"Winter gas" is normal gas without the extra EPA requirements. "Summer gas" has the required added chemicals to meet the EPA requirements due to the heat, evaporation, etc.
15% ethanol!?!?
- Thread starter Wacky
- Start date
- Views: 33457
"Winter gas" is normal gas without the extra EPA requirements. "Summer gas" has the required added chemicals to meet the EPA requirements due to the heat, evaporation, etc.
Copperhead
Veteran Member
Ethanol is going to be made, irregardless of gasoline stock piles, government intrusion into fuel, whatever. There is much more than ethanol that is derived from corn in these plants. And the best way to get everything separated into what they want is by making ethanol. Most folks are also unaware, that quite a bit of the ethanol is used for more than just fuel, but it is the byproducts of ethanol production that are desired just as much. Of every kernel of corn that goes into the ethanol facilities, not a bit is wasted. And much of it comes back out as feed supplements. But spark plug insulators, baby diapers, various plastics, pharmaceutical products, and other stuff are derived from what ethanol plants kick out. Even the CO2 produced by the process, a big chunk of it goes to the beverage companies for your soda pop.
Winter fuel is always produced this time of year to get the stock piles ready for cold weather. Just like diesel production is moving more over to winter home heating oil reserve buildup now. Nothing new to see here. Move along folks.
Different priorities.
Guys like you and I think about preserving a piece of equipment.
All that Govts know is: More broken equipment = More tax revenue.
Rgds, D.
It wouldn't be so bad if the SJWs running this game were consistently honest in educating these kids.
How about calculating the embodied energy required to produce a Prius and it's battery pack, and contrasting the lifetime energy costs compared to keeping an old Honda CRX on the road ?
Same goes for hydro-electric vs. wind power.
While I have a personal interest in most forms of alternative energy, I get annoyed when the rhetoric gets ahead of the hard data.
I think the new forms of synthetic diesel being developed hold the most promise.... but that is just another reminder that I will have to move out of Can/USA to get any meaningful choice of light-vehicles to drive.
Energy rant/drift/ramble Off.....
Rgds, D.
ultrarunner
Epic Contributor
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2004
- Messages
- 24,623
- Tractor
- Cat D3, Deere 110 TLB, Kubota BX23 and L3800 and RTV900 with restored 1948 Deere M, 1949 Farmall Cub, 1953 Ford Jubliee and 1957 Ford 740 Row Crop, Craftsman Mower, Deere 350C Dozer 50 assorted vehicles from 1905 to 2006
I see it a lot with perfectly good usable items going to scrap...
Even things like lathes and mills... not much of that work going on around here anymore.
A car from the 60's can be kept on the road indefinitely if rust or collision isn't a problem... same for other decades...
We must smog everything from 1976 up so many good cars are simply tossed rather than replace a Cat or troubleshoot a smog issue.
Even things like lathes and mills... not much of that work going on around here anymore.
A car from the 60's can be kept on the road indefinitely if rust or collision isn't a problem... same for other decades...
We must smog everything from 1976 up so many good cars are simply tossed rather than replace a Cat or troubleshoot a smog issue.
Copperhead
Veteran Member
Some valid argument to that one. But ultrarunner comment you were referencing is a little over the top. "untold financial and safety hardship for millions". If that was the case, there would be a public outrage so loud, nothing could quiet it. We have been using ethanol in gas since the late 70's in my area, and ethanol never comes up in discussions unless it is the beverage version. Lot's of older vehicles running around my area with no evidence of ethanol problems. it is probably better stated that the more complex vehicles and equipment have become, there is more cost to keep them going. Not convinced that ethanol played into it at all. My 1974 Pontiac Catalina carbureted 400 engine didn't seem to mind that it got fed E10 for most of it's life. It must have never gotten the memo that it wouldn't work. Or my 1979 Bronco 351M engine. Same thing. Both went well beyond 250,000 miles before I finally ditched them.
With legacy equipment, I'd say there is a direct safety issue..... but I'll get back to that in a bit.....
I've read about and banged this issue around enough on here to appreciate that ethanol is only one factor in problems coming up.
Overall fuel formulation - there will be variations between how fuel is formulated for high-density areas like the Bay, and rural areas of the continent. I can see where compounds that are present (or missing) in Bay area gas could worsen the impact of ethanol, esp. when combined with the factors below....
I do believe that regional fuel variations (other than just ethanol) are a major wildcard factor in what happens to stored equipment.
Moisture - if you are in Arizona (or any other locale with consistently low average humidity), then I'd expect less moisture+ethanol issues. (Yes, I'd expect Iowa to be humid
, similar to Ontario).
Operating practices - equipment that sits a lot tends to have more problems, vs. stuff used frequently. This factor is not just an ethanol issue today.
Fueling practices - I could be wrong Cu, but I suspect that you don't typically run around with 1/8 of a tank of fuel. More importantly, I'd be surprised to find that you park equipment long term with the tank mostly empty.
To be clear Cu, I'm not questioning that you had success with the old vehicles you listed - I believe you 100%. Because of the range of experiences people have with ethanol fuel, I remain technically curious as to what is going on.
The direct safety threat - fuel lines, or seals. Old rubber line was not designed to deal with ethanol - I believe that was probably what ur refers to....... that, and old non-standard (fiberglass ?) fuel tanks.
The dollar threat today..... people seem to go through a lot of gasoline fuel pumps around here. I treat my fuel (knock wood), and manage much longer life than most. I've posted it before, the report showing the higher E15 failure rates, on modern gas fuel pumps designed for ethanol. Heavier hydrocarbons being removed from gas, combined with more ethanol (a poor mechanical lube) being added leads to higher rates of fuel pump wear. This is a case where having an old mechanical fuel pump would be a bonus (Re/Re $ wise).
Many gasoline engine designs today have no serviceable fuel filter anymore. How much of a trade-off is being made with the micron rating of the fuel pickup sock ? How many of these failed fuel pumps are suffering from repeated cavitation under high engine load because the pickup sock is seriously plugged up from crappy fuel and nobody using a good quality injector cleaner, ever ?
I believe ethanol is only one factor in what is going on with today's fuel, albeit a significant one. My interest in discussing this objectively is to better understand the factors at play, so I can mitigate the impact on my equipment the best I can.
If someone is having success with different practices than what I follow, I generally believe them, and genuinely wish them continued success.
Rgds, D.
I've read about and banged this issue around enough on here to appreciate that ethanol is only one factor in problems coming up.
Overall fuel formulation - there will be variations between how fuel is formulated for high-density areas like the Bay, and rural areas of the continent. I can see where compounds that are present (or missing) in Bay area gas could worsen the impact of ethanol, esp. when combined with the factors below....
I do believe that regional fuel variations (other than just ethanol) are a major wildcard factor in what happens to stored equipment.
Moisture - if you are in Arizona (or any other locale with consistently low average humidity), then I'd expect less moisture+ethanol issues. (Yes, I'd expect Iowa to be humid
, similar to Ontario).Operating practices - equipment that sits a lot tends to have more problems, vs. stuff used frequently. This factor is not just an ethanol issue today.
Fueling practices - I could be wrong Cu, but I suspect that you don't typically run around with 1/8 of a tank of fuel. More importantly, I'd be surprised to find that you park equipment long term with the tank mostly empty.
To be clear Cu, I'm not questioning that you had success with the old vehicles you listed - I believe you 100%. Because of the range of experiences people have with ethanol fuel, I remain technically curious as to what is going on.
The direct safety threat - fuel lines, or seals. Old rubber line was not designed to deal with ethanol - I believe that was probably what ur refers to....... that, and old non-standard (fiberglass ?) fuel tanks.
The dollar threat today..... people seem to go through a lot of gasoline fuel pumps around here. I treat my fuel (knock wood), and manage much longer life than most. I've posted it before, the report showing the higher E15 failure rates, on modern gas fuel pumps designed for ethanol. Heavier hydrocarbons being removed from gas, combined with more ethanol (a poor mechanical lube) being added leads to higher rates of fuel pump wear. This is a case where having an old mechanical fuel pump would be a bonus (Re/Re $ wise).
Many gasoline engine designs today have no serviceable fuel filter anymore. How much of a trade-off is being made with the micron rating of the fuel pickup sock ? How many of these failed fuel pumps are suffering from repeated cavitation under high engine load because the pickup sock is seriously plugged up from crappy fuel and nobody using a good quality injector cleaner, ever ?
I believe ethanol is only one factor in what is going on with today's fuel, albeit a significant one. My interest in discussing this objectively is to better understand the factors at play, so I can mitigate the impact on my equipment the best I can.
If someone is having success with different practices than what I follow, I generally believe them, and genuinely wish them continued success.
Rgds, D.
ultrarunner
Epic Contributor
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2004
- Messages
- 24,623
- Tractor
- Cat D3, Deere 110 TLB, Kubota BX23 and L3800 and RTV900 with restored 1948 Deere M, 1949 Farmall Cub, 1953 Ford Jubliee and 1957 Ford 740 Row Crop, Craftsman Mower, Deere 350C Dozer 50 assorted vehicles from 1905 to 2006
My 1985 Carburetor Service Van has never had a fuel issue... I drive it at least once a week for work and sometimes everyday... I also fill up when the 34 gallon tank dips below 1/2 because if there is an emergency I need the truck ready to go and it has an auxiliary fuel transfer pump for fueling my gas powered equipment.
That said... I own 50 vehicles and many small gas engines and NEVER have I had fuel related issues prior to ethanol...
The first year ethanol was mandated I replaced a lot of fuel lines and fuel pumps... one of my buddies is a roadside assistance driver.... he said the only fuel issues he use to encounter were people running out of gas and now fuel line and fuel pump are a daily occurrence with older vehicles on the SF Bay Area roads.
Somehow the "Blame" always seems to be shifted to the owner for not maintaining fresh fuel... if Ethanol were not a problem why do some of my small engine manuals said do not use ethanol containing fuel?
That said... I own 50 vehicles and many small gas engines and NEVER have I had fuel related issues prior to ethanol...
The first year ethanol was mandated I replaced a lot of fuel lines and fuel pumps... one of my buddies is a roadside assistance driver.... he said the only fuel issues he use to encounter were people running out of gas and now fuel line and fuel pump are a daily occurrence with older vehicles on the SF Bay Area roads.
Somehow the "Blame" always seems to be shifted to the owner for not maintaining fresh fuel... if Ethanol were not a problem why do some of my small engine manuals said do not use ethanol containing fuel?
Walt 2002
Platinum Member
"If the EPA has the ability to mandate a ethanol blend they can surely mandate a non-ethanol blend... pure and simple but for some reason they don't causing untold financial and safety hardships for millions..."
You're kidding. There is no chance of relaxing ethanol requirements without a change of administrations. Not political, just fact. Remember they were pushing E15. Just in the last few days it was released that the EPA had failed to file a mandatory report required by Congress on whether ethanol was causing more damage than benefit. It will be about 18 months now before the report is produced.
Walt Conner
You're kidding. There is no chance of relaxing ethanol requirements without a change of administrations. Not political, just fact. Remember they were pushing E15. Just in the last few days it was released that the EPA had failed to file a mandatory report required by Congress on whether ethanol was causing more damage than benefit. It will be about 18 months now before the report is produced.
Walt Conner
I had missed that..... so I guess they just "forgot" to generate that report ?
I thought this was supposed to be science/engineering based.....
Rgds, D.
