Neighbor Drives 50 Miles to fill up with Fuel with no Ethanol.

[dstig1]

Like many have said, with older engines or small engines that sit a lot, it can cause issues. Around here, Minnesota passed a law mandating 10% ethanol years ago (corn states...sheesh). The classic car guys got up in arms and managed to get an exemption for premium grade gas. Stations are allowed to sell premium 91+ octane that contains no ethanol. They are not required to do so but can. It is pretty easy to find non-oxy premium if you look, and the classic car association maintains a list of stations that sell it and have a clue. I use 91/92 non-oxy for all small engine stuff now, especially my 2-strokes. Several years back Wisc was not on the ethanol bandwagon so the stations on my side of the Cheddar Curtain mostly sold non-oxy gas in all grades (not so much anymore, but there is still some). I would always see a mileage bonus from filling up in WI vs MN as ethanol robs a good 5-10% of your mileage at the standard 10% ethanol blend. My old SHO at the time got 24-26 mpg typically on gas, and dropped 2-3 mpg on 10% ethanol, and I check mileage manually every tank.

Here are 2 sources, one for this area:
Non-Oxy Fuel (then click the download button)
Ethanol-free gas stations in the U.S. and Canada

 

[RickB]

The Z-71 rpo spans many years, and the Chevy 5.3l is commonly referred to as a '327' ci motor.

Which clearly it is not. The 5.3 is 325 cu. in. the 327 is 5.4L. I love my 5.3, but I don't call it a 327.
Z-71 production began in 1988; 327 production ended in 1969.

I'd like to know how many million miles total that 5.3L GM engines have run on ethanol supplimented fuel.

 

[Toyboy]

We have 5 stations here in town that sell the non blended gas. We also get a lot of boat, ATV's and snowmobile traffic here also. Those guys don't kike the blended stuff so it is profitable for the stations to carry it. I use the unblended in everything we own from truck to weed whacker. It costs around $.09 more a gallon, but I'm willing to pay the differential.

 

[tcartwri]

Which clearly it is not. The 5.3 is 325 cu. in. the 327 is 5.4L. I love my 5.3, but I don't call it a 327.
Z-71 production began in 1988; 327 production ended in 1969.

same dealio with 5.0L fords, and 5.7L Chevs, and.....

5.3 is commonly referred to as a 327.

 

[ljohnson778]

Which clearly it is not. The 5.3 is 325 cu. in. the 327 is 5.4L. I love my 5.3, but I don't call it a 327.
Z-71 production began in 1988; 327 production ended in 1969.

I'd like to know how many million miles total that 5.3L GM engines have run on ethanol supplimented fuel.

Splitting hairs, aren't we? Notice I said 'commonly referred' to as a 327. I never said that it technically is a 327. Fact remains, whether you refer to yours as a 327 or not, many folks refer to the 5.3 as a 327. Now whether it is correctly referred to as a 327 or not is an entirely different discussion...

 

[RickB]

Splitting hairs, aren't we? Notice I said 'commonly referred' to as a 327. I never said that it technically is a 327. Fact remains, whether you refer to yours as a 327 or not, many folks refer to the 5.3 as a 327. Now whether it is correctly referred to as a 327 or not is an entirely different discussion...

Must be a local thing. Around here they call it a 5.3. Pointing out the 18 year gap between 327 production and Z-71 production is hardly "splitting hairs".
More to the point of debunking your vague claim that they overlap and might have been available together.
I could understand (but not necessarily agree with) going out of one's way to put ethanol-free gas in a carbuerated 327, but doing so for the "benefit" of a modern 5.3 makes no sense to me. But then I'm not the one doing it.

 

[Stimw]

Splitting hairs, aren't we? Notice I said 'commonly referred' to as a 327. I never said that it technically is a 327. Fact remains, whether you refer to yours as a 327 or not, many folks refer to the 5.3 as a 327. Now whether it is correctly referred to as a 327 or not is an entirely different discussion...

Anyone calling a 5.3 a 327 is clearly showing their ignorance! They are many years and worlds apart.
From the metal they are made from to the hp output, from the fuel management system to the ignition system.
Nice try though.

 

[jinman]

In my earlier post I mentioned a station in town that sold non-ethanol gasoline for a few cents a gallon more than the local prices of 10% ethanol (Walmart-Murphy USA). Last night, we returned a couple of Red Box movies to Walmart on our way to dinner and I noticed their regular was $3.53/gal. As we pulled into the parking lot of our favorite Mexican food restaurant, we saw the non-ethanol station next door is also $3.53 per gallon. I'd never seen it the same price. Perhaps Murphy sells so much more fuel that they have received a new load at higher prices while the little independent is still selling their last load. I don't know, but I only have one of three gas cans empty. So driving the 20 miles round trip just for that does not make sense. I still have about 12 gallons of non-ethanol fuel in storage.

 

[Toyboy]

We call the 5.3 a 327 also just because a lot of people don't know how to convert liters to cubic inches. It takes them back to the days it was easy for them to understand engine ci's. If you feel being exact on this is important to you.... go for it.

 

[Jstpssng]

Like many have said, with older engines or small engines that sit a lot, it can cause issues. Around here, Minnesota passed a law mandating 10% ethanol years ago (corn states...sheesh). The classic car guys got up in arms and managed to get an exemption for premium grade gas. Stations are allowed to sell premium 91+ octane that contains no ethanol. They are not required to do so but can. It is pretty easy to find non-oxy premium if you look, and the classic car association maintains a list of stations that sell it and have a clue. I use 91/92 non-oxy for all small engine stuff now, especially my 2-strokes. Several years back Wisc was not on the ethanol bandwagon so the stations on my side of the Cheddar Curtain mostly sold non-oxy gas in all grades (not so much anymore, but there is still some). I would always see a mileage bonus from filling up in WI vs MN as ethanol robs a good 5-10% of your mileage at the standard 10% ethanol blend. My old SHO at the time got 24-26 mpg typically on gas, and dropped 2-3 mpg on 10% ethanol, and I check mileage manually every tank.

Here are 2 sources, one for this area:
Non-Oxy Fuel (then click the download button)
Ethanol-free gas stations in the U.S. and Canada

Which leads to the question:"Where's the savings?" I know that I'm preaching to the choir, but it just doesn't add up.