Recent Topics
Calibration of Canon -fenske viscometers in -51 oC
by Yahya
42 minutes 3 seconds ago
New lower valance (garbage find)
by Realtech214
58 minutes 8 seconds ago
8/27-9/30 O'Reilly Sales Ad
by tenderloin
Today at 02:00 AM
monroe sensa trac vs rancho rs5000
by FLORIDA
Today at 01:44 AM
Opti-Coat has been discontinued for consumers
by The Critic
Today at 01:42 AM
8/26-9/22 AutoZone Sales Ad
by tenderloin
Today at 01:40 AM
Cardboard Box National Registry
by Merkava_4
Yesterday at 11:37 PM
Shell Helix Ultra
by MolaKule
Yesterday at 10:48 PM
2008 S40 T5
by The Critic
Yesterday at 10:42 PM
2007 Jetta Oil Recommendations?
by Tony_Mack
Yesterday at 10:05 PM
$15 off oil change
by CHARLIEBRONSON21
Yesterday at 09:27 PM
De-glazed my rotors.
by eljefino
Yesterday at 08:41 PM
Newest Members
rayzn1123, EricWalls, mikejanczak, 1972, HondaSpider
51111 Registered Users
Who's Online
25 registered (fordranger03, ac_tc, Apollo14, Fleetmon, DSparks, Dufus2, 3 invisible), 567 Guests and 218 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Stats
51111 Members
64 Forums
218344 Topics
3442524 Posts

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

Page 1 of 2 1 2 >
Topic Options
#1647753 - 10/27/09 07:57 AM E10 vs E0 MPG study
friendly_jacek Offline


Registered: 05/04/03
Posts: 5201
Loc: southeast US
I did the MPG study in my 2003 corolla with 10% ethanol in BP gas vs 0% in Chevron gas.

9 tankfulls, 100% city driving, alternating between BP and chevron gas.

There was a slight difference in means (E10=28.1 MPG; E0=28.64 MPG) but it was not statistically significant (p=0.56).

This was in contrast to the first impression when I got 26.4 MPG with E10 and it went up to 27.7 with E0.

The lesson is, changes bases on a single tankful can be misleading.

BTW, the range was 26.4 to 29.8. Both the highest and lowest was with E10.

Top
#1647765 - 10/27/09 08:04 AM Re: E10 vs E0 MPG study [Re: friendly_jacek]
bepperb Offline


Registered: 01/10/08
Posts: 4650
Loc: Milwaukee, WI
That's about what I see, ~1 mpg difference. My "tests" are all highway, Milwaukee to Minneapolis.
_________________________
2004 Highlander 2.4
2011 Toyota Sienna 3.5
Recently Gone:
2006 Accord 2.4l K24A8
1993 Kawi EX 500

Top
#1647798 - 10/27/09 08:20 AM Re: E10 vs E0 MPG study [Re: bepperb]
Kestas Offline



Registered: 06/04/02
Posts: 10786
Loc: The Motor City
One engineer wrote a letter to the editor in Automotive Engineering Sept '09 issue on this matter. He ran many tankfuls of E10 and E0 in his 2008 Nissan Rogue. The bottom line was that he got 7.8% better mileage with E0 over E10, even though E10 has only 3.3% less BTU content. Using the widely accepted basis that it takes 75% of its energy in gasoline to produce ethanol, it can be argued that he was actually burning more gasoline with E10 than if he ran 100% gasoline. E10 does not reduce our dependence on foreign oil!

Top
#1647822 - 10/27/09 08:49 AM Re: E10 vs E0 MPG study [Re: Kestas]
StevieC Offline


Registered: 08/21/08
Posts: 14339
Loc: Niagara Falls, ON, CA (near)
I think this is because most cars are calibrated for E10 and not "E0" as you called it, fuels.

Using E0 fuels in place of E10 will change the mileage somewhat as the engines computer adjusts the fuel mixture to compensate based on 02 sensor readings but the timing is still retarded for the E10 as set by the OEM, and doesn't change if the car isn't equipped with a knock-sensor based on the fuel that is used.

If the car has a knock-sensor the fuel economy should be much better with a E0 fuel versus an E10.

Now using a E0 fuel even at a higher cost is better IMO because you generally get the best or more additives from the company you purchase it from, a better octane rating, leading to lowering of NOX readings which is good for the oil and engine life due to decreased cylinder temperatures, and you have the benefit of not having all that ethanol in your system possibly wearing your fuel system components down faster than with an E0 fuel.

Most cars will never see a problem running E10 fuels but those of us that want superior life out of our components should consider running an E0 gasoline all the time. wink

Now you could get a tuner and reprogram your ECM's spark timing so that it is setup for a higher octane fuel and you can see the mileage benefit.
_________________________
'06 Hyundai Sante Fe - 330K KM's
Current Oil: RLI 0w30 (Ask me why)

Don't be part of the Sheeple, check frequently for wool over your eyes. wink

Top
#1647875 - 10/27/09 09:27 AM Re: E10 vs E0 MPG study [Re: StevieC]
440Magnum Offline


Registered: 02/01/09
Posts: 6199
Loc: Texas
Originally Posted By: StevieC
I think this is because most cars are calibrated for E10 and not "E0" as you called it, fuels.


Almost any vehicle made since the late 90s SHOULD be able to trim its tables enough to burn E10 close to optimally, I would think. However, the real test would be to run a comparison using a FlexFuel rated engine, which can run optimally on anything up to and including E80.
_________________________
'66 Dodge Polara & '69 Dodge Coronet R/T both 440/727
'08 Ram 1500 4.7/545RFE
'12 Challenger SRT8 392/6-speed
'99 Cherokee 4.0, '11 Grand Cherokee 3.6

Top
#1647890 - 10/27/09 09:37 AM Re: E10 vs E0 MPG study [Re: 440Magnum]
Kestas Offline



Registered: 06/04/02
Posts: 10786
Loc: The Motor City
It's a crying shame that automakers can't or won't design all cars to run optimally on both fuels... especially considering the Herculean efforts used to meet CAFE.

The choice to run 100% gasoline has been taken away from us.

Top
#1647962 - 10/27/09 10:49 AM Re: E10 vs E0 MPG study [Re: Kestas]
StevieC Offline


Registered: 08/21/08
Posts: 14339
Loc: Niagara Falls, ON, CA (near)
Originally Posted By: Kestas
It's a crying shame that automakers can't or won't design all cars to run optimally on both fuels... especially considering the Herculean efforts used to meet CAFE.

The choice to run 100% gasoline has been taken away from us.
+1 thumbsup I completely agree... They should not have removed the choice.
_________________________
'06 Hyundai Sante Fe - 330K KM's
Current Oil: RLI 0w30 (Ask me why)

Don't be part of the Sheeple, check frequently for wool over your eyes. wink

Top
#1648075 - 10/27/09 12:10 PM Re: E10 vs E0 MPG study [Re: StevieC]
Ursae_Majoris Offline


Registered: 03/28/09
Posts: 1350
Loc: South
I consistently loose 2 MPG (from 14 to 12) when I fill-up with E10 in my Axiom. This year am running MMO in every tank, and so far, my E0 mileage has been 15.5-16 MPG. I just started using E10 (mandatory winter mix in AK), but so far it has been right around 14.1 MPG. We'll see what happens later in winter.


Edited by Ursae_Majoris (10/27/09 12:10 PM)
_________________________
2011 Chrysler T&C, Dealer bulk fill/, OEM filter
2002 Isuzu Axiom, PureOne, 5w-30 G-Oil

Top
#1648291 - 10/27/09 03:20 PM Re: E10 vs E0 MPG study [Re: friendly_jacek]
ctrcbob Offline


Registered: 01/01/06
Posts: 502
Loc: Mount Dora FL, Penfield NY, R...
1. Doubt if there is any difference between the amount of ethanol in those two brands, sold in the same area. It could be different IF the Chevron stations advertise that they are 100% gas, and no ethanol. Otherwise, just because you THINK there is no ethanol in the Chevron gas, does not make it so.

2. ALTERNATING between the two brands is not a good test. What you are doing is mixing the two brands on each fill-up. A better test would have been to run 9 tankfulls of one, then 9 tankfulls of the other.

In my case, my former car (MKZ), plus my Continental gets between 10% to 20% WORSE on E10. Matter of fact, when Florida switched to E10, I had a good comparison. In addition, whenever I go to Western New York, I use Hess from one station that is 100% gas, and my milage goes up by 10% to 20%, with those two cars. Last year, with the MKZ, I fulled up at that Hess Station, then drove South, and made it to North Carolina before I needed gas (running on fumes). I could never do that filling up on E10 while up there. Just returned from the same trip with the Continental, and again, my gas milage was much better than when using the E10.

My Genesis is a different story. Almost all I can get is E10. I get GREAT gas milage with this car, however there is one place near where I live in Central Florida, that advertises they have 100% gas, no ethanol. Their price is normally 35 to 40 cents a gallon more than the other stations. OK, When the price of gas fell down to the $2.30 range, I started to use the no ethanol gas. I used two or three tank fulls. No Change. Could be that the Genesis is tuned for E10, don't know, but I do know that there was no difference with the Genesis but a big difference with the former MKZ and present Continental.
_________________________
Bob CTRC USN Ret.
Mount Dora FL, (It Could Be Worse)-
Penfield NY, (Nice Suburb)-
Roswell NM (Alien Central)-

2013 Avalon Limited
2011 Lincoln MKZ

Top
#1648327 - 10/27/09 03:49 PM Re: E10 vs E0 MPG study [Re: ctrcbob]
Ben99GT Offline


Registered: 02/25/05
Posts: 4299
Loc: MS
Originally Posted By: ctrcbob
It could be different IF the Chevron stations advertise that they are 100% gas, and no ethanol. Otherwise, just because you THINK there is no ethanol in the Chevron gas, does not make it so.


If you get Chevron gas that comes from the Pascagoula refinery, it doesn't contain any ethanol.

And most of the e10s you are getting aren't a full 10% of ethanol either. "Up to"...being the key words there.
_________________________
2001 F150 Supercrew
1991 Mustang LX notch
1999 Mustang GT


Top
#1648417 - 10/27/09 05:12 PM Re: E10 vs E0 MPG study [Re: Ben99GT]
friendly_jacek Offline


Registered: 05/04/03
Posts: 5201
Loc: southeast US
Yes, chevron in my area advertises "100% gas" and "no ethanol" is stated on the pumps.

As for the BP, you are correct, "up to 10% ethanol"

Top
#1648423 - 10/27/09 05:19 PM Re: E10 vs E0 MPG study [Re: ctrcbob]
friendly_jacek Offline


Registered: 05/04/03
Posts: 5201
Loc: southeast US
Originally Posted By: ctrcbob
1. Doubt if there is any difference between the amount of ethanol in those two brands, sold in the same area. It could be different IF the Chevron stations advertise that they are 100% gas, and no ethanol. Otherwise, just because you THINK there is no ethanol in the Chevron gas, does not make it so.

2. ALTERNATING between the two brands is not a good test. What you are doing is mixing the two brands on each fill-up. A better test would have been to run 9 tankfulls of one, then 9 tankfulls of the other.


#1 is addressed in the post above.

#2 the alternating is clearly a better design due to control for weather and ambient temps. When I started the study, the temps averaged 90F and AC was used 100% of time. MPG was about 27 at that time. By the time I finished, temps were near 60F and heater was used at times. MPG is about 29 now. So, your design would lead to wrong conclusions. Yes, there was some mixing, but I refilled with 1-2 gallons left from the max 13.5.

Top
#1648452 - 10/27/09 05:41 PM Re: E10 vs E0 MPG study [Re: StevieC]
eljefino Offline


Registered: 06/15/03
Posts: 23736
Loc: ME
Originally Posted By: StevieC
I think this is because most cars are calibrated for E10 and not "E0" as you called it, fuels.


No! The automakers import E0 from way far away to run their CAFE tests. IIRC it was chevron too. wink

The feedback fuel systems can more than handle this, even the stupid carbs of the early 80s.

Top
#1648485 - 10/27/09 06:13 PM Re: E10 vs E0 MPG study [Re: eljefino]
Eddie Offline


Registered: 12/07/03
Posts: 6645
Loc: Florida, Cape Coral
Due to the reduced heat value of Ethanol you should get a reduction of 4.29% in mileage using E10.
_________________________
CX5 Touring 2.5L :-)

Top
#1648779 - 10/27/09 09:41 PM Re: E10 vs E0 MPG study [Re: eljefino]
StevieC Offline


Registered: 08/21/08
Posts: 14339
Loc: Niagara Falls, ON, CA (near)
Originally Posted By: eljefino
Originally Posted By: StevieC
I think this is because most cars are calibrated for E10 and not "E0" as you called it, fuels.


No! The automakers import E0 from way far away to run their CAFE tests. IIRC it was chevron too. wink

The feedback fuel systems can more than handle this, even the stupid carbs of the early 80s.
So how does my engine without a knock sensor know there is premium fuel in the engine and advance the timing?

How does a carb engine do so without a manual retune?

Please fill me in...
_________________________
'06 Hyundai Sante Fe - 330K KM's
Current Oil: RLI 0w30 (Ask me why)

Don't be part of the Sheeple, check frequently for wool over your eyes. wink

Top
Page 1 of 2 1 2 >