I want to get to the bottom of this ethanol killing my mpg

[shovel]

If we are to make the assumption that everyone here is being somewhat fair and honest about their experiences, the remaining variable is the mechanical condition of the vehicle.

I say this because on both of my vehicles, one of which I use with a Scangauge and the other of which I just keep an eye on reciepts and odometer readings... E10 vs. 100% petrol comes out as a wash. Both vehicles run/idle/accelerate flawlessly on either fuel and miles per tank is consistent every single time no matter which fuel I fill up on, with exception made for unusual driving conditions (road trip, trailer being pulled, etc)

So, since both of my vehicles perform excellent on E10, this means it is possible for a vehicle to perform excellent on E10. That or I'm lying for some reason.. but the only person that will affect is you, since you can either work to correct what's wrong with your car and enjoy improved fuel versatility, or alternately you can shrug and say "that internet guy is full of sh@%" and keep having problems and blaming some liquid for them.

[shovel]

Originally Posted by Nerys

Is the 104 unleaded with or without ethanol?

How much 104 unleaded would I need to mix with 84 unleaded to get 87-90 octane regular?

I may be mistaken here but isn't high octane petrol "made" by adding a blend of distillates like toluene and benzene to standard grade?

My cars & the girlfriend's 02 TL run flawlessly on the 85 oct. fuel in Utah. Since the advent of knock sensors and electronic ignition, I kinda don't see the point in running high octane unless you have a forced induction engine or some other non-standard condition. Or maybe I am just delusional and imagine that the cars are running well..

[Nerys]

Well ethanol is in no way increased fuel versatility any more than High Fructose corn Syrup is in anyway good for it. The switch to E10 is 100% for Political and Financial reasons.

First problem is less energy so lower economy IE you don't save any foreign oil since you now need to buy more oil even if just a little bit.

Second PRODUCING ethanol massively and I mean REALLY massively taxes another scarce resource even more valuable than gasoline. Fresh Water. It really does take INSANE quantities of fresh water to make ethanol.

I would have to reconfirm this but I read about a plant wanting to set up production outside of Orlando Florida and for large scale operation they have to submit a proposal for how much WATER they are going to need.

they submitted a request for more water for this one plant than the ENTIRE CITY OF ORLANDO currently uses.

While not the story I am talking about its about the same issue
Ethanol Production May Consume Too Much Water - from Florida Trend, Florida's Source For Business News

NOW as to it being mechanical. PLEASE enlighten me. I KEEP hoping its mechanical I REALLY do

you see if its mechanical that means my problems GO AWAY with the simple replacement of a component.

But I have replaced EVERYTHING I can think of. I soent some $400 on the voyager replacing every damned elctro/mechnical thing I could THINK OF that would have any impact on fuel economy. New sensors new filters new exhaust you name it.

This also ignores the ACTUAL experiences I had with the vehicles as the switch to ethanol was happening here in NJ. my MPG always 100% of the time returned to normal when I avoided ethanol. Can you explain that mechanically?

My MPG levels returned to normal when I used old pre ethanol gas. Can you explain that mechanically.

all 8 Vehicles I have access to have lost similar fuel economy levels. Can you explain that mechanically.

Could my good readings at non ethanol stations during the switch and with old gas be flukes? why sure they could. but what do you think the probability of that is? I would think it would be pretty damned low.

What about all 8 vehicles having the same problem? what could cause that? what one components or one set of components across 8 vehicles ranging from 1988 vehicles to 1998 vehicles would all cause the same problems?

I AM ABSOLUTELY WILLING TO ENTERTAIN MECHNICALS BEING THE PROBLEM.

Just tell me what mechanicals to check? Since I did the most work and the most miles on the 92 Club and the 88 cherokee I will limit this to those vehicles (I am not rich so there has to be limits) if something HELPS one of those I will try it on the others.

88 Jeep Brand new cat and brand new exhaust from cat back.
92 Club Brand new cat and exhaust from the cat back

Both vehicles have brand new O2 sensors and the jeep has a brand new MAF sensor (I think thats what it was)

PCV and EGR equivs all tested good.

new plugs wires cap rotor in both vehicles. (the 92 wa a ***** to do!)

No temp problems no running problems. no noises knocks pings. both are low miles now. the van is 180k or so the jeep is 121k on the new engine (485k on the old engine)

The new engine was FLAWLESS in the old jeep it came from drove it for 2 years. when I swaped it over I replaced literally EVERYTHING except the head gasket. all new everything. timing chain and sprocket all new gaskets I scrubbed and cleaned valve cover and oil pan. No blow by. purrs like a kitten as most well cared for I6's doo.

92 van runs good and strong no issues.

both have no alts and new water pumps (the van needed a timing chain cover so I replaced everything in there while I had it apart) when I swapped the jeep engine I took no chances replaced everything that was cheap (most parts for the I6 are very cheap)

both vehicles also required there fuel pumps to be changes since ethanol introduction (this could be a coincidence but 7 of our 8 vehicles have needed new fuel pumps since ethanol. NEVER ONCE before ethanol. while not conclusive it sure does make one go hmmm and 6 of the 8 have needed O2 sensors a 7th might need one) so far all the REPLACEMENT fuel pumps and o2 sensors are holding up. I am wondering if the replacements are more tolerant ??

Compression good on all vehicles. all well within spec (upper 90% for the jeep 85%+ for the club) all cylinders within 5% of each other.

neither eats oil no burn or odd discolorations. Spark plugs are colored well no fouling or fuel air issue apparent from that angle.

both got NORMAL MPG's after all this work (before ethanol)

The first "change" in mpg of more than 2mpg was the introduction of ethanol. during the previous YEAR of driving my mpg values did not waiver by more than 2mpg "except" when I went to the mountains. while the 31" tires give me an mpg boost at home they MURDER me in the mountains :-)

What kind of vehicles are you driving? I HAVE noticed that newer cars do not seem to be bothered so much by ethanol at least not enough for the owners to notice. Most people don't even monitor this stuff so even if you cut 20% off there economy they would never know it or be able to calculate anything about it.

also not many people drive a very consistent 500-600 miles a week. I can go through an entire tank of gas in 3-4 days sometimes.

SO what else do you want to know? What else do you want me to check?

You tell me what you want to know or what you want me to check and if its within my means I WILL DO IT.

If its not ethanol GREAT then help me figure out what IS causing my issues.

either way I just want to KNOW so I can put it asside and worry about other things.

To give you some insight as to why this is so important to me lets assuming 2.10 per gallon just for a side by side comparison.

The Jeep should require roughly $3500 in gasoline a year (I average close to 40,000 miles a year or MORE although it is split among at least 2 vehicles but for math's sake lets pretend I just drive the jeep since it has the best mpg)

At its CURRENT fuel economy it will require $4666 worth of gasoline.

That means Ethanol or Mechnical I am now spending $1166 MORE DOLLARS per year in gasoline.

I do not give 2 ****s where the problem is coming from that is NOT acceptable. I could almost buy another nice Cherokee every year for that price.

I hope you understand now why this is such a big issue to me. Why I have poured so much damned money into repairing these vehicles TRYING to nail down where my losses are coming from.

If it was ONLY my cars and the rest of my cars and my families cars did not also see these drops I might consider simply REPLACING a car with another. but I could only afford another car from the SAME ERA and all data I have right now says I will have the same damned problem. I am not willing to spend thousands of dollars to "find out" and hope for the best.

Suggestions?

[Frank Lee]

You need to stop badmouthing E when you're around your vehicles, so you don't trip that circuit I told you about.

[shovel]

My cars are a 2001 S10 4.3L with a custom PCM tune (increase polling rate of emissions/closed loop sensors, adjusted fuel map to compensate for air intake & exhaust changes, eliminate EGR, disengage a/c on heavy throttle, increase trans line pressure, reduce torque management % by half) and a 1992 Tempo refitted in 1993 for CNG/gasoline dual fuel by Metropane, Inc, whose engine management devices circumvent the Ford ECU in both fuel modes. I am not closely familiar with the capabilities of this system yet, but I have observed through experimenting that the standard Ford DTC's can still be instigated (as an example, bypassing MAF produces the appropriate mav volts low DTC - no air rushing past wire = wire gets hot = increased impedance = reduced voltage), and I can observe literally no difference in engine behavior or per-tank fuel mileage on "oxygenated fuel" vs. the "100% gasoline" sold at a nearby Love's station.

I really don't know, nor am I in any way equipped to determine what difference there is between your observations and mine, other than the observer of course. I am saying that I have two cars which are utterly indifferent about oxygenated vs. "100%" gasoline.

So what we have is, either there is a mechanical difficulty on all of the vehicles you have observed, or one of us is ignorant/delusional/absent-minded/lying/etc, or there is a drastic difference among the fuels we have available to us. Obviously nothing productive can come from speculating about each other's sanity or intellect so we're left with the mechanical differences among our observed vehicles, and the regional differences which may affect the actual composition of the fuel and weather conditions in which it is stored and burned.

In any case, for your sake I hope you are able to find a workable solution so you can save that money. Maybe a mild forced induction such as those high power electric "superchargers" - not the boat cabin fans, but the 25k rpm ones that stand a chance of giving you half a PSI or more - to increase your effective compression ratio?

[Nerys]

well I NEVER saw a difference in oxygenated fuel and regular either,. We are talking about 10% ETHANOL fuel. Not oxygenated fuel ?????

As for being productive. THAT is why I want to find some non ethanol fuel. if I can do an A B A B test type setup I can at least CONFIRM OR DENY "something" is going on with the fuel. MAYBE eliminate fuel as the problem or eliminate mechanicals as the problems.

Thats the point of this thread. TO TEST and Eliminate one or the other. TO DO THAT I need some regular gas to test with. IE run 3 4 tanks of non ethanol and "see" what happens to my fuel economy.

if that shows a difference even though it would take an insane "driving" difference to account for this massive loss I will do a BLIND test on my dad's van. I will fill it up for him instructing him never to fill it and I will randomly switch between ethanol and non ethanol every few tanks and "see" what his numbers do.

if both numbers go up that would be pretty conclusive its THE DAMNED FUEL. if the numbers DON'T go up then its pretty conclusive its my Damned cars.

The metro I am getting would make for a very good test vehicle I think since it only has a 10Gallon tank. I was thinking of putting a 10 gallon fuel cell in the jeep so I could completely switch between fuels to get more accurate data and PRECISE fill and use values. ie I could very easily use precisely say 10 gallons each time. It would not even need to be exactly 10 gallons as long as each time its precisely the same exact amount of fuel.

but to do any of these I need to get or make some fuel without ethanol.

I am thinking of trying to make some gas by adding water to sequester the ethanol and then siphone off the gas. a lot of wastage to make sure I don't get any water in the gas I siphone off but done right I could make 5 gallons or so a day and fill a 55gallon barrel. that would be enough for some "initial testing. Drive for 2 tanks get solid mpg figures then switch to the "clean" gas drive that for 50 gallons get some mpg numbers and then switch back to ethanol gas.

WILL my car run ok on 84 octane? its my understanding this is what the resultant gas will be without the ethanol.

[Frank Lee]

We are talking about 10% ETHANOL fuel. Not oxygenated fuel ?????

Ummm yeah E10 IS oxygenated fuel.

[gone-ot]

E10 is 10% ethanol & 90% gasoline
E15 is 15% ethanol & 85% gasoline
E85 is 85% ethanol & 15% gasoline

M10 is 10% methanol & 90% gasoline

[MadisonMPG]

I could continue with facts, but I just am going to choose watch this unfold.

[Nerys]

Well your "facts" contradict any reality I have been able to measure so far. SO until your facts "agree" with my reality I am going to put your "facts" on the back burner.

GIVE ME SOMETHING REAL that will let your facts jive with my reality and we can talk. Till then I am FORCED to live with my reality and the nearly $1200 MORE GAS I am buying over what I WAS buying before ethanol.

Like I said if its electro/mechanical I am all ears. GIVE ME SOMETHING TO TEST that I have not already done.