Can Wayne (any others?) shed any light on how long it takes for your vehicle to adjust to ethanol? Did someone in the past say around 3 tankfuls?

 

Hey Billy

I've said for 2 years, it takes my FEH at lease 3 tanks to clear the effects of ethanol. After getting my KAM reset, I've found it takes about 4 tanks to clear-up my mileage. Wayne is the best hypermiler I know on the planet, but he doesn't have the experience I have behind the FEH. Wayne and I say what we think based on our experiences and have disagreed on this E10 issue for a long time. I knew if Debbie was using E10 when I drove her FEH, the long term fuel trim must have adjusted to it. I ask that question to Wayne and he knows that Debbie was burning E10 I guess.

I'm the only one that has raised this issue with ethanol and the three tanks it takes to clear up its effects, so I'm the man. My fuel trim is in a mess right now and I'm not a happy camper. Just got over a KAM reset and now this crap. This will cost me $, but I want everyone to understand the truth about mileage and the FEH/MMH.

I hold the record at Hybridfest for the FEH at 60mpg according to my Nav Sys Max, and it was done on E10 according to Wayne. I hope to see my record broken in the future by someone else.

GaryG

 

Hi,

There is another aspect that should be considered green house gas emissions-wise. The CO2 that is emitted when burning Ethanol was recently captured out of the atmosphere by the plant while it grew. So making Ethanol and burning it is different and is argued to be less harmful because it is part of the natural carbon cycle. Oil on the other hand, is taking CO2 that was sequestered millions of years ago and putting it back in play, increasing the overall inventory of CO2 in the air. As long as we grow plants to make Ethanol, photosynthesis is used to remove the CO2 from the atmosphere (solar power!) and put it back into a usable form to make fuel again next year.

In short, one could argue that emitting more CO2 from Ethanol is not as bad environment-wise because we can assume that the same field that created your fuel pulled the CO2 out yesterday, and will pull it out again tomorrow.

The price/mile is another story.

Discuss!

Roch

 

Debbie, I am not insulting you in any way.
I am complaining about the idiot across the street from you who has E85 priced higher than gasoline. I showed you what the station owner probably paid in an earlier post. So maybe he has his signage wrong.
If not, it is immoral, if not criminal what he is doing.

Gary, I'm putting my money where my mouth is.
I've had E10 for 3 tanks now, but also have bitter cold, near zero 'F each commute. These weeks I'm working in central Minnesota. I'm getting 33 MPG at 64 MPH when it is +15 degrees. Today I was in a hurry and drove 70 MPH in the 70 zone, and got 28.8 MPG with E10 at +8 degrees.

I just filled up with E20 for the first time tonite. It was + 1'F as I was tooling around town for 25 to 30 minutes. Got 36.6 MPG in town for the first 12 miles of E20. I could get EV frequently, but for shorter time between restarts. At +1F the car would usually restart sooner than I could get the battery down to 40% SOC.

I'll keep everyone posted on the MPG from E20.
( if some states (IE Minnesota) are thinking of mandating E20, then it must be an unspoken fact with the car manufacturer's that E20 is safe for all cars, they just don't put that in print ( yet ).

The ethanol coalition says E30 is safe for any car.

I filled up with 13.25 gallons of E10 @ $2.859 and
I added 1.75 gallons of E85 @ $2.539 about half way into refueling.
So blended cost was $2.821 a gallon.

 

Roch, you posted while I was typing but you are correct.

There is POSITIVE PROOF that ethanol production/use is a carbon negative process. The EPA says so, and any freshman level science class can and does discuss this fact, with all the reasons why, including the math. Now, who wants the math?

 

Well, I'm not sure it is carbon negative (I'll think about it while I sit on a carbon spewing airplane). It does make it more complicated though, and we all like nice simple math!

Cheers,

rcomeau

 

John-
All the E85 sold in the Twin Cities is running around $3.39 per gallon and in the great state of Minnesota, where the government believes you to be too stupid to run your own life, there are laws on the books regarding how fuel prices are set. You must charge the consumer 8% or more over what you paid and you cannot be more than one cent different from your nearby competitors. So, the guy may be an idiot (I've never met the owner) but he's following the laws. Non-compliance brings a very costly (in the thousands of dollars per incident) fine.
One would think that before mandating a product (E20) that may or may not be safe for cars the Legislature and Governor would double-check with manufacturers as to whether this would be acceptable. They did, and while the manufacturers said the car would probably still run, albeit at reduced fuel efficiency, it would most assuredly invalidate the warranty. So, in 2012 when the mandate becomes law, anybody with a car under warranty in this state will lose their claims status. There have not been any recent talks to see if there was a way a compromise could be worked out between the manufacturers and the state.

 

This sounded strange to me considering that E85 is heavily subsidized and also that E85 vehicles get about 1/3 lower MPG when running on it. E85 is almost always much less expensive than gasoline or the blends often referred to here as "E10".

So I checked and the latest reported prices in the Twin Cities at those gas buddy sites are around $2.80 (+/- 15c) for regular and around $2.25 for E85.

There are a dozen or more stations with diesel priced at $3.39 per gallon.

 

Here is a photo from Fairmont Minnesota, just 100 miles from "Twin Cities" taken 12/6/07.


The "super" is 89 Octane. I think the E85 is 89 Octane also, so it is a "fair" comparison.
Notice the snow on the ground.
Here was the temperature at my A.M. commute:
If it is hard to read, it says 6.1'F and 99% R.H.


I did a special experiment of 20% ethanol today.
I pumped 1.75 gallons of E85 and mixed it with 13.25 gallons (approx. ) of E10.
I drove 99 miles to a job site with temperature outside of about 10'F.
The car sat all day *(8 hours) outside at about 16'F with no block heater.
Then I drove the same 99 miles home.
Speeds were 70 MPH for 95 of the 99 miles in the morning. ( it was not snowing )
Speeds were 60 MPH for 95 of the 99 miles of the drive home. ( it was snowing )
Round-trip Average is in the photo below. I have a SGI and a SGIIxG.
I forgot that I did calibrate the SGI a long time ago to match reality.
The new SGIIxG was at the factory settings for speed.
The SGI is closer to "actual".


I went home and parked for ~5 minutes while I put my work stuff into the house and fed the dog.
Then I went out for a 15 mile drive around town with an already hot engine, and HV battery pack at about 55'F from using cabin heat during the ride home for 2 hours. Outside was about 20'F.
I reset the dash MPG display before I left to run an errand, and tried to use P&G and EV as best I could around town. There was snow and salt and slush on the roads most of the time.
I got a 41.8 MPG round trip for ~15 miles.


This was all done with E20.
The car behaved the same as usual.
Just lowered MPG.
Oh... about a week ago, a lowered my front tires to 35psi and rears to 40psi due to all the icy roads.
Just for a little piece of mind. Now if I do run off the road, I won't kick myself wondering "IF" it was due to the tires. Spring/Summer/Fall I run 45psi in all 4.

At work I was talking with another man who says E10 lowers MPG by 10% in his motorcycle also.
( not used today, obviously! ) But he told me he went to an automotive conference or seminar or something, and he said Volvo says MPG turns around at 30% ethanol and actually starts to IMPROVE at over 30% but less than 50% ( in a traditional engine ). So who knows? There is hope after all. I take it this man knows what he is talking about, but I want to find that Volvo report, don't you? Let me know if you find it first! -John

 

John, I just proved myself and you wrong about E10 because of short term test and observations. The long term fuel trims in KAM must be given time to readjust to the fuel changes. You and I both must look at long term fuel maps to guide this and other forums about fuel change.

GaryG