Ethanol vs Ethanol FREE gas mpg?
 

Has anyone done an mpg average test between your typical gas and ethanol free gas on a modern car? I'm curious about the difference?

How modern is modern?

I ran a tank of E0 in my 2017 fuel injected motorcycle and saw a 3 mpg improvement (53-56), but the next e10 tank I got 61. I would say results inconclusive. The only e0 pump I've found is out of my way by about 5 miles so I don't think it would be worth it for anything I am actively driving (if its gonna sit I try and fill up with e0).

just any cars after 2010 i guess

lots of articles and the few rare tests ive found online say about a 10 percent mpg increase

60mpg in my ioniq getting boosted to 66mpg would be great with no work involved. the price difference isnt worth it obviously, but im curious just to see what type of high numbers i could achieve

It's about a 3.5% difference, which is the difference in energy content. Most people see larger than 3.5% variance from one tank to the next, so anecdotal reports vary.

Difference in energy content is much higher, ~30% between E10 and E85 - here in Finland there is no zero ethanol fuel available.

Difference in fuel consumption depends, due to higher octane number of ethanol - if engine management is advanced enough, it can adapt ignition timing and boost pressure to match those qualities.

Watching only mpg numbers, it looks like gasoline is way to go, but if you care about fossile fuels burnt and carbon emissions, it's a different story.

Long story short, after my aero mods, I want to fill up with ethanol free gas and try to squeeze 800 miles of range out on a single tank of gas for an experiment or YouTube video. In theory if I go even slower, I could do 900 miles from full to completely empty…

If you don't have a closer source there's the I-5 truck stop at Coburg, OR.

I know plenty of locations and see a lot around oregon. And see even more on road trips. Was going to wait till summer when weather is warmer and I have my mods in place before putting in the pure gas

I just watched a video today, where it was tested and found that E10 87 pump gas being sold today, in the midwest, is actually 2-6% ethanol. It isn't anywhere near the "up to" figure.

Will adding nitro or noz boost my mpg too or just speed?

duckduckgo.com/?q=acetone+for+gas+mileage+extender&ia=web

Opinions are mixed on acetone.

They're just oxygen, effectively. The car will add more fuel to keep the ratio correct. It's like cracking the throttle open more than 100%.

How high does it need to be to get that?

my tank is 12 gallons. if i get 70 mpg average. thats 840 miles right there. could get 900 miles if i averaged 75mpg. obviously i would have to avoid the interstate, and if i did take the interstate, id be the right lane person drafting behind semi trucks

that range is possible, but i would have to hypermile and have patience

Some small amount of ethanol may eventually be actually more favorable to fuel-economy in a warmer weather

My old 1998 Mazda gave around 5% better FE on straight ULP (E0).
My current 2012 Hyundai only shows a small increase over running E10.
I still choose to use ULP because I can often buy it cheaper than E10 at a petrol station near home.

IIRC the only E0 gasoline commercially available in my country is AvGas, yet its lead content renders it unsuitable for any car with its catalyst still in place. And it's so expensive that most of the piston-engined cropduster aircraft here fly on ethanol, which BTW is not so cost-effective for the flexfuel cars. Even though in some regions it's quite common to use regular E5 or E10 pump gas smuggled from neighboring countries instead of AvGas, it's an illegal practice here.

I'm curious the actual ethanol content that is typical in E10. 10% is the maximum, with less than that very typical.

Next puchase test it. I believe there are methods using cheap test kits or even DIY with mason jars. Sorry, I am exclusively diesel.

Every source Ive seen online says when they test e10 it actually is about 12-14 percent

And apparently Biden is pushing for more ethanol in gas now to help lower prices…

Can you share those sources? Seems very risky to be running above the maximum allowable ethanol content since that exposes the fuel dispensers to liability for damage and fines from regulatory agencies.

https://youtu.be/Pd_ef6YEEtE

scotty kilmer said itll be e15 now

Good luck with that. I was partially involved with the Chevron avaiation fuel fubar at Modesto back in the '90s where they mixed car gas or jet fuel into a 110ll tanker and filled up many aircraft that had subsequent engine damage. Went on for many years. My engine was 80/87 and the fuel never went below those specs, my engine showed no internal damage but the FAA MANDATORY teardown was still on my dime. Chevron sent me a $50 check from the mass settlement.

One can reject the class settlement and litigate individually, with all the hassle that entails.

Jet fuel is even more dangerous for an AvGas-fueled aircraft than MoGas. There was at least one incident I'm aware of that fueling a Cirrus with jet fuel caused it to lose power while taking off and falling, yet in most cases involving aircraft fueled with either low-ethanol or ethanol-free MoGas smuggled into Brazil from neighboring countries were also related to overloading the aircraft.

That would be the pilots fault either case for not checking prior to flight. Avgas goes from either red or blue to clear when other fuels are added as does jetfuel. I knew my fuel would go clear, and it did. Nothing else to check except for level or unexpected crud in fuel sump. Once again the pissy portion was mandatory tear down that I had to pay for. Even more annoying was I had one tank of original fuel which I used for take off and initial climb so knock was improbable. Had I payed cash for the fuel, they wouldn't have had a trace method and I would have escaped teardown. Chevron did finally pay for damage, but not the teardown.

Alaskan joke:<<If your private plane isn't overloaded, you are flying solo. >>

When I started studying aviation-related subjects, I was already aware of the traceability issue. ANAC is quite strict sometimes...

I found from experience running my '06 Crown Vic as a daily driver for 5 years in normal driving up until this gas crunch, that during October to March, when E10 is required here, I used at least 6% more fuel, which was like losing a gallon per tank. I went from about 290 miles a tank to about 270 miles a tank with mixed driving in my commute.

They claim E10 is for reduced emissions but I am using an additional gallon per week of E10. So about 6% reduction in gas mileage.

It's a quite complicated math to find out if there is any actual improvement to the carbon footprint with ethanol blends. I am quite favorable to pure ethanol usage as a motor fuel, yet the E27 mandatory blend to the gasoline in my country is a controversial measure that I also tend to consider troublesome.

October to March should also have cooler weather (and worse mpg).

https://ecomodder.com/forum/member-d...ab-display.png
https://ecomodder.com/forum/member-d...thly-temps.png
https://ecomodder.com/forum/showthre...ind-27293.html

Unfortunately the lower emissions come at a cost to total emissions because you become less efficient

Also considering how the logistics may increase the footprint of a presumably "cleaner" fuel, due to the increased amount of tanker-truck trips necessary to supply gas stations with either pure ethanol or some high-ethanol blend such as the E27 mandatory in Brazil, it does become a matter of concern. Had either other feedstocks such as corn being more widely used for ethanol brewing, and smaller distilleries being more widespread at a regional level decreasing the miles the fuel would have to be hauled until it reaches the customer, ethanol could've still be taken more seriously.

Is this the most recent thread about ethanol?
America Was Wrong About Ethanol - Study Shows
White board talk, confirms my suspicion.

E10 vs Gasoline
 

The straight gasoline would have a heating value in the neighborhood of 117,427-Btu/gallon vs 111,836-Btu for REGULAR UNLEADED E10.
So the engine 'see's' 4.76% less available chemical energy coming in, requiring the difference be made up in more fuel mass per brake-horsepower-hour of work.
A difference in OCTANE rating might allow a high-compression engine to operate without destructive detonation, increasing it's thermal efficiency, and cancelling the loss in the difference in Btus.
It would 'all depend.'
'Specificity.';)

When my stepmother's oldest son inquired me about a rumor that any car with EFI would in fact be flexfuel, one of the aspects I pointed out to him was ethanol being used to bump the octane rating up of the lower-grade gasoline available in Brazil. However, as ethanol is classified as an "oxygenate", a larger amount of ethanol would lead the O² sensor to throw an error code even if the engine would be still running smooth.

Afaik, on a flex fuel usa car, the conditions map was increased to accept out of parameter temperature conditions caused by the alcohol. IE: different exhaust temps with no corresponding other symptoms would now be acceptable then add more or less fuel. Suspect the after cat egt probably stays the same.

Not a computer mechanic, but can play one on the internet

This is a better description of straight gas vs E85:
Why Does Ethanol Make So Much Power? (Versus Gasoline)

I had done some benchmarks mixing E10 and E85 to test different ethanol ratios using our 2003 and 2010 Prius:

• straight gas - expensive and poorest hill climb performance
• E10 - much more affordable than E85
• E50 - highest ratio that did not cause a check engine light
• E85 - best hill climb performance but highest cost and threw a benign check engine code, injector on too long

Bob Wilson

It's the same elsewhere. What I meant is, as most cars with EFI have oxygen sensors anyway, some folks actually tried to run on ethanol on non-flexfuel models expecting the EFI and ignition to compensate. Sure a CEL might be triggered once the ECM is not programmed specificly to handle a higher amount of ethanol.