straight gas vs. 10% ethanol blend

[trollbait]

Originally Posted by litesong

The average 10 year old car travels only 58% of new cars' distance. The average 15 year old car only travels 38% of new cars' distance. For miles traveled, the average car is younger than 11 years old. Even older vehicles burning E0 with modern refinings for the EPA tests, score excellent rating.

Excellent rating compared to current emission standards or to the standard when they went on the road?

Even though they are driven fewer miles, older cars are responsible for a larger portion of the pollution emitted by personal vehicles. The bad ones are mainly the carburetor ones. So we probably can start to shift gasoline formulations away from those to keep emissions low for them, and to ones best for fuel injected car emissions and efficiency.

It would also be better to switch from AKI to RON for octane ratings and bump regular up a couple points while we are at it. RON is the more important value for fuel injected engines, and higher octanes allow higher higher compression ratios, which can lead to higher engine efficiency.

We are going to ULSG in a couple of years. That would be a good time to do so.

[litesong]

Originally Posted by trollbait

Excellent rating compared to current emission standards or to the standard when they went on the road?

No.....Excellent ratings for gasoline engine vehicles using E0, even compared to ethanol blends. Vehicles burning E0 during emissions tests have gained low emissions recognition, even for vehicles with 100,000 miles. New E0 refinings, combined with well burning E0 gas engines, presently give good & excellent emissions. All this, because high 114 octane ethanol, which needs high compression ratio(16:1) ethanol engines to burn efficiently, is NOT burning efficiently in low 87 octane, low compression ratio(9:1 to 12:1) gasoline engines.

[litesong]

Originally Posted by litesong

No.....Excellent ratings for gasoline engine vehicles using E0, even compared to ethanol blends. Vehicles burning E0 during emissions tests have gained low emissions recognition, even for vehicles with 100,000 miles. New E0 refinings, combined with well burning E0 gas engines, presently give good & excellent emissions. All this, because high 114 octane ethanol, which needs high compression ratio(16:1) ethanol engines to burn efficiently, is NOT burning efficiently in low 87 octane, low compression ratio(9:1 to 12:1) gasoline engines.

E0 sources continue to rise, now inside 4% to get 10,000. Three states have voted to end ethanol blending into their gasoline fuel stocks, with other states considering such actions. The EPA still refuses to follow ethanol blending rules, which are mathematically & physically UNENFORCABLE & IMPOSSIBLE to meet. Ethanol blending, that only favored the "ethanol in gasoline industry", never operated in gasoline engines properly, which was obvious from the beginning.

[GasSavers_Howard]

Originally Posted by litesong

E0 sources continue to rise, now inside 4% to get 10,000. Three states have voted to end ethanol blending into their gasoline fuel stocks, with other states considering such actions. The EPA still refuses to follow ethanol blending rules, which are mathematically & physically UNENFORCABLE & IMPOSSIBLE to meet. Ethanol blending, that only favored the "ethanol in gasoline industry", never operated in gasoline engines properly, which was obvious from the beginning.

I drive two older vehicles, a 1997 Chevy C15, and a 1994 Subaru Legacy. Both lose almost exactly 10% on E10......I've documented it a number of times.

I feel that adding ethanol to gasoline should not be legal. Not only do we lose mileage, but the energy input in making ethanol if ALL of it is honest accounted for exceeds the energy output. Unfortunately proponents only account for part of the total energy cost and paint a rosy picture through either ignorance of dishonesty, or a combination of the two.

H.W.

[3Cheers4RealGears]

I can't get E0 where I live (People's Republic of New Jersey), but it's becoming more popular and available as "ethanol free" in northern NY state near the western edge of the Adirondack Park. People want it for their boats and small engines. Unfortunately it's only available in a "super premium" version which is about 20-25% more expensive than regular E10. In my 2012 Hyundai Sonata 6-speed manual, my first full tank of highway driving gave maybe 12% improvement, compared to the previous return trip from the lake on E10 (average speeds comparable, but more non-highway driving at the end before filling tank on the first trip; the second trip I went to the airport the following day, which is also highway travel).

Not enough to pay for itself, but it still got me a new "best mileage to date" number, though...

The return from our lake house is usually the best mileage I get, because it's a net drop of 1000 feet in elevation so a fair amount of potential energy gets converted into kinetic energy. Over the years I can clearly see the mileage difference going and returning on that route with any car.

[litesong]

pure-gas.org is within 2% of 10,000 listings for E0. Demand for E0 has increased from 3.4% to 7% in two years. As stated by others, E0 is more available in higher octanes for recreational & high performance vehicles. I believe the EPA penalizes gasoline manufacturers for NOT blending ethanol into gasoline. Gasoline manufacturers overcome the penalties more readily, by producing E0 in high octanes & charging a high price. Selling E0 in low 87 octanes is tough, since they must compete with a superior(but penalized) product against low-ball 87 octane 10% ethanol blends.

[litesong]

Originally Posted by 3Cheers4RealGears

maybe 12% improvement, compared to the previous return trip from the lake on E10 (average speeds comparable, but more non-highway driving at the end before filling tank on the first trip;
Not enough to pay for itself, but it still got me a new "best mileage to date" number, though...

Yes, the EPA & "ethanol in gasoline industry" has driven E0 to rarity, which increases its price a lot. Your 12% mpg difference from 1 tank is too high. With many decades, including all seasons, my accurate records for 4 vehicles, show 8%, 8%, 7% & 5% mpg increases, E0/E10. E0/E10 price differences locally are E0, 20% to 30+% higher than E10. If EPA would stop mandating ethanol blending, E0 would not be rare & would have a much lower price compared to E10.

[litesong]

Originally Posted by litesong

pure-gas.org is within 2% of 10,000 listings for E0. Demand for E0 has increased from 3.4% to 7% in two years.

The quote above was only 2 months ago. Grassroots pure-gas.org, just two months later, now lists 10,100 100% ethanol-free gasoline(E0) sources. Tho EPA & the "ethanol in gasoline industry" has worked hard to crush E0 in cities & "desert" E0 regions, millions of drivers know that E0 burns best in gasoline engines & demand E0. I believe the southeast U.S. has the densest numbers of E0 sources, because southeastern NASCAR race fans know E0 gives best performance in gasoline engines & demand E0.

[Matt715]

Pretty much every station here in northern Wisconsin offers E0 premium and many offer 87 E0, not because people run it in their cars, but many people are scared to run ethanol in their boats, snowmobiles, ect. even though they are and have been manufactured to run up to E10 for quite some time now. I've tried running E0 87 in my truck for a few consecutive tank fulls and only saw small mileage gains, not enough to offset the extra price over E10.

[Jay2TheRescue]

I see about a 2 MPG increase on my truck. That does not sound like much, but it is over a 10% increase. I use E0 when I'm on highway trips in the truck, and E10 when I'm driving around town.