Top Tier E0

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jan 13, 2016
Messages
3,488
Location
Northeast Nebraska
Just found out a Shell station I use to buy gas at for 40+ years is going to start carrying E0 again. I hope this is a trend and E0 will become available again for everyone. For the last few years Casey's was the only place to buy E0, not that it was bad gas but I always liked the idea of using top tier gas.
 
It's available here as well, but it's usually about $1 more than gas "containing no more than 10% ethanol", and labeled as "boat fuel".

I wouldn't mind a return of E0 if it were priced competitively.
 
Our Kwik Trip has just started to carry E-0 premium (91), and all of Kwik Trip's gas is Top Tier. (They advertise it as such, and there's a Top Tier sticker on the pump.) It's only 5-10 cents more than premium elsewhere.
 
Waco is 130,000 people and only one pump in town sells 100% gasoline, and It's at a Murphy USA.

+ $0.45 a gallon
 
Originally Posted By: Ramblejam
"Contain nominally 10.0% ± 1% by volume ethanol as measured by ASTM D 4815 or D 5845."

http://www.toptiergas.com/deposit-control

That's the additive test requirement, and it may mandate almost a worst case for the base fuel to test how effective the additive is. Retail fuel isn't required to match the testing requirements, and it may be difficult to meet that in practice anyways.
 
This immediately preceeds what I quoted:
"4.3.1.2 Base Fuel. The base fuel shall conform to ASTM D 4814 and shall contain commercial fuel grade ethanol conforming to ASTM D 4806. All gasoline blend stocks used to formulate the base fuel shall be representative of normal U.S. refinery operations and shall be derived from conversion units downstream of distillation. Butanes and pentanes are allowed for vapor pressure adjustment. The use of chemical streams is prohibited. The base fuel shall have the following specific properties after the addition of ethanol:"
 
Originally Posted By: skyactiv
You will get a little better fuel economy on it but E0 gas can cause issues during cold weather.


Really?

Can you be more specific?
 
Originally Posted By: Ramblejam
This immediately preceeds what I quoted:
"4.3.1.2 Base Fuel. The base fuel shall conform to ASTM D 4814 and shall contain commercial fuel grade ethanol conforming to ASTM D 4806. All gasoline blend stocks used to formulate the base fuel shall be representative of normal U.S. refinery operations and shall be derived from conversion units downstream of distillation. Butanes and pentanes are allowed for vapor pressure adjustment. The use of chemical streams is prohibited. The base fuel shall have the following specific properties after the addition of ethanol:"

All of 4.3 is about the requirements for the testing procedure. The rest of 4.3.1.2 include requirements that the base fuel contain a minimum level of olefins, which are known to produce deposits. The specification also says the base fuel must produce a certain level of deposits on the valves.

It's a test of the performance of the additive. It's not going to be much of a test if the fuel doesn't leave deposits. The base fuel specification isn't a requirement for fuel sold at retail.
 
Originally Posted By: Danno
Originally Posted By: skyactiv
You will get a little better fuel economy on it but E0 gas can cause issues during cold weather.


Really?

Can you be more specific?

Water was mentioned. Water and gasoline don't mix. Any alcohol will help mix both water and gasoline, so it will disperse the water evenly throughout the mixture rather than pool in drops. As long as it's dissolved with fuel, it shouldn't freeze. That works up to a point when too much water overloads it and there's phase separation. The capacity for E10 to disperse water gets lower with lower temperatures. Granted, I think the worry about water contamination in a car tank with modern emissions systems is overblown. Vented tanks on power equipment or marine engines is different.

Water also doesn't lubricate well, so an injector sucking in water drops isn't good. Red Line claims that their water remover product adds lubrication to the water
 
Originally Posted By: y_p_w
It's a test of the performance of the additive.

Yes, I understand what you're saying.

What I'm trying to get across is that testing is only performed with a 10% ethanol base fuel. To then subsequently take that TOP TIER detergency package, dump it into a non-ethanol base fuel and proclaim that it meets the same standard/does the same thing is a tad...presumptive?
 
Originally Posted By: Ramblejam
Originally Posted By: y_p_w
It's a test of the performance of the additive.

Yes, I understand what you're saying.

What I'm trying to get across is that testing is only performed with a 10% ethanol base fuel. To then subsequently take that TOP TIER detergency package, dump it into a non-ethanol base fuel and proclaim that it meets the same standard/does the same thing is a tad...presumptive?

A lot of testing is presumptive. The idea of this test is to test the additive against a base condition that produces heavy deposits without the additive package. It also specifies an engine that very few people will be using, in a bench testing environment under controlled conditions. In the real world it's a best guess as to how much better it should be relative to no detergent. The API motor oil tests operate on a specific older engine that few people use any more, but manufacturers still specify meeting the standard. Manufacturers also specify fuel octane rating requirements based on test conditions that only approximate real-world engine requirements.

Of course it's not going to be an exact match of real-world conditions. The fuel seller has very little control of the base fuel that they buy. The fuel could be the combined output of several refineries sent in by pipeline, and it could be mixed with fuel in the tank from older deliveries. It could even be a mix of summer and winter blend fuel, or even a different additive package (some . It's supposed to meet a basic standard, but it's not likely to be that carefully controlled fuel blend that meets the exact test fuel requirement. The fuel seller is even free to up the concentration of additive, even though that changes one of the conditions specified in the test.

Nothing is likely going to be a perfect re-creation of the conditions that a real-world fuel consumer is going to face. They're allowed to take an additive that passes the testing requirements and call it Top Tier. I wouldn't worry too much about it.

The one thing I'd worry about E0 is that it's probably a "specialty fuel" since most fuels these days are made to be blended with ethanol to meet the pump octane rating. Most of that stuff is sent by pipeline as a fungible commodity, where the customer can take delivery almost anywhere, but where it's cheaper if they deposit and withdraw like it's a bank account and the fuel may not be the exact stuff put in, but of the same standard. The pipeline company decides how to route the fuel. E0 might require a dedicated "segregated" delivery, which costs more and is probably reflected in the price.
 
y_p_w,

Regardless of any difference in viewpoint, thank you for the intelligently well-written & informative replies. Have a great weekend!
 
I use only nonethanol in my older rotary powered vehicles. Luckily, the best price I can get for nonethanol is Shell and Philips 66. I usually get the shell. But sadly around here nonethanol is anywhere from $.50 to $.80 more expensive for 87 grade. For premium it is anywhere from 20 to 50 cents more.
 
Originally Posted By: y_p_w
Granted, I think the worry about water contamination in a car tank with modern emissions systems is overblown.

Yes, it is. I haven't needed to use gas line antifreeze basically ever. When carbs were the norm, most of the "gassers" I had were on LPG. I don't think I've ever purchased the product, despite using almost exclusively E0 for the past number of years.
 
Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: y_p_w
Granted, I think the worry about water contamination in a car tank with modern emissions systems is overblown.

Yes, it is. I haven't needed to use gas line antifreeze basically ever. When carbs were the norm, most of the "gassers" I had were on LPG. I don't think I've ever purchased the product, despite using almost exclusively E0 for the past number of years.

Modern fuel systems are pretty well sealed. I know a popular conception is that they're filled with air that might contain water vapor, but I've heard they're pressurized with fuel vapor.

E10 is supposed to be pretty good at mixing with water. Makes me wonder why anyone buys fuel line water remover/antifreeze unless there's no alcohol at all.
 
And there are still a bunch of methyl hydrate ones out there, too, much more prominently sold than the isopropanol ones. People still buy it, I guess. If I were worried and felt a need for the alcohol, there is at least one E10 premium, and I've used it once in a blue moon, quite happily. There's just no cost benefit, since it's more than ordinary premium, because it's something like 94 octane instead of the usual 91, and only one brand has it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top