Oklahoma Dreamin': Mustang-lovin' corn-grower chases record with ethanol
Brent Hajek loves racing cars and corn. The Oklahoma corn farmer is also the proprietor of a race car museum, and has managed to combine his two passions in an effort to set a new land speed record.
The idea came out of the record Ford set with a Mustang Mach 1 some 40 years ago. Hajek wanted to commemorate the event by returning to Bonneville, and even got the original record driver's son to pilot his modified S197 Mustang. The idea really gained steam – and support from FoMoCo – when Hajek and co. decided to go for the record using E85 bio-ethanol. They set a top speed of 252.78 mph, which will be a new record if and when they manage to replicate it so it can be etched into the books. In the meantime, Hajek is convinced the initiative will pave the way for Ford to produce an E85-powered Mustang straight from the factory, which may be the corniest Mustang dream we've heard yet. Follow the jump to watch the video.
[Source: NewsOK via AutoblogGreen]
_opt_thumbnail.jpg)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Michael 8:08PM (1/04/2009)
This is so terrible how could they have done this oh my gosh think of all the people that wouldn't have been fed with the corn used to make that ethanol it's terrible.
/sarcasm
Reply
Torrent 8:22PM (1/04/2009)
lol
Jake B 8:56PM (1/04/2009)
How can you joke about that. E85 is a scheme that is driving food prices up and making a few people in the US filthy rich. The amount of energy required to make E85 is so high it makes it nearly unreasonable to produce it. Pursue HYDROGEN INSTEAD!
jpm100 9:59PM (1/04/2009)
The price of corn has fallen about 50%. The use of ethanol has gone up.
Much higher levels of exporting that were completely unexpected where responsible for the price surge last year. Now that they are returning to normal, so are the prices.
notYou 10:19PM (1/04/2009)
JakeB: nobody's stopping you from growing your own fscking corn, get to it.
Oh, that's right, you're looking for socialism. See "5 Year Plan" to find out how well that works out, not that you'd care.
Oh, and while we're at it: "The amount of energy required to make E85 is so high it makes it nearly unreasonable to produce it."
That "nearly" you said - that's called the spread. It's difference between price and cost. The fact that it exists makes it reasonable to produce it. (Actually, subsidies mess this up, but without those you wouldn't have your food prices either, so it's a wash).
And if you're really concerned about the net energy after we've accounted for what it takes to acquire the resource, you should be pro-fossil fuels - since they are the most cost effective and abundant energy rich resource we have. You might have missed that on your way to the green party meeting...
notYou 10:20PM (1/04/2009)
Maybe we can just use the "organic" corn and starve the enviro-Idiots.
dinnercoat 10:53PM (1/04/2009)
notYou:
I don't see how Jake B was advocating "socialism" (though I am amused that you used it as an insult, disregarding that in the USA at least police and fire services are "socialism" and the interstate system is "socialism" and etc etc etc ...)
The point is that CORN ethanol in the United States is being forced due to a broken subsidies system set up in the 1970s. Corn is artificially cheap due to this broken system which causes production to vastly overtake demand. If you would like to learn more I would recommend "The Omnivore's Dilemma" by Michael Pollan as he covers in detail the causes and effects of the subsidy system in its current form in of the chapters.
Though back to corn as a source for ethanol, were it not for this artificially cheap corn glut directly caused by US agriculture policy perhaps we'd be focusing on more reasonable crops for ethanol production as have been mentioned many times on this site and are not worth bearing to repeat.
arturo 11:29PM (1/04/2009)
@michael
you r either stealing people's quotes or you are the same person at autobloggreen were i saw the exact same message a day or two ago.
Michael 1:45AM (1/05/2009)
@arturo
Or none of the above. Having now perused the relevant AutoBlogGreen post, I still don't know what you're talking about.
Jake B 2:46AM (1/05/2009)
Whoa hater mchaters. I think E85 is an inferior alternative fuel compared to other alternative fuels such as hydrogen. I will burn gasoline in my American V8 as long as the cost is viable.
BoneHeadOtto 8:37AM (1/05/2009)
@arturo
- yeah he is stealing my quotes.
Ethanol as a fuel itself is not terrible but when made from corn it is the worst possible alt fuel. We have corn and ethanol subsidized making its actual cost hidden. We have a food commodity now doubling as an enregy commodity and the big problem we will face is commodity traders pushing a food commodity through the roof. Just look at what happened to oil when the commodity traders went crazy this last year.
And Hydrogen is not a viable option. It is too difficult to produce and transport for now. Personally i think we should be persuing better battery tech. If all cars were electric we could better control energy prices and emissions. It is much easier to solve emissions problems at a large energy producing facility, than it is in the automobile. Produce the energy somewhere other than under the hood, and we now have cars that can be fueled by anything that can be converted to electricity. This variability in energy sources would give us more ability to regulate energy prices. Plus better battery tech is not far off.
Jeff Banks 8:25PM (1/04/2009)
Not sure why all cars don't come ethanol equipped. Even if you don't use it, all the engine equipment less prone to corrosion anyway.
Reply
Stuka 11:01PM (1/04/2009)
Well, you lose about 20% of your fuel efficiency. So for a mustang, you would go from 25mpg HWY, to 20mpg HWY. I know with my Focus, fuel economy with E85 was horrible compared to straight gasoline. Even E10 showed worse fuel economy.
010111 8:08AM (1/05/2009)
stuka...
his point : you missed it.
CarbonBlack 5:54PM (1/05/2009)
Stuka:
Even if the car was able to run on ethanol, that doesn't mean you would have to.
I agree with Jeff. make all cars ethanol capable. It won't cost much more, and there are almost no downsides to ethanol capable vehicles.
loj 8:30PM (1/04/2009)
Subsidies been berry, berry good to me.
Reply
jcar302 8:43PM (1/04/2009)
I'm guessing this is more for advertisement than anything.
I'd bet the use of the ford racing whipple was fords idea on how to sell more supercharger kits.
I'm willing to bet if this was done with turbos or a race version of a procharger, that the car would easily exceed 252.
Reply
firstplace 8:53PM (1/04/2009)
cool but really not that high tech. Ethanol has high octane rating. High octane rating means more compression or boost is possible and more horsepower (even if you need to burn more to do it....
Reply
studemax 11:23PM (1/04/2009)
Since none of you knows a thing about setting records on the salt flats, and since the point of this video is not corn - let me set you straight.
The driver is Danny Thompson - Mickey Thompson's son. Remember him? Hot rodding superman from years gone by?
And the owner, Brent Hajek - is a Ford collector, who usually snaps up any kind of Ford formerly used for drag racing. He got a hankering to head to the salt for a little fun in a Ford!
The E-85 was Ford's idea, as a research project done on someone else's dime. But of late, Ford has been having on the salt, too!
So that's the real point, folks - fun on the salt, going fast safely in a Ford, and maybe setting a record while they were at it.
And in case you think it's easy, over 6000 people have climbed Mt. Everest - less than 600 have gone 200 on the salt. So stop jibbering, and just enjoy!
Reply
Berto 12:10AM (1/05/2009)
Wow the mustang held up at that speed?
That must have needed a lot of reinforcement and rigidity work!
Reply