuel.

Emissions parts per million were the same except for smog-forming oxides of nitrogen, which was 1 ppm for E85, versus 9 ppm for gasoline. However, E85 produces acetaldehyde, a probable carcinogen.

The manufacturers get average fuel economy credits for each FFV built, which is a very strong motivation for companies like Chrysler which build a lot of SUV's and sedans with large V8's. Therefore the credits are indirectly responsible for more gas-guzzling vehicles being built.

The government rates FFV's at about 1.66 times the fuel economy they actually get, even though the vast majority of FFV's may never be filled up with E85 at all. So a 2007 Tahoe which is rated for CAFE purposes at 21mpg will be rated at 35mpg instead. The credits are estimated to have saved Detroit automakers more than $1.6 billion in CAFE fines. Since FFV's cost automakers only about $200 more per vehicle to make them versus a gasoline version, it's a great tradeoff.
__________________
-- Marcus
Cape Canaveral, Florida
2005 Jeep Grand Cherokee Laredo 4.7L
2005 Dodge Durango SLT 4.7L
Intrepidjeep is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Thread Tools


Suggested Threads





Jeep, Wrangler, Cherokee, Grand Cherokee, and other models are copyrighted and trademarked to Jeep/Chrysler Corporation. JeepForum.com is not in any way associated with Jeep or the Chrysler Corp.