User Tag List

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 37

Thread: Ethanol (E10) less economical

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Coorparoo, Brisbane
    Age
    43
    Posts
    3,771

    Default Ethanol (E10) less economical

    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
    2015 Audi S3 | MTX | Sedan | Sepang Blue | Sunroof | SPP1 | Assistance Package | BW - Week 17 | Delivery June/July '15... Hopefully...

    Help support OzMPSClub - Become a VIP Member today! - Click here for more details...

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Coomera, Gold Coast
    Age
    41
    Posts
    3,565
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Awesome find Dan!

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

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Canberra
    Age
    38
    Posts
    267

    Default

    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.

  4. #4

    Default

    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.

  5. #5

    Default

    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.

  6. #6

    Default

    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?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    North side, Vic
    Age
    37
    Posts
    6,745

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MPS3 View Post
    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.
    MY16 WRX STi Crystal White Pearl
    -= Rally Armour Flaps - 2XS Muffler Delete =-

    FG FPV F6 MKII Vixen - SOLD
    -= Bluepower SRI - ID1000 Injectors - Venom Cat - XCAL3 - ProcessWest Stg2 Intercooler - 359 RWKW=-

    CX9 Grand Touring Stormy Blue
    -= The rolling armchair =-

    6 MPS Velocity Red - SOLD
    -=Cat Back Exhaust - Pirelli PZero=-

    3 MPS Aurora Blue - SOLD
    -=PG SRI - PG Inlet - ETS TMIC - GFB Hybrid BOV - Best Mufflers DP - Eibach Pro - AccessPort STG2 - Autotech HPFP - ITV22 - Michelin PSS=-

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Coorparoo, Brisbane
    Age
    43
    Posts
    3,771

    Default

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

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

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Perth, WA
    Age
    52
    Posts
    6,388

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DanSP23Bris View Post

    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...
    R36 - Just like an MPS6 except with a growly V6

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Brisbane (Ferny Grove)
    Age
    39
    Posts
    1,329

    Default

    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...

  11. #11
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Sydney
    Age
    41
    Posts
    130

    Default

    Good to know.

    Which fuel do you guys prefer, BP Ultimate, Mobil 8000 etc?

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Brisbane (Ferny Grove)
    Age
    39
    Posts
    1,329

    Default

    If I can help it, I use BP Ultimate in both my car and bike. I try to stay away from Mobil, because it runs like crap for some reason.

  13. #13

    Default

    I have run E10 in my wifes Camry and it went from 10.2L/100km to 11.2L, so, it worked out at 10% roughly but costs approx 2% less. Even if it was 10 cents cheaper I wouldn't run it.

    But, the independant servo near my work (dunno what its called from memory) sells 95 octane blended from E10. My car uses more fuel with it, but, it still has E10 and costs the same as the 91 octane. I have tried it to see how it goes and I know if I'm desperate that I can use it.

    As you can see, I do experiment a bit with fuels, I have found BP Ultimate to be the best, just not BP for regular ULP (it contains E10) for the same, if not more, than the other servos.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Perth, WA
    Age
    52
    Posts
    6,388

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by <Robbo> View Post
    Good to know.

    Which fuel do you guys prefer, BP Ultimate, Mobil 8000 etc?
    WA seems to be a bit behind with the fuel thing. No E10 as far as I know, only bio-diesel and 98 is only in Caltex and BP (No Mobil here and Shell doesn't have the VMAX)
    R36 - Just like an MPS6 except with a growly V6

  15. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DanSP23Bris View Post
    Justin, I think it was to do with valve seats from memory...

    Either way, im not puttin no sugar juice in my car!
    Ethanol deteriorates typical rubber products, when australia stopped selling "super"(leaded petrol) and older cars had to run on lead replacement fuel then some cars were having issues with valve seats, which is the reason they needed additives.

    Quote Originally Posted by kmh001 View Post
    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.
    Thereotically E10 has a higher RON rating than standard unleaded, not sure if you meant comparing it to 98RON fuels or not though. I dont know the RON of E10.

    Ethanol has a much lower energy density compared to petrol, but a higher RON rating. More and more heavily modified cars are looking into and getting tuned to use E85 because of this. More power can be made, but the trade off is fuel economy. Realistically, you have to allow for about 30% more fuel needed when getting tuned on E85.

    Obviously with a lower ethanol percentage in E10 the differences are nowhere near as much.
    ^^^The message is up there stupid^^^

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Perth, WA
    Age
    52
    Posts
    6,388

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by VGP View Post

    Thereotically E10 has a higher RON rating than standard unleaded, not sure if you meant comparing it to 98RON fuels or not though. I dont know the RON of E10.

    .
    E10 has a RON of 95

    Another page with some interesting information around the production or Ethanol

    Ethanol, ethyl alcohol
    R36 - Just like an MPS6 except with a growly V6

  17. #17

    Default

    I have never used it and on the fuel flap of the 2 it saids its OK to use E10 but

    The 2 loves 98PULP and since my lease has no restrictions on what fuel I use as long as its Caltex or BP the only time it has had anything less is when I took delivery...

  18. #18

    Default

    Has anyone run E85, it needs to be tuned as said before, it runs a a lot richer than PULP but heaps more power by adjusting timing. I think the V8 supercars run it.

  19. Default What's wrong with 95?

    Hiya - I've had my 2006 MPS6 for 3months (lovvvvvvvvving it!) and have run it on Vortex95 since purchase. I'm just after some feedback re why I should use 98 not 95, as 98 seems to be most popular. I did try a tank of 98, but the car didn't seem to perform any differently. Cheers!

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Coorparoo, Brisbane
    Age
    43
    Posts
    3,771

    Default

    I've only ever used 98. Pulled up at a servo that only offered 95 juice, I drove right out.

    98RON will burn cleaner, and leave less deposits.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •