Author Topic: ethanol v non  (Read 1435 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Steve in Sunny Fla

  • Industry Member
  • I Need a Life
  • *
  • Posts: 7772
  • AREA: Southeast Area
  • COG#: 6977
  • Membership Level: Active
ethanol v non
« on: January 24, 2019, 12:34:59 am »
C-14 ECU flashing for performance and rideability enhancement
C-10 Carb work , cams, & performance enhancements
 " Modifications for sport-tourers, BY a sport-tourer"
https://sites.google.com/site/shoodabenengineering/home

Offline VTconnie

  • Crotch Rocket
  • ****
  • Posts: 1613
  • AREA: Northeast Area
  • COG#: 11081
  • Membership Level: Active
Re: ethanol v non
« Reply #1 on: January 24, 2019, 12:54:11 am »
Thanks for sharing, YT is one of my favorite resources. I use E-0 in my F-250 plow truck with the 5.4L gasser, even though it is more expensive.
<--2003 Concours C-10 "Conifer", -AKA- The Cruise Missile
1980 CB900C DOHC "Old Iron" -AKA- The Hill Climber                

Offline MAN OF BLUES

  • I Need a Life
  • ******
  • Posts: 9158
  • AREA: North Central Area
  • COG#: 5977
  • Membership Level: Active
Re: ethanol v non
« Reply #2 on: January 24, 2019, 01:08:03 am »
thank you.
I was always a skeptic, and feared repercussions for my thoughts.
what you have shown me, with regards to lower compression, carb fed engines, and results based on non Loaded acceleration, simply add to the database.. and increase my beliefs.

running at a "set: rpm range, differs greatly when an engine is pressed Hard, and as oppsed to just run. This is a perfect example of what you and I both know, and understand.

30 YEARS OF KAW.....Rich R. (the other one..)  COG 5977  JUSTAMEMBAHNOW
and if you are gonna call me names... it's MR. Analdweeb if you please...

Offline Mettler1

  • Iron Butt
  • *****
  • Posts: 3343
  • You want answers? We got answers!!
  • AREA: North Central Area
  • COG#: 1431
  • Membership Level: Active
Re: ethanol v non
« Reply #3 on: January 24, 2019, 03:40:41 am »
  Don't know squat about either types of gasoline but my car and  C-10 has been using it (ethanol) for 24 yrs and 115,000 miles and still runs great. Same with the lawn mower and snow blower. Doesn't seem to be a problem for me :)
'94 Concours 115,000 miles-- 7th gear,2MM,KB fork brace,Over flowtubes,Stick coils,Tcro shifter,GPS,SiSF'sTorque cams,SPOOKFAK,block off plates, SS brake & clutch lines,KB risers, FENDA EXTENDA, emulators, SiSF carb Spa, Delkevic exhaust, Murphs' knee savers +grips, etc

Offline bajasam

  • Mini Bike
  • **
  • Posts: 163
  • AREA: Southwest Area
  • COG#: Forum
  • Membership Level: Forum Subscriber
Re: ethanol v non
« Reply #4 on: January 24, 2019, 05:02:58 pm »
and it will most likely never be a problem for you.its been mandated by law in az for nearly forty years with nary any complaints. only really big issue is in high moisture regions where you might store gas for long periods it will absorb moisture out of the atmosphere and cause issues if you lacking in your upkeep of your vehicles. if you keep up your equipment you have no worries.it does have less btu's per gram so there is a tiny advantage to pure gasoline on the performance side but most would never notice.

Offline Oldschool

  • Tricycle
  • Posts: 39
  • AREA: Southwest Area
  • COG#: Forum
  • Membership Level: Forum Subscriber
Re: ethanol v non
« Reply #5 on: January 24, 2019, 07:26:33 pm »
I live in Grand Junction, CO. We have 3 places here where I can by 87 and 91 octane non ethanol fuel.

I ran a few tests of my own. I have 190,000 miles on my 2002 GMC Sonoma 4wd. I always track my mpg..I get tank after tank at 20 mpg using standard 85 octane fuel containing 10% ethanol.

I started buying the non ethanol 87 octane. I ran 3 or 4 tanks through the truck and got a solid 24 mpg each tank. It costs more so I put together a spreadsheet based on 40,000 miles of driving, which is what I drive in a year. Over this distance, at the difference in mpg, and considering the price difference, I save approx $200 a year using non ethanol fuel.

Mike


Offline TimR

  • Global Moderator
  • Iron Butt
  • **
  • Posts: 3725
  • AREA: Northwest Area
  • COG#: 9032
  • Membership Level: Active
Re: ethanol v non
« Reply #6 on: January 24, 2019, 07:57:52 pm »
Great info all the way around. Mike I like your spread sheet info. I have a 95 Bronco5.8 with tow package. A few years ago we went to my oldest daughters house for Christmas. Getting to her house is a 5 hour drive. For this trop I filled up with pure gas. The tank was close to "E" and spent a lot of money filling the 36 gallon tank. I found for the one way trip my gas mileage did improve but not as much as mike did. There is a stretch of high way posted at 75mph. My 5.8 really likes gas at 75 mph.

My concern is how much more pollutants are we putting into the air by burning gas that doesn't take us as far. I wrote a WA legislator about my concerns and of course no answer back.  I use pure gas in my motorcycles and lawn mower as often as I can. I store the motorcycles over the winter with a tank full of pure gas.

Using pure gas the 900 gets 45 mpg going up hill or down.  The C14 likes pure gas too.  Tim
Blue 1975 Z1B 900, Red 09 C14     I might not be perfect but at least I don't ride a Suzuki

Offline Ranger Jim

  • Iron Butt
  • *****
  • Posts: 3521
  • AREA: Southeast Area
  • COG#: 6720
  • Membership Level: Asst. Area Director
Re: ethanol v non
« Reply #7 on: January 24, 2019, 08:12:50 pm »
You/we aren't putting any more pollutants in the air with pure gas. Ethanol was required so as to (ostensibly) reduce the amount of oil required to produce the same volume of fuel. It was enacted during the time when the USA was importing a large amount of oil from other countries.  The only reason that pure gas is more expensive than the ethanol blend is because the ethanol blend is subsidized by the government (through a lower fuel tax.  The only folks benefitting are the corn farmers, ethanol distilleries, and politicians. >:(
JIM CULP
OtP Jr. Slave Laborer (Safety)

No one is a TOTAL failure; they can always be used as a bad example.

Offline bajasam

  • Mini Bike
  • **
  • Posts: 163
  • AREA: Southwest Area
  • COG#: Forum
  • Membership Level: Forum Subscriber
Re: ethanol v non
« Reply #8 on: January 24, 2019, 10:51:18 pm »
thats pretty spot on, the worst possible thing about ethanol-gas is not what it does to your motor but what it does to the taxpayer and how it corrupts the govt.

Offline MAN OF BLUES

  • I Need a Life
  • ******
  • Posts: 9158
  • AREA: North Central Area
  • COG#: 5977
  • Membership Level: Active
Re: ethanol v non
« Reply #9 on: January 25, 2019, 04:15:18 am »
buying ethanol laden fuel, for the same prices, which rise and fall at  the whims of petro slugs, is simply ridiculous today... the prices I saw and paid, for the mandatory fuels here in Ohio, far surpassed what I now pay for 100% gasoline   (been filling up with it at $2.99/gal)

the prices of combo fuels, when they reached the $3+ mark, a few years back, when it was not gas, but alcohol laden gas.... just makes it a no brainier..
funny, the prices I saw, from the outlet that sold real gas.. only went up a max of $0.20 when the other stations went up $0.60 a gallon...

I guess it's time to buy corn, and brew yer own....and at least if it aint good for fuel, you can still drink it......



all my vehicles have been subjected to really puke fuel, soo much so that I have had to drain some, and add a lot of Iso-Heet, to remove residual water... since I restored and resurrected the last truck, and filled it with "real" gasoline, and subsequently done similar  to the one that had severe water issues.. I have found both to  give exceptional performance, reliability, and also mile per gallon readings that exceed 20% more, for the effort..
I'M A BORN AGAIN GASTION... I will never again pay for gas, at the price they ask, when it is  just simple "corn squeezing"... liquor is ok, I can drink that.. and will pay for it.. when they make boooze as cheap as gas... welll there ya go.

well... there ya go...

RIP Popcorn, you old Bastich'
\


30 YEARS OF KAW.....Rich R. (the other one..)  COG 5977  JUSTAMEMBAHNOW
and if you are gonna call me names... it's MR. Analdweeb if you please...

Offline connieklr

  • Street Cruiser
  • ****
  • Posts: 976
  • AREA: Northeast Area
  • COG#: 1608
  • Membership Level: Active
Re: ethanol v non
« Reply #10 on: January 25, 2019, 10:57:48 am »
"ML's"???

Did this fella not know what an "ML" was, or was he just being lazy?

________________
Guy Young
COG #1608
COG Life Member
Semi-Civilian
GB Young Services, LLC

Offline Uncle Rob

  • Road Bike
  • ***
  • Posts: 344
  • "Knock it off with those negative waves!"
  • AREA: Southeast Area
  • COG#: 11810
  • Membership Level: Active
Re: ethanol v non
« Reply #11 on: February 14, 2019, 08:05:00 pm »
Ethanol i fuel for America is a dumb idea that will never go away, because the corn farmers can make too much money off of it.  In Brazil, where they make it from the leftovers of sugar can production, it makes sense.  Having said that, if you turn it over fast enough, your vehicle will run ok.  If it is going to sit in the tank for an extended period of time, use non ethanol.  The decrease in maintenance cost will far outweigh the increased cost of the fuel.
2003 C10
1999 Buell X1
Others in pieces

Rob Thomson

Offline Nosmo

  • Sport Tourer
  • *****
  • Posts: 2012
  • "We're all in this together" -- Red Green
  • AREA: Northwest Area
  • COG#: Forum
  • Membership Level: Forum Subscriber
Re: ethanol v non
« Reply #12 on: February 15, 2019, 01:37:32 am »
The American Motorcyclist Association is fighting the upcoming approval and distribution of E-15, which is going to be a horrendous can of worms.  Rest assured it WILL get to the pumps and it WILL get into vehicles/engines that can't legally or physically run on it.  Who cares?  No one except a few informed vehicles owners who will never be listened to because the special interest corn farmers and their political minions will force it upon us to make more billions in profits.

https://www.slingshotforums.com/threads/ama-alert-congress-again-pushing-use-of-e15-fuel-despite-risks.54017/

http://magazine.americanmotorcyclist.com/5835/e15-fuel-subject-of-congressional-panel/

https://www.slingshotforums.com/threads/ama-explains-blender-pump-confusion-about-e10-e15-e16-e50-and-e51-e83.54273/

2003 Connie    2007 Wee-Strom   

"What could possibly go wrong...click....go wrong...click...go wrong...click...go wrong..."

Offline JS

  • Big Wheels
  • Posts: 8
  • AREA: South Central Area
  • COG#: Forum
  • Membership Level: Forum Subscriber
Re: ethanol v non
« Reply #13 on: February 16, 2019, 04:57:14 am »
If using a pour-in gas-tank repair liner it's best to have no cornflakes in gasoline. Liners that do not work with Ethanol usually form a film on the butterflies, etc. For my ZG1000 and my BBC it's definitely No Ethanol.

Just say using gasoline with No Ethanol will save the endangered yellow dotted snowflake corn beetle.





« Last Edit: March 14, 2019, 02:46:34 am by JS »

Offline kds

  • Training Wheels
  • *
  • Posts: 79
  • Life is either a daring adventure or nothing. HK
  • AREA: Southeast Area
  • COG#: 10622
  • Membership Level: Active
Re: ethanol v non
« Reply #14 on: May 02, 2019, 11:42:15 am »
Read this on a classic car website for ethanol abatement. Anyone tried any of these methods:

Seven Steps to Avoid Ethanol Fuel Problems in Your Classic Car

    1-Use ethanol-resistant hoses or nylon tubing to replace any plastic or rubber fuel lines.
    2-Replace fiberglass fuel tanks with a stainless steel tank.
    3-Use a water separator filter in the fuel line leading to the carburetor. Since water collects in the filter, you can easily remove it.
    4-Change out any O-rings in the fuel system to ethanol compatible rings.
    5-A carburetor fogging solution prevents condensation from filling fuel bowls.
    5-Use a flex-fuel-compatible fuel filter as it stops degradation of the fuel filter media.
    6-Use a non-alcohol based fuel treatment to prevent excessive water collection in your fuel. Ethanol based fuel treatments worsen problems caused by E10 gas.

Anyone tried any of these? How did it work? Will it work?

Thanks.

Offline Greenie

  • Road Bike
  • ***
  • Posts: 331
  • AREA: Northeast Area
  • COG#: 1019
  • Membership Level: Active
Re: ethanol v non
« Reply #15 on: May 03, 2019, 07:54:11 am »
I use Super Tech TC-W3 - it's a two stroke oil mix available at Walmart - just a few ounces in the gas tank will help keep parts from corroding. At work we have lots of small engines (chain saws, mowers and line trimmers) with very few ethanol related problems - and I don't treat everything with the TC-W3 all that consistently.

Offline coffee_brake

  • Crotch Rocket
  • ****
  • Posts: 1524
  • AREA: Southeast Area
  • COG#: 7653
  • Membership Level: Active
Re: ethanol v non
« Reply #16 on: May 03, 2019, 05:49:19 pm »
Living in extreme humidity most of the year, with several fuel systems to maintain (truck, bikes, mower), I do use some Heet.

Can anybody tell us more about a fuel filter that could separate out water before it reaches the carb(s)?
Jenn in "Chaahlston, y'all...."

Offline Lee

  • Mini Bike
  • **
  • Posts: 152
  • AREA: South Central Area
  • COG#: 12558
  • Membership Level: Active
Re: ethanol v non
« Reply #17 on: May 04, 2019, 03:36:35 am »
thats pretty spot on, the worst possible thing about ethanol-gas is not what it does to your motor but what it does to the taxpayer and how it corrupts the govt.

A hardy AMEN brother! Plus what it does to fuel system........

Offline turbojoe78_MA

  • Street Cruiser
  • ****
  • Posts: 899
  • AREA: Northeast Area
  • COG#: 8645
  • Membership Level: Active
Re: ethanol v non
« Reply #18 on: May 04, 2019, 10:55:51 am »
Living in extreme humidity most of the year, with several fuel systems to maintain (truck, bikes, mower), I do use some Heet.

Can anybody tell us more about a fuel filter that could separate out water before it reaches the carb(s)?

Jenn,  the only applications I've seen water separating fuel filters used were in boats and home heating oil systems.
There about the same size as the larger oil filters used in old V8 cars so the ones I've seen, and used wouldn't be too easy to add to a bike.
1968 Honda 160 Scrambler,  Sold / 1979 Kawasaki SR 650, Traded in for next one,  1978 Kawasaki KZ 1000 Z1R Turbo Sold / 1986 Kawasaki ZX 1000R Ninja Sold / 1999 Kawasaki Concours Sold / 2014 Kawasaki Concours


Offline MAN OF BLUES

  • I Need a Life
  • ******
  • Posts: 9158
  • AREA: North Central Area
  • COG#: 5977
  • Membership Level: Active
Re: ethanol v non
« Reply #19 on: May 04, 2019, 06:37:20 pm »
Living in extreme humidity most of the year, with several fuel systems to maintain (truck, bikes, mower), I do use some Heet.

Can anybody tell us more about a fuel filter that could separate out water before it reaches the carb(s)?


not really practical for use on a gravity feed bike (due to space), or a fuel injected bike with an in tank pump (the pump acts like a blender)..

was very commonplace on old "Classic" cars/trucks from their roots, up thru the late 50's to '70 or so, tho... ones that had a mechanical fuel pump....(or farm equipment with high sitting big fuel tank to gravity feed)
the filter/sediment bowl was always placed somewhere in a "loop" lower than the carbs, so water could "settle" in there.



as a kid, I had a few cars with them, both British, and American 50's-60's era models.

My dad would make his own for cars that didn't have them (when they began making those small cylindrical "stone" filters that installed in the carb inlet line);  he used those real thick glass, skinny and tall horseradish jars with a couple "barb" hose fittings thru the lid... worked great, and you could see the water, and dump them easily... he was pretty smart at times..
« Last Edit: May 04, 2019, 06:52:00 pm by MAN OF BLUES »

30 YEARS OF KAW.....Rich R. (the other one..)  COG 5977  JUSTAMEMBAHNOW
and if you are gonna call me names... it's MR. Analdweeb if you please...

Offline coffee_brake

  • Crotch Rocket
  • ****
  • Posts: 1524
  • AREA: Southeast Area
  • COG#: 7653
  • Membership Level: Active
Re: ethanol v non
« Reply #20 on: May 05, 2019, 01:21:07 am »
Ah, OK, the photos triggered memories of the farm tractors I grew up watching my grandaddy run and the big machines my daddy welded on after that. That's the glass bowl, it lets water sink to the bottom. Gotcha!

Why on Earth weren't carbed bikes with fuel pumps fitted with a smaller system like this?

Jenn in "Chaahlston, y'all...."

Offline MAN OF BLUES

  • I Need a Life
  • ******
  • Posts: 9158
  • AREA: North Central Area
  • COG#: 5977
  • Membership Level: Active
Re: ethanol v non
« Reply #21 on: May 05, 2019, 02:56:19 am »
Ah, OK, the photos triggered memories of the farm tractors I grew up watching my grandaddy run and the big machines my daddy welded on after that. That's the glass bowl, it lets water sink to the bottom. Gotcha!

Why on Earth weren't carbed bikes with fuel pumps fitted with a smaller system like this?
there were no fuel pumps, on our carbed bikes, (per-se)  we had gravity feed only, on the C10.

 carbed bikes, without fuel pumps, is An oxymoron girl, gravity feed to carbs is much different to the in tank fuel pump pressurized feed to an injector rail...  one pressurizes fuel up about 40psi, the other lets fuel flow down hill @ atmospheric pressure, around 14 #.... but beyond that, every bend, and connection, creates a restriction on the gravity flow.

Now, to go further, an injected bike, with an in tank pump, mixes and swirls the fuel and water, kinda like shaking salad dressing... under pressure, and being consumed, it spritzes thru the injectors, and the bike runs...
with a Gravity Fed CARB bike, like the C10, the fuel sits in the bowl.. Water, if present, sits at the bottom.. riding the bike agitates it during that activity, ... but when left sitting for a few hours/days/weeks/months... the water sits ther, and upon startup an first ride... globs up the jets.... because there is no "pressure" feed like on an injector, the jet plugs... the Injectors on a C14, have 43# psi behind the flow.. they WILL push water thru, a reduction in performance, and apparent "smooth running" will be clearly evident.. but... the bike usually will start and run...
« Last Edit: May 05, 2019, 03:15:53 am by MAN OF BLUES »

30 YEARS OF KAW.....Rich R. (the other one..)  COG 5977  JUSTAMEMBAHNOW
and if you are gonna call me names... it's MR. Analdweeb if you please...

Offline Rastus

  • Tricycle
  • Posts: 38
  • AREA: South Central Area
  • COG#: 12520
  • Membership Level: Active
Re: ethanol v non
« Reply #22 on: May 05, 2019, 04:58:19 pm »
I did a 19-states in 19 days run of the central and western states during the heat of August, 2017. In the Midwest and western states out to Idaho, I was able to find premium non-ethanol gas, which my ‘03 Connie really likes. Once into Oregon and California, non-ethanol gas of any grade was impossible to find, and performance and mileage suffered. I have found that non-ethanol gas works better in my chainsaw and lawnmowers, also.

Offline coffee_brake

  • Crotch Rocket
  • ****
  • Posts: 1524
  • AREA: Southeast Area
  • COG#: 7653
  • Membership Level: Active
Re: ethanol v non
« Reply #23 on: May 06, 2019, 02:16:07 am »
Ah, OK, the photos triggered memories of the farm tractors I grew up watching my grandaddy run and the big machines my daddy welded on after that. That's the glass bowl, it lets water sink to the bottom. Gotcha!

Why on Earth weren't carbed bikes with fuel pumps fitted with a smaller system like this?
there were no fuel pumps, on our carbed bikes, (per-se)  we had gravity feed only, on the C10.

 carbed bikes, without fuel pumps, is An oxymoron girl, gravity feed to carbs is much different to the in tank fuel pump pressurized feed to an injector rail...  one pressurizes fuel up about 40psi, the other lets fuel flow down hill @ atmospheric pressure, around 14 #.... but beyond that, every bend, and connection, creates a restriction on the gravity flow.

Now, to go further, an injected bike, with an in tank pump, mixes and swirls the fuel and water, kinda like shaking salad dressing... under pressure, and being consumed, it spritzes thru the injectors, and the bike runs...
with a Gravity Fed CARB bike, like the C10, the fuel sits in the bowl.. Water, if present, sits at the bottom.. riding the bike agitates it during that activity, ... but when left sitting for a few hours/days/weeks/months... the water sits ther, and upon startup an first ride... globs up the jets.... because there is no "pressure" feed like on an injector, the jet plugs... the Injectors on a C14, have 43# psi behind the flow.. they WILL push water thru, a reduction in performance, and apparent "smooth running" will be clearly evident.. but... the bike usually will start and run...

I understand, and was thinking of a carbed bike with a fuel pump, like the old VFR's and a few old Yammies. And all those bikes before fuel that goes bad quickly was a thing.
Jenn in "Chaahlston, y'all...."

Offline Daboo

  • Moped
  • **
  • Posts: 214
  • AREA: Northwest Area
  • COG#: 12797
  • Membership Level: Active
Re: ethanol v non
« Reply #24 on: May 06, 2019, 03:09:57 am »
One of the things I foresee happening, is that we will get E15 mandated across the country.  The people making the rules in the EPA won't care about the cost to you.  If you're fuel system fails and it costs to much to repair your bike, the cost you incur is for the greater good.

Chris
IBA# 49894 True Rounder = 0-20's - Rounder -- to -- 100's+ Red Hot Rounder

John 14:6