• Welcome, Guest! We hope you enjoy the excellent technical knowledge, event information and discussions that the BMW MOA forum provides. Some forum content will be hidden from you if you remain logged out. If you want to view all content, please click the 'Log in' button above and enter your BMW MOA username and password.

    If you are not an MOA member, why not take the time to join the club, so you can enjoy posting on the forum, the BMW Owners News magazine, and all of the discounts and benefits the BMW MOA offers?

Tier 1 Gasoline

Its all fun to talk about I guess....but what are you really going to do about it...

...like so many issues in our world today.."O"

This will be just like when they took the lead away..I had to buy lead substitute and add it to my old Chevy's to keep them happy and around a few more years.

oh well...

We're all blessed people in this country to be able to have it available and at a price that most of us can somewhat afford...at least for now.

Hopefully we will all get another riding season in this year:thumb
 
There's hope. Congress has dropped the ethanol subsidy.

They dropped the subsidy but kept the mandate that it had to be added to gasoline. It doesn't help us with the problem. It only stops a stupid government tax break and makes the actual users of the corn squeezins pay for it.
 
They dropped the subsidy but kept the mandate that it had to be added to gasoline. It doesn't help us with the problem. It only stops a stupid government tax break and makes the actual users of the corn squeezins pay for it.

those "ultimate users" would be we the people. we were already paying for it as a tax subsidy, albeit indirectly and in a fashion that we did not see on a daily basis. now we get the opportunity to pay for it a drip at a time.
at least no longer subsidizing the mega-corporations directly feels a bit better.

yes, next move is to get the ethanol mandate gone.
 
Last week I was able to fill up with ethanol free premium gas for the first time in years. I've put 250 miles on that tank, and I can't believe how well the bike runs. I may be kidding myself, but it seems to run smoother and pull better when passing on a two lane.
 
I just bought the wally world/Murphy's gas tonite & their pump sticker says 10% "or less" ethanol for cleaner air...
 
Yeah, I've read that "10% ethanol for cleaner air" marketing crap on many gas pumps.

Hmmm,....just for instance, lets take 100,000 cars, running on 10% ethanol blended fuel versus non-ethanol fuel, using 20 gallons of fuel per 490 miles. Every car is getting, approx 4% worse fuel mileage per tank with ethanol fuel than non-ethanol fuel. So the same cars with non-ethanol gas would go 510 miles on the same 20 gallons of fuel.

So for those 100,000 cars, they'd need to use another .8 gallon per car to hit the same 510 miles. That's just another 80,000 gallons of fuel used for the same miles. Hmm, wonder how much energy is used to bring that additional 80,000 gallons of 10% Ethanol fuel to the end user? Cleaner air is the product? I doubt it when an additional 20 diesel tanker truck loads are needed to deliver those 80,000 gallons to the end users.

Now multiply that times the FAR more than 100,000 cars on the road and I don't buy the "cleaner air" one bit. Cleaner air is ONLY based on the result of burning those gallons of fuel in an engine. It has nothing to do with how those gallons of fuel are made available to the end user.
 
Last edited:
Andy, where did you get the 4% less mileage using ethanol?

My Ford F150, two Audi's and the R1100 all got 10% less....

Just curious.

Ken
 
I was being "civil" in my rough estimation. My point was to realistically consider what is the result of mandated 10% ethanol blended fuel. It's certainly not "cleaner air" as the marketers would like us to believe, because we have to use more of it to go the same distance. If we are using more of it, that being the 90% of the mix which is gasoline, that means there is more of it being hauled to the gas stations. The only way that it gets there is by diesel truck.

Sure, many cars these days are getting better overall gas mileage, than say ten years ago. But there are still a lot of vehicles on the road not of that group. And since the processing and delivery system of ethanol blended fuels is the same as for non-blended fuel, using more of it to produce the equal miles is simply not productive. I agree to the cleaner air aspect because cars these days run FAR cleaner than they used to. Newer cars with better emission systems produce much less air pollution than they used to, but the fuel itself, straight gas or 10% blended has little to do with that in my opnion.
 
We are in total agreement Andy, I just wondered if the 4% was a published figure or not.

Thanks,
Ken
 
It would take a long time to do this topic justice.. but I'm at work, so a quick and fast will have to do:

ANDYVH- ethanol blended fuels' exhaust is much cleaner than un-oxygenated fuels. Much cleaner. Even if you consider the drop in fuel economy, it's still not even close.

For example, I was involved in some automotive emissions testing where we were testing alcohols mixed into gas, in 2- and 4-stroke motorcycles, we saw a 96% decrease in carbon monoxide.. yes, 96%. Unburned hydrocarbons were lowered between 30-60% depending on the machine... There were massive reductions in air pollution across the board.

Regarding the decrease in mileage- ethanol has 76K btu/gal and gasoline has 113K btu/gal- so on a strictly energy basis, ethanol blended gasoline (@10%) will have around 109K btu/gallon-- just under a 4% loss. But in lots of the testing we did (using motorcycles) at a 10% blend we were able to increase gas mileage.

The reason (we surmised) is that while gas has more btu's, not ALL the gas combusts- but by adding an oxygenate we increased the combustion efficiency and were able raise fuel economy while using a lower-powered fuel.... after about 10% we saw drops in fuel economy that would correspond linearly with the btu levels of the fuel...

So.. long story short, ethanol is a good fuel. While making it from corn is not the best way to make it... (not even close, for about 100 reasons...) But ethanol is a good fuel.

Okay... flame on
 
So.. long story short, ethanol is a good fuel. While making it from corn is not the best way to make it... (not even close, for about 100 reasons...) But ethanol is a good fuel.

Okay... flame on

But.... but... but... that isn't what I read on the internet by some guy who says he has lots of bikes. :laugh
 
It would take a long time to do this topic justice.. but I'm at work, so a quick and fast will have to do:

ANDYVH- ethanol blended fuels' exhaust is much cleaner than un-oxygenated fuels. Much cleaner. Even if you consider the drop in fuel economy, it's still not even close.

For example, I was involved in some automotive emissions testing where we were testing alcohols mixed into gas, in 2- and 4-stroke motorcycles, we saw a 96% decrease in carbon monoxide.. yes, 96%. Unburned hydrocarbons were lowered between 30-60% depending on the machine... There were massive reductions in air pollution across the board.

Regarding the decrease in mileage- ethanol has 76K btu/gal and gasoline has 113K btu/gal- so on a strictly energy basis, ethanol blended gasoline (@10%) will have around 109K btu/gallon-- just under a 4% loss. But in lots of the testing we did (using motorcycles) at a 10% blend we were able to increase gas mileage.

The reason (we surmised) is that while gas has more btu's, not ALL the gas combusts- but by adding an oxygenate we increased the combustion efficiency and were able raise fuel economy while using a lower-powered fuel.... after about 10% we saw drops in fuel economy that would correspond linearly with the btu levels of the fuel...

So.. long story short, ethanol is a good fuel. While making it from corn is not the best way to make it... (not even close, for about 100 reasons...) But ethanol is a good fuel.

Okay... flame on

I haven't heard any arguments that ethanol in itself is a bad fuel, in fact the Brazilians are doing a hell of a nice job with it using a sugar cane base. I have noticed a decrease in fuel economy as noted, more so with the motorcycle than the cars, but doing the math as far as cost it doesn't really bother me too much.

My problem with blended gasoline is the blending process itself (which I've discussed at length in this thread already). Reformulated gasoline relies on ethanol for alot of things, but one in particular is reaching a desired octane. The 87 octane fuel is really an 83 octane pre-blend and relies on the ethanol to boost the octane. That compounded with ethanol's cleaning properties and water retention (even from the atmosphere, like brake fluid) while being stored and transported really turn me off. I'm sure there's a better way of doing it, but this is probably the cheapest.
 
Did anyone ever see piles of corn 75 feet tall??Laying right on the ground.I think this has somethink to do with this crap they screw-up our gas with.This gives farmers a way to sell there crop when its booming.A lot of this corn IS NOT good for FOOD .So there is MANY reasons for using corn this way:lurk.

And now the rest of the story....? True that not all corn is good to eat. However the subsidies paid to farmers have caused them to virtually quit growing food corn.
 
For example, I was involved in some automotive emissions testing where we were testing alcohols mixed into gas, in 2- and 4-stroke motorcycles, we saw a 96% decrease in carbon monoxide.. yes, 96%. Unburned hydrocarbons were lowered between 30-60% depending on the machine... There were massive reductions in air pollution across the board.

Interesting....I was not aware of this. Further research in my future! lol

Regarding the decrease in mileage- ethanol has 76K btu/gal and gasoline has 113K btu/gal- so on a strictly energy basis, ethanol blended gasoline (@10%) will have around 109K btu/gallon-- just under a 4% loss. But in lots of the testing we did (using motorcycles) at a 10% blend we were able to increase gas mileage.

The reason (we surmised) is that while gas has more btu's, not ALL the gas combusts- but by adding an oxygenate we increased the combustion efficiency and were able raise fuel economy while using a lower-powered fuel.... after about 10% we saw drops in fuel economy that would correspond linearly with the btu levels of the fuel...

So.. long story short, ethanol is a good fuel. While making it from corn is not the best way to make it... (not even close, for about 100 reasons...) But ethanol is a good fuel.

Okay... flame on

Now there you go again......lol So how were you tuning the engines differently? Between my father and I we have tested 3 R1100's, three Audi's, and a ford F150. The average drop in all of these vehicles when using ethanol was 10%. The R1100's will go from 42-43 to 52-54 on the hiway. The F150 goes from 15-16mpg to 18-21. What is the secret to getting better mileage using ethanol?

Thanks, Ken[COLOR]
 
I could agree that ethanol is good fuel if:
1. it produced the same amount of energy per gallon as does gasoline. It's close, but it does not contain as much thermal energy capability as does gasoline. So more of it is needed to achieve the same miles per tank as gasoline.
2. it didn't inherently attract more moisture than does gasoline.
3. if it could be made for less per barrel/gallon than it takes to make gasoline. So far every report I have seen says it cost more to make ethanol than gasoline. It is made economical by government subsidy.

I don't argue that ethanol blended fuels themselves are not cleaner burning fuels. That is an established fact by testing. But, its the overall result/cost of getting MORE ethanol blended fuel to the end user that should be made known to the public. It takes more E10 per mile than does non-E10, so that means more of it has to transported to the end user. That means more tanker truck loads. More truck loads means more oil used to make more diesel fuel.

Its like the tweaked rationale saying current electric cars save the environment and use less carbon based fuels. That would be true, IF the extra electrical demand didn't come down the grid via burning more coal, which is the case right now. To make more electricity, we use more coal. Until that changes, electric cars DO reduce the demand for gasoline, but would increase the demand for coal if a large percentage of the populace drove them.
 
The F-150 notes above are EXACTLY what my results have been with our F-150.

Our Avalon has a 6 to 10% mileage loss when using the ethanol blended fuels...

I don't breathe from an exhaust pipe, so I don't doubt that there COULD be less pollution from the "oxygenated" fuels. But frankly comparing the emissions of 2008 vehicle to something built pre-air pumps, catalytic converters, etc, etc... I DON'T REALLY CARE very much. At some point there is something called diminishing returns..

What I do care about is getting less mileage (and most often at a higher cost per gallon) and supporting an insane 'ethanol from corn' industry that is responsible for a lot of unaccounted environmental impacts in an effort to be "GREEN".

Okay, flame off now!
 
Back
Top