Gas pumps and ethanol.

[SparkyJJO]

I have no options for any non-ethanol gas around here.

But I do have an E85 station

 

[Eli]

There's only one station in Santa Fe that carries it, and only in premium. So it's like a full 30-40 cents more than Regular........

I ran it for a while, just to see if I could notice a difference in MPG or anything. I couldn't, so I stopped getting it.. But I kinda like to support the cause.. They had a petition up to sign if you wanted them to keep it...

 

[LTC8K6]

It seems to be common in places with a lot of hunting and fishing, and boating. People want the pure stuff for their small engines and their boat engines.

 

[Zivic]

I have no options for any non-ethanol gas around here.

But I do have an E85 station

boost your car and consider yourself lucky to have E85 available

 

[ThatsABigOne]

It seems to be common in places with a lot of hunting and fishing, and boating. People want the pure stuff for their small engines and their boat engines.

So next time at a gas station I should be dressed up as a hunter, put camo on my car with guns visible, and demand 100% gas? :awe:

 

[LTC8K6]

So next time at a gas station I should be dressed up as a hunter, put camo on my car with guns visible, and demand 100% gas? :awe:

Okay...

 

[SparkyJJO]

boost your car and consider yourself lucky to have E85 available

I wouldn't want to boost it to the point I needed anything more than 91 octane. So no, E85 is of zero benefit for me.

 

[Zivic]

I wouldn't want to boost it to the point I needed anything more than 91 octane. So no, E85 is of zero benefit for me.

I have no idea what your drive, but all I have to ask is why?

not like you have to run it all the time, and where I live, E85 is just as readily available as standard 93. It is about 20% cheaper than 93, yet in my car, I only see about a 13% reduction in mileage yet, I gain over 125 whp vs pump gas -> heck, if you are comparing to 91 octane, I bet my hp gain would be in the 140-150 whp range

So you say you wouldn't want to boost it to the point of "needing" E85...

Well, it makes a lot of sense you wouldn't want substantially more HP, and using a fuel that actually costs you less factoring in the mileage/price

While I agree that ethanol in gasoline is BS, let's not all jump on ethanol being all bad

 

[LTC8K6]

E85 should cost more, factoring in the mileage. The EPA gives a figure of 25% for the average mileage loss. E85 would have to be 2.44 a gallon to break even where I live. It's not available at all though, and even if it were, who wants 25% less range?

For me, E85 is all bad.

 

[Ferzerp]

Ethanol as fuel is pretty much all bad as it currently is done except in specific applications.

We're making it out of food.... Silly idea.
We're adding it where it doesn't belong... Silly idea.
It's 30% less energy dense than gasoline. If you're getting similar mileage, it's not because your car is using it well, it's using gasoline extremely poorly.

It's good for applications needing higher compression, but we should stop trying to shove it in to everything.

 

[DVad3r]

Shell V-Power here in Ontario contains no ethanol. Silver grade contains only 5 %.

 

[desy]

We are making it out of cattle feed whose byproduct is. . . . . cattle feed w less starch
We are adding it as a replacment to MTBE cause MTBE causes cancer
Less energy dense at E85 which should only be in turbo cars, E15 will hardly be noticible which is what the article and original thread is about

 

[Rifter]

Shell V-Power here in Ontario contains no ethanol. Silver grade contains only 5 %.

same in BC, its all i buy. Either that or Chevron premium plus 94 octane, those are the only 2 fuels available in BC with no ethanol.

 

[sisq0kidd]

I work for an oil company out here in Southern California and ethanol is 10% across the board and across brands.

Also, I just wanted to clear some things up:

1) Winter blends and Summer blends have nothing to do with ethanol volume.
2) Refineries are not manipulating production. I can guarantee you almost all of them are running at full capacity and they want it this way.

 

[Ferzerp]

We are making it out of cattle feed whose byproduct is. . . . . cattle feed w less starch
We are adding it as a replacment to MTBE cause MTBE causes cancer
Less energy dense at E85 which should only be in turbo cars, E15 will hardly be noticible which is what the article and original thread is about

E15 of a given volume only has 95% of the potential energy of non-ethanol fuel. That is noticeable.

E85 is even worse. It's around 25% less energy per volume. (The one flex fuel engine I owned used 50% more fuel with E85 than E10.)

E10 is 97%

These are pure potentials, no accounting for tuning, efficiency, etc.

 

[DVad3r]

same in BC, its all i buy. Either that or Chevron premium plus 94 octane, those are the only 2 fuels available in BC with no ethanol.

Nice, we don't even have Chevron in Ontario, our best gas is Petro Canada which has 94 available. All the Sunoco stations went under and now in place of them are Petro Canada's and new Husky stations which we didn't have before.

But yea I try to get V-Power whenever I can for my car and bike. I find I get the best mileage out of it.

 

[LTC8K6]

I work for an oil company out here in Southern California and ethanol is 10% across the board and across brands.

Also, I just wanted to clear some things up:

1) Winter blends and Summer blends have nothing to do with ethanol volume.
2) Refineries are not manipulating production. I can guarantee you almost all of them are running at full capacity and they want it this way.

Maybe not in Cali, but I would think the switch from E85 to E70 in the cold weather states during the cold months might have some impact on Ethanol volume.

Unless I misunderstood you.

http://green.autoblog.com/2007/02/27/when-is-e85-not-85-percent-ethanol-when-its-e70-with-an-e85-st/

 

[notty22]

I know it's worked its way in to Nascar. And it's prominently advertised constantly and painted on every car, so the Gas suppliers want it in their business models.
Maybe marketing believes consumers will feel this is a green effort ?

 

[sisq0kidd]

Maybe not in Cali, but I would think the switch from E85 to E70 in the cold weather states during the cold months might have some impact on Ethanol volume.

Unless I misunderstood you.

http://green.autoblog.com/2007/02/27/when-is-e85-not-85-percent-ethanol-when-its-e70-with-an-e85-st/

Let me clear that up as I worded that poorly. I meant to only speak for California regulations, I'm not sure how the rest of the country figures out their ethanol mix.

 

[SparkyJJO]

I have no idea what your drive, but all I have to ask is why?

not like you have to run it all the time, and where I live, E85 is just as readily available as standard 93. It is about 20% cheaper than 93, yet in my car, I only see about a 13% reduction in mileage yet, I gain over 125 whp vs pump gas -> heck, if you are comparing to 91 octane, I bet my hp gain would be in the 140-150 whp range

So you say you wouldn't want to boost it to the point of "needing" E85...

Well, it makes a lot of sense you wouldn't want substantially more HP, and using a fuel that actually costs you less factoring in the mileage/price

While I agree that ethanol in gasoline is BS, let's not all jump on ethanol being all bad

Well first the vehicle I have no I have no desire to boost. It is just a 4.2L I6 Trailblazer 4x4 lol

Anyway, I wouldn't want to boost above needing premium fuel and requiring E85, as there is only one, maybe two stations in the general area that have it. I want to be able to drive somewhere and be able to pull into a gas station and get fuel whenever I need to instead of hunting around.

I'd also rather not replace half the fuel system if I could avoid it.