Ethanol fuel & engine problems

Here's good read on the ethanol blended fuels now being
sold just about everywhere. In the boating industry,
ethanol creates serious engine problems. We install water
seperation filters and many of us keep out tanks topped off
to help reduce the water absorption by ethanol.

I've had a few minor glitches while driving the Six at
highway speed and I now think they are ethanol related
(water contaminated). It appears that the older the car,
the more problems ethanol blended gasoline causes.

https://www.fuel-testers.com/ethanol_engine_precautions.html

I'm just a rookie when it comes to automotive skills but
the chemistry should apply to auto as well. All comments
from experienced auto guys are welcomed.

dale

Ethanol sucks. Period.

...just my professional opinion...

/bcforum/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/devilgrin.gif

DrEntropy said:

Ethanol sucks. Period.

...just my professional opinion...

/bcforum/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/devilgrin.gif

Click to expand...

And professionally expressed! /bcforum/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/jester.gif

Couldn't help it. Goin' thru a dissertation doesn't seem to make any diff'rence, so... /bcforum/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smirk.gif

Seafoam!!!


1/2 a can at each fillup

I won't even use ethanol in my modern vehicles. The "cleaner emissions" equals about a 10-20% drop in fuel economy in any vehicle I've put it in. Seems like an oxymoron...burn more fuel, but lower emissions /bcforum/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wall.gif

/bcforum/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/iagree.gif

Doc, you said that very well

I work for a Honda store and have had more running problems since Ethanol was introduced. Now our government wants to mandate an required amount per gallon.

I think I'm gonna take up brain surgery, at least the gov't can't tax it on amount of use, and God isn't changing the model every year

/bcforum/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/nopity.gif

Tinster; How are you? Don't let that 6 get ate up by corn gas.

Dave

Hey Dave !! Howdy to Annie and The Girls!!

I've got one water/fuel separator built into my Mercury
outboard. I installed another one myself between the fuel
tank and the engine.

I'm wondering if I should install one of these units into
my Triumph's fuel line.

What does anyone think? Here is the unit I installed in my
boat to protect my engine from ethanol fuel related
problems..

https://www.jamestowndistributors.com/use...Water+Separator

/bcforum/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/cheers.gif

The girls and Annie say HI!!!!!!

If your getting moisture problems, then that filter would be a good idea. Can't hurt!

/bcforum/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/savewave.gif

Dave

I trust Racor products, just don't think it necessary with a gas burning car, Dale. You're more likely to suffer poor running and deterioration of "soft" parts than a water condition there. Mebbe toss some "dry gas" treatment into the tank every other fillup.

...To further muddy th' water... /bcforum/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/jester.gif

Dale,
Ethanol aside, keep in mind, that a boat is a different animal, operating in a different environment. The boat I once had had a 500 gallon gas tank and I never had more the 100 gallons in it. A lot of air space, and moisture laden air came in. Every now and then, I opened the bottom drain to check for water. Sometimes yes, sometimes no. I always checked the drain on the fuel filter and never a drop.

So unless you know for a fact that you have a water problem, which I doubt you will with the current blends, don't do it. Just one more thing to go wrong.

Besides, if the TR6 stops because of water in the fuel, you can still walk farther then you can swim.

Tinster
I won't go near the stuff. My wife has a new 4 wheel drive and she will be staying well away from it too. I read somewhere that the new car warranties are void if there are engine/fuel problems attributed to ethanol use. Any ethanol mixes sold in my state must be clearly labelled. On the east coast I think they can sneak in a % before requiring labelling.
Regards
Craig

ObiRichKanobi said:

I won't even use ethanol in my modern vehicles. The "cleaner emissions" equals about a 10-20% drop in fuel economy in any vehicle I've put it in. Seems like an oxymoron...burn more fuel, but lower emissions /bcforum/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wall.gif

Click to expand...

Of course; that's EXACTLY what they mandated in the 70's by requiring detuned engines and air pumps to clean the emissions at the price of hideous gas mileage!
Only a politician could figure that out.

If you live in Texas you don't have any choice at a filling station.
Ethanol or stay still!

I'm confused. I thought ALL gasoline being sold in the USA has ethanol, and that the max. percentage in 10%. So, how can you NOT be using it?

Around here in Northern Wisconsin, several retailers offer and advertise their 92 octane with no alcohol added. They may be catering to the outboard motor/marine market.

Al

Tinster said:

Here's good read on the ethanol blended fuels now being
sold just about everywhere.

Click to expand...

Mmm, I dunno. I'm always suspicious of information from someone who is trying to sell me something. In this case they are trying to sell you a test kit, and giving all the reasons why you HAVE to have one.

Several of their comments seem to not apply or be distorted, IMO. For example, it's true that E10 is somewhat hygroscopic when it's dry (meaning it can absorb water from the atmosphere); but it can also dissolve that water (where it does no harm). Once it gets close to being saturated (ie having absorbed as much water as it can hold in suspension), it is no longer hygroscopic and stops absorbing water. Then if more water is added through some other means (like tank condensation), then only the extra water falls out of suspension. So unless liquid water is added AFTER it has absorbed as much as it can hold from the atmostphere, you should get only a relatively small amount of liquid water (and ethanol) at the bottom of the tank. This is actually pretty similar to the way non-oxygenated gasoline acts, and we've been dealing with that for 100 years; so maybe the sky isn't falling after all.

And pretty much all it takes to avoid the serious consequences that they talk about is some way of blocking the heavier water/ethanol blend from the carbs; like the sediment bowl on a TR2-4 or the paper element fuel filter on later TRs. IOW our cars are already equipped to deal with the problem, because it's been around for a long, long time.

These people are also trying to sell you something ... but for an opposing viewpoint, see
https://www.epa.gov/oms/regs/fuels/rfg/waterphs.pdf

AltaKnight said:

ObiRichKanobi said:

I won't even use ethanol in my modern vehicles. The "cleaner emissions" equals about a 10-20% drop in fuel economy in any vehicle I've put it in. Seems like an oxymoron...burn more fuel, but lower emissions /bcforum/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wall.gif

Click to expand...

Of course; that's EXACTLY what they mandated in the 70's by requiring detuned engines and air pumps to clean the emissions at the price of hideous gas mileage!
Only a politician could figure that out.

Click to expand...

It's not complicated, government pushes industry to do what it won't do on its own. Today the emissions standards are even tighter than they were back in the 70's, yet we've got cars with higher performance then ever in the entire history of the automobile.

Yes, cleaner fuels drop mileage. They drop emissions by about 40-60%, and mileage by about 5-20%. Overall, that's a net gain. Well shown on the various monitors stationed along highways and such.

What about the stories (rumours) we hear that it takes more energy to make ethanol than the gas it replaces and its production actually produces global warming.

I heard long ago that if all the methane produced in New Zealand by the sheep herds could be collected for use in cars, and if the cars could be modified to run on methane, then New Zealand would not need a petroleum to gasoline facility. There would be enough methane for all the cars to operate there all year long. Now this would save global warming !

Don Elliott said:

What about the stories (rumours) we hear that it takes more energy to make ethanol than the gas it replaces

Click to expand...

Likely true only if you ignore how much energy went into forming the petroleum in the first place. "Fossil" fuels are free energy, it's really tough for "renewable" fuels to compete with that. Until of course the fossil fuels are gone.<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:] and its production actually produces global warming.[/QUOTE]Too soon to say, IMO. Wait until some other experts have had a chance to go over their analysys and point out the flaws. Seems to me they had to make a whole lot of assumptions about what will happen in the future, without so much as a crystal ball. Different assumptions may well produce different answers.

Oddly enough, as I heard it, they gave a timeline for when the CO2 equation would balance again. That implies to me that they have some huge "one time" CO2 charge in their model, like perhaps they assumed that all the cleared forests would be burned rather than being put to good use. Maybe what that means is that we should also start using methanol from wood pulp as a fuel (or even wood pulp directly).
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:]I heard long ago that if all the methane produced in New Zealand by the sheep herds could be collected for use in cars, and if the cars could be modified to run on methane, then New Zealand would not need a petroleum to gasoline facility. There would be enough methane for all the cars to operate there all year long. Now this would save global warming ! [/QUOTE]Methane as a motor fuel is do-able, though it has many disadvantages. However, collecting methane from every sheep in NZ might be a problem /bcforum/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif