# Forum More Stuff Debate & Technical Discussion  Does your car take E10 petrol?

## Make it work

I have just replaced my car, we bought a little Laser 1.8 (what a come down from the Legend but that is another story), anyway I was surprised at how many car manufacturers do not recommend using this crap fuel in their brand of cars. 
My Honda Legend  :Bigcry:  was on the don't list as is my Porsche, I lost a $100 deposit on a 1.6 Laser because I found out too late that it was on the don't list too. 
So I got to thinking, I wonder how many motorists are going to have to shell out for Premium Unleaded when the unleaded phase out takes full effect in NSW in July this year. 
I have attached a PDF that lists those that do and don't work on E10. 
BTW most garden equipment won't even run on the stuff so we will be mowing with premium, what a joke.

----------


## stevoh741

Yet another way to jamb another money grab to us

----------


## ringtail

Piss poor attempt to prop up an dying unviable sugar industry. Dont even consider using it in anything, ever. Its rubbish.

----------


## jago

My wife put in my Suzuki when she ran out of normal petrol the servo she  pulled into only sold  e10. The trip back from Newcastle was slow and engine very sluggish  and we got less mileage out of it !!  the first thing I did when I got home was siphon it out and replace with high octane ....

----------


## Moondog55

That's interesting because I used to run the old RED motor on LPG with added alcohol, adding a 50/50 mix of Ethanol/Methanol diluted with distilled water gave an extra 12Hp at the back wheels on the Dyno while also running smoother and cooler and many times in the old days i have had to add metho to the tank to get the water out ( actually back into solution so it would run through the carbie ) and I never had any problems, reading the PDF it seems o that perhaps it is only small engines with overssquare cylinders have this problem

----------


## Make it work

There is another worrying thing that I observed, I spoke to 4 different mechanics about the effects of using this rubbish fuel in a car on the don't list and what, if anything, can be done to make them compatible. 3 of the 4 thought it was the same saga as when leaded petrol was phased out in the 90's, when clearly it is a completely different set of parameters that have nothing to do with upper cyclinder lubrication, so no need to replace valves & valve seats and the like. 3 of the 4 had no idea and the fourth suggested an additive which they prepare and market, it won't make the car run better but it will apperantely clean any condensed moisture absorbed by the ethonol, out of the tank & the fuel system but at $25 every 3 months at least, that adds $100 P/A to the fuel bill, might as well use premium. 
As for the water / alcohol mix making a carby motor (no computer) run better, that is because the combustion rate is slowed down by the cooling effect of the water, it effectively pushes the piston all the way down the cyclinder giving much more torque and allows you to advance the spark much more than without the additive. You also won't see much, if any carbon deposits in that engine. Unfortunately I don't think it goes as well with an EFI motor, it messes with the inputs to the computer and then it overcompensates, usually by making the motor run so rich that the economy is shot out the window. 
I sure hope there are no unsuspecting motorists who pay many hundreds of dollars in unnecessary engine work done by clowns who really have no idea. 
On a happier note, I got my $100 deposit back on the 1.6 Laser, WOO HOO!!!

----------


## jago

Interesting. 
I wondered why the auto gear chafes seemed to be in a different ratio when using e10, the Suzukis no sports car (2.7 litre V6 ) but has good mid range torque that disappeared when using this crap fuel, must have @@@@ed with the computers readings. I recommend high octane racing fuel

----------


## Moondog55

What is the octane rating of E10 petrol??

----------


## jago

Google suggest a range of 91-94 my car is best suited 97+ I know from racing that the octane rating can seriously mess with performance. It's not unusual for the Japanase and Americans to juice their local Hereos when moto GP ( bikes) visit I am sure it's the same in certain car classes.

----------


## Moondog55

yeah, middle of the range, my Falcon ute runs well on 91. that's how it was built, Ceciles Renault runs best on super (96+ ) but I am old, I can remember when for a very short time you could buy 100 octane super at the pump ( the old XL brand ) Often wonder how the Ford would go on a much higher compression ratio and 104 octane fuel. I am not converting to LPG until we can get the dual fuel fumigation systems licensed in Australia 
I did hear that Avgas was going unleaded and lower in octane rating tho, so that option is out even discounted lead poisoning of some fuel sensing systems etc: etc:

----------


## Make it work

What is dual fuel fumigation, and how is it different / better than the gas systems being installed at the moment. 
I did make some enquiries about liquid injection systems and although pricey compared to the standard vapour systems, they do offer similar figures on performance and fuel ecomomy as when run on petrol, at least unleaded, probably even better if you compare fugured on liquid injected LPG to the E10 rubbish.

----------


## Moondog55

Dual fuel fumigation is the petrol equivalent of "Dieselpane" when air is pulled into the cylinder so is a little LPG vapour, then when the piston is in the correct position for maximum power the injection system adds a modified amount of liquid petrol. From my reading the power gain is about 10% ~  fuel economy gains because LPG is cheaper and no power losses, you can run a higher compression ration as well but not sure by how much.
Current gas systems are either LPG only  that is a dedicated LPG with NO petrol or a switchable system that only runs petrol from time to time, no Australian fitters have  this system

----------


## Smurf

In theory, yes you can run an engine on ethanol. Even a 100% ethanol fuel is quite possible (and it's a high octane fuel that also just happens to be an oxygenate too). 
But the reality is that virtually no cars on Australian roads have engines intended for use with this fuel and that's where the problem is. Using a fuel other than that which was intended when the engine was designed. 
Morally however, I have a big problem with the idea that we turn food into fuel. It takes literally a year's worth of food for a person in order to make enough ethanol to equal just one tank of petrol. This is very much a case of the poor starving (as the higher demand drives up food prices) so that the rich can drive. No thanks - I'd rather walk if need be.

----------


## Moondog55

Smurf I agree, but ethanol doesn't need food grade carbohydrate for its production, the yeast will grow on any treated cellulose waste like sawdust, it was just easier to use a product containing lots of sugar to avoid several steps in the production cycle. bagasse contains enough sugar to ferment with out treatment and I was under the impression that's how Brazil was running its ethanol production. 
Benefit of this way of producing fuel is the waste is excellent fertilliser, hell our present sewage treatment is wasting two of our most precious resources' water and nitrogen.
Politicians can't think past the next election and no-one with the capital has thought this through. if they had they would be building new sewage treatment plants that extract everything usable before sending the water back into the system.
We have known for years how to do this; but the systems have never got past the trial stage. 
Methane, crude oil, animal feed; fertiliser and water can all be produced from the stuff cities currently waste

----------


## chrisp

> Morally however, I have a big problem with the idea that we turn food into fuel. It takes literally a year's worth of food for a person in order to make enough ethanol to equal just one tank of petrol. This is very much a case of the poor starving (as the higher demand drives up food prices) so that the rich can drive. No thanks - I'd rather walk if need be.

  I agree with your sentiment, however, I think we as a society have taken the availability of energy for granted and overlook its true worth. 
I do find it somewhat amazing that some complain about the cost of electricity (and petrol), but in reality they are both are far undervalued. 
Here is a repost of a similar response I made sometime ago (with then update-to-date figures in red).  The figures might now be a little out of date, but the conclusion is unchanged.   

> Part of the problem, I think, as that we have all become a bit spoilt   with the relatively low cost of energy.  It doesn't really matter if you   talk petrol, gas or electricity - they are all *dirt cheap!* 
> Let me repeat that - *dirt cheap* - do you believe it? 
> If I asked a average person to work for the equivalent cost of the energy they produce, I'd be charged with exploitation. 
> For example, a 80kg person running (i.e. hard work) for 8 hours consumes:*30 kJ/kg/hr x 80kg x 8 hr =  19200 kJ*Their useful work output would be far less, but we'll use input figures for this exercise (pun  ). 
>  Electricity costs the average household about [S]$0.14/kWh[/S] $0.22/kWh*1 kWh = 60 x 60 kJ = 3600 kJ (=*[S]$0.14[/S]* $0.22  )*The cost in electricity per kJ:[S]$0.14[/S]* $0.22 / 3600 =* [S]$0.0000389[/S] *$0.0000611*Cost of energy used by a 80kg person running for 8 hours:*19200kJ x* [S]$0.0000389[/S]* $0.0000611* */kJ =* [S]$0.75[/S]* $1.17*If  that person was paid at the going rate for the work they do at the same  rate we typically pay for electricity, they'd earn less than:[S]$0.10[/S] *$0.15 per hour*I   suspect most of us produce far less output (=energy) in a typical day.    Would you be willing to work hard for 8 hours to be paid less than [S]$0.10[/S] $0.15 per hour? 
> I'm sure the energy cost per unit for petrol is higher, but I'm an electrical engineer, not a chemical engineer  *The  point I'm trying to make is that we have under valued the true worth   of our energy supply.  We are using energy sources that took millions   of years to produce and burning it up like it costs nothing.*  http://www.renovateforum.com/f216/po...91/#post833799

----------


## Moondog55

I remember Clarkson saying a very similar thing on "Top Gear" , he compared the price of petrol to the price of a bottle of "Evian Water"  some people are paying $9- a liter for water and whinge about the price of fuel????

----------


## jago

Yeah I paid more per gallon for water in the states than I did for fuel! Go figure that!

----------

