A tech acquaintance I know in the NO, LA region sees cars with fuel pump issues...and generally, when the test the fuel, ethanol content is closer to 15-18% and the drivers generally are using V Power as their gasoline. Just some food for thought as we think aboout Top Tier Fuels..
High Ethanol Content - V-Power
- Thread starter chefwong
- Start date
- Status
Higher Ethanol contents are good and bad.
Bad because you get less mileage due to the lower BTU output, and because it dries up the fuel which can cause excess fuel system corrosion and premature fuel system component failure. A way around this is to use a UCL with every fill-up like Lucas or MMO.
It would be especially harmful if the vehicle is only calibrated for E-10 and the content was more like E-15+ as this would result in much poorer economy and possible lean burn problems and/or engine damage in some cases.
It's good (If at E-10 levels) because like any Alcahol it acts as a solvent to keep things clean and will help fuel stay fluid in the frigid temperatures.
I think we need to go back to 100% gasoline but refine it to a top-tier standard and desulferize it as much as possible.
Enough with these Corn idiots already.
Bad because you get less mileage due to the lower BTU output, and because it dries up the fuel which can cause excess fuel system corrosion and premature fuel system component failure. A way around this is to use a UCL with every fill-up like Lucas or MMO.
It would be especially harmful if the vehicle is only calibrated for E-10 and the content was more like E-15+ as this would result in much poorer economy and possible lean burn problems and/or engine damage in some cases.
It's good (If at E-10 levels) because like any Alcahol it acts as a solvent to keep things clean and will help fuel stay fluid in the frigid temperatures.
I think we need to go back to 100% gasoline but refine it to a top-tier standard and desulferize it as much as possible.
Enough with these Corn idiots already.
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2007
- Messages
- 5,294
Top Tier ain't all its cracked up to be. I've tried Shell, BP, Marathon, and once on vacation Chevron (no local stations) but lately my Forester is running best on the under additized more generic gas from Pilot Travel Center. The subaru ej253 can be somewhat prone to ping due to high compression (10.5:1) large bore, short stroke setup yet is spec'd in the non-turbo version for 87 octane reg unleaded. I was getting some light ping on BP, Shell, or Marathon, but it is reduced with the generic Pilot fuel. Perhaps some detergency additive present in the upper tier fuel that is not present as much in generic fuel, was responsible, I have no idea.
If that ethanol report is the case it's time for me to avoid Shell again. A few years ago, Shell had issues locally with high levels of sulfur in their gasoline. It seems the sulfur coated the in-tank sending units of fuel gages and damaged a fairly large number of cars.
That's really, really high. Well, at least I don't have to worry about V-power or Top Tier gas. I try using the cheapest stuff at a good station.
The ethanol lobby wants us to use E15 and higher blends. Then they trot out worthless studies showing that E15, E20, etc. is fine in our cars when manufacturers will invalidate your warranty if you put anything higher than E10. I wonder who I should believe.
U.L. won't certify pumps for E15.
EPA is suppose to make a decision by December 1 on whether to allow E15. Hopefully they'll deny the waiver.
The ethanol lobby wants us to use E15 and higher blends. Then they trot out worthless studies showing that E15, E20, etc. is fine in our cars when manufacturers will invalidate your warranty if you put anything higher than E10. I wonder who I should believe.
U.L. won't certify pumps for E15.
EPA is suppose to make a decision by December 1 on whether to allow E15. Hopefully they'll deny the waiver.
On certain models, it's fine. It's the ones with the turbos and certain other ones that he's seen his fair share of issue. And from what I recall, before they even test the fuel -- they pretty much suspect it's a V-Power user. Lo and behold it is...
I know gas is regional but just some Food For thought...
I know gas is regional but just some Food For thought...
Our V-Power up here contains 0% Ethanol as labeled at the pump... That's interesting that yours has it...
^ Other stations aren't so clear but shell here in the GTA clearly states ethanol 10% in regular 87, 5% in mid 89 and none at all in 91 V power. I always use shell V power for my yard equipment for that reason. The cars while I'd prefer no ethanol, can handle it and nothing but Vpower would be a little pricey.
Me too eh !
I have been using Vpower in my turbo because of the lack of Ethanol in the Ontario stations 91 octane. It is one of the only gasolines i see declaring no ethanol.
I don't think a little ethanol in gas i a bad idea especially in winter to dry it out but even 10% is bad - let alone 15%.
And really anything above about 0.25% is probably counterproductive unless someone is making ethanol out of a product that doesn't cost more, chew up argibusiness subsidies and make feed grain more expensive.
I have been using Vpower in my turbo because of the lack of Ethanol in the Ontario stations 91 octane. It is one of the only gasolines i see declaring no ethanol.
I don't think a little ethanol in gas i a bad idea especially in winter to dry it out but even 10% is bad - let alone 15%.
And really anything above about 0.25% is probably counterproductive unless someone is making ethanol out of a product that doesn't cost more, chew up argibusiness subsidies and make feed grain more expensive.
I wish we have pure gas V-Power. Everything here is E10. I don't think I've seen a major chain with pure gas in a long time.
Time to ask Shell company the question. We've seen lots of rumors and guesses here and I don't accept local lore about ethanol percentages.
I purchase nearly 100% of my gas from a Shell station that advertises, with a large outdoor sign, that their fuels do not contain any ethanol.
Originally Posted By: Greggy_D
I thought Ethanol laden gas burns dirtier than 100% gas.
It does.
THe ethanol will help keep the fuel system cleaner (pump, etc), but in actual burning, it is dirtier. That is why the top tier "base" gasoline for the cleaning test must be conducted with E10 fuel - to assure it keeps the worst case clean.
I thought Ethanol laden gas burns dirtier than 100% gas.
It does.
THe ethanol will help keep the fuel system cleaner (pump, etc), but in actual burning, it is dirtier. That is why the top tier "base" gasoline for the cleaning test must be conducted with E10 fuel - to assure it keeps the worst case clean.
This is the reason I really like to use mmo during the winter months.Plus the winter fuel is a very dry fuel.
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2007
- Messages
- 5,294
On flex fuel cars that are factory certified for E85, how do they wire the in-tank fuel pumps... because as cited by an earlier poster in regards to UL refusing to certify beyond E15-- ethanol is a conductor whereas gasoline is an insulator. So I'm thinking that for a Flex Fuel badged "E85 is okay to use" vehicle, how do they setup the fuel pump so there is not a problem with the fluid in the tank that is now a conductor and not an insulator?
I've asked this before but received no answer . If federal law requires the presence of an oxygenate and MTBE is prohibited, what oxygenate is present in a gasoline that says it contains no ethanol? I am worried that methanol or something else is being added that allows them to say "No ethanol" and still meet the oxygenate standard.
Shell fuel (regular) has consistently given my wife's Sentra SER (2.5L DOHC with 177HP output using REGULAR GAS!) the best gas mileage the onboard computer has calculated. In point of fact, I have asked my wife to fill up with preference to these stations: Shell, Phillips 76, Chevron. Unfortunately Chevron is a rare find in Central Mass.
The octane level of ETHANOL at, as I recall, 113, significantly improves the stability of pentane during ignition. Apparently there are some cars with ECU that are not sensing the potential of ethanol or not adjusting the air/fuel ratio appropriately which is why the fuel economy suffers.
Not to be paranoid, but some fuels mixed with ethanol are being subverted by excessive water. It has been discovered and it is the tip of the iceberg.
Our 2001 Pathfinder doesn't make the E10 adjustment very well either and its fuel mileage is down about 15%. It seems to reduce the amount of advance and I have yet to hear a single ping under load, even when climbing a steep hill with it mashed to the floor. That indicates an ECU that is way, way conservative. A little bit of "ping" under high load conditions such as a steep hill and maximum demand is what you want to "optimize" fuel mileage. I've yet to hear it with an ECU car other than my wife's SER.
A point of fact: my ZRX1200R motorcycle, with 10.1 compression and none of the ECU/sensor baloney, with +4 DEGREES over stock advance DOES NOT PING ON E10 WHEN FUELED WITH REGULAR GRADE. Not ever at any load and at any rpm up to 10,000. And the gas mileage remains in the mid-forties as it has been since establishing the advance.
I am experimenting with additives to improve the Pathfinder's performance by chemically stimulating a faster burn rate with some positive results but too early to tell. Going to new iridium/platinum plugs is also planned down the road.
Does anyone know where I can get hydrazine with an eyedropper?
It would be nice to experiment with a more aggressive advance curve and not just fuel. The ECU advance curves in cars definitely need some help. In motorcycles, it is accepted that to maximize performance a Power Commander Ignition Control module is a must. Virtually every Hyabusa or ZX-14 at the drags has a power commander modifying the ignition curve.
Bottom line...its not the fuel...its the vehicle. It was designed for a specific fuel and that fuel is and will remain history. Get the vehicle advanced and you will recover lost mileage. My 2 cents.
The octane level of ETHANOL at, as I recall, 113, significantly improves the stability of pentane during ignition. Apparently there are some cars with ECU that are not sensing the potential of ethanol or not adjusting the air/fuel ratio appropriately which is why the fuel economy suffers.
Not to be paranoid, but some fuels mixed with ethanol are being subverted by excessive water. It has been discovered and it is the tip of the iceberg.
Our 2001 Pathfinder doesn't make the E10 adjustment very well either and its fuel mileage is down about 15%. It seems to reduce the amount of advance and I have yet to hear a single ping under load, even when climbing a steep hill with it mashed to the floor. That indicates an ECU that is way, way conservative. A little bit of "ping" under high load conditions such as a steep hill and maximum demand is what you want to "optimize" fuel mileage. I've yet to hear it with an ECU car other than my wife's SER.
A point of fact: my ZRX1200R motorcycle, with 10.1 compression and none of the ECU/sensor baloney, with +4 DEGREES over stock advance DOES NOT PING ON E10 WHEN FUELED WITH REGULAR GRADE. Not ever at any load and at any rpm up to 10,000. And the gas mileage remains in the mid-forties as it has been since establishing the advance.
I am experimenting with additives to improve the Pathfinder's performance by chemically stimulating a faster burn rate with some positive results but too early to tell. Going to new iridium/platinum plugs is also planned down the road.
Does anyone know where I can get hydrazine with an eyedropper?
It would be nice to experiment with a more aggressive advance curve and not just fuel. The ECU advance curves in cars definitely need some help. In motorcycles, it is accepted that to maximize performance a Power Commander Ignition Control module is a must. Virtually every Hyabusa or ZX-14 at the drags has a power commander modifying the ignition curve.
Bottom line...its not the fuel...its the vehicle. It was designed for a specific fuel and that fuel is and will remain history. Get the vehicle advanced and you will recover lost mileage. My 2 cents.
Originally Posted By: Boomer
I've asked this before but received no answer . If federal law requires the presence of an oxygenate and MTBE is prohibited, what oxygenate is present in a gasoline that says it contains no ethanol? I am worried that methanol or something else is being added that allows them to say "No ethanol" and still meet the oxygenate standard.
MTBE has been replaced by ETBE, or ETHYL TERT-BUTYL ETHER. It is not ethanol but ethanol is used to make it. It is an ether.
Check it out on Wikipedia.
Synthetic gasoline is the new reality. Oops! Strike that. Gasoline is obsolete. In Europe it is called "Petrol" and in the US we will call it "Fuel"
or maybe just "Gas"
but I hope not.
I've asked this before but received no answer . If federal law requires the presence of an oxygenate and MTBE is prohibited, what oxygenate is present in a gasoline that says it contains no ethanol? I am worried that methanol or something else is being added that allows them to say "No ethanol" and still meet the oxygenate standard.
MTBE has been replaced by ETBE, or ETHYL TERT-BUTYL ETHER. It is not ethanol but ethanol is used to make it. It is an ether.
Check it out on Wikipedia.
Synthetic gasoline is the new reality. Oops! Strike that. Gasoline is obsolete. In Europe it is called "Petrol" and in the US we will call it "Fuel"
or maybe just "Gas"
I also use Shell V-Power (my car is speced for high octane) and noticed somewhat better mileage with Shell V-Power compared to Esso or PetroCanada. The no ehtanol claim on the pumps is what makes some people use it, generally not many are aware of it but I hear quite a few poeple report better mileage with Shell, the same folks usually add that Sunoco plain sucks when it comes to mileage.
That's just my observation
That's just my observation
- Status
Similar threads
