Non oxygenated gas

[Guest the chad]

As I know it is simply gas without 10% e. A bit more money. Would we get a little better mpg and not suffer drivability problems?

[2seater]

The short answer would be yes, you should get slightly better mileage. Driveability will be unaffected. Do you have unadulterated 87 octane in MN?

[Guest gotitright]

Also it is a whole lot better on any lawn type equipment that you may have. Pure gas is the only thing that works - the 10 or 15% E is hell on the blowers, weed whackers, or whatever. Just my 2$ worth.

[Ronnie]

The percentage of Ethanol in gasoline is probably going to increase as time goes by. I don't believe finding alternative fuel sources is the best approach to offsetting the power and mileage loses caused by the Ethanol. I think we should start looking for a source for computer chips with modified programming that is optimized for burning gasoline with Ethanol. I think it makes the most economic sense in the long run. Has anyone looked at what it would take? It could be as simple as advancing the spark timing to make the gasohol burn better.

[NTX5467]

The earlier FlexFuel S-10s used a fuel filter with an electric sensor in it to detect E85 fuels. The owners almost fell over when they found out the fuel filter for their 4 cyl S-10 was $90.00.

Current GM FlexFuel vehicles use a "virtual fuel type sensor" from the signals from the oxygen sensors to the ECM/PCM. I somewhat suspect that existing software could well compensate for E15 fuels just as it compensates for E10 fuels, or the earlier ReFormulated Gasoline (which had about 5.67% ethanol in it). The limiting factor will be the flow rate of the injectors themselves. E10 has been observed to be worth a 6% drop in fuel economy, with the earlier RFG being pegged at 2-3% fuel economy loss (this last figure from the Chevron website in the ealier 1990s).

With increased percentage of ethanol, the "optimum" air/fuel ratio drops. With E0, it's about 14.7. With E10, it's 14.2 . With E15, it gets down in the high 13s. You see the progression . . . The key thing is that these air/fuel ratios are within the realm of the existing engine management system, probably down to about 12.5, I suspect. What might end up causing a lean condition would be that the injector flow is not high enough with higher-ethanol'd fuel.

In the case of the Buick V-6, I don't recall any being factory equipped for FlexFuel, but if they were, it'd be the last ones in production (2010?). If these injectors would retrofit, that would be the easy part. What about the possibility of Canadian-spec vehicles with the Buick V-6 having FlexFuel compatibility from the factory?

On the supply side of things, the last ACDelco e-zine I got mentioned that ACDelco was altering their fuel tank pump modules to be more compatible with high-ethanol fuels. No real time table or part number list was presented, just that it was happening. You might find that newsletter at ACDelcotechconnect.com .

Just some thoughts,

NTX5467

[Guest Richard D]

You would also ned a device that can determine the percentage of gas to ethanol to tell the ECM to tell the injectors how much fuel to spray. For higher amounts of ethanol might even need different injectors. There is a Marathon station and a boat marina within 4 miles of my home and they sell 100% gasoline, did not notice any driveability differences but did get about 1 to 2 more miles per gallon.

[padgett]

2 mpg better with real gas than E10. Just confirms what I have thought: you can just throw away the ethanol and use the same amount of gasoline.

TD is the real answer, infrastructure is already here.