Author |
Message |
Good
| Posted on Friday, March 21, 2008 - 04:44 pm: |
|
I just got a new 2008 cityX and want to know if anyone has ever put E10 bioethanol in their bike. The owners manual says it will run on 10% ethanol fuel, which all gas engines on the road today do, but my SeQuential Biofuels station in Eugene, OR doesn't specify an octane rating. I guess I'm hoping someone out there has tried this before and knows the quality of the fuel. Please let me know if you've heard of someone, or tried this yourself. |
Bombardier
| Posted on Saturday, March 22, 2008 - 09:46 pm: |
|
Not a good idea. High Performance engine. Low Performance fuel. |
Mnbueller
| Posted on Thursday, April 10, 2008 - 08:50 am: |
|
E10 is not Low Performance fuel. Pure Ethanol has an octane of 105 But with an E10 blend if the octane number is not labeled, don't use it, because you have no idea what they are mixing the E10 with. In Minnesota 87 and 89 octane fuels are all E10 mixes. The 90+ octanes are all considered Premium and are not mixed. |
Jermort
| Posted on Thursday, April 17, 2008 - 09:46 pm: |
|
All Colorado fuels are 'winterized' and contain 10% Ethanol (supposed to be clean burning). Also, the Buell manual says it's okay to run a 10% Ethanol blend. I would, however make sure that you're getting at least 91 octane. jer |
Bombardier
| Posted on Friday, April 25, 2008 - 05:42 pm: |
|
Octane has bugger all to do with energy. This is the fuel's ability to resist pre- ignition or knocking. This fuel has and is causing issues with rubber components in fuel systems and as such is not allowed to be used here in any marine or aviation equipment. Ethanol is also hygroscopic which means it attracts/absorbs water which when it is burnt in the combustion process can lean out the air/fuel ratio. This may be okay for machines with fast acting wide band O2 sensors but I do not believe that the XB falls into this category. It also has less energy which is why you will use more of the stuff to go the same distance. Therefore my comment of low performance fuel is, I believe, well justified. |
Hiatus138
| Posted on Wednesday, April 30, 2008 - 01:56 am: |
|
The simple answer is that E10 is what all the pumps sell in Oregon all winter anyway. Ethanol's natural octane is like 120, so even if it's mixed with 85 oct. "regular" you shouldn't have trouble. You might look into the project the UK's "BIKE" magazine is doing currently, where http://wthey are converting a new Triumph 675 to run on 85% ethanol, 15% gas (E85) Fuel line decay is a problem. (ethanol attacks rubber) Water in the fuel is a problem. Cold starting (below 70 deg.) is a problem. If one can take advantage of ethanol's high octane (by raising compression perhaps as high as 12 or 14 to 1) one could make very good power. However, bombardier is correct in stating that ethanol has less energy in it, hence you need around 1.5 times as much fuel to go the same distance. 90 miles from a tank of fuel? Hmmmm. To say that ethanol is a low performance fuel is not quite correct. look at how much power drag racers get out of ethanol (or it's cousin methanol). The key is the high compression ratio, and an engine purposefully tuned for it. This seems like it could be a really cool thing for a Bueller, as I think Buells have a couple of features that would make alcohol fuel advantageous. 1.The XB frame wraps the fuel around the engine, thus pre-warming it, helping with cold weather fuel vaporization. 2. Ethanol has a cooling effect on intake air, intake tract, and cylinder heads. it sucks heat from them as it vaporizes. This is good for any air cooled bike. 3. I believe that the bottom end of the Thunderstorm engine could handle the higher comp. ratio required for good power. The sportster has a long history of racing, so there should be a lot of chopper guys with experience running high comp. ratios. 4. The tuneability of the DDFI fuel injection should make it easy to richen the air/fuel ratio the 150% required I wish you luck, and keep us posted! This kind of topic is sure to come up more and more in the future. P.S. GOOD, come visit us Portland Buell Riders sometime! Gene Lewis |
Bombardier
| Posted on Wednesday, April 30, 2008 - 06:09 am: |
|
Valid comments however as the bike stands from standard it would not provide any benefit and in fact would cause problems in the long term with regards to fuel system degredation and the short term in the lack of riding range and the wallet. |
Id073897
| Posted on Wednesday, April 30, 2008 - 01:34 pm: |
|
4. The tuneability of the DDFI fuel injection should make it easy to richen the air/fuel ratio the 150% required No,this aint possible. You will need larger injectors or a significantly higher fuel pressure. Just a remark: currently the octane booster is mainly MTBE (Methyl tert-butyl ether), with a RON of 114 (like ethanol) and a calorific value of 26 MJ/kg (ethanol: 21 MJ/kg, petrol ~30 MJ/kg). Taking into account that every petrol type is made from a "general purpose" low octane petrol enhanced by brand specific additives, you need the same amount of MTBE as you would need of ethanol to reach the required octane level. 95 octane petrol contains about 10% MTBE (or ethanol) for it RON, so the summarized difference in calorific value is about 10% of the difference given above - 0.5 MJ/kg. This is roughly 1.6%, and I bet, you lose more power with a used air filter. Better not to mention the driver's Body Mass Index. Regards, Gunter |
Jermort
| Posted on Wednesday, April 30, 2008 - 02:04 pm: |
|
Gunter, you are truely the 'Geek' of Buelling!! jammer |
Hiatus138
| Posted on Wednesday, April 30, 2008 - 11:40 pm: |
|
LOL, i agree. Thanks Gunter for the clarification (and everything else!) Gene Lewis |
Gohot
| Posted on Thursday, October 02, 2008 - 03:24 pm: |
|
In California I ran Shell 92, then moved to North Carolina. I saw that they had Sunoco gas here and thought that it would be the hot ticket, especially since it was 93 octane. That wasn't the case though, and I think the disapointment is due to the ethanol content in Sunoco. I am always burning Shell 93 now, and it seems like the best I can find. I find the more ethanol, the less the performance. The "crisp" is lost, plus it smells a tad funkier. It may just be me on the smell thing, but it is for sure that the power is down with ethanol. |
Buellgrrrl
| Posted on Thursday, October 02, 2008 - 07:39 pm: |
|
We've been running on E10 in Minnesota for years with no problems. E10 is mandated here, although gas stations are allowed to have a separate pump with non ethanol gasoline, labeled for "collector, motorcycle, off highway" etc. vehicles. Very few stations have these separate pumps, so if you intend to avoid ethanol here your wanderings will be limited. "Premium" gas sold here has the same 10% ethanol as the other grades. Some stations in the rural areas in the midwest now have blender pumps, where you may choose between 10%, 20%, 30%, 50%, and 85% ethanol. As a 20% ethanol mandate is under consideration, I been testing most of my gas engine vehicles on E20 and E30 with no problems. In fact, the 1000 cc. BMW airhead ceased pinging on E20 and my Ranger pickup gets just as good a mileage on cheaper E30 than it does on E10. This jives with a recent study that found that 20-30% ethanol produces the lowest fuel costs, and is in many cases more cost effective than E10 or E85. |
|