Fuel Type - Ethanol's effect on MPG

If you get the chance, check out my last fill up on Fuelly. I actually just posted a thread about it the other day. I'm getting around 9MPG increase on my first tank of E0 fuel. The tank I'm currently on is even higher--some of which is my honing of driving style, but mostly it's the E0 gas. (I believe).

Not to mention, with ethanol free gas, the car acts like a Corvette. A completely different car, much peppier and quite frankly I believe it's better for the car all around. Perhaps I just want it to be the fuel more than it actually is the fuel.. I'm still in it too early to know for sure. But the results look promising at this point in my testing.

Did you know the EPA uses ethanol free fuel for their efficiency testing?

 

True, the EPA has not changed a test since 1972, they have added some, but the original tests are still identical over all years, for CAFE purposes. (If they changed, how would car makers cope with year to year goals?)

 

Dang it...now I know why my Sago palms died! Seriously we had a bunch in our yard in Lousiana but that was 10 yrs ago and they died of freezing, unless of course ...you ?

>>I just went through the 259 Ethanol Free (E0) stations in Virginia:

147 Unbranded NoName
80 Small brands Non-TopTier (Spirit, Royal, Liberty, etc etc)
24 Majors Non-TopTier (16 Marathon, BP, Sun, etc)
8 Majors TopTier (6 Shell, 1 Exxon, 1 Phillips)

259 Ethanol Free in VA

So it's pretty rare to find a E0 TopTier major brand that I would normally use. I am confused if TopTier means anything but a fan club of the majors, but the trend is clear.

Yes I am well aware of the E0 used in the EPA testing, the conspiracy theorist in me says the reason for this is EPA (and CR) are hiding the negative MPG impact of E10. But we just have to get used to it, as someone said, Congress believes E10+ is good for the Country.

 

Ewww... I have 3 sago palms and they started turning yellow this week

 

I've read their reason for this is "due to the inconsistency of blends from one batch of fuel to another."

C'mon now, the Government is here to protect us. They'd never do anything evil or corrupt! Just sit back, relax, and let Big Brother take care of things!!

(I hope it's clear that the last bit was total sarcasm..)

 

Third tank of E0 fuel calculated to 71.8 MPG's and brought my average up to 60.0. It's almost like steroids for cars!

 

Adiing etanol to gas to make E10 has two detractions:
1. it has less combustion energy and
2. it is corrosive.
As a ChE in automotive I have been party to the testing. Gaskets in particular on older cars are vulnerable. Asfor mpg the variation is demonstrated only if you perform regorous statistical evaluatrions and its not easy. But the mpg will be about 1 -1.2 mpg less whicvh matters not. But long term corrosion in the injecor system and fuel parts does.

 

More repairs for me, replacing corroded lines, injectors, pumps. E10 acts as a "water magnet" with condensation as well as high humidity.

Go figure.

DBCassidy

 

So even if E0 fuel doesn't break even with the cost of regular gas (as far as cost of tank to distance travelled goes) the general consensus here is that using E0 fuel is better in the long run than standard E10 gas? Since I have the capability to use E0 gas all the time, I'm wondering if perhaps I should even though the cost is more (slightly) than using E10..

 

If your engine was made before 1991, you definitely want E0 as the fuel systems were not designed for E10.
(Some lawnmowers and chainsaws still aren't)

I have no trouble with E10 in a modern automoble, and I expect the old wives tails to die out in about 5 decades. (Like 3000 mile oil changes, or early oil changes the first time, five decades after they were true, they are dying out)

 

Perhaps those are true, but when I was told I didn't need to change the oil until 10,000 miles I felt very uneasy about it.. Heck even every 5,000 miles just doesn't sound right. My Toyota dealer wouldn't change my oil early, believe me I tried.. "It's waranted for oil changes every 10,000 miles" they said. "Fully synthetic 0 weight oil" they said.

Old habbits die hard I guess. In the meantime I prefer my E0 fuel, I swear it makes my car peppier and happier!

 

I believe it makes you happier and you are able to convince yourself it is peppier. And I like you happy, so it is all good.

 

I don't know the answer, but here in north VA we only have E10 and it is major oil companies I use (Shell, Exxon, Chevron) that are considered TopTier.com reformulated gasoline with extra detergent additives and 10% ethanol. Assuming I wanted to trek 60-miles to get E0, it would be a no-name or small off-brand station not rated on TopTier.com and probably not EPA reformulated gasoline. Therefore getting Eo seems like I could be getting less quality* gasoline, although I am a little skeptical if TopTier + EPA reformulated E10 gasoline is really cleaner, but OTOH I have no problems to report after 120k miles.

* I do not know really know how EPA reformulated gasoline conceivably forces a refinery to use a certain recipe to make gasoline. Conceivably an E0 refinery has more flexibility to put more energy into each gallon if they are not forced by EPA regs to make it a certain way. Possibly this gives E0 a further edge on MPG but who knows what that means in terms of gunk build up? If you have access to TopTier.com E0, I would be tempted to use it. I see in VA we seem to have maybe 2% of E0 stations are TopTier.com companies.

 

I didn't do the calculation but the 3.6% loss in combustion energy is why the mpg drops by 1 or 2 mpg.
BTW RON is research octane number which is the octane ratings you see. 91 RON is 91 octane equivalent gasoline. The posts leave off the 'research word but its the octane number determined by research method.

 

Refineries do have the opportunity to formulate their gasoline output by changing the various chemicals. Most of the time the refinery runs according to the various chemicals produced by changing the many ways to process the crude oil so that the amount of 87, 91, and 94 octane is maximized based on the shipments needed to fulfill station orders. That processing will also change based on thed crude oil received and then additives are used to not only provide cleaning but to enhance burning as well as the octane number. One example is the use of tetra-ethyl- lead to boost octane but is no longer legal to use so other chemicals are used. There are dozens of others, many held proprietary by the oil company. Refineries often change recipoes to fit the various emission standards for many areas of the nation; and they will change by season of the year. So the specs for gasoline is mainly set by regulations regarding the octane and emissions rather than energy of combustion so just because you got 50 mpg yesterday doesn't mean you'll get it today. Combustion energy is not a hard wired specification.

 

You can drive over to Summit Point racetrack (WV) and get 'real' gas, which is fornmulated for maximum combustion energy as well as octane sure to be higher than the grade mentioned. Buill Scott must have pumps there at really high prices.
But as you say its mainly for racers where max power is necessary. For the rest, if its an older hign comprewssion engined car running a non-alcohol content injection cleaner will pretty well take care of the need for 'real' gas using E10.

 

I think that is interesting point...some of the mid-west folks were part of gasoline coop that gave the E0 option. I assume the E0 available from the coop was probably designed for optionally blending with ethanol. Conceptually if you had an E0 designed for max power, it might be more MPG than the coop E0.

In other words, when we say ethanol is -3% on MPG, that assumes no change in the E0 component, which might be possible to optimize without the ethanol in there.

 

Found this app today for my iPhone

Pure Gas

Pure Gas for iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4, iPhone 4S, iPhone 5, iPod touch (3rd generation), iPod touch (4th generation), iPod touch (5th generation) and iPad on the iTunes App Store

cf. Ethanol-free gas stations in the U.S. and Canada

 

The test has not changed much since about 2008 when it was adjusted to be more like 'real' driving, mainly for adjustments to the actual results to please manufacturers. For example acceleration between the many duifferent speeds in a test are done as gently as possible and much slower than wany of us drive in reality. I once ran a test with the program altered to max acceledration between steps any virtually destroyed the mpg ratings. It was a muscle xdar so it wasn't hard.
The reason almost no drivers get mpg in real driving is because the test is actually designed to be as favorable to manufacturers as possible, especially since they run the tests for the EPA. If you think Hyundai is the only manufacturer who 'played' with the results you are a target for internet scams. The test is good for one reason: its a standard test that can accurately compare one vehicle with another. I wonder just how many cars of equal type have to be averaged to get the reported value. Or how few can be averaged for how knows how many are tested. It was a question asked but never answered.
Any time you see quoted EPA mpg values always use the city mileage as your likely results as long as you drive both highway and city miles. Its marketing in actuon; its called 'puffery' and its legal.

 

I do think that the specified fuel in EPA testing has been changed to E10 gas and that will likely result in a 3-4% loss in mpg, not eough to show up much when mpg is rounded off to the nearest whole mpg. But if you think manufacturers will not sweat blood to get that test from 39.4 to 39.6 mpg you are sadly misinformed.