bio-fuels

DanJR1 · 17 Jan 2006, 21:35 (Ref:1503392)

whats more powerful? bio-ethanol or bio-methanol?

**dtype38** · 17 Jan 2006, 22:16 (Ref:1503411)

If burned at 100% efficiency Ethanol has around 50% higher energy content per kilogramme than Methanol, but as with any fuel, the heavier it is the more difficult it is to burn it effeciently... :-)

DanJR1 · 18 Jan 2006, 12:53 (Ref:1503750)

so im guessing thats why cart use methanol rather than ethanol?

**dtype38** · 18 Jan 2006, 14:56 (Ref:1503822)

No idea I'm afraid. With long established race series it is often historical reasons that decide what fuel is used. Could be it was more readily available, or was used in a parent series, or because a major sponsor favoured it, or anything. But these things then tend to get written into the rules to control what's going on and make sure there's a level playing field. Sorry can't be more help. Anyone else know?

thebear · 18 Jan 2006, 15:24 (Ref:1503840)

Also, Methanol provides a significant cooling effect.

The IRL is however shifting to Ethanol. Something about `pleasing' the US' mid-western corn producers.

If I can find the refernce, I will post it here.

Goran Malmberg · 18 Jan 2006, 17:41 (Ref:1503895)

I drive my Hemi on etanol. One advantage over metanol is that it is less corrosive to the system. So its better for normal use.
Goran Malmberg

R59 · 18 Jan 2006, 21:17 (Ref:1504016)

But, while the MSA still regard "Fuel" as "Petrol/Gasoline", for racing purposes, you have to rely on your championship to allow the use of alternative fuels.

I look forward to my 2006 copy of the blue book to see "Bio-Ethanol" under the classification of "Pump Fuel".

Look, a bright pink elephant just flew over my house....

Rob.

R59 · 18 Jan 2006, 21:19 (Ref:1504021)

Quote:

Originally Posted by thebear

Also, Methanol provides a significant cooling effect.

The IRL is however shifting to Ethanol. Something about `pleasing' the US' mid-western corn producers.

If I can find the refernce, I will post it here.

Ethanol is simpler to produce, and is more environmentally "friendly" than methy-alcohol. Look at all of the ethanol produced by them rednecks!!!

**dtype38** · 18 Jan 2006, 23:11 (Ref:1504103)

Quote:

Originally Posted by racing59

Look at all of the ethanol produced by them rednecks!!!

Are you congratulating the inhabitants of the Southern States on the industrious exploitation of their abundant natural resourses.... or suggesting they have a problem in the digestive department

R59 · 18 Jan 2006, 23:18 (Ref:1504109)

Weeeeel, ah'd have to say it's a matter of making the best use of what ya got (redundant plumbing equipment, plenty of corn, and a will to just injoy it (and not pay the IRS any money!))

Does make me wonder why Nascar isn't powered by alcohol, or did they drink it all first...

**dtype38** · 20 Jan 2006, 00:12 (Ref:1504843)

I like that sort of racing..... did I put it in the tank or did we drink it? Dunno.... don't care.... does it run.... then lets go racing

R59 · 20 Jan 2006, 09:56 (Ref:1505056)

Hadn't thought of that.

Get a DNF after half distance, and then drink the rest of the tank to drown the sorrows!

hic. zzzz zzzz z zz

Rob.

DanJR1 · 16 Mar 2006, 21:34 (Ref:1550581)

so if i had two indentical cars, with the comparable amounts of fuel (when energy per kilo is taken into account) of bio-ethanol and bio-methanol, which would be most powerful and fastest?

DanJR1 · 6 Jun 2006, 13:17 (Ref:1628508)

can people help me with my last post on this thread, because its for college work

thanks

**dtype38** · 6 Jun 2006, 16:03 (Ref:1628597)

I think you need to consider your question a bit more carefully. Just how identical are these cars... say in terms of compression ratio or fuel injection nozzel diameter for instance? Are you excluding any option to optimise each car for the fuel they are using? Also, you need to be a bit more specific about what you mean by "comparable amounts of fuel" do you mean equal mass, volume, total calorific content, etc.? Not that this would affect how "powerful or fast" the car was, only how long it would run.

With the question as stated, the answer would probably be "the car using the fuel that the designer had in mind when he designed it".

Sorry Dan, but what you're asking is like saying "What would run fastest on crude oil, a Supertanker or a Boeing 747?" The answer is obviously the Supertanker, because the latter just wouldn't go anywhere. :-)

ian_w · 6 Jun 2006, 19:16 (Ref:1628729)

Methanol provides the highest power. I think there has been a thread about this before.

If you look in your text books you will find the calorific values for the fuels in units such as kJ/kg, on this rating methanol doesn't look too clever. However, when you burn it in an engine you need to take into account the stoichimetric air-fuel ratio ( the amount of fuel theoretically require to give complete combustion ). This is 6.5 for methanol, around 9 for ethanol and approx 14.5 for petrol. On this basis, for a stoichimetric mixture methanol releases the highest energy. I think its about 1.5% more than ethanol and about 4% more than petrol - this is from memory so I will stand corrected if somebody quotes the absolute figures.

As other people have also stated, methanol also have a huge cooling effect - if you get you injection system right then you can get an additional good benefit from this as well.

ss_collins · 6 Jun 2006, 19:19 (Ref:1628732)

Look, a bright pink elephant just flew over my house....

hmm flew here too - I wouldn't be quite so sceptical about this one - theres a very quiet but very strong lobby for e85

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Super Fuels	ACE Motorsport	Racing Technology	25	24 Apr 2006 21:58
Changing Fuels by 2007	macdaddy	IRL Indycar Series	8	11 Mar 2005 22:47
Alternative fuels	Lotusonpole	Formula One	21	24 Feb 2005 12:30
Fuels / Be sanctioned--leaded or unleaded	Pierre	Historic Racing Today	15	2 Jun 2004 14:56