E0 91 octane versus E10 87 octane

[litesong]

I have 3 NA cars with many years of data with 87 octane 10% ethanol blends(E10), & many years of data with 87 octane E0. All 3 cars show mpg increases for E0 of 8%, 7% & 5%. All engines run smoother, quieter & with a trace extra low rpm torque, such that less downshifting is needed to ascend hills. 87 octane E0 is comprised of gasoline molecules averaging 87 octane(duh!). 87 octane E10 has ethanol molecules that average 114 octane of which 87 octane gasoline engines, as coming from the factory, are NOT designed to burn efficiently. ALSO, the gasoline molecules must average 84 octane, IF an average octane of 87 is to be created, while blending 10% ethanol. Yeah, even the 84 octane gasoline molecules aren't right for an 87 octane gasoline engine.

Sure, there is a wide range of octane between 91 octane E0 vs. 87 octane E10. AND there is a difference of 3 percentage points in gasoline molecules, comparing 87 octane E10 to 87 octane E0, which doesn't include the ethanol difference. If your 87 octane gasoline engine isn't performing right with 87 E10..... try some 87 octane E0!!!

[101Volts]

Having older model cars, I wonder about this. The 1984 Caprice was last filled up with 91 (0% Ethanol) gas and all other tanks were with Ethanol gas. I haven't been driving it lately given the winter weather though.

[litesong]

Originally Posted by 101Volts

The 1984 Caprice was last filled up with 91 (0% Ethanol) gas and all other tanks were with Ethanol gas. I haven't been driving it lately given the winter weather though.

Use E0 for years & E10 for years to reduce the variables. Don't switch back & forth between E0/E10 often. As I stated previously, "....I have 3 NA cars with many years of data with 87 octane 10% ethanol blends(E10), & many years of data with 87 octane E0."

Be patient & gather your years of data...... like me.

[101Volts]

Originally Posted by litesong

Use E0 for years & E10 for years to reduce the variables. Don't switch back & forth between E0/E10 often. As I stated previously, "....I have 3 NA cars with many years of data with 87 octane 10% ethanol blends(E10), & many years of data with 87 octane E0."

Be patient & gather your years of data...... like me.

Thanks, though I was planning on using E0 for the Chevy and the Mercury too just to prevent excessive engine wear. I expect to get some more fuel economy out of E0 too since the vehicles weren't designed with E10 in mind.

[roosterk0031]

The problem with data collected over years is the variable of changes to the car, wear and tear, brakes dragging, changes in tires, driving style, commute etc...

A better collection of data would be to 3 tanks E10 and then 3 tanks E0 and repeat. That would help cancel out all other variables. My years of data with my wifes 02 FFV suburban showed a 18% drop in mileage from E10 to E85, mostly her driving. Her Impala shows the same 18-20% loss. I've never run enough E0 in either to see a difference.

E0 nets higher MPG with my Cobalt and higher cost per mile.

[Chrysler kid]

I would gladly pay extra at the pump for e0, ethanol is not as efficiently burned as gasoline

Non ethanol based gas stations are impossible to find, and are mostly farmer co-ops.

Ethanol blended gas and e85 is a joke. We have 3rd world countries and even homeless dying from starvation and the government is propping up the American corn farmers with subsidies and using the over produced corn to make a less potent solution that really doesn't help the environment because it also decreases fuel efficiency

If e15 is ever mandated I'm going to start buying e0 by the drum.

[serialk11r]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

Ethanol for fuel in the States doesn't make sense. Perhaps it makes more sense in tropical climates, and for vehicles optimized to run that fuel.

But ethanol is a common additive even in countries that don't produce sugarcane or corn (under subsidy), so I imagine it's a useful octane booster additive.

[litesong]

Originally Posted by roosterk0031

The problem with data collected over years is the variable of changes to the car, wear and tear, brakes dragging, changes in tires, driving style, commute etc...

You're the first person out of hundreds, that believes short trials are better than long trials. I can see why you tote ethanol & do NOT know of the greatness of E0. My 3 cars got the same mileage(using E0 or E10), whether they were new or had 100,000 miles. My 3 cars got their best mpg from the word go. I never understood why drivers kept saying you have to break cars in. Driving style----I always drove to get good mpg. Commute....fairly similar through the decades. Highway improvements offset the increased traffic.

[roosterk0031]

Originally Posted by litesong

You're the first person out of hundreds, that believes short trials are better than long trials. I can see why you tote ethanol & do NOT know of the greatness of E0. My 3 cars got the same mileage(using E0 or E10), whether they were new or had 100,000 miles. My 3 cars got their best mpg from the word go. I never understood why drivers kept saying you have to break cars in. Driving style----I always drove to get good mpg. Commute....fairly similar through the decades. Highway improvements offset the increased traffic.

An true ABA test has to be conducted same day, way way way to many varibles if conducted over a year(s) Lets start with tire wear, as they wear MPG goes up, did you test E10 or E0 first year, how about variations in winter, variations in driving, I don't drive the same today as last year, how about that maybe that right front caliper that was draging last year but now the pads worn so it doen't any more. How about the MAF that's dirty this year, or O2 sensor that maybe be is better this year than last. Or maybe it's your MAP sensor, or a fuel injector that's failing now and leaking extra fuel. The varibles are almost limit less if you spread them out over a year.

But if you mix 3 tanks of E0 then 3 tanks of E10 most of those varibale get cancelled out of time. Best would be to have some one else fill your car so you don't know or care which happens like with me and my wife. Hence the 18% number she accumulated over roughly 15,000 miles running E85 and 35,000 miles of her running E10(2002 suburban on fuelly). I haven't collected the data as well with her current car the 2010 Impala but a snap shot shows almost the same 18%, fuel log one here if you want to check it out.

With fuel a true ABA same day test is almost impossible to do with traditional means(tank to tank). But it has been done by U of North or South Dakota or U of Minnesota. Some cars did better with higher E content some didn't. Not a easy find but it's out there, don't feel like finding it again, search my old post might be easiest way to find it..

Disclaimer, I like ethanol because it's cheaper per mile and why ship corn out of country to only buy oil or any other product, a properly tuned E85 engine emmits 1/2 the CO2 (green house gasses as a gasoline or diesel(search Cummins E85) and that Carbon was sucked out of the air by the corn plant to make it (circle of life). And no reason that cummins wouldn't be even better on e100, just think if all the truck and tractors that haul the corn out of the fields or delivery crap to walmart could run on it.

Cummins has shown whats possible with cheaper than diesel(installed) cleaner than diesel, more powerful that gas, cleaner than gas, what more could you want.

[DOFZO]

Corn is not the answer.





ZO.