When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
a) Ethanol has less energy per unit volume and as a result burns less effeciant. E85 cars have been reported to get 10-15% less milage than a standard petrol car. Not anymore. That's an old figure. The current figures are now between 1-5% less. This makes up for the cost now.
b) Ethanol has to be transported by truck because it corrodes the pipelines. This costs more enviornmentally and financially. This is a myth. Ethanol doesn't corrode copper piping. The studies for this show that it's not the corrosion but actually the mount of water E85 picks up over long distances.
c) Subsidized farmland for ethanol has caused a significant rise in the cost of food across the market Total BS. Sorry, but more than 50% of ethanol comes from South America. In addition, the corn used to make ethanol has nothing to do with our food stock. The bi-product of making ethanol from corn is actually the food they use to feed live stock. There are separate fields set aside for ethanol. When E85 was emerging as a serious competitor against the E10 blends, this was a scare tactic that farmers used in their favor to raise prices on food. However, it's completely untrue and totally debunked.
d) Stored ethanol has a tendancy to go bad faster than pure petrol. Alcohol doesn't go bad. However, petrol can. Alcohol merely attracts and retains water.
e) Ethonal gasolines actully cost more to make/refine and distribute than traditional petrol. Back in the days when E85 was new, that was true. Because of mass production, this is no longer true, which is way E85 is cheaper per gallon than E10 and E15. Gasoline has been made in mass quantity for a VERY long time. However, Ethanol has only been widely used for the last 15 years and even then in small amounts in the gasoline blends. Now that E85 is a primary blend, production had to be ramped up. The cost to make E85 is now significantly lower than before.
Why then do we use a less-effecient/more expensive additive in our fuels?....you'll have to see PR&C for that answer......
Sorry disagree with this information. Now I've had quite a few Lsx based motors including the monster I have now.
If you don't mess with the tuning table it is fine to run 87 even at 6500 rpms.
The computer has 2 tables for timing a high octane table and low octane table. The low will default if the computer see that there is ping for xxx period of time. Yes you will loose some ponies but your not going to blow up the motor. Gm did this on purpose to control warranty claims. Do you think the C6's that Hertz rents out ends with premium every time? The additional backup is the knock sensor which will also cut timing if needed. Another reason why the motors are one of the best designs in history.
You can't compare a LT1 based car with a LSX. The design of the motor and computer is much smarter then the older design. If your broke and need to get to work go ahead put 86 in you'll just get there a little slower.
I agree with this. But it takes a bit of time for your LSx motor to reconfigure the timing for 87 when you've been running 91 for a while. (I think it was about 20 miles, I could be wrong) And in the meantime you ping for a while.
The computer doesn't react instantly to this change. This I know. And yeah, I agree, the LS1 is definitely smarter and different from an LT1. But the point is that higher compressions DO call for higher octane.
I agree with this. But it takes a bit of time for your LSx motor to reconfigure the timing for 87 when you've been running 91 for a while. (I think it was about 20 miles, I could be wrong) And in the meantime you ping for a while.
The computer doesn't react instantly to this change. This I know. And yeah, I agree, the LS1 is definitely smarter and different from an LT1. But the point is that higher compressions DO call for higher octane.
The knock sensors also need to work for the computer to make these adjustments. And those are a pain in the @ss to change.
Just google E85 myths... There's a lot of BS talk about how E85 is bad. But the truth is that most people listen to Fox News and don't do research of their own. If you actually look things up, you'll see that 90% of the information your fed is either bent or broken by the time it actually reaches your ears. OPEC and "others" have made it a point to scare people away from buying E85 vehicles.
You should also know that a lot of FAST race cars only use alcohol. MANY use E85 because it can net extremely big gains over Gasoline. In fact, with turbo applications, the boost can be raised much higher because E85 burns cooler and has a very high octane rating.
I agree with this. But it takes a bit of time for your LSx motor to reconfigure the timing for 87 when you've been running 91 for a while. (I think it was about 20 miles, I could be wrong) And in the meantime you ping for a while.
The computer doesn't react instantly to this change. This I know. And yeah, I agree, the LS1 is definitely smarter and different from an LT1. But the point is that higher compressions DO call for higher octane.
The way it works is the knock sensors pick up knock instantly and cut the timing. It knows that if it does it xx times in a row it will use the low octane table which every so often it will add a bit of timing to check and see if it can go back to the high octane table.
I've tuned some of my cars and still have a scan tool it will switch to that low octane table pretty fast if your on it. If you drive it easy it won't even switch because there is no knock.
I've had 10 Lsx based corvettes and 5 fbody lsx cars. One the main reasons why these cars ping is with the higher miles they get a good amount of carbon build up in the motor. Seafoam them and generally it goes away.
a) Ethanol has less energy per unit volume and as a result burns less effeciant. E85 cars have been reported to get 10-15% less milage than a standard petrol car. Not anymore. That's an old figure. The current figures are now between 1-5% less. This makes up for the cost now
Actually the 2 websites you posted stated a 5-15% loss.
You should also know that a lot of FAST race cars only use alcohol. MANY use E85 because it can net extremely big gains over Gasoline. In fact, with turbo applications, the boost can be raised much higher because E85 burns cooler and has a very high octane rating.
This is true. E85 burns cooler which = less detonation
d) Stored ethanol has a tendancy to go bad faster than pure petrol. Alcohol doesn't go bad. However, petrol can. Alcohol merely attracts and retains water
Which has become a major issue for the stations underground tanks and why you are seeing so many stations all over the US replacing them with new and improved tanks that can evaporate the accumulated water before it becomes a measurable amount.
a) Ethanol has less energy per unit volume and as a result burns less effeciant. E85 cars have been reported to get 10-15% less milage than a standard petrol car.
b) Ethanol has to be transported by truck because it corrodes the pipelines. This costs more enviornmentally and financially.
c) Subsidized farmland for ethanol has caused a significant rise in the cost of food across the market
d) Stored ethanol has a tendancy to go bad faster than pure petrol.
e) Ethonal gasolines actully cost more to make/refine and distribute than traditional petrol.
Why then do we use a less-effecient/more expensive additive in our fuels?....you'll have to see PR&C for that answer......
Geez. This is worse than my mom having to tell me as a kid that eating broccoli would make me big and strong.
Actually the 2 websites you posted stated a 5-15% loss.
Right. Those are also pretty old, but it was to state a general point. And I believe that one of them says that with proper tuning, you don't see a mileage change at all.
I'm trying to find the articles I read about the 1-5% drop. When I find it, I'll post it.
d) Stored ethanol has a tendancy to go bad faster than pure petrol. Alcohol doesn't go bad. However, petrol can. Alcohol merely attracts and retains water
Which has become a major issue for the stations underground tanks and why you are seeing so many stations all over the US replacing them with new and improved tanks that can evaporate the accumulated water before it becomes a measurable amount.
I haven't heard about this, but I wouldn't doubt it for a minute. Most engineers don't take into account what will happen in the future with things like this.
a) Ethanol has less energy per unit volume and as a result burns less effeciant. E85 cars have been reported to get 10-15% less milage than a standard petrol car.
b) Ethanol has to be transported by truck because it corrodes the pipelines. This costs more enviornmentally and financially.
c) Subsidized farmland for ethanol has caused a significant rise in the cost of food across the market
d) Stored ethanol has a tendancy to go bad faster than pure petrol.
e) Ethonal gasolines actully cost more to make/refine and distribute than traditional petrol.
Why then do we use a less-effecient/more expensive additive in our fuels?....you'll have to see PR&C for that answer......
Around here the Shell and Meijers gas stations are still all real gasoline. I've tested the shell numerous times because that's what I run in my airplane. Ethanol is a big time no no in older a/c.
From: It's true money can't buy happiness, but it is more comfortable crying in a Corvette than on a bicyc
St. Jude Donor '13
Originally Posted by Purerock105
Florida runs 10% or less.
You beat me to it. All the pumps here state LESS than 10%. Sometimes I wonder how much. 9.9% is under. 5% is better. We'll never know. I asked at one station and should have known better. All I got was a "Huh?"