Recent Topics
Would syn be good for truck that sits a lot?
by Chris B.
07/29/14 03:31 PM
Avoid State Farm!
by DBMaster
07/29/14 03:16 PM
Plastic Hub caps making noise
by Mark72
07/29/14 03:03 PM
Honda Eu2000I Extended Run System
by Ope_Freak
07/29/14 01:49 PM
Cessna to intro diesel 172 for 2015
by LoneRanger
07/29/14 12:37 PM
Oil and filter recommendation
by cb_13
07/29/14 12:27 PM
11000mAh Dual USB Power Bank/Car Jump Starter $55
by doyall
07/29/14 11:07 AM
Easier On Oil : V-6 or I-4 ?
by ChrisD46
07/29/14 10:39 AM
7/29-8/25 Auto Sales Ad
by tenderloin
07/29/14 09:55 AM
Dealership radiator flush job
by Idlewild294
07/29/14 09:54 AM
People are stupid
by Stelth
07/29/14 09:28 AM
Castrol SynBlend 5w/30 5,500miles 12 Canyon
by NewC-05
07/29/14 07:47 AM
Newest Members
jjs1235, Tomas, bovk, papafordboy, mrmjmab61
50794 Registered Users
Who's Online
94 registered (29662, 05LGTLtd, Andy636, 1 FMF, 97f150, 10 invisible), 2246 Guests and 218 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Stats
50794 Members
64 Forums
216989 Topics
3416372 Posts

Max Online: 2862 @ 07/07/14 03:10 PM
Donate to BITOG

Page 3 of 14 < 1 2 3 4 5 ... 13 14 >
Topic Options
#3177745 - 11/04/13 01:14 AM Re: Pure Gas vs. 10% E [Re: markum]
901Memphis Offline


Registered: 08/14/10
Posts: 4889
Loc: Northern Kentucky
Why hasn't the corrosion issue came up yet? Pure gas is better for your whole fuel system.
_________________________
1999 Ford Taurus 145k (Vulcan v6) - Mobil 1 High Mileage 5w30 | FL400S
2002 Buick Century 102k - PU 5w30 / Fram Ultra XG 3980 / Filter mag

Top
#3179003 - 11/05/13 08:57 AM Re: Pure Gas vs. 10% E [Re: markum]
tig1 Offline


Registered: 01/03/09
Posts: 9701
Loc: Illinois
I've been using E10 for at least 18 years here in Illinois. All of my engines have run fine,(including OPE) no iceing problems in winter, and no fuel system problems.
_________________________
2007 Ford Fusion 138,000 miles
M1 0-20
2007 Ford Focus 126,000 miles
M1 0-20
10,000 mile OCIs on both engines
M1 ATF
M1 10-30 in all OPE

Top
#3180934 - 11/07/13 02:02 AM Re: Pure Gas vs. 10% E [Re: TiredTrucker]
Shannow Offline


Registered: 12/12/02
Posts: 26076
Loc: a prison island
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
Originally Posted By: hatt
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker


The biggest "farce" is the idea that the food supply is diminished due to biofuel production.

Sad I have to repeat this again.... and you can check all this out for yourself.

80% of the total US corn production is used for livestock feed. Also, of the total US corn production, 40% is used for ethanol production. The human consumption portion of the total corn production is NOT AFFECTED!

Of the corn that is fed to livestock, most of the starches in the corn just pass thru. Cattle use the lysine from the corn and do not digest the starches. The starches, are what is used for ethanol production. So..... why not use some of the corn production for ethanol and use the resulting Dried Distillers Grain, which is primarily lysine based protein that livestock can actually use, in livestock production. This reduces feedlot runoff wastes and provides a fuel for automotive use. There is no "waste", but in fact, there is greater utilization of the nation's corn production.

It does not "waste" billions of gallons of water. True, it uses a large amount of water, but most of it is recycled, and what does get evaporated into the atmosphere just returns to the normal water cycle that has gone on since the world began. Seems some think that the water used in biofuel production is forever lost. Sad the public school system did such a lousy job.

More false information. Cows can and do digest starch from corn.

Link


I take it you ACTUALLY read the abstract portion of the article? Seems from that alone that starch absorbtion is a problem. The Abstract promote the idea the corn must be processed in one of many ways, including fermentation, to increase digestion. The abstract also mentions how starches are not absorbed in the small intestine tract. Unprocessed corn can cause digestional distress, like the abstract stated. That is why DDG is in such demand. It is a high lysine product that REDUCES the problems of digestion in livestock. Seems like the article did not support much of your contention. Here is an excerpt from page 118 of the article you reference that support my contention....

Grinding grain to a very fine particle size will increase starch digestibility. However, benefits in starch digestion from fine grinding are CONSIDERABLY LESS than those obtained from FERMENTATION or heat processing. (emphasis mine)

As for what starches are used by livestock, are better supplied and digested thru roughage such as silage and legume crops such as alfalfa and clover. The NATURAL sources of starches for ruminants. It is because of this fact, that feeds for livestock are a mixture of silage, legumes, and grain products.


Cattle should eat grass, not grains...not fermented grains, not returned bread loaves.

This rubbish about non human food grains not affecting the food supply is exactly rubbish, because either requires space. Space diverted to growing non-food is space that used to be used to grow food is a reduction in human food supplies.

Grain feeding cattle is what gives the vegetarian extremists the ammunition on how inefficient the process is.

Top
#3263553 - 01/29/14 09:04 AM Re: Pure Gas vs. 10% E [Re: markum]
TiredTrucker Offline


Registered: 01/04/08
Posts: 894
Loc: Kellogg, IA
But you seem to think that the amount of grain produced remains static. You can only have a loss to any group, if there is not enough being produced to support that group along with another. Grain production has eclipsed all time records. There is more than enough grain for all concerns. And also, it pretends that there is no other use to the same kernel of corn once it has been directed to ethanol production. The plants that make ethanol from that corn also produce corn oil, DDG, and a laundry list of byproducts from that same kernel of corn. Nothing is wasted.

And I would check with the ag extension service of your state university. These are the folks who's task is to study all the livestock issues. Dried Distillers Grain (DDG) is a very beneficial product for livestock. It reduces the risks of intestinal colitis substantially, it provides a high level of protein and nutrients that is very digestible compared to other methods. You really have very little familiarity with what livestock actually eat, and what is beneficial to them. Me thinks ye have an agenda.

I am reminded of a thing John Wayne said in the movie "Mclintock". Pertaining to policiticans, he said, "They think that cows are something you milk, and Indians are something in front of a cigar store". If you actually grew up and lived around these ruminants, you might have a different outlook on what they should or should not eat.
_________________________
Hey there, VA, what do ya say? How many vets did you kill today?

Top
#3263566 - 01/29/14 09:16 AM Re: Pure Gas vs. 10% E [Re: 901Memphis]
TiredTrucker Offline


Registered: 01/04/08
Posts: 894
Loc: Kellogg, IA
Originally Posted By: 901Memphis
Why hasn't the corrosion issue came up yet? Pure gas is better for your whole fuel system.


Probably the reason that it hasn't come up, is that there is a standing reward out for documented evidence of ethanol causing harm to fuel systems and engines, and no one has been able to produce the evidence and collect the reward. Oh sure, you hear anecdotal stories of this, but when the details have come to light, it was usually the fault of the owner not properly filling the tanks, storing fuel improperly, leaving fuel sit in a tank or carburetor for a couple of years, the ethanol cleaning out the crud in a fuel tank on an older vehicle that never got a dose of ethanol with a subsequent filter clogging issue, etc.

The only time ethanol is corrosive, is when mixed with water. If you have high volumes of water in your fuel tank, you have other issues than the ethanol. I have seen several engine and fuel system tear downs on vehicles that got a study diet of E85. Anywhere from 2 years to over 100,000 miles. And I have yet to see any negative effects, but have seen some very positive ones.

But feel free to think that the corrosion issue is as bad as you think. If you can document a case where ethanol was the culprit, then by all means, call you state ethanol producers and see if you can get that reward that is out there. I want someone to win it, if nothing else, so that we can find out once and for all if this is all true.
_________________________
Hey there, VA, what do ya say? How many vets did you kill today?

Top
#3265060 - 01/30/14 04:56 PM Re: Pure Gas vs. 10% E [Re: TiredTrucker]
turtlevette Offline


Registered: 12/24/13
Posts: 685
Loc: Massachusetts
There are a few places like Florida where I guess E10 is a new thing. Living in more progressive places like Louisiana, Colorado and Massachusetts, I've been putting it in my vette for 30 years and am still waiting for the corrosion to begin and fuel lines to disintegrate. This latest round of chicken little's crying and throwing fits is getting tiresome.

Ethanol is sold in many gas additives such as gas drier. It's an octane booster, gas dryer, and fuel system cleaner for free.

What's to complain about?
_________________________
08 Mustang 4.0 GC
02 Suburban 5.3 M1 0w-30 AFE
75 Corvette Val 0W-20 syn
79 Trans Am M1 TDT
84 Suburban Castrol Edge Ti 5W-20 syn

Top
#3266812 - 02/01/14 12:26 PM Re: Pure Gas vs. 10% E [Re: markum]
TiredTrucker Offline


Registered: 01/04/08
Posts: 894
Loc: Kellogg, IA
I think that most people who have such a disdain for ethanol actually developed that because of government shoving it at them. If it had been purely market driven, then the hue and cry might not have been so loud.

Many of us have used various ethanol blends for several decades with no problems. Sure, there are occasional problems, primarily because of someone's goof in how they stored it or something. And when you combine the forcing thing by the government and the few instances of screwups that caused problems, you have fertile ground for the conspiracy folks to plant seeds of discontent about ethanol.

Don't expect these ideas to die off anytime soon. And have no problem with folks hating ethanol. I use E85 and that leaves a better market price for me.
_________________________
Hey there, VA, what do ya say? How many vets did you kill today?

Top
#3267135 - 02/01/14 06:08 PM Re: Pure Gas vs. 10% E [Re: TiredTrucker]
outdoorsman310 Offline


Registered: 08/26/13
Posts: 113
Loc: DE
Originally Posted By: TiredTrucker
I think that most people who have such a disdain for ethanol actually developed that because of government shoving it at them. If it had been purely market driven, then the hue and cry might not have been so loud.

Many of us have used various ethanol blends for several decades with no problems. Sure, there are occasional problems, primarily because of someone's goof in how they stored it or something. And when you combine the forcing thing by the government and the few instances of screwups that caused problems, you have fertile ground for the conspiracy folks to plant seeds of discontent about ethanol.

Don't expect these ideas to die off anytime soon. And have no problem with folks hating ethanol. I use E85 and that leaves a better market price for me.


It would not be market driven because while most people getting gas do not know about the effects of ethanol in fuel, americans like to keep old ways and not change.

Ethanol has pros and cons like anything else. I will start with positive aspects.
ethanol can, and will decrease tailpipe emissions on engines tuned properly for it. This is because it has oxygen in it and allows more complete combustion of fuel. Ethanol can also decrease combustion chamber temps because alcohol can burn much richer air/fuel mixtures than gas. If this does not make sense, think of spraying water, oil, gas whatever onto a hot piece of metal. while it may combust, the cold liquid will cool the piece of metal. The ability to burn more fuel more completely allows more power to be made. At a ratio of about 10% ethanol to 90%gasoline, the ethanol increases the octane rating, allowing refiners to use ethanol instead of more harmful chemicals like benzene from fuel, allows more complete combustion, allows more power to be made, can mix with a small amount of water from the fuel system, and makes people supplying crops and ethanol producers happy.

Here are some disadvantageous aspects of ethanol in fuel. Ethanol can absorb moisture from the air beyond the capacity of keeping the water in suspension. This can cause water droplets at the bottom of the fuel tank, lines, and carburetor bowl. Since ethanol oxygenates the fuel, the water can and will eat away at metal in the fuel systems. this causes problems from a hole in the tank, to a corroded and useless carburetor or fuel pump. gasohol has a shorter shelf life than straight gasoline. this can cause fuel system problems in seldom used vehicles and equipment. Ethanol is a very poor lubricant, even diluting lubricants in a 2 stroke crankcase and impeding the lubricating ability of gasoline to a point. Now when you have a vehicle or piece of equipment that is not designed or tuned for gasohol, you can have fuel system problems including certain rubbers or polymers degrade, leaking fuel and causing improper operation, unsafe situations, and spilled fuel that evaporates and is a harsh pollutant. Gasohol needs to be run at a richer fuel/air ratio than straight gas.this results in increased fuel consumption, and can cause higher combustion temperatures that can increase emissions. most people don't tune carbureted things for gasohol so they may run poorly, getting poor fuel economy and poor emissions.
people that grow corn and other crops for ethanol production may decide to just grow corn and not rotate other crops. This leads to soil deprivation and an increased use of fertilizers. when the fertilizer gets washed away from many farms, it enters waterways and can encourage huge growths of algae that blocks light from organisms below. they can die and create co2. The algae will die and create huge amounts of co2 killing fish and damaging ecosystems. crops must be transported to ethanol fermenting facilities. this causes pollution. the facility uses a large amount of power creating more pollution, the fermentation produces waste, and the ethanol must be transported to be mixed with gas.
people will get decreased mileage with gasohol than with gasoline. resulting in increased use of fuel.

I believe that gasohol can be helpful to air quality in select areas of california where exhaust gases are trapped over cities. The vehicles would need to be tuned properly for gasohol. This could increase the air quality of certain areas. However over an entire country, the negative environmental and engine problems caused by gasohol outweigh the positive aspects of gasohol. I believe that automakers should work with oil companies to create more efficient, and durable engines that do not use ethanol.
Eric

Top
#3267279 - 02/01/14 08:35 PM Re: Pure Gas vs. 10% E [Re: outdoorsman310]
turtlevette Offline


Registered: 12/24/13
Posts: 685
Loc: Massachusetts
Originally Posted By: outdoorsman310

Here are some disadvantageous aspects of ethanol in fuel. Ethanol can absorb moisture from the air beyond the capacity of keeping the water in suspension. This can cause water droplets at the bottom of the fuel tank, lines, and carburetor bowl. Since ethanol oxygenates the fuel, the water can and will eat away at metal in the fuel systems. this causes problems from a hole in the tank, to a corroded and useless carburetor or fuel pump. gasohol has a shorter shelf life than straight gasoline. this can cause fuel system problems in seldom used vehicles and equipment. Ethanol is a very poor lubricant, even diluting lubricants in a 2 stroke crankcase and impeding the lubricating ability of gasoline to a point. Now when you have a vehicle or piece of equipment that is not designed or tuned for gasohol, you can have fuel system problems including certain rubbers or polymers degrade, leaking fuel and causing improper operation, unsafe situations, and spilled fuel that evaporates and is a harsh pollutant. Gasohol needs to be run at a richer fuel/air ratio than straight gas.this results in increased fuel consumption, and can cause higher combustion temperatures that can increase emissions. most people don't tune carbureted things for gasohol so they may run poorly, getting poor fuel economy and poor emissions.
people that grow corn and other crops for ethanol production may decide to just grow corn and not rotate other crops. This leads to soil deprivation and an increased use of fertilizers. when the fertilizer gets washed away from many farms, it enters waterways and can encourage huge growths of algae that blocks light from organisms below. they can die and create co2. The algae will die and create huge amounts of co2 killing fish and damaging ecosystems. crops must be transported to ethanol fermenting facilities. this causes pollution. the facility uses a large amount of power creating more pollution, the fermentation produces waste, and the ethanol must be transported to be mixed with gas.
people will get decreased mileage with gasohol than with gasoline. resulting in increased use of fuel.

I believe that gasohol can be helpful to air quality in select areas of california where exhaust gases are trapped over cities. The vehicles would need to be tuned properly for gasohol. This could increase the air quality of certain areas. However over an entire country, the negative environmental and engine problems caused by gasohol outweigh the positive aspects of gasohol. I believe that automakers should work with oil companies to create more efficient, and durable engines that do not use ethanol.
Eric


All of the above is fear mongering old wives tales.

Do you understand that most of the country has been using 10% ethanol in gas for a very long time? If the problems were as bad as that something would have changed long ago.

Who is buying this stuff?
_________________________
08 Mustang 4.0 GC
02 Suburban 5.3 M1 0w-30 AFE
75 Corvette Val 0W-20 syn
79 Trans Am M1 TDT
84 Suburban Castrol Edge Ti 5W-20 syn

Top
#3267542 - 02/02/14 06:11 AM Re: Pure Gas vs. 10% E [Re: markum]
SteveSRT8 Online   content


Registered: 10/10/08
Posts: 14263
Loc: Sunny Florida
All of his points are valid, just outdated.

No one mentioned aldehydes.
_________________________
"In a democracy, dissent is an act of faith."
J. William Fulbright
Best ET-12.79 @ 111 mph
4340 pounds, Street tires
Just like we go to Publix

Top
#3267608 - 02/02/14 07:53 AM Re: Pure Gas vs. 10% E [Re: turtlevette]
outdoorsman310 Offline


Registered: 08/26/13
Posts: 113
Loc: DE
these are all possible but with regular use and maintenance, you shouldn't experience many problems with ethanol fuel besides reduced mileage.

Top
#3267642 - 02/02/14 08:27 AM Re: Pure Gas vs. 10% E [Re: turtlevette]
kschachn Offline


Registered: 12/26/05
Posts: 2336
Loc: Upper Midwest
Can you explain why we need to use it though? Are we short on oil?

Originally Posted By: turtlevette
All of the above is fear mongering old wives tales.

Do you understand that most of the country has been using 10% ethanol in gas for a very long time? If the problems were as bad as that something would have changed long ago.

Who is buying this stuff?
_________________________
1994 BMW 530i, 186K
1996 Honda Accord, 199K
1999 Toyota Sienna, 301K
2000 Toyota ECHO, 222K

Top
#3267767 - 02/02/14 09:58 AM Re: Pure Gas vs. 10% E [Re: kschachn]
outdoorsman310 Offline


Registered: 08/26/13
Posts: 113
Loc: DE
it is to displace other octane increasers, and an attempt to decrease certain tailpipe emissions. it kinda works in practice on some vehicles but imo, it does more harm than good if you look at the big picture.

Top
#3267929 - 02/02/14 12:32 PM Re: Pure Gas vs. 10% E [Re: SteveSRT8]
TiredTrucker Offline


Registered: 01/04/08
Posts: 894
Loc: Kellogg, IA
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
All of his points are valid, just outdated.

No one mentioned aldehydes.


Aldehydes are in just about every fruit and vegetable you eat also. Aldehydes occur throughout nature, though I will concede, that they are also a byproduct of ethanol combustion process. But they do break down. They are only a "possible" carcinogen. There is no definitive proof that in the atmospheric concentrations that would be typical of auto emissions, that there is a detrimental effect on people. And one has to balance what is perceived to be a problem from their formation, in relation to the increased other problems from burning petrol based fuels only.

In short, tit for tat.
_________________________
Hey there, VA, what do ya say? How many vets did you kill today?

Top
#3267940 - 02/02/14 12:44 PM Re: Pure Gas vs. 10% E [Re: kschachn]
TiredTrucker Offline


Registered: 01/04/08
Posts: 894
Loc: Kellogg, IA
Originally Posted By: kschachn
Can you explain why we need to use it though? Are we short on oil?



I can, at least for my situation. It is cheaper, on a per mile use basis, to use E85 in my vehicle. It leaves less residues and buildups in the fuel system and engine. E85 burns cooler, and produces more hp and torque in the 5.3L engine in my Silverado, according to the official GM power curve charts, substantiated in independent dyno testing. Approximately 12 hp increase and 10 lb torque increase with stock tuning. And for those that like to custom tune their ECM's, you can really pull out some performance and substantial fuel economy over stock tunes using E85. Just a quick look at the the more performance oriented forums for Camaro's, Corvette's, etc substantiate that.

I concede that no one "needs" to use it. But some of us actually prefer to use it. I am not for any government imposed mandates and such, but I definitely prefer using the stuff. It has nothing to do with oil shortage. I am not convinced that any major push has been in that regard. It has been common knowledge that the only reason for an oil import situation is that we are not allowed to retrieve the oil we already have here. And that ethanol production would never displace all the gasoline needed by this country. But there is a strong case that as an oxygenate, cleaning agent, and emissions reduction, it does have a place. How much each of those things is important is relative, but they are proven. And it is biodegradable as opposed to petrol based fuels.

I actually take a somewhat opposite position on all of this. Why would I want to use substandard gasoline only products only, that require regular detergents and other additives to prevent gumming, residues, carbon buildup, etc when I have a better fuel available? Todays engines and fuel systems are not the ones I had available in the 60's and 70's. Technology has changed and I like using a fuel that is readily available in my area at lower cost and has benefits over gasoline only.

Those that have other views... cool. At least we still have some choices.
_________________________
Hey there, VA, what do ya say? How many vets did you kill today?

Top
Page 3 of 14 < 1 2 3 4 5 ... 13 14 >