Topic: Additives to counteract effects of ethanol fuel?

[Retro Rocket]

Well i don't know about our bikes but i just recently sold an older 1980's car with a 1970's tech motor and i can assure you all that not only did it run way better on higher octane fuel it used less also. It used to ping under load with the lower octane fuel and ran like a dream on the high octane. The best thing was it was more economical.....And had more power.....

Mick

[Gaither]

Mick

'Bet it had a higher compression ratio.

[Retro Rocket]

Mick

'Bet it had a higher compression ratio.

Hi Gaither, i wouldn't call 8.8 to 1 very high compression mate.....It pinged its guts out on normal unleaded and ran like a dream on premium, I have a mate that restores old 1960,s cars and he only uses premium, normal unleaded does the same thing to his cars, lots of pinging under load... Maybe our fuel recipes are different but in my experience older cars definitely run better on premium unleaded and have better fuel economy...

Mick

[Skunk Stripe]

It is probably related to their timing advance more than anything. The 2 main things higher octane does is allow more timing advance or more compression. The reason for this is that it burns slower. High octane fuel does not contain more energy per gallon than regular has.

[Retro Rocket]

Well the fuel may not have more "energy" but my car had more power and was more economical so it is kind of irrelevant that it has no more energy ....It was a 3.3litre 6 cylinder carburettor engine , nothing high tech and the difference was noticable as soon as you put your foot down....Everything was stock on the engine including timing....

Mick

[736cc]

My old Dodge had a slant 6 and ran soooo much better and idled smoother w/ timing advanced...but it pinged like mad on regular. Back to stock timing it ran barely mediocre but didn't ping.
Also had  strange habit of the carb vibrating loose every few months.

[Gaither]

Mick

It must have been the ign timing since 8.8 isn't considered high. As you know, the higher you can run the ign timing without "clatter" the more power/perfomance you'll enjoy. The slower the timing gives the opposite. You were simply getting all you could get out of the engine with the fuel your had to work with - which is intelligent.

When GM was testing their new Cadilac OHV V/8 on the road, in a very heavy '47 Caddy, they found they could get 28 MPG by running a 16-1 Comp ratio (imagine that in those days!). Can we say "efficiency"? They couldn't convince the oil co's to blend/market the gasoline required - why would they want to increase mileage!. So, GM dropped the comp ratio which cut the fuel mileage drastically ('can't recall that number).

Back when we had cars you could tinker with, I never used a timing light. I simply slowly advanced the distributor til the engine would begin to "ping" under a good load. Then, I slightly retarded the timing til it got quiet. Then, I had all the advanced timing a given engine would stand for the fuel I was using. In those days, I always ran "High-test".

[Nortstudio]

I hate to interject here folks, but I am now a little lost on whether we have determined a decent additive for our bikes to help with the ethanol problem.

This thread has evolved, and being a newbie, I have now learned a bunch about octane and ratings here and also from doing some online research, because of this thread.

Seems the higher octane might be useful if the engine requires that type of higher combustion, or is tuned to where pinging is an issue with a lower octane. Some also say that higher octane may produce less gunk in our engine after burning.  Do I have that right?   

My question now is: does the higher octane option have less ethanol by volume, therefore making it a option that gets us closer to our goal, which originally was to avoid this corn based "not an issue in 1976" additive in our fuel???

Or is this an apples and oranges deal? 

[Gaither]

Nort

'Not sure there is a consensus on an effective additive.

When the label on the pump says "10%" about all we can do is believe it (whether true or not!). The 10% applies to all octane grades.

Of course, the glorious EPA has cleared the way to  cram (mandate!) 15% down our collective throats! Can you say, "Law without representation"?

[Nortstudio]

What do you mean "without representation?"  The lobbyists are getting plenty of representation, as far as I can tell....

[Markcb750]

As the energy density chart below shows, what we are getting with our Gasohol is HOSED.

Couple that with the problem that the energy to produce a gallon of Ethanol is significantly greater then the energy contained in it and we have a classic American political & corporate fleecing of the average Joe.


You get lower millage with Gasohol, have too, every time.

The ethanol absorbs and secretes H2O as its temperature and its exposure to humidity varies, in our unsealed gas tanks this problem is exacerbated.

I use Sea Foam to counteract the problem this can cause in the carburetors, Not so much on long rides, but if it just being run to the store and back I like to think the Sea Foam will reduce the varnish build up, but who knows.

If i know the bike will be parked for several days, I turn off the petcock about a mile from the house, then let the bike run out of gas in the garage, including nursing as much as I can out of the bowls by applying the choke on/off till i can't keep it running any longer.

[Nortstudio]

Agreed, ethanol is an experiment gone wrong.  I'd like to think they originally had good intentions with the idea, somewhere early on, but this is not the first (nor last) time we see dollars trumping logic.  Seems like "the big concept" is going to be effective distribution for these alternative fuels.

Here in NYC I am constantly doing very short trips, maybe 3-8 miles at a pop.  I have a bottle of seafoam, but I need to use it more regularly. I keep the StaBil under the seat, so it's a bit easier to have with me on fill-ups.  Maybe I need to put some seafoam in a different container so that I can have it on hand.

[Skunk Stripe]

I fail to see why you keep sta-bil under the seat. The fuel does not evaporate THAT fast or go bad that fast unless you only ride every couple of weeks. Sta-bil is for storage and I doubt it keeps ethanol from evaporating that much.

[Nortstudio]

It was suggested to me to put a smaller amount in at regular fill ups.  There is a guide on the back of the bottle that mentions this too.  I don't do each time, maybe every 2-3 stops at the station, and less than the prescribed amount for storage.

And it's only been in the winter.  The snow has taken longer than a couple weeks to thaw each time, so that's just about on your schedule.

[Gaither]

Nort

IMHO, you give "them" far too high a motive. "They" knew all about ethanol and knew exactly what "they" were doing. "They" also knew that we were the intended victims and that we would pay throuth the pocketbook REPEATEDLY before (and after) we pay for it at the pump!

Now, we sit here "talking" to each other about it when we (millions of us) should be giving "them" &%#* about it every day til they are forced to shut down all ethanol refineries. Any way you look at it, ethanol is one of the most rediculous items "they" have ever shoved down our throats!

"They" also know hydrogen is the way to go. "They" cry "technology and distribution problems". "They" also know that is a lie! You don't distribute hydrogen. Why waste the cost of distribution? You simply generate it at each fillling station! The technology is already available. If you want a hydrogen generator just search on line. Generators are readily available NOW! This is already being done successfully in one small country (I can never recall the name of).

"They" know exactly what "they" are doing and to whom "they" are doing it to!!!!

[Deltarider]

This is already being done successfully in one small country (I can never recall the name of).

Could that be Iceland?

[dave500]

i only use our premium in everything,my car and bike will ping on the lower grade rubbish,the bike runs pretty high comp and the car does as well,with curved dissy etc i wont touch ethanol,if you could add something or remove the ethanol?

[Gaither]

Delta

I think you're right. 'Had quite a good documentary on Public TV about it.

[nomad]

Has anyone tried the trick of pouring water into a gas container, mix/ shake it up, let the ethanol chemically bond with the water at which point it settles to the bottom of the container, then drain the water/ ethanol mix out of the container through a drain in the bottom of the container leaving nothing but gasoline?

If you have room for such a set up, it would help.  I know you'd still have the need to fill up while out and about, but at those times you could simply use SeaFoam or other additive.  At home you'd have a stash of 100% pure gasoline (if this trick actually works).

Can anyone verify that this actually works?

[w1sa]

Curiosity got the better of me.....so I took a measured sample of fresh E10 91 RON and combined it with a measured sample of tap-water.

viz. 1000 ml  E10 and  500 ml Water..........shook the combined sample in a clean, clear, sealed container, (vigorously) for 40 seconds.

The immediate result (after a couple minutes to settle)..........(approx) 7.5% reduction in visible E10 level.

If that changes over the following day(s), I'll let you know.

[Nortstudio]

I am sickly curious to see how this turns out.....

Do I need a new hobby? 

Curiosity got the better of me.....so I took a measured sample of fresh E10 91 RON and combined it with a measured sample of tap-water.

viz. 1000 ml  E10 and  500 ml Water..........shook the combined sample in a clean, clear, sealed container, (vigorously) for 40 seconds.

The immediate result (after a couple minutes to settle)..........(approx) 7.5% reduction in visible E10 level.

If that changes over the following day(s), I'll let you know.

[Gaither]

Nort

Yeah, I can just see you keeping a large container of gasahol in your apartment!

[w1sa]

After 24 hrs of sitting, my sample returned to same temperature (20C) conditions. On re-assessment of the reduced E10 level I estimate 8% reduction at this time.

Not satisfied with a performance of 80% extraction, I went to the BP web site and there I read a news item stating that ethanol was being removed from Qld E10 supplies for a period of 150days from late January '11. This being due to flood damage to infrastructure and the inability to guarantee crop/product (ethanol) supplies..........so I rang and spoke to their fuel/tech support, who would only confirm that other states are/could be affected to a lesser/similar extent (according to their location) due to the general national shortage (in Australia) of distributable ethanol supplies.

Based on this information, I think it's a reasonable assumption that I only had a sample with approx. 8% ethanol and (if so).........the extraction method and percentage extracted (for practical purposes), was close to 100% of available ethanol in the sample.   

[Nortstudio]

Wait, are you saying that if you stick a can of gas in the backyard, the ethanol will separate from it, and we could all be back to using the glory of non-corn gas?

That's some good Sherlockin' W1sa!

If that's not what you mean, then I am still lost, but proud to know we have people on this forum with this type of gumption

[nomad]

Wait, are you saying that if you stick a can of gas in the backyard, the ethanol will separate from it, and we could all be back to using the glory of non-corn gas?

You gotta dump some water into the gas can it to get it to separate (in a timely manner).

Btw, w1sa... thanks for being the resident scientist on this one!