If the 15% ethanol proposal goes through, would this increased ethanol content affect how much MMO to be addded to overcome the loss of lubricidity?

In June 2008, in this thread,

Sr. Member and Chief Technical Engineer Rich Kelly wrote: If you ethanol content is in the 15- 20 percent range, use 6-ounces of Marvel Mystery Oil to every 10-gallons of gasoline.

If it does go through most “modern” cars, trucks, and All Motorcycles will not be able to get gas.....
It’ll dry-rot all the rubber connections. And on Motorcycles it’ll rip the cylinder walls down, to say
the least of what it would do to the inside of the gas tanks....

I have run several tanks of 85 ethanol in my 2002 dodge.  Things I ve noted:  at a 50/50 mix of 85 ethanol and regular gas, not much difference in mileage, but filling up at 3/4 tank of 85 ethanol, the gas mileage drops from 15.5 to 12 mpg.  Its tempting to use the ethanol at 2.49 a gallon, but older cars wont do well on it.  I have not gotten any engine damage or fuel pump problems from it, but I only did maybe half dozen tanks of it.  Its not worth using after my experiment because I buy 120 gallons of gas a week, poor mileage cost me money.  Ethanol is not a savings unless u have a auto made to use it.  Its a waste of money for me.  I buy MMO by the gallon and use it in my oil and gas, so I can run thru a lot of MMO.  It goes into my mowers and motor cycles.

“If it does go through most “modern” cars, trucks, and All Motorcycles will not be able to get gas.....
It’ll dry-rot all the rubber connections. And on Motorcycles it’ll rip the cylinder walls down, to say
the least of what it would do to the inside of the gas tanks.... “

I’m not sure where you get your information or what you are calling a “modern” car. I worked in the plant that made almost all of the fuel delivery components for Ford vehicles from 1990 through 2006. All the components that were made during those years were proven to be able to stand up to ethanol fuels. That being said, I hate ethanol laced fuel and have seen many older model fuel pumps and fuel sender modules that were damaged by it. We had a product return department to do evaluations on failed components and ethanol is very hard on the fuel systems that aren’t designed for it, but all our fuel systems (at least since 1990) were designed for it.

Orangedot, this truth you speak is drowned out by the alarmists and scare tactics of the petroleum industry. If a vehicle can run 10% which all since 1990 can, they will also run 20% with no damage.

Now, unable to prove that E15 harms engines, they are making up other myths about ethanol. It has no impact on the cost of food either, another lie. I have run 30% in non FFVs for over 100,000 miles now. Don’t believe the lies about ethanol. Big oil will stop at nothing to keep us addicted!

It’s no myth that the increased use of corn for ethanol production has raised the price of corn used as food—increased demand causing higher prices is basic economics.  The corn used for an increase in ethanol production here in the good ol’ USA several ten years ago was largely taken out of exports, and it was no coincidence that in 2007 the price of tortillas in Mexico skyrocketed.

However, my main gripes about ethanol production here in the good ol’ USA are (1) it’s only profitable for the producers because of taxpayer subsidies; (2) it’s diverting a crop normally used for cattle feed or human food to something else; and (3) whether the amount of energy obtained from the ethanol produced is as much as is used to produce it, is highly questionable.

The second concern would be alleviated if alternate “feedstocks” for ethanol production could be developed economically.

Anyway, back to ethanol in cars.  The only two concerns in that regard I am aware of are (A) less lubrication in the cylinder as compared to that provided by purely hydrocarbon gasoline, and (B) burning a gallon of ethanol only produces about 2/3 as much energy as burning a gallon of gasoline.  In earlier threads, MMO has been offered as a way to alleviate concern (A).

As to concern (B): Cheerfully disregarding non-linearities of relative volumes in mixtures, a rough-and-ready estimate predicts that 10% ethanol would reduce mileage by 3.33%, and 15% ethanol by 5% compared to hydrocarbon gasoline.  Applying this to this to skyraider‘s statement that

filling up at 3/4 tank of 85 ethanol, the gas mileage drops from 15.5 to 12 mpg

is a little tricky, because I don’t know whether the 15.5 MPG is based on pure gasoline or 10% ethanol.  Assuming it’s based on pure gasoline, the rough-and-ready estimate gives a reduction to 12.2 MPG.  Assuming 15.5 MPG is from 10% ethanol, the rough-and-ready estimate is 11.95+ MPG.

I certainly don’t want this to become a pro/anti ethanol thread, as there are hundreds of those out there. So I apologize for bringing up the food/fuel argument That belongs on another website I am sure, my fault. yes straight gas does produce better MPG. But much more CO2 per mile as well.

Sticking to the MMO, I do use the MMO with my higher blends, always have. I use it because of MMOs track record over the decades with gasoline. Gasoline is actually more corossive than ethanol to the majority of materials used in today’s cars. google “materials compatibility with various fuels” and you will see this is a fact.  In addition, the car companies DON’T want you to know that the more ethanol you run (that your control module/injectors can still compensate for), the longevity of your engine increases due to decreased carbon build up because of the cleanliness of the burn.

steven120566 - 13 November 2010 05:03 PM

I certainly don’t want this to become a pro/anti ethanol thread, as there are hundreds of those out there. So I apologize for bringing up the food/fuel argument That belongs on another website I am sure, my fault. yes straight gas does produce better MPG. But much more CO2 per mile as well.

Sticking to the MMO, I do use the MMO with my higher blends, always have. I use it because of MMOs track record over the decades with gasoline. Gasoline is actually more corossive than ethanol to the majority of materials used in today’s cars. google “materials compatibility with various fuels” and you will see this is a fact.  In addition, the car companies DON’T want you to know that the more ethanol you run (that your control module/injectors can still compensate for), the longevity of your engine increases due to decreased carbon build up because of the cleanliness of the burn.

I have to disagree also. Ethanol is not a good fuel for many reasons and I hate to see more of it being mandated.

E15 was NOT mandated. The EPA ruled that it could be blended and sold, they did not require it in any way. Don’t buy E15 if you prefer E10 or straight up gas. There is absolutely no requirement nor will there ever be - that you have to buy it.

Even E-10 is mandated in just a couple of states on the STATE level. I do not like mandates either. Get rid of ethanol subsidies, allow consumers the choice. Mandate nothing in regards to fuel blends, and let the consumer decide.

Your comment “Big oil will stop at nothing to keep us addicted!” told me all I needed to know about your limited view of the situation. There is no sense in going any further.

Regardless of my or your view of the situation, my statement was accurate in that the EPA in no way mandated ethanol for non FFVs. And we agree on the fact that we don’t want mandates from what I can tell. Are you saying ethanol as a fuel should be banned? Because I am in no way indicating that gasoline should be. I just ain’t buying it, but that doesn’t mean I think anyone else shouldn’t do whatever they want.

Ethanol may become more and more popular. The country of Brazil runs everything entirely on Ethanol, and they produce it themselves. They have no dependency on crude at all. We have to keep looking for alternatives.

I do not use 85 ethanol any more, only the 10percent range is where I get the 15.5mpg.  When I can find regular gas, no ethanol, I do buy then.

Sugar cane ethanol has an energy balance seven times greater than ethanol produced from corn. Brazilian distillers are able to produce ethanol for 22 cents per liter, compared with the 30 cents per liter for corn-based ethanol. U.S. corn-derived ethanol costs 30% more because the corn starch must first be converted to sugar before being distilled into alcohol.

I’m all for alternative fuels but Brazil does NOT run “everything entirely on Ethanol”. It’s only mandated at 25% right now in automobiles let alone other fuel burning devices.

I’m no big oil company backer but I won’t begrudge the average oil company from getting it’s 10 cents profit on a gallon of gasoline. If Exxon is gouging us at ten cents a gallon, what exactly is the federal government doing to us at 18.4 cents a gallon in taxes? And they are looking at a bill right now that will raise that another 15 cents. Some numbers put Exxon’s profit margin at 10.7%. Profit margins at Microsoft, on the other hand, are 26%. So much misinformation is out there, and it’s so hard to sort out. I’m done and moving on.

I know it has caused a lot of trouble in the marine Industry eats the fiberglass fuel tanks and gums the engines older outboards too.