marlinspike

I don't know about the OP's car, but not all of us drive cars with fancy O2 sensors and the like. Having to richen your mixture is no fun, and the older ignition systems don't seem to appreciate it.

Actually, you'll find that it's 10%, not less than 10%, and many stations are running significantly more. There's nothing in place to check it, and the mixing is done at the trucks, so it comes out quite imprecise. When you combine this with a federal mandate on ethanol consumption, gas companies are taking it to the limit and beyond whenever they can get away with it.

But ethanol fuels like E10 don't have this property.

I<3Strippers!

knotts island has no ethanol in the gas.

Lawlercaust

There is one on 460, its 757, but its out here.

nftuatn

just run 116 in the shit and be done with it..

Impulsed7

LOL at this thread.

when they add 10% ethanol to your gas, they arent taking 87octane and adding 10% ethanol and marking it 87. then you would have less energy per amount of gas... but they are taking lower octane (more energy) and adding ethanol (less energy) to get 87, (same amount of energy).

applies to 89 and 93 as well.

in the end, same amt of energy. the ethanol mixed gas is only bad for your car if you are storing it for long periods of time, as it will absorb more water than a tank with gasoline alone.

go read something, your brain might grow.

Fabrik8

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gasoline

Going by the numbers on Wikipedia, which are probably where you got yours (they're identical but ethanol is 84600), there is a 3.3% difference in energy density (by volume) between (non-diluted) gasoline and E10. I crunched numbers from a few other sources and found between 1.4% and 3.4% difference by volume, which makes sense because of the differences in brands and seasonal types of gasoline.

That doesn't actually equate to power loss either, because that would assume the exact same volume is injected, and ignores closed-loop fueling and differences in latent heat of vaporization, combustion temp, etc. But, let's say that it does equate just for sake of discussion.

So, you've made some generalizations about ethanol, so I'm going to make some generalizations about your car. You probably have a 125HP Civic. You'd lose ~4HP at the crank if your engine was in outstanding health.. You could clean the air filter and put in new plugs and gain that all back.

So really, I'm calling absolute bullshit on your claim that your car is significantly slower.

Oh, I forgot something..

Your car sucks......PERIOD.

Impulsed7

take what he said, then add my post. If you can add, that makes u a moron. If you cant add, well... the forums will say the rest.

Fabrik8

No, don't add your post. It wasn't correct either. I completely missed it the first time around, and I just went back and read it.


Octane rating doesn't have anything to do with the energy content of a fuel. For example, pure ethanol is 116 octane (AKI or (R+M)/2 rating, whichever name you prefer) but has a much lower energy density than gasoline.

If you took 87 octane gas, and added 10% ethanol, you'd have a mixture that has a higher octane rating than 87 octane gasoline, but a lower energy density.

If you want to end up with 87 octane, you start with something lower than 87 octane, and add ethanol. Then you end up with the correct octane, but a slightly lower energy density.

nftuatn

that is why his sig proves true...over and over

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShawnD
I think fabrik8 enjoys shitting on peoples logic with science.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nftuatn
lmao....he does it quite often and very well...

Impulsed7

same ability to produce power vs the amount of knock you could induce. thats the only point I was trying to make.

you have to inject more fuel to get that power, and a more advanced engine would adv. timing to extract that power. so gas mileage would suffer, and does with e85. As usuall the american gvt. is more concerned with emissions and looking good on the green front than efficiency.