|Quote, originally posted by Raven »|
|Here's his reply:|
All recent GM and other cars are of course designed to handle up to E10, except for the 'flex fuel' ones, which used to have a fuel sensor to determine mix, but now just look at the short term 'learning' values after a fill-up to see if the mixture has gone leaner or richer since before the fill, then figure out the new values required. In other words, just an exaggerated version of the normal learning process from the O2 sensor readings.
Bottom line, chances are the system could adjust enough to compensate for the added fuel flow required by a 30% mix. Also, ethanol isn't too bad re corrosion, so fuel system components should be OK, however mileage would be down noticeably and emissions, though different, aren't really any better. The slightly higher octane rating would also have no benefit in this case. Furthermore, from a "well to wheels" CO2 standpoint, corn based ethanol is much worse than gasoline. Unless it's priced at least 40% lower, there's really no good reason to run ethanol until they start making it efficiently from bio-waste
Cool, thanks very much. So, why doesn't the manual just say that?
I'll probably stick with regular E-10, but it also sounds like he confirms my in-laws story that engines are designed to deal with up to 30% ethanol as the extreme case.
The story with my '96 tracker is that I've been putting E-85 in it for abotu 5 years. Sometimes as much as 2/3 of a tank with regular. I also add Lucas Fuel treatment that I buy by the gallon from a truck stop. I was having lots of trouble with the fuel rail needing cleaned but it's been okay for the last couple of years. Yes, the mileage droped about 15-20%.
As for emissions, it's a common rumor in E-check counties here that if you want your car to pass e-check (tailpipe test) that you should fill it up with 1/2 a tank of E-85 and drive it on the freeway for an hour before you bring it in.