Saab 9-7X 5.3L E85 Fuel [Archive] - SaabCentral Forums

: Saab 9-7X 5.3L E85 Fuel


valvefive
20th April 2004, 11:28 PM
GM offers the 5.3L engine E85 flex-fuel version on the Yukon/Tahoe platform. When this engine was introduced on the Envoy/Rainer platform, it was not E85 flex-fuel. I suspect the 9-7X will be the same story, but I hope that changes.

There are many benefits to E85 - www.e85fuel.com - and this would be an easy feature for Saab to promote for the environmentalist folks out there.

I burn E85 in my Yukon 90% of the time and love it. Helps the farmers and me - in that is costs 25 cents a gallon less than gasoline in my state. The Feds also offer a tax deduction for a flex-fuel vehicle ($2000.00 in 2003)

My point is that Americans will not get away from the internal combustion engine or SUVs anytime soon and there are other alternatives to crude oil to fuel these machines. GM has already developed system, they should use and promote it.

If Saab offers the 9-7X with a flex-fuel 5.3L, I will be the first in line to buy one.

valbowski1980
21st April 2004, 01:17 PM
It would be a step in the right direction. Do you know how these engines do as far as emittions?

valvefive
21st April 2004, 02:07 PM
E85 reduces hydrocarbon, benzene and CO2 emissions over gasoline.

The drawbacks I have found are:

1) few retail outlets
2) 2-3 mpg less than gasoline

Other than that, performance (pulling a boat) and starting in all kinds of weather (I live in Minnesota) has been very good. Anther plus is that the exhaust smells like alcohol :wink:

GM has the system, they should use it! There is a lot of information on the net about E85, but just to get you started....

www.iowacorn.org/ethanol/ethanol_3.html


www.gm.com/company/gmability/environment/news_issues/news/e85_030204.html

www.gm.com/company/gmability/environment/news_issues/news/e85_030204.html

www.gm.com/automotive/innovations/altfuel/infoEvents/newsletter_2003v4i2.pdf

http://www.gm.com/automotive/innovations/altfuel/

CosmicSaab
21st April 2004, 02:26 PM
Well, the 9-7x is using a new variant of the 5.3L engine, so it may have it.

mike saunders
22nd April 2004, 12:28 AM
Flex fuel is a nice idea, and burning ethanol lowers hydrocarbon emissions and helps reduce smog. Problem is that it contributes to nitric oxides and acid rain, which doesn't affect folks in the Midwest, but kills the wee little fishies in the lakes in the Northeast. It's the main reason why there's only lukewarm support for flex-fuel options among the green community; it's diplacing one problem for another. Saab should offer a diesel, and GM, with its deep pockets, should encourage production of biodiesel, which has minimal emissions.

As a former Jeep owner (three Grand Wagoneers that had the aerodynamics of cinder blocks), I realize people have a valid use for SUV with towing capacity. Mileage is a hot-button issue these days. It would be nice if Saab helped us to stay away from becoming "a state of oil dependence"

Oh...and I've rented Trailblazers twice. Amazing pickup, but handled like the flappy things under an old lady's arms. Big and wobbly. (Actually, it wasn't as bad as the Chevy Tracker, which I tried to return to the car rental place in DC. That car was borderline unsafe.)

/rant

PunktKruger
22nd April 2004, 03:05 AM
it's diplacing one problem for another.
I tend to think it's displacing two problems for one, personally:

Reduced smog and ozone depletion and reduced dependency on foreign oil for a little extra acid rain, something that can be countered to an extent.

fabric
22nd April 2004, 02:57 PM
Reduced smog and ozone depletion and reduced dependency on foreign oil for a little extra acid rain, something that can be countered to an extent.

This guy made a conversion for diesels so they can run on vegetable oil:

http://www.greasecar.com/

You need a little diesel for statup and shutdown, but you can use used vegetable oil from your favorite chinese restaurant, and your emissions smell like fried food.

Somebody has even put it in their newer VW TDI.

Mike Saunders is right, Saab should bring over their TiD engines. Maybe when the low-sulfur fuel is required (2006).

valbowski1980
24th April 2004, 08:41 PM
The grease car is a neat idea, kinda makes me want to get an old 300D benz and have the kit installed onto it.

valvefive
1st May 2004, 04:38 PM
The offical response from Saab on this subject:

"Thank you for contacting the Saab Internet Team.


I apologize for the delay in getting back to you.

The new Saab 9-7X will share engines from the current Trailblazer/Envoy platform. Saab will offer a 5.3 liter V8 and a 4.2 liter in-line 6 cylinder engine for the 9-7X. At this time no flex-fuel engine is planned for the Saab 9-7X.

Please let us know if we can be of any further assistance.

Sincerely,
Dorsey

Saab Customer Interaction Center"

Flash9-7x
24th November 2004, 01:21 PM
It is my understanding that the 5.3 V8 offered is also known as "displacement on demand", meaning that it runs on the needed number of cylinders depending upon the requirement. I am not an expert on this particular engine, however it was designed to provide both an opportunity for improved fuel efficiency while maintaining the ability to produce a V8's torque.

There is a whole litany of items that this engine does to maintain its functionality, like electronically firing each cylinder at specified frequencies regardless of demand load, and oil pressure sensing monitors, plus multiple cams. Others may have more details, but this engine is a significant departure from an old 283ci.

valbowski1980
11th February 2005, 09:20 PM
It is my understanding that the 5.3 V8 offered is also known as "displacement on demand", meaning that it runs on the needed number of cylinders depending upon the requirement.

While such technology might do well for a car which is lighter, more aerodynamic, and has less rolling resistance, I'm not so sure that it will have such a big impact on a 6000 Lbs + Tank. How often will the DOD actually engage since the motor has so much to overcome? My guess is that it will be on mostly durring constant highway cruising where you get the best fuel economy anyway.

Will it help economy? Probably not by much.

Lodro
11th February 2005, 11:46 PM
While such technology might do well for a car which is lighter, more aerodynamic, and has less rolling resistance, I'm not so sure that it will have such a big impact on a 6000 Lbs + Tank.

You may be right about that. I just read that Honda decided not to put cylinder deactivation in the new Ridgeline pickup because aero drag made it not worthwhile.

Btw...the Envoy v8 "only" weighs 4,600lbs, not actually bad for the class. For comaprison, an Audi A6 Avant weighs 4,000+. The SRX about 4,400. The V8 Touareg, 5,300. :o Oh, and I just read that an S4 quattro gets like 15 mpg city. No one is giving drivers of those a rough time. (Maybe they should :D)

valbowski1980
12th February 2005, 02:37 AM
Yahoo gives 5750 as the GVWR for the of the Envoy SLE 4WD V6. The V8 Denali brakes the 6000 LBS mark by one. I omitted the 2WDs as they are completely useless.

You are right about the AUDIs needing a diet but at least their center of gravity is lower so they are a lot more stable.

Lodro
12th February 2005, 06:33 PM
Yahoo gives 5750 as the GVWR for the of the Envoy SLE 4WD V6. The V8 Denali brakes the 6000 LBS mark by one. I omitted the 2WDs as they are completely useless.

Sorry man, thats _Gross_ vehicle weight you are looking at. That is the how much the car would weigh at maximim payload.

Lodro
12th February 2005, 06:46 PM
Oh btw, in general newer cars are all porkers. This has less to do with increased size and everything to do with customer demands such as safety strucutre, sound deadening materials, amenities such as ac, power everything,etc.. VW/Audi is one of the worst in this regard. A 70s era Golf weighed about 1800 lbs, now they weigh close to 3,000 or more. An A4 weighs nearly 3,600 n some trim levels.