Ethanol (E10) less economical

[CharlieBrown]

Thought this made for interesting reading.

Given that the majority of the cars here (MPS) won't be too happy running in E10, with the wider community looking to this as a cheaper option, seems to be all but a myth...


RUNNING your car on the ethanol-blend petrol E10 may not be the good deal it looks, according to Queensland's peak motoring body.

The RACQ said a minimum of four cents a litre discount was needed to compensate for the higher fuel consumption when using E10 blends.

The lower octane level of E10 blends means cars go fewer kilometres for every litre of fuel consumed.

Major petrol station chains are typically offering two to three cents a litre discount on E10, RACQ's general manager for external relations Gary Fites said.

"With E10 increasingly being headlined on service station price boards because of its slightly lower pump price, it can look good buying for cost-conscious motorists," Mr Fites said in a statement.

"With RACQ's own field testing confirming other independent research that indicates around three per cent higher fuel consumption when using E10, a minimum discount of four cents a litre would be needed at current price levels to make use of the ethanol blend more economical than regular ULP."

Mr Fites said motorists who want to get the best value fuel should make a close check on the relative pricing of regular unleaded petrol and E10.

Source - Courier Mail - Ethanol less economical | The Courier-Mail

[tricache]

Awesome find Dan!

I have always been a bit suspect of e10, like I don't even run it in my Neo!!

[remotegt]

yep always known that. thats why its cheaper. works out the same in the end. need to use more ethanol based fuel to get same mileage out of normal ulp.

always 98octane for me.

[kmh001]

It's not only the lower octane that degrades performance, we all know the stoiciometrically correct AFR for petrol is 14.7:1, but for ethanol it's around 9:1.

[matt]

When I was doing 1000km a week I tried E10 for a month straight, I was getting about 510km before the fuel light would come on, on 91 I was getting about 560 / 570 strangely though I was getting similar figures on 95 and 98 (98 actually being worse) all but the 95 was being purchased from the Shell in Tugan, all the same run up the M1, off at the cleveland exit and up through to Victoria point and the reverse run of an afternoon. Now I run 1 tank 98 to every third tank of 91 and find that in city I get about 480 from a tank, note this is in an Auto SP23.

[MPS3]

Notice how the inside of our petrol flaps on the MPS it says 95 octane or E10 safe? Would anyone be game to put E10 in their MPS?

[Jmac]

Notice how the inside of our petrol flaps on the MPS it says 95 octane or E10 safe? Would anyone be game to put E10 in their MPS?

I have noticed this, but from memory this is for two reasons, in worse case (ie no 98) you CAN run 95.. and the E10 was because some cars are not E10 safe, ie. the ethanol can degrade some engine components (eg rubber).

Someone correct me if I am wrong.

[CharlieBrown]

Justin, I think it was to do with valve seats from memory...

Either way, im not puttin no sugar juice in my car!

[shakespeare]

Either way, im not puttin no sugar juice in my car!

Likewise, only delicious 98 for me

And the other thing with Ethanol - producing the stuff consumes large amounts of resources, land, food etc etc...

[Jeev]

I was alternating between E10 and BP Ultimate week to week and saw no issues, but I haven't run E10 for a little while now. The truth is that many of the fuels contain Ethanol anyway...