Quote:
Originally Posted by litesong
All 3 cars show mpg increases for E0 of 8%, 7% & 5%...... 87 octane E10 has ethanol molecules that average 114 octane.... ALSO, the gasoline molecules must average 84 octane, IF an average octane of 87 is to be created, while blending 10% ethanol.
This is simple: gasoline engine engineers designed 87 octane gasoline engines to run best with 87 octane 100% E0. Ethanol engine engineers designed 114 octane ethanol engines to run best with 114 octane 100% ethanol. Ethanol/gasoline blends run neither gasoline or ethanol engines best.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcp123
By the math, should be a 3% difference. But EVERY hack on every forum always claims a 10% diff...
|
Since I only claim 8% to 5% E0/E10 mpg differences, am I LESS of a hack?
Good ethanol engine engineers designed high 114 octane, high compression ratio(16:1) ethanol engines to get the most energy AND work out of 100% ethanol. Ethanol, as used(but NOT burned efficiently) in low 87 octane, low compression ratio (9:1 to 12:1) gasoline engines, cannot give up energy & its work, nearly as efficiently. That is why adding only 10% ethanol to gasoline, lowers mpg 8% to 5%.
Already stated, is that 87 octane E0 is 87 octane(& is NOT BASE octane 84 mixed with high octane premium to average 87 octane). But 87 octane E10 is a mis-brewed mix of 114 octane ethanol AND 84 octane gasoline molecules, neither of which perform optimally in 87 octane gasoline engines designed to burn 87 octane gasoline at its best.