Originally Posted By: severach
E10 is available locally and the most accurate method I've found is to fill with 4 gallons then run the tank until the fuel level is below the float and can't move the needle on slow corners. 120 miles for 30 MPG 1994 Grand Am 2.3L SOHC 3 speed auto 50/50 city/highway repeats very accurately. Unfortunately 2%-4% is the distance between where the tank needle stops moving and where I notice it to pull another 4 gallon tank from the back seat.
E10 washed to ~E0.5+water may have improved MPG a tiny bit but it didn't make up for the discarded fuel and the stinky work to get it. The separation step of the E10 wash is a challenge that currently selling gas cans won't be able to perform. The only way I have to get rid of all that ethanol+water is to burn it.
E0 is not available locally so I picked up five 5 gallon containers. I blew the lines and drained the tank to remove all E10. After two expensive 5 gallons tanks with the same MPG I left the other 3 sit for another time. Small engines don't run like [censored] with pure gasoline.
My very clean and well tuned engines lose little from E0 to E10. Before they get clean 10% loss is normal. I still vote against E10 because though I can minimize its losses, other than the lucky few, the general public won't so on the whole we use more petroleum fuel with E10 than we would if it was all E0. At best we're paying ethanol producers to do nothing. I shouldn't need to run my add pack all the time and maintain better than new engine condition so E10 for me can almost match what E0 does for everyone.
For E15 I expect 15% snake oil to produce an average 15% loss and boost peak losses beyond 30% but the EPA won't see this in testing because they will be supplied engines like mine where the loss is tiny. I can't wait to see what E96 does.
I have no clue what you are talking about ???
E10 is available locally and the most accurate method I've found is to fill with 4 gallons then run the tank until the fuel level is below the float and can't move the needle on slow corners. 120 miles for 30 MPG 1994 Grand Am 2.3L SOHC 3 speed auto 50/50 city/highway repeats very accurately. Unfortunately 2%-4% is the distance between where the tank needle stops moving and where I notice it to pull another 4 gallon tank from the back seat.
E10 washed to ~E0.5+water may have improved MPG a tiny bit but it didn't make up for the discarded fuel and the stinky work to get it. The separation step of the E10 wash is a challenge that currently selling gas cans won't be able to perform. The only way I have to get rid of all that ethanol+water is to burn it.
E0 is not available locally so I picked up five 5 gallon containers. I blew the lines and drained the tank to remove all E10. After two expensive 5 gallons tanks with the same MPG I left the other 3 sit for another time. Small engines don't run like [censored] with pure gasoline.
My very clean and well tuned engines lose little from E0 to E10. Before they get clean 10% loss is normal. I still vote against E10 because though I can minimize its losses, other than the lucky few, the general public won't so on the whole we use more petroleum fuel with E10 than we would if it was all E0. At best we're paying ethanol producers to do nothing. I shouldn't need to run my add pack all the time and maintain better than new engine condition so E10 for me can almost match what E0 does for everyone.
For E15 I expect 15% snake oil to produce an average 15% loss and boost peak losses beyond 30% but the EPA won't see this in testing because they will be supplied engines like mine where the loss is tiny. I can't wait to see what E96 does.
I have no clue what you are talking about ???
