E15 will replace E10! EPA deadline for comments =5/21/2009. - Page 4 - Fuelly Forums

Android Users - Coming Soon! - Migrating from aCar 4.8 to 5.0

Go Back   Fuelly Forums > The Pub > General Discussion (Off-Topic)
Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 04-28-2009, 10:12 PM   #31
Registered Member
 
theclencher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 542
Country: United States
I know, it's like taboo or something. WTF?

No need to "get rid of" anyone. It's so simple: have 0, 1, or 2 kids. Attrition will take care of the rest of it.

No matter what the topic is, when someone says "god says...." RUN! You KNOW it's gonna be NUTS.
__________________

__________________
Tempo/Topaz:
Old EPA 23/33/27
New EPA 21/30/24

F150:
New EPA12/14/17

theclencher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 10:48 PM   #32
Site Team / Moderator
 
Jay2TheRescue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 4,657
Country: United States
Location: Northern Virginia
Quote:
Originally Posted by VetteOwner View Post

lol the worst gas additive i can think of thru time would be LEAD. rather be burnign corn than lead lol

But man, lead sure made the cars run nice... My old 74 Chevy ran on leaded fuel. Yeah, it would run on unleaded, but it ran like crap on it... was a little better with premium unleaded, but when leaded fuel was used it ran very well. Then again, those engines were designed to run on leaded fuel, and you had problems if they weren't run on leaded.

-Jay
__________________

__________________






Jay2TheRescue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2009, 10:44 AM   #33
Registered Member
 
VetteOwner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,546
Country: United States
yea this discussion comes up on the few model A forums i belong to. it was introduced because the valves and seats would burn up quickly if lead wasnt in the gas(they didnt have the high strength stuff we have today). but model A's and T's were before leaded gas. once the v8 was introduced then leaded gas became everywhere.
VetteOwner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2009, 10:47 AM   #34
Registered Member
 
VetteOwner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,546
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by theclencher View Post

No matter what the topic is, when someone says "god says...." RUN! You KNOW it's gonna be NUTS.
LOL exactly, im fine with people beliveing in religion and practicing it (all kinds). Now in a nutshell im open to the idea some higher up thing/guy could have created everything but i tend to lean towards the scientific proof side of things.

its the weirdos that try to push thier religion on you and quote the bible for everything saying its 100% proof.
VetteOwner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2009, 12:04 PM   #35
|V3|2D
 
thisisntjared's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,186
Country: United States
Send a message via AIM to thisisntjared
Quote:
Originally Posted by VetteOwner View Post
scientific proof side of things.
me too where is it?
__________________
don't waste your time or time will waste you
thisisntjared is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2009, 12:32 PM   #36
Site Team / Moderator
 
Jay2TheRescue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 4,657
Country: United States
Location: Northern Virginia
Not to be a spoilsport, but just a reminder to everyone that we shouldn't be going so far off the E10-E15 topic of discussion and turn it into a theological discussion.
__________________






Jay2TheRescue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2009, 01:57 PM   #37
Registered Member
 
theclencher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 542
Country: United States
God told me to tell you this

Quote:
Originally Posted by thisisntjared View Post
me too where is it?
Feel free to dissect my gaslogs for the Lambo- they have notations as to how much E85 was in the tank. Look for downward fe trend whenever E85 was in there.

Then there is this: http://www.motortrend.com/features/n...057/index.html

Study Finds Certain Ethanol Blends Can Provide Better Fuel Economy Than Gasoline - Auto News from December 05, 2007
"Optimal Blend" Is Likely E20 or E30; Coalition Calls for Further Government Research


SIOUX FALLS, S.D., Dec. 5 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Research findings released today show that mid-range ethanol blends--fuel mixtures with more ethanol than E10 but less than E85--can in some cases provide better fuel economy than regular unleaded gasoline, even in standard, non-flex-fuel vehicles.


Previous assumptions held that ethanol's lower energy content directly correlates with lower fuel economy for drivers. Those assumptions were found to be incorrect. Instead, the new research strongly suggests that there is an "optimal blend level" of ethanol and gasoline--most likely E20 or E30--at which cars will get better mileage than predicted based strictly on the fuel's per-gallon Btu content. The new study, cosponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy and the American Coalition for Ethanol (ACE), also found that mid-range ethanol blends reduce harmful tailpipe emissions.


"Initial findings indicate that we as a nation haven't begun to recognize the value of ethanol," said Brian Jennings, executive vice president of the American Coalition for Ethanol. "This is a compelling argument for more research on the promise of higher ethanol blends in gasoline. There is strong evidence that the optimal ethanol-gasoline blend for standard, non-flex-fuel vehicles is greater than E10 and instead may be E20 or E30. We encourage the federal government to move swiftly to research the use of higher ethanol blends and make necessary approvals so that American motorists can have the cost-effective ethanol choices they deserve at the pump."


The University of North Dakota Energy & Environmental Research Center (EERC) and the Minnesota Center for Automotive Research (MnCAR) conducted the research using four 2007 model vehicles: a Toyota Camry, a Ford Fusion and two Chevrolet Impalas, one flex-fuel and one non-flex-fuel. Researchers used the EPA Highway Fuel Economy Test (HWFET) to examine a range of ethanol-gasoline blends from straight Tier 2 gasoline up to 85 percent ethanol. All of the vehicles got better mileage with ethanol blends than the ethanol's energy content would predict, and three out of four actually traveled farther on a mid-level ethanol blend than on unleaded gasoline.


"I applaud the American Coalition for Ethanol for taking action and studying the impact of intermediate blends of ethanol. I am encouraged by the findings of this study, which should benefit the federal regulatory process for approving higher blends of ethanol," said U.S. Senator John Thune (R-SD). "Intermediate blends of ethanol will offer consumers more choices at the pump, reduce dependence on foreign oil, and benefit our domestic ethanol industry for years to come."


In addition to the favorable fuel economy findings, the research provides strong evidence that standard, non-flex-fuel vehicles can operate on ethanol blends beyond E10. The three non-flex-fuel vehicles tested operated on levels as high as E65 before any engine fault codes were displayed. Emissions results for the ethanol blends were favorable for nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide and nonmethane organic gases, showing an especially significant reduction in CO2 emissions for each vehicle's "optimal" ethanol blend (E20 for the flex-fuel Chevy, E30 for the Toyota and Ford, E40 for the non-flex Chevy).


"These studies show that moderate 20-30 percent ethanol blends can reduce air pollution, improve gas mileage, and save drivers money in the most popular cars on the road today," said Brett Hulsey, president of Better Environmental Solutions, an environmental health consulting firm. "Moderate ethanol blends are homegrown in America, can be delivered with existing pumps to current vehicles, and cost less than gasoline. Ethanol lowers CO2 emissions 20 percent from gasoline, making it one of our most effective greenhouse gas reduction programs currently in place."


KEY FINDINGS


Ethanol's energy content was not found to be a direct predictor of fuel economy. A fuel's energy content in British Thermal Units (Btu) is current standard practice for estimating fuel economy, a method that, because of ethanol's lower Btu value, leads to estimates of decreased fuel economy in proportion to the percentage of ethanol in the fuel blend.


-- This research, however, did not find ethanol's Btu content to be a direct predictor of fuel economy. All four vehicles tested exhibited better fuel economy with the ethanol blends than the Btu-value estimates predicted.


E20 and E30 ethanol blends outperformed unleaded gasoline in fuel economy tests for certain autos. Contrary to Btu-based estimates of fuel economy for ethanol blends, three of the four vehicles tested achieved their highest fuel efficiency not on gasoline, but on an ethanol blend. Mid-level blends of ethanol E20 (20% ethanol, 80% gasoline) and E30 (30% ethanol, 70% gasoline) offered the best fuel economy in these tests.


-- E30 offered better fuel economy than gasoline (a 1% increase) in both the Toyota and the Ford.

-- E20 offered better fuel economy than gasoline (a 15% increase) in the flex-fuel Chevrolet.

-- The non-flex-fuel Chevrolet more closely followed the Btu-calculated trend for fuel economy, but did experience a significant improvement over the trend line with E40 (40% ethanol, 60% gasoline), indicating that this may be the "optimal" ethanol blend level for this vehicle.


Standard, non-flex-fuel vehicles operated well on ethanol blends beyond 10 percent - All automakers currently cover the use of up to E10 (10% ethanol, 90% gasoline) by warranty for standard, non-flex-fuel vehicles. In this preliminary research, the three non-flex-fuel vehicles tested each operated successfully on ethanol blends significantly higher than this 10% ethanol level.


-- The Ford Fusion operated on E45, the Toyota on E65, and the non-flex-fuel Chevy on E55. No engine fault codes were displayed until these levels were surpassed.
__________________
Tempo/Topaz:
Old EPA 23/33/27
New EPA 21/30/24

F150:
New EPA12/14/17

theclencher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2009, 05:44 PM   #38
Site Team / Moderator
 
Jay2TheRescue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 4,657
Country: United States
Location: Northern Virginia
I have no issue with using higher blends of alcohol, but it should be cheaper to account for the reduced mileage. Here, even where E85 is available, it costs just as much, if not more than the regular gasoline.
__________________






Jay2TheRescue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2009, 06:49 PM   #39
Registered Member
 
theclencher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 542
Country: United States
I wouldn't be all that interested in it either if it cost the same or more.
__________________
Tempo/Topaz:
Old EPA 23/33/27
New EPA 21/30/24

F150:
New EPA12/14/17

theclencher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2009, 07:34 PM   #40
|V3|2D
 
thisisntjared's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,186
Country: United States
Send a message via AIM to thisisntjared
Quote:
Originally Posted by VetteOwner View Post
Now in a nutshell im open to the idea some higher up thing/guy could have created everything but i tend to lean towards the scientific proof side of things.
when i asked where the proof was i meant to the theories contrary to creation. sorry for the misconception.

regarding the ethanol argument: believe me, if i could get bigger injectors and run straight e85 all day i would. to me there is a difference between my personal preference and the principle at hand.
__________________

__________________
don't waste your time or time will waste you
thisisntjared is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
YAY! The fit is here! Matt Timion General Discussion (Off-Topic) 45 10-21-2006 02:43 PM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:23 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.