Ethanol / gasoline mix

"Dad" > wrote in message
.. .
>
> "Dale" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On or about Sat, 16 Jun 2007 17:22:53 -0500, RT wrote or did cause to
>> be written:
>>
>>>Ok, that seems to answer my question about Corvettes using blended
>>>fuels without a loss/significant loss in performance. Thanks.
>>
>> WHOA!!! Dad didn't say that. He would have if that is what you asked
>> because he LOVES ethanol but you just asked if it was safe and it IS
>> safe to use in a modern car. But you do take a big performance hit.
>> Ethanol has about 33% less energy per gallon. That is offset somewhat
>> by its octane rating of 100+. In a C6 you should expect about 10 RWHP
>> less running a 10% ethanol mix. You also get 0.5-1 mpg less mileage.
>
> Ethanol isn't necessarily my love in life but Corvettes and travel are. I
> started a 10,000 mile trip in a new 2004 C5, less than 400 miles when I
> left. My travel took me from Auburn, Cord, Duesenberg Museum in Auburn
> Indiana to Portland Oregon, then to Greenville South Carolina.
>
> Many of the western states were running 10/15% ethanol and mileage varied
> as much by driving at night as it did with different brands/blends of gas.
> Average for the trip was 28.8, high was 32 mpg with Shell w/ethanol. Both
> the tank before and after were better than the low of 27.2 and major
> versus unheard of brands seemed to be little different. Driving to show
> its difference is just not accurate enough to prove anything much.
>
> I will not try to address the performance change if any, my seat of the
> pants dynamometer is not any more accurate than anyone else's on here.
>
> It's strange that a new performance gadget can be added and "it sure feels
> stronger", but seldom does it feel less. The difference just isn't enough
> to worry about for the new gadget or using ethanol. You just can't measure
> the difference without it being done in a lab, and I haven't seen a good
> test yet, most are trying to prove their point rather than fact.
>
> By this all I can say is Dale is right, plus ethanol is here to stay, the
> greenies said so.

Some farmers are makin' some money, and geopolitically ethanol isn't a bad
idea either. At today's prices, the sultans and oil company sheiks are
still gettin' theirs though.

>>And before the usual crowd chimes in "Well I never saw any difference"
>> this is physics. The fact you didn't observe the physics doesn't
>> change the physical properties of ethanol. Look it up. Even the
>> ethanol producers acknowledge it doesn't provide the performance or
>> economy of gasoline.

AJM

On or about Sun, 17 Jun 2007 09:05:02 -0400, "Dad"
> wrote or did cause to be written:

10% ethanol is hard to notice. That's 0.1 * 0.3 = 3% less performance
and economy. Again, because of the increase in octane rating, it might
only be 2.5%. With a 400HP engine that's 10 hp. Hard to notice. With
the current 28mpg highway rating it's 0.7mpg less. You're right that
driving habits make a far larger impact. E85 will be more than 100hp
and 7mpg less. THAT will be noticeable.

But the environmentalists have lost very few battles in the past. Who
can argue against baby seal eyes. Facts don't matter. Say ethanol is
good for the environment. Doesn't matter that we will erode farm land
that took thousands of years to develop. Doesn't matter that it takes
a lot more energy to grow it than to refine oil. Doesn't matter that
it puts more CO2 into the atmosphere than oil. JUst say it's good for
the environment and that should be enough. Ethanol is here to stay.

And the news on the TV this moment is how oil companies are
rethinking increasing gasoline production since the President has said
he wants to decrease usage by 20% and replace it with ethanol. No
matter that this would take all the farm land currently used to grow
corn for food resulting in skyrocketing meat prices. The oil companies
are listening and shelving plans to increase production meaning gas
prices will increase drastically in the future when we don't see that
20% decrease in demand. Sometimes you just want to scream "WAKE UP
PEOPLE!!!"

</rant off> 10% Ethanol is safe to use but I will gladly pay 30 cents
more / gallon for real gas.

On Jun 17, 7:44 am, Dale > wrote:
> But you do take a big performance hit.
> Ethanol has about 33% less energy per gallon. That is offset somewhat
> by its octane rating of 100+. In a C6 you should expect about 10 RWHP
> less running a 10% ethanol mix. You also get 0.5-1 mpg less mileage.
>
> And before the usual crowd chimes in "Well I never saw any difference"
> this is physics. The fact you didn't observe the physics doesn't
> change the physical properties of ethanol.

It's worse than just that. Since the ethanol is oxygen bearing, the
O2 sensor will detect its presense as a lean condition and the ECM
will richen the mixture. Thus, you use more fuel and pollute worse.

I live right on the edge of the rural/city boundary and have been able
to choose to buy "city gas" with 10% ethanol or normal fuel at home.
All my vehicles get noticeably worse mileage on ethanol mix.

Plus, while running ethanol fuel, I lost a drag race to a Subaru
Impreza WRX so it must cut the C5's power by at least half .

But I am not a chemist.


-rev

"The Reverend Natural Light" > wrote in message
ps.com...
Snip
> Plus, while running ethanol fuel, I lost a drag race to a Subaru
> Impreza WRX so it must cut the C5's power by at least half .
>
> But I am not a chemist.
>
> -rev
>
If there were not to many kids in the WRX it would have beat you
anyhow. ;-)) You sound like you're a better chemist than you are a
drag racer. :-((

--
Dad
05 C6 Silver/Red 6spd Z51
72 Shark Black/Black/4spd
64 Red/red/white top/4spd

The Reverend Natural Light wrote:
> On Jun 17, 7:44 am, Dale > wrote:
>> But you do take a big performance hit.
>> Ethanol has about 33% less energy per gallon. That is offset somewhat
>> by its octane rating of 100+. In a C6 you should expect about 10 RWHP
>> less running a 10% ethanol mix. You also get 0.5-1 mpg less mileage.
>>
>> And before the usual crowd chimes in "Well I never saw any difference"
>> this is physics. The fact you didn't observe the physics doesn't
>> change the physical properties of ethanol.
>
> It's worse than just that. Since the ethanol is oxygen bearing, the
> O2 sensor will detect its presense as a lean condition and the ECM
> will richen the mixture. Thus, you use more fuel and pollute worse.
>
> I live right on the edge of the rural/city boundary and have been able
> to choose to buy "city gas" with 10% ethanol or normal fuel at home.
> All my vehicles get noticeably worse mileage on ethanol mix.
>
> Plus, while running ethanol fuel, I lost a drag race to a Subaru
> Impreza WRX so it must cut the C5's power by at least half .
>
> But I am not a chemist.
>
>
> -rev
>
>

Can't speak to the C6 but I do have some C4 &
C5 experience that tells me we are hunkering
down a dumb path. Excess amounts of this
stuff causes brain damage.

First off: I favor occasional, small amounts
of ethanol -- from an Oak barrel, aged 8-12
years. Also OK in malt beverages or in a
glass of wine. Also good for sterilizing the
skin prior to a blood draw. Don't care for
Everclear or for putting it in my gas tank.

As a Californian, I pay a good share of the
tax hit to support the current 'Ethanol
Party.' It's a sort of charity since the
stuff doesn't transport well enough to add to
the California fuel supply. We use just
enough to replace the MTBE that we lost a
couple of years ago. (6-7% Ethanol blend is
typical here). For this we take a 5% hit on
mileage in comparison to when we used MTBE.

BP is working on ethanol from Calif.
sugarbeets which will probably put the screws
to our beef industry. In exchange for this
"good deal", BP and Shell want to drop the
refining capacity in this state by 10% --
another good deal at the pump.

In addition to federal taxes, I also pay at
the pump since total gasoline consumption is
higher and our cost of gas augmented with 6%
ethanol is about 10% a gallon higher than
what most of the U.S. pays. So, there's not
much to be said for the goodness of Ethanol
out here. Oh yeah, the air is dirtier since
we started using this stuff. (and the Feds
have been yelling at us for a couple of years
over that problem.)

I think that -rev's 50% hit on C5 performance
may be a bit high but, I notice a definite
performance hit on desert hill climbs with
the C5. The enrichment that -rev is talking
about is significant and probably saves the
engine. On a hard climb, using Calif. fuel,
I occasionally hear that single ping as the
retard takes effect. Never have that happen
coming back home with Nevada or Utah fuel
even though the return trip is usually more
"heat soaked" with higher loads on the engine
and a/c.

As rev says, "it gets worse..."

Our Ethanol-drunk politicos have cut off the
major research dollars for an MTBE
replacement. Such a replacement would have
given us cleaner air than ethanol, better
fuel economy and for the C5, better
hot-weather, uphill performance.

Get a good read at:

< http://www.idavette.net/hib/fuel/index.htm >

Halvorson does a good job differentiating
between pre-L98, L98, LT1/4 and LSn cylinder
heads and sound fuel choices for each.

No BS, just Halvorson's opinions based on
sound science and experience.

--
pj

it is the law in Seattle
every winter - 10% mix

ssome

"Dale" > wrote in message
...
> On or about Sun, 17 Jun 2007 09:05:02 -0400, "Dad"
> > wrote or did cause to be written:
>
> 10% ethanol is hard to notice. That's 0.1 * 0.3 = 3% less performance
> and economy. Again, because of the increase in octane rating, it might
> only be 2.5%. With a 400HP engine that's 10 hp. Hard to notice. With
> the current 28mpg highway rating it's 0.7mpg less. You're right that
> driving habits make a far larger impact. E85 will be more than 100hp
> and 7mpg less. THAT will be noticeable.
>
> But the environmentalists have lost very few battles in the past. Who
> can argue against baby seal eyes. Facts don't matter. Say ethanol is
> good for the environment. Doesn't matter that we will erode farm land
> that took thousands of years to develop. Doesn't matter that it takes
> a lot more energy to grow it than to refine oil. Doesn't matter that
> it puts more CO2 into the atmosphere than oil. JUst say it's good for
> the environment and that should be enough. Ethanol is here to stay.
>
> And the news on the TV this moment is how oil companies are
> rethinking increasing gasoline production since the President has said
> he wants to decrease usage by 20% and replace it with ethanol. No
> matter that this would take all the farm land currently used to grow
> corn for food resulting in skyrocketing meat prices. The oil companies
> are listening and shelving plans to increase production meaning gas
> prices will increase drastically in the future when we don't see that
> 20% decrease in demand. Sometimes you just want to scream "WAKE UP
> PEOPLE!!!"
>
> </rant off> 10% Ethanol is safe to use but I will gladly pay 30 cents
> more / gallon for real gas.

In the mid-west you have to look for the non-10%ethanol otherwise that's
the norm.

ssome wrote:
> it is the law in Seattle
> every winter - 10% mix
>
> ssome
>
> "Dale" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On or about Sun, 17 Jun 2007 09:05:02 -0400, "Dad"
>> > wrote or did cause to be written:
>>
>> 10% ethanol is hard to notice. That's 0.1 * 0.3 = 3% less performance
>> and economy. Again, because of the increase in octane rating, it might
>> only be 2.5%. With a 400HP engine that's 10 hp. Hard to notice. With
>> the current 28mpg highway rating it's 0.7mpg less. You're right that
>> driving habits make a far larger impact. E85 will be more than 100hp
>> and 7mpg less. THAT will be noticeable.
>>
>> But the environmentalists have lost very few battles in the past. Who
>> can argue against baby seal eyes. Facts don't matter. Say ethanol is
>> good for the environment. Doesn't matter that we will erode farm land
>> that took thousands of years to develop. Doesn't matter that it takes
>> a lot more energy to grow it than to refine oil. Doesn't matter that
>> it puts more CO2 into the atmosphere than oil. JUst say it's good for
>> the environment and that should be enough. Ethanol is here to stay.
>>
>> And the news on the TV this moment is how oil companies are
>> rethinking increasing gasoline production since the President has said
>> he wants to decrease usage by 20% and replace it with ethanol. No
>> matter that this would take all the farm land currently used to grow
>> corn for food resulting in skyrocketing meat prices. The oil companies
>> are listening and shelving plans to increase production meaning gas
>> prices will increase drastically in the future when we don't see that
>> 20% decrease in demand. Sometimes you just want to scream "WAKE UP
>> PEOPLE!!!"
>>
>> </rant off> 10% Ethanol is safe to use but I will gladly pay 30 cents
>> more / gallon for real gas.
>
>

> > 10% ethanol is hard to notice. That's 0.1 * 0.3 = 3% less performance
> > and economy. Again, because of the increase in octane rating, it might
> > only be 2.5%.

In my '96 Toyota truck (10% ethanol mandatory in my area of Oregon), the
mileage dropped about 30%. Thought something else may be wrong and had a
complete tune-up to the tune of $600 -- helped a wee bit but still down
about 25%.

Thankfully I work only 4 blocks from home and only drive about 250 miles
a month in my truck -- but still it seems pretty self-defeating to claim
environmental responsibility but go far less on a gallon.

We need to invest in research that will completely replace
transportation using combustibles.

Here's waving to ya - \||||

Owen
___

'67BB & '72BB

-- not affiliated with JLA forum in any way -- alt.autos.corvette is
original posting --
___

"To know the world intimately is the beginning of caring."
-- Ann Hayman Zwinger

And all for $3.80 a gallon



"ssome" > wrote in message
. ..
> it is the law in Seattle
> every winter - 10% mix
>
> ssome
>
> "Dale" > wrote in message
> ...
> > On or about Sun, 17 Jun 2007 09:05:02 -0400, "Dad"
> > > wrote or did cause to be written:
> >
> > 10% ethanol is hard to notice. That's 0.1 * 0.3 = 3% less performance
> > and economy. Again, because of the increase in octane rating, it might
> > only be 2.5%. With a 400HP engine that's 10 hp. Hard to notice. With
> > the current 28mpg highway rating it's 0.7mpg less. You're right that
> > driving habits make a far larger impact. E85 will be more than 100hp
> > and 7mpg less. THAT will be noticeable.
> >
> > But the environmentalists have lost very few battles in the past. Who
> > can argue against baby seal eyes. Facts don't matter. Say ethanol is
> > good for the environment. Doesn't matter that we will erode farm land
> > that took thousands of years to develop. Doesn't matter that it takes
> > a lot more energy to grow it than to refine oil. Doesn't matter that
> > it puts more CO2 into the atmosphere than oil. JUst say it's good for
> > the environment and that should be enough. Ethanol is here to stay.
> >
> > And the news on the TV this moment is how oil companies are
> > rethinking increasing gasoline production since the President has said
> > he wants to decrease usage by 20% and replace it with ethanol. No
> > matter that this would take all the farm land currently used to grow
> > corn for food resulting in skyrocketing meat prices. The oil companies
> > are listening and shelving plans to increase production meaning gas
> > prices will increase drastically in the future when we don't see that
> > 20% decrease in demand. Sometimes you just want to scream "WAKE UP
> > PEOPLE!!!"
> >
> > </rant off> 10% Ethanol is safe to use but I will gladly pay 30 cents
> > more / gallon for real gas.
>
>

Ethanol is NO solution. Just the government kissing the asses of the
midwest corn farmers. The rest of us (including the environment and our car
engines) are being screwed.

Vito


"Speaker of the Truth" > wrote in message
news:l6OdnQ62Pvo2nF_anZ2dnUVZ_tijnZ2d@wideopenwest .com...
> And all for $3.80 a gallon
>
>
>
> "ssome" > wrote in message
> . ..
>> it is the law in Seattle
>> every winter - 10% mix
>>
>> ssome
>>
>> "Dale" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > On or about Sun, 17 Jun 2007 09:05:02 -0400, "Dad"
>> > > wrote or did cause to be written:
>> >
>> > 10% ethanol is hard to notice. That's 0.1 * 0.3 = 3% less performance
>> > and economy. Again, because of the increase in octane rating, it might
>> > only be 2.5%. With a 400HP engine that's 10 hp. Hard to notice. With
>> > the current 28mpg highway rating it's 0.7mpg less. You're right that
>> > driving habits make a far larger impact. E85 will be more than 100hp
>> > and 7mpg less. THAT will be noticeable.
>> >
>> > But the environmentalists have lost very few battles in the past. Who
>> > can argue against baby seal eyes. Facts don't matter. Say ethanol is
>> > good for the environment. Doesn't matter that we will erode farm land
>> > that took thousands of years to develop. Doesn't matter that it takes
>> > a lot more energy to grow it than to refine oil. Doesn't matter that
>> > it puts more CO2 into the atmosphere than oil. JUst say it's good for
>> > the environment and that should be enough. Ethanol is here to stay.
>> >
>> > And the news on the TV this moment is how oil companies are
>> > rethinking increasing gasoline production since the President has said
>> > he wants to decrease usage by 20% and replace it with ethanol. No
>> > matter that this would take all the farm land currently used to grow
>> > corn for food resulting in skyrocketing meat prices. The oil companies
>> > are listening and shelving plans to increase production meaning gas
>> > prices will increase drastically in the future when we don't see that
>> > 20% decrease in demand. Sometimes you just want to scream "WAKE UP
>> > PEOPLE!!!"
>> >
>> > </rant off> 10% Ethanol is safe to use but I will gladly pay 30 cents
>> > more / gallon for real gas.
>>
>>
>
>
>