My experience on using 0% ethanol 93 gasoline

tkearns119 · 01-07-2016, 10:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeM3SSII

I would not gobble everything you read from that bio fuels pitched pdf (" funded through an educational grant from the Renewable Fuels Foundation"). Information will be cast with a pro-ethanol agenda, make no mistake. Aligned with the money.

People like us driving a performance car should be more circumspect and consult independent studies.

I made no comment about the politcal leanings one way or another of the ethanol fuel lobby. Just referenced one citation of which there are many other articles from many sources. Besides, to use your words, wouldn't a "pro-ethanol agenda" seek to claim their fuel was of high quality or in this case high octane as advertised??? The simple fact, no politics included, unlike octane values reported on fuel pumps for E15 and lower, they are not "required" for E85 and the calculation being used is likely inflating the actual octane value. Just wondered if my friend DrFerry was aware. Shouldn't be an issue as 91 is the minimum recommended octane for our vehicles and even using the blend DrFerry is describing will still be well above that. Is MIT "independent" enough for you? Or maybe an organization of engineers.

http://papers.sae.org/2010-01-0619/

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...L0Gy6nOHH6ExIQ

Rajmun340 · 01-08-2016, 05:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DrFerry

JoeM3SSII,
Perhaps the article I cited from hotrod.com could be considered by some as an example of people like us consulting independent sources.

I totally agree with 'following the money approach' - and being skeptical of companies or Fed organizations aligned with the corporate oligarchy dictatorship we now live in.

However, we should also be careful to discern knowledge even when from questionable sources. The .pdf IMO seems packed with all sorts of golden nuggets. But that's just me. Maybe I am naive.

All the best.

It's a very well presented document, I can almost see the copious salaries of those paid to write it, the generous number of pages and the big corporate style formatting. I perused it earlier and yes it contains nice neutral definitions and nomenclature references but it also holds your hand and closes your eyes in an long ethanol happy utopia. It's not what is in this document that annoys me it's what is left out. I have been building my own library for some time from independent academic research sources and testing on the topic of ethanol written by automotive engineers that would scare the sh*t out of people from this forum. But i am not going to release that just yet.

admranger · 01-08-2016, 06:27 PM

still jealous you can buy 93 octane fuel...alcohol or not... Enjoy!

fwiw, I use non-alcohol gas in my Stihl chainsaw that I have on the family farm (heat with wood still!). Their premixed fuel smells like good old race gas, but it's stupid expensive (got double warranty though when I bought 6 cans w/the saw so a no brainer).

FogCityM3 · 01-09-2016, 12:13 PM

OP, have you tried logging the different gas formulations? I put in E85 and 91 octane gas (E10) resulting in a ~E25 combo. Per the ECU readout using the BT tool, the timing targets were nearly all met, was the same or better than 100 octane race gas and the "actual moment" or torque was as high/higher than the 100 race gas. Then I tried logging with E25 but using the race gas instead of the 91, and recorded no pre-detonation, no timing pull, and another 10 bhp produced at peak. Somehow the software is "tricked" in that the MAF sensor believes there is a lot more air coming into the cylinder, as I had the highest mass air flow volume ever recorded and correspondingly, more fuel was delivered into the cylinders. The engine seemed to run a tad cooler too (I have the e steering wheel and go on the same drive all the time with consistent temps at sea level).

My worry is that over time, continued ethanol use may cause damage through water absorption, corrosion, gumming injectors etc (on the gas cap says do not use anything higher than E10) so for peace of mind, when I go to the track, I just use 100 octane at the pump and no longer do the mixture. However, I can say I did not experience any engine hesitation, rough idle, etc. It felt like the car was producing more power, the power delivery was smoother like race gas, but the engine and exhaust note was quieter. I'm not sure if the 100 octane is e10, my guess is that it is E10 because is being sold at the pump at a gas station, so not exactly an apples-to-apples comparison with non E vs E gas at the same octane level. But my conclusion in running higher ethanol levels due to properties and higher octane improves engine performance and allows timing targets to be hit, while running cooler. I'm not sure its the best thing to do over the long haul.

01-08-2016, 06:27 PM	#25
admranger Retired Curmudgeon 2985 Rep 4,047 Posts Drives: ‘19 X3M40i, ‘18 m550i Join Date: May 2011 Location: Las Vegas, NV iTrader: (1)	still jealous you can buy 93 octane fuel...alcohol or not... Enjoy! fwiw, I use non-alcohol gas in my Stihl chainsaw that I have on the family farm (heat with wood still!). Their premixed fuel smells like good old race gas, but it's stupid expensive (got double warranty though when I bought 6 cans w/the saw so a no brainer). __________________ '19 X3 M40 Carbon Black/Oyster, '23 Jeep Grand Cherokee L Summit, Past BMWs: '18 M550i, '18 330 GT, '16 X5 40e, '11 E90M3, '06 X5 4.4, '03 330i ZHP, '02 M3, '97 Z3 2.8, '95 M3 (2x), '94 530i (manual), '92 525i (manual), '88 M3, '87 325iS
	Appreciate 0 Quote

01-09-2016, 12:13 PM	#26
FogCityM3 Colonel 499 Rep 2,400 Posts Drives: M3 (E90) & Porsche GT3 RS Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: San Francisco iTrader: (0)	OP, have you tried logging the different gas formulations? I put in E85 and 91 octane gas (E10) resulting in a ~E25 combo. Per the ECU readout using the BT tool, the timing targets were nearly all met, was the same or better than 100 octane race gas and the "actual moment" or torque was as high/higher than the 100 race gas. Then I tried logging with E25 but using the race gas instead of the 91, and recorded no pre-detonation, no timing pull, and another 10 bhp produced at peak. Somehow the software is "tricked" in that the MAF sensor believes there is a lot more air coming into the cylinder, as I had the highest mass air flow volume ever recorded and correspondingly, more fuel was delivered into the cylinders. The engine seemed to run a tad cooler too (I have the e steering wheel and go on the same drive all the time with consistent temps at sea level). My worry is that over time, continued ethanol use may cause damage through water absorption, corrosion, gumming injectors etc (on the gas cap says do not use anything higher than E10) so for peace of mind, when I go to the track, I just use 100 octane at the pump and no longer do the mixture. However, I can say I did not experience any engine hesitation, rough idle, etc. It felt like the car was producing more power, the power delivery was smoother like race gas, but the engine and exhaust note was quieter. I'm not sure if the 100 octane is e10, my guess is that it is E10 because is being sold at the pump at a gas station, so not exactly an apples-to-apples comparison with non E vs E gas at the same octane level. But my conclusion in running higher ethanol levels due to properties and higher octane improves engine performance and allows timing targets to be hit, while running cooler. I'm not sure its the best thing to do over the long haul.
	Appreciate 1 Quote