I ran across this interesting bit of information from the Fed’s 2005 mileage guide (www.fueleconomy.gov).  The far right column is for additional information, such as “P” stands for premium fuel required, “E85” stands for 85% Ethanol/15% gasoline blend fuel.  I couldn’t help but notice that the Mercedes C240 FFV is rated at 14/19, burning E85, while the Premium fuel model is rated at 20/25.  I noted this same “spread” in other vehicles offering E85 models.  I think this represents a pretty fair comparison of fuel burn between these two fuels as the vehicles are the same otherwise.   

Mark S.

----- Original Message -----

From: Russell Duffy

To: Rotary motors in aircraft

Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2005 8:47 PM

Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Alternative fuel

 

Did you notice the little “©2003 South Dakota Corn Utilization Council. All Rights Reserved”

at the bottom of the page? Did you find the same thing on the Saab website?

 

Al 

 

Just can't sneak anything past you can I Al :-)   As I'm sure you suspected, the South Dakota corn cartel controls Saab :-)

 

Seriously, I didn't research the Saab sites too much.  I did see their claim for better performance and economy with E85.  There may be some weasel-eze involved though, particularly on the economy side.  They mentioned that E85 was cheaper at the pump, but also avoided some other taxes, including some parking fees of all things. 

 

Mostly, I just can't resist challenging Ed's math :-)

 

Rusty (hate those invisible fuel flames)