Quote:
Originally Posted by WesternStarSCR
|
The problem I have with these articles is that their claims cannot possibly line up with reality.
When they say a phrase like
"AAA automotive engineering experts .... believe that sustained use of E15 in both newer and older vehicles could result in significant problems such as accelerated engine wear and failure, fuel-system damage and false “check engine” lights..." -
For starters, using the word "believe" illuminates my "Check Bulls#!t" light.
And by what specific mechanism do they explain this claim? What do they say causes the "significant problems"? Do they say that a difference in lubricity accelerates wear? Sorry, not true. Do they say it damages rubber hoses and such? Sorry, also not even remotely true. Do they say the difference in stoichiometry or combustion byproducts exceeds the fuel delivery capacity of the injectors, or of the feedback sensors? I have yet to experience or hear of any vehicle with bandwidth that narrowly focused.
I'd like to see something with
rigor.
Some dubiously biased experts-for-hire regurgitating their 'beliefs' is rubbish, any bottle of Summer's Eve can gush 'beliefs', if it contradicts my first-hand experience it's nothing more than the braying of farm animals to me.