Pure Gas ( No Ethanol ) experiment

It certainly is here. Doesn't exist. E0 is always 91 or higher. And costs a fair bit more as well.

I'm confused. I read the chart as showing fuel economy % decreases more with each level of ethanol as compared to non ethanol.

 

Hydroscopic only matters in a system that is not sealed. If you have a sealed system like modern cars the ability to absorb water wouldn't matter at all. In fact moisture in fuel systems hasn't been a problem since modern emissions controls took over.

 

Out of curiosity, I'm trying this with my Gen2. On my 2nd tank of ethanol-free 87oct from Murphy USA. No improvement logged for mpg, but I perceive the ICE running smoother at lower speeds. My wife delivers, so the cars idles a lot in between orders. Last tank she got 40mpg, spending 2-3 hours a day, idling in grocery-store parking lots .

I see a slight benefit, but is it worth the extra 50 cents a gallon?

 

Yes, ICE runs slightly smoother with 87 octane E0, where gasoline engines are using specifically what engineers recommend. Some people have noted a very slight increase in low rpm torque. But you really should show, as stated, 8% to 5% better MPG, if you are a featherfooter. If you (or your wife) drive "to keep up with traffic", you aren't driving like I do.

 

When she is delivering on the clock, hyper-miling takes a back seat.

 

Yes, many people like to think their jobs are on the line, to justify "keeping up with the other cars", which are over-accelerating & speeding "to keep their jobs too". Its amazing how many fast drivers are starving to death.

 

OP,

Your intentions were good, but I can't wait for this thread to die...



Rob43

 

Some people jes' don' liak ta know what the most efficient gasoline is fer their VEE-hickl....or to know what wool is being draped over the American people's eyes by the "ethanol in gasoline industry". Easiest thang ta do, is NOT ta read this here thread.

 

I would think that would be the last thing it would do seeing as it is a Prius. Sitting still doesn't require the engine to be running. Is she sitting in the car with the heat on or something?

 

Yes. As "ethanol in gasoline industry" data always admit, their differences are comparable to the energy difference between inaccurately designated 87 octane ethanol blend (E10) & accurately designated 100% 87 octane gasoline (E0). However, 87 octane engine engineers recommend accurately designated 87 octane gasoline(E0) for most efficient results in 87 octane gasoline engines. The use of mismatched 83.5 octane gasoline & mismatched 114 octane ethanol(E10) in 87 octane gasoline engines leads to further losses, other than just the energy differences. Both the 83.5 octane gasoline & 114 octane ethanol in 87 octane E10, is missing some of the power stroke in the 87 octane gasoline engine. That is why accurately designated 87 octane E0, as burned efficiently in 87 octane gasoline engines, produces 8%, 8%, 7%-8%, 7% & 5% better MPG than inaccurately designated 87 octane E10.

 

I don't mind it so much when people have heartfelt issues with e-10 based on mechanical issues, some if which are real...as "discussed" above.
I similarly do not mind it so much when some people express misgivings about wanting to eat nice, fresh corn-on-the-cob instead of subsidizing farmers to make hooch.
There are also ecological and geopolitical issues that have been discussed and debated as-nauseous in this forum as well as people conducting experiments with e- all the way through e85 - including ME.

However (comma!) lying with numbers is still....lying, no matter how many times you tweet it or post it.

Period.
Full stop.

There have been ZERO credible claims of more than about a 2-percent delta in fuel efficiency for E0 versus E10.
The energy delta is about 1.8 percent.
The Prius, a car that lives on SOLELY for its efficiency is DESIGNED for E10.

Vaccines work.
The Earth is not flat.
There's no such thing as a 100mpg carburetor.
Nitrogen in tires doesn't make your car drive better or more efficiently.
People pay for their own walls.

....some lies simply will not die. Probably because the human animal simply prefers them over the truth!

 

But, but, but... we’ve been assured there are such things as “alternate facts” and that mainstream news is really “fake news”. Have we been lied to?!?

 

Didn't you mean something closer to 3.x percent?

 

Don't think so....
Gasoline gallon equivalent - Wikipedia

I still see 1.8 (average) but I'm a product of public education - mostly...and thus open to a cited differing opinion.....

Where would I find 3?

 

(1) The chart posted here.

(2) The same page you referenced, but further down: Gasoline gallon equivalent - Wikipedia
"... Pure ethanol provides 2/3 of the heat value available in pure gasoline.

In the most common calculation, that is, the BTU value of pure gasoline vs gasoline with 10% ethanol, the latter has just over 96% BTU value of pure gasoline. ..."

It doesn't help that the table on that wikipedia page shows a 2.4% spread among other gasoline formulations.

 

Yes, but what's the thermal efficiency of the ICE?
Why is it then that the resulting GGE not 97-percent?
Are the MPGe values touted by the EVangelists equally misleading?
Yes...it's understood that the efficiency of an electric motor is > than an ICE but doesn't that then make the GGE tabulation more important?

The difference between 1.8 and 3-percent of additional fuel efficiency is fairly trivial, but we should be able to firmly establish more or less what we expect one gallon of gas to be in order to beat back the borders of ignorance on this subject and what we should expect as an additional MPG benefit for paying an additional 15-20 percent for the privilege of using a fuel without a beneficial cleaning agent.

I've added a 1980's Honda generator to my collection of ICE equipment (EG2200x)....and I expect to get it running today.
This means that I will be buying more "pure gas" over the next few months as I prepare for hurricane season.
I promised myself that I would not try and feed another gas generator, but it's big enough and free enough to try and use.

So.....while I'm a strong proponent to letting customers DECIDE on which flavor of gas they should be allowed to purchase, that decision should not be infleuenced by crap data from politically (or monetarily) motivated hacks.

I'll take the 3-percent value as within the range of probability, but I'm still a little skeptical over why it's not reflected in the gas version of MPGe.....

 

The Spring temperatures have required running the AC again.

 

I'm now into my 3rd tank of 87(no ethanol). My mpg has risen from 40 to 42.5 . The usage has been just city-delivery driving with long periods of idle time and the A/C going. Still not sure if it is worth the extra 50 cents per gallon.