http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/fuels/additive/e15/index.htm#mitigate
Personally, if I see an E15 warning label on a pump, I'm outta there!
Last edited:
EPA E15 Label
- Thread starter OilNerd
- Start date
- Status
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/fuels/additive/e15/index.htm#mitigate
Personally, if I see an E15 warning label on a pump, I'm outta there!
Originally Posted By: greystone
I still can't figure out what all the automakers changed in 2001 that made them able to run E15 with no side effects.
Yet, it very clearly advises NOT to use it on a vehicle built prior to 2001.
+1 It doesn't make me feel too safe.
I still can't figure out what all the automakers changed in 2001 that made them able to run E15 with no side effects.
Yet, it very clearly advises NOT to use it on a vehicle built prior to 2001.
+1 It doesn't make me feel too safe.
Vehicles built after '01 upgraded some components to handle the increased corrosiveness of the ethanol, such as plastic and rubber parts in the fuel lines and some stainless or rust resistant coatings on exposed parts. Also the computer can detect and compensate for the ethanol in the fuel.
Originally Posted By: umungus1122
Vehicles built after '01 upgraded some components to handle the increased corrosiveness of the ethanol, such as plastic and rubber parts in the fuel lines and some stainless or rust resistant coatings on exposed parts. Also the computer can detect and compensate for the ethanol in the fuel.
That would only apply to those vehicles with FFV labels.
Vehicles built after '01 upgraded some components to handle the increased corrosiveness of the ethanol, such as plastic and rubber parts in the fuel lines and some stainless or rust resistant coatings on exposed parts. Also the computer can detect and compensate for the ethanol in the fuel.
That would only apply to those vehicles with FFV labels.
Agreed, If I see this label, I'm taking my business elsewhere.
greystone is correct. Only FFV vehicles generally have the upgrades as described in unmungus1122's post.
The reason for the 2001 cutoff as I understand it has to do with the vehciles that were tested, which only inlcuded 2001 and up vehicles. On top of that, there was logic (if you want to call it that) applied about average fleet ages by the time the rules would be in effect.
The reason for the 2001 cutoff as I understand it has to do with the vehciles that were tested, which only inlcuded 2001 and up vehicles. On top of that, there was logic (if you want to call it that) applied about average fleet ages by the time the rules would be in effect.
2003 !Echo! OM says 10% max ethanol, which is what CT has had for over a decade, not likely I will be going against mfg recommendation when there are many unknowns.
Even brand new vehicles warn against using any more than 10% ethanol. This E15 and 2001-and-newer-only thing has always sounded fishy to me.
"But automakers remain displeased about the prospect of “E15” in their vehicles’ tanks, and are publicly fighting back in advance of the higher blend’s debut.
In letters released today, a dozen domestic and foreign manufacturers complained that the higher ethanol content could damage their vehicles’ engines and void customers’ warranties. They also said the EPA’s new warning sticker — released last week — was not enough to keep unsuspecting drivers from “misfueling” vehicles with the new blend.
"Honda said the higher ethanol content could result in “the potential for engine failure,” while Chrysler said it was “not confident that our vehicles will not be damaged from the use of E15” and that “blends beyond E10 will void the warranty.”
"Ford said it did “not support the introduction of E15 into the marketplace for the legacy fleet,” also citing the potential for the higher blend to void its warranty."
Automakers balk at EPA plan
The auto manufacturers agree with all of you. Yet another example of the government and their horse leading the cart mentality.
In letters released today, a dozen domestic and foreign manufacturers complained that the higher ethanol content could damage their vehicles’ engines and void customers’ warranties. They also said the EPA’s new warning sticker — released last week — was not enough to keep unsuspecting drivers from “misfueling” vehicles with the new blend.
"Honda said the higher ethanol content could result in “the potential for engine failure,” while Chrysler said it was “not confident that our vehicles will not be damaged from the use of E15” and that “blends beyond E10 will void the warranty.”
"Ford said it did “not support the introduction of E15 into the marketplace for the legacy fleet,” also citing the potential for the higher blend to void its warranty."
Automakers balk at EPA plan
The auto manufacturers agree with all of you. Yet another example of the government and their horse leading the cart mentality.
"But Oge strongly disagreed with the automakers’ assessments, saying that a Department of Energy study tested nearly 100 cars, including 19 different models, and included tests that measured the impact of E15 after 120,000 miles of wear and tear.
“We used the same test procedures that a car company has to use when they certify that their gaskets will last for 120,000 miles or eight years,” she said, saying that in some cases the engines were taken completely apart to inspect hoses and vales. No unusual damage was found compared to control vehicles tested with normal gasoline.”
EPA says E15 is safe
Sounds like some at the EPA would really like to eliminate the legacy fleet as quickly as possible.
“We used the same test procedures that a car company has to use when they certify that their gaskets will last for 120,000 miles or eight years,” she said, saying that in some cases the engines were taken completely apart to inspect hoses and vales. No unusual damage was found compared to control vehicles tested with normal gasoline.”
EPA says E15 is safe
Sounds like some at the EPA would really like to eliminate the legacy fleet as quickly as possible.
I really hope this E15 thing doesn't catch on. I can't imagine that most stations are going to have a separate E10 tank put in, which means just about every station that switches to E15 is a station I'm going to drive past to fill up the Miata (1995).
I hope it doesn't catch on, as well. I worry about it becoming like E10, where most people no longer have a choice in the matter.
The EPA tests 100 cars and declares it safe, and the people who'll have to fix any damage, under warranty, say it's not.
Who to trust here?
The EPA tests 100 cars and declares it safe, and the people who'll have to fix any damage, under warranty, say it's not.
Who to trust here?
For a while, anyway. The subsidies may be going away (still not final), but the use mandate in the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 is still going to require more ethanol use each year. When that required production exceeds what can be blended at 10% and E85 demand, we may still face a de facto E15 mandate.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
