Using E10 is false economy?

[Cav]

Originally Posted by arronm

Rubbish. My 98 comes from BP down the road. We refine our own fuel in WA

Mate I thought you said you wuz gunna stay away from these threads and go back to all the performance stuff.

It is a pity that you RUBBISH other peoples opinions. You can disagree of course, that's what discussion is all about; but to only comment on one point that I made without addressing the core thrust of my post does not contribute anything to the thread.

If you want to participate effectively in a discussion, show some respect for the opinions of others and if they are wrong point out why. You mention that WA has a refinery without commenting all all the other points I made. How does this add to the general thrust of this thread regarding the difference between the various fuels with associated performance and economy?

[arronm]

Ratter has explained twice the benefits of higher octane fuel. I don't need to talk about it any more. It's a fact. And we don't always need to prove these things, just have faith in people that know. And all fuels above 91 can add performance. Your post wasn't a opinion. It stated two facts. One that our fuel comes from Singapore and two, that higher octane fuel don't add performance. Wrong on both accounts.

And to the original question. E10 is about 95 Ron so while you may use a bit more , it can add performance to cars that will put timing on lesser fuel. So yes I think it's worth it

I use 98 in all my daily cars, most are tuned for it and E85 in the turbos

Hey Cav do you think E85 might add some performance.?? I got the same compression.

[tweeked]

I just did a return trip Melbourne to Sydney return in a 2010 Aurion. (no hate or I will get Hulk onto you lol) Same load, same driving style.

Leg one I brimmed with Caltex 91 in Craigieburn, limped into Castle Hill in Sydney on fumes. Threw a full tank of Caltex 98 in Castle Hill, drove around Sydney for a few days then topped up again with 98 and set off, so it would have been a pure 98 in the tank. Expected to make Melbourne easily on the higher grade, but had to fill up at Tallarook Caltex on the Hume, as the needle was lower than when I hit the outskirts of Sydney on the first leg.

91 for the Aurion from now on, and 98 only for the GT

[GASWAGON]

Oh well.......At least we dont live in the U.K or N.Z I suppose?

[nstg8a]

Whenever a thread like this comes up there is usually someone spouting that e10 is the devils ****, and not worth using to start a fire.
You get the usual 'I only run 98 in my mass produced family sedan, anything less and it runs like crap' and I always think that if that was true then it's indicating some issues within that car, and the fuel is merely highlighting those faults.
It's good to see a thread with actual information, and no hysterical nonsense.

Personally I think the fuel companies are pretty smart, and it doesn't really matter what you run, they're all gonna cost you round the same. Where one will get you better mileage you wil also pay more for it, buy cheaper fuel and get slightly less mileage.

[Sar4890]

I have run both 98 and 91 in my ba xr6 and ran the the same route Adelaide to Port Augusta which is a regular run for me and it made no noticeable difference to my mileage nor my performance perhaps if my vehicle was flashtuned to benefit for the octane my results might have varied so its 91 all the way for me. I also haven't tried e10 so i cant comment on it.

[Tom Tucker]

Originally Posted by cro142

The biggest downside to E10 has not been mentioned here yet.

Ethanol as an additive to petrol has been claimed to be more environmentally friendly, as ethanol is a renewable resource.

However, this comes at a cost. Ethanol is made from sugar cane, and the production of sugar cane requires large-scale agriculture to produce a fuel additive rather than food.

This large scale agriculture requires huge inputs in the way of diesel fuel and fertilisers. The fertiliser residues leach from the soil and into our waterways - and in the case of Queensland grown sugar cane, the fertiliser residues will be carried into the ocean, and affect the Great Barrier Reef with higher algae growth, upsetting the ecological balance.

As well, increased areas of cultivated land will increase the rate of soil erosion and ultimately the sediment content of waters in the Great Barrier Reef region.
This soil erosion has been measured at up to 100 tonnes of soil lost per hectare per year. Not good.

Surely we should be tolerating these downsides ONLY for food production - not for a fuel additive which has very little benefit in saving oil reserves.

E10 is politically driven, it is not a logical approach to saving oil reserves.

If a car on E10 uses 10% more fuel, doesn't this mean the E10 is doing absolutely nothing??

Why bother?

Politics!

Actually, ethanol is produced a number of ways. Suger cane is only one. And it is usually a produced using by products ie waste that would otherwise be disposed of, especially in the case of flour production by products.

So the argument that ethanol comes at either the cost of food crops or larger agricultural energy inputs isn't quite accurate.

It is absolutely environmentally beneficial. But it has an element of politics because 10% isn't particularly significant. It's a nominal number that says we're doing something about renewable energy but don't want to upset voters who aren't necessarily well informed on ethanol and believe it's all bad.

[GasoLane]

Originally Posted by Tom Tucker

But it has an element of politics because 10% isn't particularly significant. It's a nominal number that says we're doing something about renewable energy but don't want to upset voters who aren't necessarily well informed on ethanol and believe it's all bad.

Or because your car manufacturer says no more than 10%

[GASWAGON]

My wife bought a brand new Toyota corolla about 6 months ago.

The sticker on the fuel flap says E10 compatable.

Toyota told her to run 91.

[Cav]

Originally Posted by arronm

Hey Cav do you think E85 might add some performance.?? I got the same compression.

Mate it will go like one of them V8 supercars

[Itsme]

Originally Posted by GasOLane

Or because your car manufacturer says no more than 10%

Exception for Holden Commodores!

[GasoLane]

Originally Posted by trublu

Exception for Holden Commodores!

My manufacturer (not GMH) says no more than 10% along with this comment....

"Purchasing your fuel from a reputable supplier may reduce the risk of exceeding this 10% limit or of receiving fuel with abnormal properties."

[arronm]

I can run E85 in my commodore ,but why would I. Use heaps more for SFA performance gain. But in the F6s, great performance gain, but sure chews it.

All my falcons and territory say E10 compatible. But I just run 98 in the daily cars.

[TheSneakiness]

My ex's car (2014 Lancer) has been run on 91, 95 and 98.

It pinged its head off on 91 and ran like absolute garbage.

95 and 98 the difference was 1/10th of f all but ran much smoother and had more go. I did advise her to stay away from E10 so it hasn't been run on that but I don't see it being any better than 91.