Anyone having problems w/ mixing it (10%) w/ racing fuel to up octane? Any seperation/fallout etc? Thanks.
I didn't see where anyone mentioned it, but the EPA has backed away from a bump to 15% after industry reps told them last week that they didn't know how older cars would handle it. They are concerned with liability and flooding the world with damaged cars. Since only a small portion of cars made today are E85 compatible, I suspect it will be 20 years before the old car numbers dwindle enough to make a high percentage viable, assuming they flip the switch now in new car manufacturing. Short story, this is a lobby of corn producers that is losing this round.
I can't find anywhere were it says that EPA has backed away from E15 in vehicles from 2006 and older. They are simply waiting for test results to give a go ahead to do that and then only down to 2001. I know in Idaho you won't be seeing stations installing extra pumps and tanks just to serve E15. They already have tanks for E10 regular and E10 Premium and diesel and the cost to add another if they had room would put them over the top. Most dealers will just stay as they are unless it is a new station being built.
I recently read a petition going around by SEMA stating that they were trying to fight the manditory increase. They were trying to rally support. Dunno if they were successful or not.
It's all interpretation, I guess. Just the way I heard a comentator say it. Here's a current story: http://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/70087-epa-signals-e15-ok-but-delays-decision And an interesting segment- " Each side of the issue hastily called a news conference to discuss the EPA decision. A coalition of strange bedfellows that includes environmental groups, oil refiners, small engine makers and food manufacturers said they were encouraged by EPA’s decision to delay a final resolution. But some raised concerns that EPA signaled it would allow E15 for use in newer cars but not for other engines that use gasoline. Small-engine makers say higher ethanol blends damage their products and raise a safety issue because they can cause idling chainsaws and other small equipment to restart spontaneously. A bifurcated fuel system will create confusion in the marketplace, said Kris Kiser, executive vice president of the Outdoor Power Equipment Institute. Meanwhile, environmental groups worry that long-term use of higher-ethanol blends could damage a car’s emissions control system, which reduces air pollution." Now they say they will decide in June. I wonder if it has anything to do with waiting to see the chips fall in the november elections...
Only problem I've had with it is the noticeable drop in mileage. I always manage to run the mower & other lawn equipment dry so no problems there yet.
I read that report too but it is old news and dated 12/02/2009 When Idaho became an E10 state, one of the local small engine mechanics was over 60 lawn mowers behind in repairs and all were ethanol starting related and that was in the first 2 weeks of use.
I would suspect that is more from shitty maint. and the fact that alky will clean a system out other than them not being compatible with Ethanol. How many folks clean and flush out their mowers each year? I am guilty, I checked the oil in mine and cleaned the plug and carb for the first time in over ten years a couple summers back
I suspect that too. When we went from MTBE to 10% Ethanol here I had a couple of customers that complained that the "new" fuel "ruined" their fuel lines, their 40+ year old fuel lines. One of them even vehemently argued the point that rubber lasts forever, and it had to be the fuel. Can't fix stupid.
I was refering to regular gas, not racing fuel which is a totaly different monster as with aviation fuel, no ethonal there either.
Here is a story dealing with the algae based diesel, they can make ethanol from it as well. I have mentioned. http://www.aolnews.com/weird-news/a...oat-powered-by-algae/19692768?test=latestnews
I'm not happy with 10% (or whatever it is the stations sell around my area) First of all, my DD is an F350 with a gas V10. Before 10% my gas mileage was 11.8 to 12.4. With 10% it's barely capable of 10 mpg. Since there is only about 75% of the energy content with the blend gallon for gallon, that's about as good as it will get. With 15% - I might get 9 mpg Now - my '31 Roadster - just registered it on 1 July. Everything on the car is brand new, with first fire of the engine early in 2009. I had to pull the gas gauge sender and replace it yesterday - corroded. The bottom of the tank, a new Tanks, Inc '32 style on the back - a film of rust on the bottom. Yeah, there was a couple of gallons left in the tank between first fire and being registered - but heck ya gotta start it just to hear it run so that couple of gallons of gas, was not the same couple over that time. Hygroscopic!! The damn stuff collects water. Makes me wonder if my Edelbrock carb and Carter fuel pump will survive. My SS gas line will, but the connecting braided stuff - ???? The second sender??? This is gonna get expensive for many of us
We get 14-18 with my folks V10 in a 250. And no, it is not going to get expensive. As stated many times from those of us in states that have been running this stuff for 25 years. I have tanks sit for ages and the stuff is still good.
It is here, and it is not going away. Time to adapt to what is available to us. I hear stories all of the time, but two things remain true, the plural of anecdote is not data, and speculation is not science. Yes, the BTU level is lower than straight gasoline, so mileage will be reduced in a vehicle tuned or mapped to run on straight gasoline. Re-map or re-tune, and move on. The future is here.
I'm Building a gasser style car and plan on running E-85 so I'm building with that in mind. I just got my carb back from the rebuilder/modifier, a Holley 750 dp. He is Mark Sullen, a wiz at this stuff. He has a web site that includes a messaage board. There is alot to be learned there and many questions about tuning and products can be resolved too." MarkSullensE-85carburators.com" Normal Norman
Me too. I've tried E85 in my '03 and my '29. They both ran good, with measurured range loss of about four-six mpg. I have friends with bone stock motors all the way from '29 through '60 running their old cars with absolutely no detectable issues. My issues with it are simple; it's less efficient. But, the upside to all that is the greenies have something to do with their lives, makes them feel warm inside, so that's an upside, I guess. Ha. It seems that a lot of people have an agenda; don't want to hear the good news, they just want to rant, and wring their hands, about what might happen, which is the same old song, second verse, that was playing on the juke-box when leaded gas was being replaced with unleaded fourty years ago.
First of all, open road(not combined) my '06 3 valve V10 open road gas mileage is 14.4 with 'regular' gas and 12-13 with 10% - and proven several times. My truck is an 8400 pound 4x4 Super Crew with 4.10s. There are no mods as this engine has few to be found except Banks and to do a 1-2000 dollar mod has a heluva long payback period. What I noted above is combined city country. Now if I'm now using about 20% more fuel with 10%, that means a $30 fill up is now $36. To me that's expensive and if I lose another 10% ....... well, you do the math. Tuning for that fuel - yep, disconnect the battery, walk away, have an adult beverage or two, reconnect the battery and you are tuned - nahhhhh
OK, that sounds more reasonable. You made it sound worse than it is. But, we are talking F250 and 350s! Put it into perspective. I have a Ranger with a 3.0. Heaviest Ranger Model with the smallest engine they did in 00. IT ONLY GETS 18 HWY! That makes a trip in my folks 250 not sound so bad at 14+!
Wife drives an 07 Commander with a 5.7 Hemi, 4x4, 3" lift, diablo programmer, and 32" mud terrain tires Most we get out of it is 13.5 on the highway. Before the mods 15.5. We only run mid grade in it, so I feel the pain of poor mileage. But it suits our needs. However those figures mean nothing in this discussion. I do dread the proposed increases in ethanol content, but what can we do except adapt. I DAMN sure don't want to have to drive some boring ass modern turd just because it's "ethanol compatible".
Ethanol gas left me stranded the other day. Swelled the flathead's mechanical fuel pump top o-ring so big that it came out creating a leak which wouldn't allow the pump to SUCK. That SUCKED. 2 hrs and a tow strap and I made it back home.
I just made a thread here: http://www.acccdefender.org/forum/showthread.php?tid=150 I created a thread here for this but it was deleted. The moderators feel that ethanol does not affect our old cars and deleted my thread!!!! Post a link to it on every car site and forum you now! Spread the word!!!!! I know there is a lobby to get rid of ethanol fuel all together, good luck on that one. I'm just talking about getting more local pumps with ethanol free fuel in as many cities and towns as we can, NOW! Please post any constructive suggestions, I need as many good ideas as I can get to get this off the ground!!!!!! Thanks! Alex
No, someone who can't read the forum rules took a political dump in your thread. Please don't do the same to this one.
AHHH, ok. Well this has nothing to do with politics or agendas. I'm trying to convince locally owned service stations to provide a single pump for gear heads with old cars an ethanol free pump.
You raised the Jeep and made it LESS aero, added huge mud tires with MORE drag and resistance and expected to GAIN MPG!?!?!?! Please pass the spliff, that must be some good stuff
If your worried enough about it, Gates makes a rubber fuel line call Gates Barricade. It's supposed to be better with ethanol blends.
At what point did I say that I expected it to GAIN MPG??? I think you may have read that too fast...or read into it too much. I can assure you that I did not expect the mileage to increase with its' current modifications.
The Jalopy Journal
