| Author | Message | ||
     Ezblast |
Hi folks - needed to through this out there: The New Gas has 10 to in a few states 30 percent alcohol in it now. What does this mean to you the Blast rider and other Buell riders? Just this - first forget regular gasoline, the bike is going to be harder to start with this gas, and on cold days it may not start at all. Stick to premium, it is necessary now just to preserve motor longevity. Second - expect you gas mileage to drop 5 to 10 miles per gallon, and that's for the ten percent gas/alcohol group, it gets worse as its alcohol percentage increases. Some of the old additives that worked in the pre-booze gas, do not work well with the booze type gas, it tells on your bike as a transient lean condition as a lack of power, most noticeable going up a hill - example the new Chevron primo with 10%booze good going up a hill in 5th gear, the Shell version of the same thing, different stations, had me down shifting, that's why I installed the DAJ. This new gas they are phasing in, is going to make it very hard on carburetor type vehicles - if nothing else - gas mileage is going to take a serious hit - be prepared. EZ | ||
| Cataract2 |
Far as I know the highest I've heard of so far is 15%. Still think we should drag the people from the EPA who approved this out into the street to be "dealt with". | ||
| Aesquire |
The previous additive to oxygenate gas ( MTBE ) was poisonous as it leaked into the water supply. Alcohol semi-adequately takes care of the problem. Side effects are severe, though. Even at 10%, booze in the gas gives you corrosion problems and separation issues. Higher concentrations are even more unstable. John Deere now states that your warranty is void if you do not run Stabil. 2-stroke motors for lawn gear, etc. have problems with oil separation and cylinder washdown. Older gears carbs and fuel lines are turning to fuzzy wads of aluminum corrosion. Again, stabil or other additives are a must to keep things running. Not just for storage. There has been a political decision to stretch the gas supply with booze. Aside from corrosion problems, there turn out to be a few issues. Boozy gas gets less miles per gallon, the alcohol can't be transported by pipeline, and needs a truck ( burning fuel ) to get to the mixing/storage areas, and improper concentrations really hurt mileage and driveability. Then there's the secondary issues that you get from laws written by politicians with no engineering knowledge. ( I know we have a few doctors, are there ANY electrical, chemical etc. engineers in Congress? ) Instead of a program to make booze from garbage and crop waste, we make it mostly from food. This has led to higher food prices, riots and revolutions, and with higher fuel prices, a planetary inflation issue deliberately ignored by D.C. ( Partly because the Greenie cult cannot be concerned with either truth or humans. Also the politicians dare not admit error during an election cycle, which is now continuous..... ) Ethanol has shown it's a bad idea. Now, making all cars flex fuel capable with M85 ( methanol ) fuel would in fact stretch the fuel supply, but the transport and production systems for methanol are nearly nonexistent and will totally trash the fuel systems of older vehicles. I realize the politicians want us to power our lives on Moonbeams and Unicorn farts, but I can't seem to get a delivery out to my place, or specs on the tank for my back yard. The Moonbeams also don't seem to be compatible with my car, truck, or tractor, but I can't get specs on the imaginary future fuels from Washington. | ||
| Cowboy |
Damn those tree hugging Yellow dogs. I guess next we will have smuglers hauling good gasoline from Mexaco. | ||
| Glitch |
Who's bright idea was it to burn food for energy in the first place? | ||
| Brumbear |
It appears they have 30% as well http://www.e85fuel.com/programs-for-retailers/ | ||
| Two_seasons |
Follow the money and power (control). It's all about making you get back to the pump more frequently, that way each extra gallon you purchase fills up the US treasury and your state treasury at a faster rate. Didn't you notice this, as cars started getting better mpg, the unwashed masses got more ethanol? Like Aesquire said, first MTBE, but then they found out they were killing the golden goose, so switched us over to ethanol. You can buy an ethanol testing kit from either Briggs & Stratton or Kohler. It's just a little vial that you put gas in then fill the rest of the way with water. Interesting what is already being foisted upon us! | ||
| Just_ziptab |
Ethanol(10%) is 12 cents a gallon cheaper (here)than regular.....and the sheeple will buy it for that uneducated reason. I burn regular at 12 cents a gallon more,but finale cost is 3 to 5 cents less fuel cost PER MILE! That's huge for a S-10 that gets 20-28 MPG. If your vehicle gets 7MPG on ethanol and 8 MPG on regular,that's 7 cents a mile savings by using regular. If your vehicle gets 45 MPG on ethanol and 46 MPG on regular the difference is not as much. The country is too big with too many people needing something to do,regardless that it is an unnecessary job.Ethanol is one way to create jobs. The industry is too big to die now and it will only get worse with the industry pushing,crying,begging for higher ethanol percentages. I used ethanol for years...not knowing any better. Been on strictly regular for 3 years now in everything I own and couldn't be happier with the way everything is running. | ||
| Theshue |
website with a state by state list of ethanol free gas stations. http://www.pure-gas.org/ | ||
| Pwnzor |
Hmmm... I spend roughly $3000 a month on gasoline. My van has over 250,000 miles on it, and I run the hell out of it. The motor doesn't complain, I get plenty of power, there is no undue amount of oxidization on my spark plugs, and I'm not having any issues that I can detect. YMMV. | ||
| Blake |
I don't see how adding 10% ethanol could drop fuel mileage by 10%. That is basically saying that the ethanol has zero fuel value, which of course if false. I've certainly not seen that scale of impact. Might be a percent or so at worst. It is an interesting topic of discussion though. | ||
| Boltrider |
I've had no issues with E10 and I've been using it for several years now. That's just with the Buell and a couple of trucks I've owned. Haven't used E20 or E30 and I wouldn't want to. Pure-gas.org lists 3 stations in CA with ethanol-free gas. If true, then what are they using to oxygenate the fuel? (Message edited by boltrider on May 15, 2011) | ||
| Johnnymceldoo |
I rode to work all this week. I save about $25 per week when I ride. Despite the rain forecast everyday I just sucked it up and rode to work and even raided the lawn lower gas jug to squeeze out another week of riding without filling up. Luckily I received only one rain enema this week via my buell select seat. | ||
| Pwnzor |
If I need to get somewhere cheap, the bike is not the way for me to do it. I'll hop in my 1988 Honda CRX Si. 43MPG on the highway. The 2006 Z1000 gets only 34 MPG. | ||
| Prof_stack |
My thumper regularly gets 65mpg. Last two tanks I filled with ethanol-free gas. Even with running the Enfield way harder than usual (WOT at times) it returned 71mpg, about the 10% conventional wisdom says it would be. There are 3 stations in Seattle right now. Might be less soon. Sigh... | ||
| Sifo |
E10 gas supposedly reduces mileage about 2%. I seem to recollect having a bit bigger difference in the past, but to be fair have never had enough access to pure gas in recent decades to really put it to the test. My brother had to rebuild the fuel system on his chain saw do to the corrosive qualities of E10. Newer equipment shouldn't have any problems though because you are paying more for systems that will handle ethanol. I have been convinced by someone who works for an ethanol producer that it's a loser technology. I've started trying to squeeze more MPG from my Buell, mostly from shifting shorter and using a higher gear than I normally do at cruise speed around town. The last fill showed 47 mpg. Not bad for all around town riding. Typical has been about 42-43 mpg for me. I have seen as high as 57 mpg at a nice steady 55-60 mph. | ||
| Pwnzor |
My XB12R generally averaged around 50MPG. Pure gas stations, there are quite a few of them dotted around the South. I don't bother trying to go to them, but if there is one within direct view when it's time to fuel, I'll patronize it. I figure they went out of their way to provide a superior product, and I do believe it is superior, so I'll spend my money with them. Unfortunately for them, the $2800-$3200 per month I spend on fuel has to be done so on the fly, and I don't have time to hunt around for bargains or brand names. It's go-go-go NOW NOW NOW, that's why they shell out the $2 per mile on my services. Expediting is like that, sometimes working local all day for 12 hours... and when suddenly you are asked to drive 900 miles to Wisconsin, you have to drive straight through as fast as you can. Going 5 or 10 miles out of the way for gas just isn't an option. When I see the sign, I pull in and buy it. It's not as often as I'd like, but again I don't seem to have any problem with the 10% ethanol in my van, and I get consistent mileage of 17-19MPG on the E350 Super Duty, fully loaded. | ||
| Iamike |
I'm not a huge proponent of ethanol but I've been using it for about 30 years now. The claims that people have a huge loss of mileage with 10% I have trouble believing. Alcohol has about 85% of the energy of pure gasoline and at a 10% mixture yields about a 4% loss of mileage. I have roughly tested it in my vehicles and found that correct. With that loss of mileage it you pay the same for either wouldn't be worth using ethanol. In Iowa there is a $0.10 difference and it still saves a little money by using regular. Since alcohol is a solvent I feel that everything stays a little cleaner due to it. It helps on some pollution but actually adds to others (from Wikipedia). The one thing that I have noticed since switching is that I have never had gas line freeze since using it. The acohol absorbs the water and it is burned. I'm sure fuel pumps in the gas tanks may have a little to do with that too. The last thing. We had a local small town gas station that got caught using E85 in both his regular and ethanol pumps (due to the tax break). The Dept. of Ag person saw that he was buying it but didn't have the permit for it so they checked his pumps. In the year that he had been doing that there were no complaints from his customers. | ||
| Blake |
>>> Alcohol has about 85% of the energy of pure gasoline and at a 10% mixture yields about a 4% loss of mileage That doesn't work out mathematically. 85%*0.1 gallon + 100%*0.9 gallon = 0.985 gallon of pure gasoline equivalent So mileage should be around 1.5% reduced is all. | ||
| Iamike |
Yeah, I was going by memory (which always isn't so good anymore). Now that I think about it, it may be 70%. But in anyway, a 10% mixture doesn't reduce the mileage by that much. When I referred to the Wikipedia article the figures they show didn't look right either. I was trying to find the reference that I have seen in the past. I was more interested in being outside today. | ||
| Ezblast |
So the FI folks are not really noticing the difference, is that because the FI compensates? The folks with carbs are having a very hard time starting their bikes after winter storage, but then a lot of those folks use regular instead of premium and I'm sure that's part of the problem as well. You can sure notice the lack of power compared to regular hi octane gas going up a steep hill though, so perhaps those don't worry numbers quoted are a bit unreal compared to real life experience with the product. EZ | ||
| Stirz007 |
Oh it gets even better. One of my clients is a local refinery. THEY are not happy about ethanol AT ALL. The stuff wreaks havoc on seals and gaskets, so their pumps, racks and associated delivery equipment all have to be upgraded. Currently 10% mix causes problems (much more frequent replacement of seals/gaskets), but when it goes to 20%, they are looking at having to completely replace a lot of fairly expensive equipment. Not to mention the coating system in your nice aluminum tank isn't going to play well with a 20% mix. (Message edited by Stirz007 on May 15, 2011) | ||
| Fast1075 |
Gasoline is stochiometric at a ratio of 14.7 to 1....ethanol is stochiometric at a ratio of 9 to 1....so if your fueling system cares, it will use more fuel if it has ethanol in it to maintain proper oxygen levels... I live in Florida..all gasolines contain "at least" 10% ethanol....except for "recreational" fuel that is ethanol free...a friend owns a small engine shop, he LOVES ethanol fuel...he says he keeps busy fixing machinery that the ethanol killed... | ||
| Slaughter |
At this point, I do not even care if burning food in your gastank is the greatest thing for mileage and engine life - it is making ALL food products much more expensive. Land use is MUCH MORE PROFITABLE when producing FUEL than when producing FOOD (human or livestock food). Talk to dairy farmers and others about the noticeable reduction in feed and the increase in costs. | ||
| Gentleman_jon |
Just remember one thing men. There is only one man capable and intent on destroying this country. Unfortunately, he is the President of the United States. Remember " Hope and Change"? Happy now? | ||
| Two_seasons |
Gentleman_jon: You obviously did not hear Newt Gingrich yesterday speaking about nationalized health care. He and Granny Pelosi agree. Much more in D.C. than just Pres. Obama who want to change our country for the worse. But, back on track, ethanol has created more issues than it's solved. And it most definitely has created food shortages in third world countries. The farmers will sell to the grain distillers before they sell the grain overseas. Economics. The ethanol industry and their current ads are disingenuous at best, out right lies at worse. The USA may have used 25% of the currently produced petroleum resources, but we have also fed the world and helped protect them with our military. Several years ago, the only peep you heard about this issue was from the green crowd. Now, they control the story line in D..C. The upside is that with modern technology, those tidbits and speeches of long ago are readily available to share with those who wish to hear. | ||
| Gentleman_jon |
Well, you are right and you are wrong Seasons. You're right, I did not listen to Newt. At my advanced age, I have learned not to upset m'sef unnecessarily:-). On the other hand,  The Other Hand The last time I looked, he was just a fat, over the hill goofball, without any public position, and rather unlikely to ever have one again. So my timid assertion : "There is only one man capable and intent on destroying this country." Doesn't seem all that unreasonable, does it? That isn't to say that he doesn't have a lot of little helpers like Holder, Chu, Reed, Napolitano, Schumer and many others. Holder being the worse, am I right?  | ||
| Two_seasons |
Holder is the Chief Law Enforcement Officer of the USA...however... ...he isn't elected, confirmed yes...however... ...I think you'd have to agree that it's actually the Supreme Court who holds sway above him...however ... ...if Congress allows Holder to enforce the law at his choosing (DOMA for instance)...then... ...there are a lot of elected politicians who WE THE PEOPLE need to hold accountable, not just at election time. Why do you think US Senator Kohl from Wisconsin is leaving? Seems to be that he is very comfortable with his accomplishments doesn't it? Back on subject...Kohl consistently votes for more ethanol subsidies. | ||
| Just_ziptab |
"The government pays refiners 45 cents a gallon through a tax credit to refine ethanol. Another 54-cents-per-gallon tariff blocks imports of cheaper and more energy-efficient sugar-based ethanol from Brazil." The less ethanol you buy,the less tax(your money!) is paid out.The ethanol industry should stand on it's own two feet......  | ||
| Aesquire |
It can't. that's why it's subsidized. New York has 10% booze gas. ( "to replace MTBE" ) |
