Non-ethanol fuel: Do we care?

iceracer wrote: In the pre ethanol water in the gas could cause problems in the winter by freezing. Then people added ALCOHOL to their gas to absorb the water. With E-10/15 no need to add more. So there is one plus. If you live where water freezes.

I do live where water freezes and before the coming of E-10 and double wall storage tanks, gas line freeze ups were an issue. Alcohol acts as an anti-freeze to keep the water from freezing in the fuel line. It does not absorb the water, it keeps it from freezing. E-10 works the same way. It does not absorb the water, the water in the fuel will absorb some ethanol, but it won't be mixed or invisible.

In reply to Knurled:

That should smooth out at a big higher RPM, shouldn't it? You'd just have to be careful not to let it into closed loop at low rpm (or using a wideband, target leaner than stoich in the ranges where the stutter is an issue to get the actual AFR in the right range).

It might take a good bit of trial and error to figure it all out, but there's no reason it can't work.

rslifkin wrote: In reply to Knurled: That should smooth out at a big higher RPM, shouldn't it? You'd just have to be careful not to let it into closed loop at low rpm (or using a wideband, target leaner than stoich in the ranges where the stutter is an issue to get the actual AFR in the right range).

It's load dependent. You can hold the revs at 9000 and it will be stuttering if the engine isn't loaded. (This is why in traffic I pretty much run near WOT and upshift under 2000rpm, and shift in and out of gear to accelerate/coast after up to speed - it bucks righteously at low speeds otherwise) Closed loop would only really work if you could make a 2D map instead of simple manifold pressure and RPM cutoffs.

It never runs leaner than stoich, ever. My "lean cruise" is about 13.5-14:1. Leaner than that and it starts to lean-miss and fuel consumption goes up. It will happily run at 16-17:1 at/near full throttle but I don't quite have the cojones to run sustained exhaust gas temps that high with steel apex seals and .7mm side seals Towing up some of the longer grades, I was seeing 85-90kpa manifold pressure at 4000rpm. I have the engine tuned to run 14:1 there because I don't want to run leaner without an EGT gauge to let me know if I'm hurting anything.

Anyway, this is irrespective of running on ethanol, and the original point is that maybe some people in some regions of the country have a crappy fuel blend and that is the real problem, not the ethanol in itself. If Illinois fuel had excessive ethanol leading to my lean miss problems, that doesn't explain my friend's problems on Illinois E85...

It's been dissolving my crap fuel lines on my 240Z and then I replace them as they get soft. I only drive it once a year when im in town and I have to inspect everything VERY closely before I start going down the road. I would say i'm about 95% ethanol resistant lines at this point.

Also, I have to add that its hilarious when people buy HEET in the winter time to prevent freeze ups anymore. If you have a 20 gallon tank on E10, you could have as much as 2 gallons of alcohol in your tank, what is another 12 oz in a bottle?

Literally, at -40F I start right up with regular e10 87 octane in my carbureted Land Cruiser so that's one benefit I guess.

In reply to Knurled:

Could you set the engine to run on one rotor at cruise?

alfadriver wrote: On a related note, I wonder sometimes why some of the former sugar growing islands that I just visited don't try to make their own fuel. So that they can import less.

An excellent question indeed, especially since many are still growing sugar cane and exporting unrefined sugar, which is a borderline-profitable use of vast tracts of land. The only good reason I can imagine is that it takes some energy to produce ethanol from sugar cane, and until very recently 100% of that energy has come from...imported liquid fossil fuels.

In reply to GameboyRMH:

I'd go very old school, use the dry cane to distill the alcohol.

And the ash can be used to fertilize the cane.

rslifkin wrote: In reply to frenchyd: I generally make a point to buy fuel from busy / heavily used stations for that reason. Minimizes the risk of things being stale.

87 octane 10% ethanol is the most used fuel so if that is what you buy your pretty safe just about anyplace you buy.. However the less in demand stuff like 91/93 octane non-oxygenated gas with it's 65-85 cent a gallon price premium can sit in even some busy stations tanks for a pretty long time before it's sold enough to need refilling.. Especially when it says right on the pumps legal only for certain applications.

Knurled wrote: FWIW, the owner's manual in my first car, a 1972 Ford Thunderbird, said that the vehicle was completely fine with running gasohol, which was the 1970s term for gasoline with 10% ethanol. On a professional level, I have never seen fuel system problems attributable to alcohol in the fuel. Rochester fuel injectors died a lot in the 80s/early 90s, but that is mostly because Rochester injectors sucked. I mostly think the "OMG ETHANOL BAD" is scare tactics. I vivdly remember taking EvanB's 2.5RS to a fuel station in Iowa at the RXNC for a fillup. The options were 87 octane, and non-ethanol 87 octane. The non-ethanol was maybe 60 cents a gallon more! At the contemporary fuel prices that was about 30%. BOOGA BOOGA BOOGA. Also Obama's gonna take your guns so stock up now, due to demand all prices are temporarily 50-100% higher but buy now while you still can!

Well said, I can't believe how gullible some people are..

Lol no doubt, no one has taken my guns. But seriously it's in the eye of the beholder. I have an uncle who is dead set against running "tainted" gas aka 10% ethanol in any of his older performance and machinery. In my experience so long as it doesn't sit longer than a few months, I have not had any subsequent problems in older machinery. And there is a following of the higher percentage ethanol here-e30, that several turbo drag cars seem to run for the higher octane.

As far as I know we were the first state in the nation (or maybe Iowa?) that had ethanol mixed into gas. It was meant to help the sinking farm economy in the 1980's. In an aside remember Farm Aid?

I don't know when Ohio started doing it, but I remember when I was 8, in 1986, putting gas in my mom's new Skyhawk, and the pumps always said "10% ethanol added" even back then.

So it's been at least 31 years...

Also, they don't let 8 year olds fill up cars for their parents anymore. Granted, I've MET 8 year olds, but still, I never once accidentally set anything on fire with gasoline.

Before at the same time as we saw ethanol in fuel, we saw a lot of Methanol. Back when I started working, I would have guessed that Methanol was going to be the fuel of choice. Alas, the corn industry is strong, and got their way.

When talking with some of the old timers at work, it was in the 80's that the degradation was noticed- oddly only in light fuel bends- not E85 or M85, but E10-20. But that's also when it was fixed, too- the fuel issues were very closely looked at, understood and fixed by probably 1990 or so.

Gas engines ran perfectly well on light ethanol blends until it became a law that E10 was going to be the bulk average. Odd about that. That's when small engine makers decided to get into the political battle and put crappy parts in their engines that were not compatible anymore. Before that, nobody has problems. Now, all of a sudden, we do. Again, odd timing.

I respect your views on various subjects automotive, but we work with methanol at work, and used to campaign a T/A dragster, and methanol is WAY worse than ethanol as a motor fuel. Methanol is most of the things that people claim E10 is. Methanol can corrode light metals in a shockingly short period of time if it gets past the oxidation layer, like "I used to have a chainsaw engine but I left methanol in it and now I have a pile of white powder and steel fasteners" kind of corrosion. I wouldn't want it anywhere near my car, except as a 70/30 mix with blue dye in my washer solvent tank (which is plastic, as is the pump, and all fittings in the system)

However, buying 55 gallon drums of methanol doesn't raise any kind of BATF questions the way buying 55 gallon drums of ethanol does, so methanol is used as a racing fuel. I'm firmly convinced that E85 is only 15-30% gasoline so that it is denatured, and can be sold at $2/gallon instead of $100/gallon, which is roughly what Everclear costs. If our silly brains didn't get jollies from drinking ethanol, we wouldn't need to denature it and it would just be sold as E100. Or just "alcohol".

Years ago the local "stock" car tracks started using Methanol. It didn't last long as the problems out weighed the benefits.

In reply to Knurled:

Oh, I'm not positive on Methanol, its just that 25 years ago, it was the leader in what would be the alternative fuel. And I'm sure it's the reason why the people prior to me had a lot of work to do. But due to probably the corn states, we chose ethanol, and particularly corn ethanol- even though there are far better sources of it, even.

I am open to using it, since it's a typical part of distillation of most things- but it would be so minor relative to ethanol, that it would likely have no impact.

I just keep some stabil in my small engine fuel, probably don't need it. My new toro lawn mower says it is made for e10. If I had gotten the lion powered one, that I really wanted but was backlogged into next century, I would care even less

frenchyd wrote: 87 octane 10% ethanol is the most used fuel so if that is what you buy your pretty safe just about anyplace you buy..

When I'm feeding the Jeep, it's 93 octane E10 most of the time (it'll get 91 if 93 isn't available and only gets E0 if it's cheaper than E10 or the only thing available).

alfadriver wrote: Before at the same time as we saw ethanol in fuel, we saw a lot of Methanol. Back when I started working, I would have guessed that Methanol was going to be the fuel of choice. Alas, the corn industry is strong, and got their way. When talking with some of the old timers at work, it was in the 80's that the degradation was noticed- oddly only in light fuel bends- not E85 or M85, but E10-20. But that's also when it was fixed, too- the fuel issues were very closely looked at, understood and fixed by probably 1990 or so. Gas engines ran perfectly well on light ethanol blends until it became a law that E10 was going to be the bulk average. Odd about that. That's when small engine makers decided to get into the political battle and put crappy parts in their engines that were not compatible anymore. Before that, nobody has problems. Now, all of a sudden, we do. Again, odd timing.

Years ago I too used methanol (coal alcohol) in race cars. I'm lucky apparently because a lot of those who used methanol must have spilled more on themselves or got too much exposure... whatever. Back then we wore no protection like modern drag racers do today. As a result some of those racers have cancers associated with methanol fuels, while a few of my friends have died..

Ethanol (Corn alcohol) does have it's faults as well. Chief among them is liver problems. (from drinking too much) luckily most ethanol is denatured by adding 2% of something to poison it, most common? methanol! Just 2% methanol turns moonshine into poison..

As for the installation of cheap crappy parts, I'm not sure the two are directly related.. When did maximum return on investment rather than building the best become this nations watch word? On the other hand the corrosiveness of Methanol compared to ethanol is significant.. Methanol itself is corrosive while ethanol attracts water which over time can cause corrosion. We needed to drain the methanol from our sprint cars right away if we didn't want it attacking the soft aluminum parts in our cars.. While ethanol has to sit long enough to attract water before problems happen.

Knurled wrote: I respect your views on various subjects automotive, but we work with methanol at work, and used to campaign a T/A dragster, and methanol is WAY worse than ethanol as a motor fuel. Methanol is most of the things that people claim E10 is. Methanol can corrode light metals in a shockingly short period of time if it gets past the oxidation layer, like "I used to have a chainsaw engine but I left methanol in it and now I have a pile of white powder and steel fasteners" kind of corrosion. I wouldn't want it anywhere near my car, except as a 70/30 mix with blue dye in my washer solvent tank (which is plastic, as is the pump, and all fittings in the system) However, buying 55 gallon drums of methanol doesn't raise any kind of BATF questions the way buying 55 gallon drums of ethanol does, so methanol is used as a racing fuel. I'm firmly convinced that E85 is only 15-30% gasoline so that it is denatured, and can be sold at $2/gallon instead of $100/gallon, which is roughly what Everclear costs. If our silly brains didn't get jollies from drinking ethanol, we wouldn't need to denature it and it would just be sold as E100. Or just "alcohol".

Years ago when Ethanol plants first sprung up here in corn country we racers used to be able to buy Ethanol at the plant as long as we denatured under their supervision. Back then we could simply bring in a can of gasoline to do it. Then it became a rule we had to have a sealed can of gas like what you get from the race fuel suppliers, they kept a tube of it sealed.. Last I checked no one was able to buy ethanol directly from the plant.. I don't know if it became too burdensome for the plant to deal with or if the regulations basically outlawed the practice..

Somehow the Indy boys get to race with ethanol though so there must be someplace..

rslifkin wrote:

frenchyd wrote: 87 octane 10% ethanol is the most used fuel so if that is what you buy your pretty safe just about anyplace you buy..

When I'm feeding the Jeep, it's 93 octane E10 most of the time (it'll get 91 if 93 isn't available and only gets E0 if it's cheaper than E10 or the only thing available).

You have to use 93 octane in your Jeep? Wow what compression is it? Most modern engines run perfectly fine on 87 octane gas, only a tiny few have stickers on them requiring 93 octane..

frenchyd wrote: Somehow the Indy boys get to race with ethanol though so there must be someplace..

I thought they used methanol at Indy. I still remember the incident where a car caught fire during a pitstop when the refueling rig splashed everywhere. Methanol flames are too cool to be visible in direct sunlight, so nobody knew there was a problem until the driver and some of the crews' suits atarted turning white with ash and they started hopping and flailing around...

Was a little kid when that happened. Some images stick with you.

'Course, they might have switched to ethanol for safety reasons since then. I got bored with open wheel racing and looked to NASCAR and IMSA instead.

frenchyd wrote:

rslifkin wrote:

frenchyd wrote: 87 octane 10% ethanol is the most used fuel so if that is what you buy your pretty safe just about anyplace you buy..

When I'm feeding the Jeep, it's 93 octane E10 most of the time (it'll get 91 if 93 isn't available and only gets E0 if it's cheaper than E10 or the only thing available).

You have to use 93 octane in your Jeep? Wow what compression is it? Most modern engines run perfectly fine on 87 octane gas, only a tiny few have stickers on them requiring 93 octane..

Factory spec was 91 or better at 9.1:1 compression. They could have made it run on 87, but with the iron heads, etc. it required holding the timing back. The same engine in a truck spec-ed for 87 (with less aggressive timing) made a bit less power, burned more fuel and was still known for pinging sometimes.

Even now at 9.7:1 with iron heads, it'll run fine on 91 pushed pretty much to MBT.

Keep in mind, there's no knock sensors on it, so there has to be some safety margin built into the fuel choice.

Knurled wrote:

frenchyd wrote: Somehow the Indy boys get to race with ethanol though so there must be someplace..

I thought they used methanol at Indy. I still remember the incident where a car caught fire during a pitstop when the refueling rig splashed everywhere. Methanol flames are too cool to be visible in direct sunlight, so nobody knew there was a problem until the driver and some of the crews' suits atarted turning white with ash and they started hopping and flailing around... Was a little kid when that happened. Some images stick with you. 'Course, they might have switched to ethanol for safety reasons since then. I got bored with open wheel racing and looked to NASCAR and IMSA instead.

Both versions of alcohol burn with a flame that is pretty tough to see in daylight, but are extremely simple to put out.. Water! water dilutes alcohol and puts it out quickly while gasoline will still burn right on top of water.. However Indy switched to ethanol probably due to the fact that Indiana is a major corn producer. (or maybe some money exchanged hands?

rslifkin wrote:

frenchyd wrote:

rslifkin wrote:

frenchyd wrote: 87 octane 10% ethanol is the most used fuel so if that is what you buy your pretty safe just about anyplace you buy..

When I'm feeding the Jeep, it's 93 octane E10 most of the time (it'll get 91 if 93 isn't available and only gets E0 if it's cheaper than E10 or the only thing available).

You have to use 93 octane in your Jeep? Wow what compression is it? Most modern engines run perfectly fine on 87 octane gas, only a tiny few have stickers on them requiring 93 octane..

Factory spec was 91 or better at 9.1:1 compression. They could have made it run on 87, but with the iron heads, etc. it required holding the timing back. The same engine in a truck spec-ed for 87 (with less aggressive timing) made a bit less power, burned more fuel and was still known for pinging sometimes. Even now at 9.7:1 with iron heads, it'll run fine on 91 pushed pretty much to MBT. Keep in mind, there's no knock sensors on it, so there has to be some safety margin built into the fuel choice.

Ethanol has an octane of 114 (methanol is 116) plus the flame front on alcohol is slower than the flame front on Gasoline both of which improve knock resistance.. If you are having "ping" or knock at 9.1-1 compression it's likely there are some sharp corners in the combustion chamber someplace.

Knurled wrote:

frenchyd wrote: Somehow the Indy boys get to race with ethanol though so there must be someplace..

I thought they used methanol at Indy. I still remember the incident where a car caught fire during a pitstop when the refueling rig splashed everywhere. Methanol flames are too cool to be visible in direct sunlight, so nobody knew there was a problem until the driver and some of the crews' suits atarted turning white with ash and they started hopping and flailing around... Was a little kid when that happened. Some images stick with you. 'Course, they might have switched to ethanol for safety reasons since then. I got bored with open wheel racing and looked to NASCAR and IMSA instead.

They used to. The switch to ethanol happened a few years ago, highlighted with the Iowa Corn (# of something) race. I don't think it was for safety reasons- I think it was for monetary reasons thanks to sponsorship.

The issue I have with corn ethanol isn't the ethanol, it's the corn part. And the small detail that corn gets some subsidies to make ethanol. Whereas there are more sugar rich products available out there that gets no help. So corn dominates all of the discussions. And, there was a report from the EPA pointing out that corn can not really support the US- there's not enough corn acreage to do much more than E15.

Cane sugar in the south and sugar beets in the north.... That would be a nice addition. More effective than the ever elusive switch grass.