Ethanol free gas hurts?!?!

Pure nonsense. non-ethanol is better for all engines, ethanol attracts water and then turns acidic. Damaging fuel lines, diaphragms, gaskets, etc...

Ethanol is a farmer boost, not to mention robbing you of about 3% of your engine power and potential mileage...

 

Um yeah no.

General electrochemistry:

pH of ethanol is about 7.3.

pH of water is 7.

Add the two together and you don't all of a sudden magically get a substance with a pH of 2.

Ethanol is not compatible with certain components used in older engines & fuel systems.

Then there is the whole "ethanol is hygroscopic" property that can lead to gum formation and fouling.

Keep moisture to a minimum.

 

Im that guy right now. the retard that took 10 minutes to find the popcorn smilie...

 

Maybe that guy was a corn farmer

 

I ran E85 for 14k miles daily driving my car. Never had a single gumming issue. Probably because my fuel system wasnt introduced to water.

 

Now I've heard everything That guy was probably a corn farmer.

 

I have driven few tanks with 65% 95E10 and 35% RE85. Runs fine, I think there is even more torque with this blend.

The more octane (RE85 has 106), the more timing advance = less consumption/more power.

 

That's cute. Something I would have given to my kiddo.

 

Cool! Glad you guys have had your fun.

Now we can choose to either have a civilized conversation involving what we all think we know, exchange info, and perhaps learn something.

Or we can resort to sophmoric insults complete with name calling, then leave here knowing nothing more than we did.

 

Maybe there is something lost in translation here.

Your OP was full of inaccuracies, misperceptions, and errors.

You then post a HotRod magazine article referencing methanol to support your original disproven assertions.

No one here was discussing methanol since it's not added by the refiner to meet gasoline specifications. Nor was the thread OP referring to methanol in his initial post.

It is at this point we are all asking ourselves "wtf" and scratching our heads.

So please, what does methanol have anything to do with this discussion? What are you trying to communicate and share with us.

 

I understand fully the difference between methanol and ethanol. Yes, I used loosely the alcohol groups for comparison. Ethanol contains even more energy than methanol, so there's that.

http://energy.agwired.com/2006/02/13/ethanol-vs-methanol/


Gasoline has more chemical energy than gasoline? Completely agreed, and never denied. Internal combustion engines are notoriously inefficient, we all know that. More energy is lost as heat than is converted to energy. Basic stuff. However, the percentage of energy conversion to mechanical energy differs between fuels. In other words, different fuels may be more efficient at producing mechanical energy (power) than others. "Energy Conversion Efficiency" Note that doesn't translate to fuel economy. In the case of using any alcohol, there is a significant mpg loss compared to pure gasoline.

Also note I said alcohol *can* produce more power. I didn't say it *does* produce more power. The variable is tuning - and we aren't talking about forced induction necessarily. Higher compression may be tolerated using alcohol, as well as the more appropriate AFR and timing parameters (which again tend to favor power, not mpgs). Any given modern vehicle is flashed with a tuning map giving it a range of tolerances to tune for fuel variances. Again, we all know that. Some are more conservative, some are more liberal with the possible parameters. This is one of the reasons some vehicles tolerate ethanol blends better than others.

So...back to my claim blends can make more power than pure gasoline: whether I'm right or wrong, here are a few references to back the claim:

http://stat.fsu.edu/~jfrade/HOMEWORKS/FIN5515/fall08/project-DER/556.pdf
http://zfacts.com/p/436.html
http://www.stuff.co.nz/motoring/news/9266802/Ethanol-More-or-less-power


Let's again underscore the loss in efficiency with blends.

Sure, there are other possible concerns when it comes to running blends. Water pooling could be a problem, sure enough. Perhaps there are others. However, under normal, daily driven routine vehicles this typically isn't a huge concern. The bottom line is the response addressed if blends will harm the engine. The short answer is it isn't Armageddon, and no reason to panic.

.

 

I've been getting consistently 22-24 mpg mixed driving including 4 wheeling with my '14 lbdc 4x4. I've also been using non etoh gas in my daily driver impreza. It is a normal 2.5i. I drive 24.5 miles to work one way, 95% highway, but significant stop and go traffic. My mileage improved from ~22-23 to 28-30 when I switched. I currently pay 2.20 - 2.30 for non etoh gas.
'Nuff said.

 

Just slowly back away from the keyboard...

 

I average 18 on e10 87 octane. I paid $1.93/gal last night.

 

im the i read only the first 3 posts........
ethanol is in there because MTBE is bad mkay, and cant use it any more.
much like tetraethyl lead was bad mkay, so we need to use MTBE. then they fould out the MTBE leeches into the ground water.

 

Should have gone down five more. Lol

 

Just be careful, I hear ignorance is contagious...