93 octane in California (?)

[FlexRex]

I have seen really gunked up LPFP assemblies in subarus (2-3) where guys mixed to obtain a blend, unlike myself having access to 51% from pump directly. Thats enough for me to believe something is precipitating like you just posted.

That may also attribute to “alleged” injector failures with ethanol blend tunes here. I am sure the higher the levels of ethanol the more exacerbated the problem will be.

Sponsored

 

[JT Si]

I have seen really gunked up LPFP assemblies in subarus (2-3) where guys mixed to obtain a blend, unlike myself having access to 51% from pump directly. Thats enough for me to believe something is precipitating like you just posted.

That may also attribute to “alleged” injector failures with ethanol blend tunes here.

That sounds like a plausible explanation for the flex fuel injector failures.

I won't worry about blending my E15.

 

[Civii]

@Civii a practical problem w mixing ethanol blends and gasoline is that additives in one may not mix well w other, and viceversa. I could be wrong though, never confirmed it myself.

Do they dispense e30 straight from the pump in california? If so, why not consider an e30 tune or e25 tune and run e30 anyway. Otherwise I would at least make sure that mixing e85 and unleaded is 100% fine. I run straight e85 which in az is 51% really so no mixing involved otherwise i would have a definite answer on this already.

The only E pumps near me are E85. In the future I do plan on getting a FlexFuel kit so I can run an eBlend tune (e30-e40) which would be better, imo. I personally have never experienced any issues with mixing both e85 & 91 where I am. Long term problem? Maybe, but only time will tell.

 

[Gotch]

Octane rating and cooling effect not withstanding, the big bump comes from ethanol being 35% oxygen. That is oxygen that you don’t have to compress or pressurize for a given power output.

 

[dellyjoughnut]

My question is why OP needs 110 rated fuel if there are no plans for racing?

I looked at the posting for the 110 fuel by OP and it has lead. Can’t be used. Will destroy catalytic converters. It’s dyed purple. The dyes are used to tell if the fuel is taxed and if used correctly. I read there’s a hefty fine if caught. The SDS shows there is no ethanol. It also shows toluene. I know the higher octane rating is due to Toluene which has a rating of 118 by itself after google searching a list.

OP could buy 5 gallon containers of toluene, pay the hazardous shipping fee, and blend his own fuel. Gasoline from the pump already has toluene and xylene as aromatics that contribute to knock resistance.

 

[Gruber]

Hey man still MIT says one is 129 and other 102 far from 105 and 90 you claimed from some non MIT source. Carburator is a herring, drop it, irrelevant. We are discussing DIT engines and ethanol use.

Bottom line is effective knock resistance not theoretical one. Effectively it increases 40-45% efficiency as that is defined by knock threshold. Whats 40-45% of 93oct? Exactly..

So adding e85 1gal to 91oct will DEFINITELY increase both theoretical octane to 93 and effective to 95-6 or so.

All in DIT engines of course..

There is no such thing as a "theoretical" RON or MON.
RON or MON are only determined experimentally , and only one way - using the standard carbureted engine, which is the important point here. What you are discussing here won't change the meaning of RON/MON.
For ethanol, RON is below 110 and MON is just below 90 and this won't change. No enthusiastic for biofuels, but still ignorant 2008 report (not even a published paper) can change it. "MIT Laboratory for Energy and the Environment" is about as credible on octane numbers as The Corn Growers Association.

 

[FlexRex]

@Gruber not true. MIT uses 129 and 103 for ethanol. How many times am i gonna correct you about this? Secondly, when i refer to theoretical octane i simply mean RON and MON as that value is obtained/calculated. I do it to discriminate between the one you believe in and the one called effective or practical.

If you know more than them or choose a different source than so be it, your choice. Id find you more sources but its better if you do it yourself cuz then you wont try to shoot them down in order to be right.

Then there is “combined effective” (to be distinguished from what i call theoretical or what you call 110+90/2) octane rating of 150 which you don’t believe in, by choice.

What i am discussing here is how ethanol works in DIT engines. If you are set on bringing a red herring (carburators) its your choice yet again. Not one of use cares how fuels work in carburated engines here.

I welcome you to post one proper source with data relevant to DIT engines that conflicts with what i had posted.

 

[FlexRex]

My question is why OP needs 110 rated fuel if there are no plans for racing?

I looked at the posting for the 110 fuel by OP and it has lead. Can’t be used. Will destroy catalytic converters. It’s dyed purple. The dyes are used to tell if the fuel is taxed and if used correctly. I read there’s a hefty fine if caught. The SDS shows there is no ethanol. It also shows toluene. I know the higher octane rating is due to Toluene which has a rating of 118 by itself after google searching a list.

OP could buy 5 gallon containers of toluene, pay the hazardous shipping fee, and blend his own fuel. Gasoline from the pump already has toluene and xylene as aromatics that contribute to knock resistance.

He can order barrels of ethanol to be delivered too, 85% by volume.

Yes, What is the intent?

 

[Gotch]

He can order barrels of ethanol to be delivered too, 85% by volume.

Yes, What is the intent?

shit, you can order 100% ethanol, even better in its anhydrous form (200 Proof ftw) and blend that! If the shit doesn’t give him grins, he can cut it with water and have some intoxicating moonshine!

 

[Gruber]

@Gruber not true. MIT uses 129 and 103 for ethanol. How many times am i gonna correct you about this? Secondly, when i refer to theoretical octane i simply mean RON and MON as that value is obtained/calculated. I do it to discriminate between the one you believe in and the one called effective or practical.

If you know more than them or choose a different source than so be it, your choice. Id find you more sources but its better if you do it yourself cuz then you wont try to shoot them down in order to be right.

Then there is “combined effective” (to be distinguished from what i call theoretical or what you call 110+90/2) octane rating of 150 which you don’t believe in, by choice.

What i am discussing here is how ethanol works in DIT engines. If you are set on bringing a red herring (carburators) its your choice yet again. Not one of use cares how fuels work in carburated engines here.

I welcome you to post one proper source with data relevant to DIT engines that conflicts with what i had posted.

RON/MON are measured (not figured in any other way) on a standard carbureted engine only. There ain't no such thing as RON/MON for a DI engine.
Anyone can (and is welcome to) figure or cook up their own octane numbers for any fuel on any specific engine. Just, for heavens sake, don't call them RON/MON, because these names are already taken.
Any private octane numbers will not match with the real RON/MON-based pump octane ratings used by all gas stations in the US.

 

[FlexRex]

No one said that there is a ron and mon for dit specifically. But there is SPECIFICALLY corollary effects direct injecting ethanol has over carburated and port injected engines running ethanol; hence comes in the effective octane rating which brings the ron+mon/2 octane (we happen to disagree on too) to an even higher “effective” number SPECIFICALLY in dit engines.

You should read the MIT paper. Or at least find a current ethanol in dit engine use paper which is either contradictory or supportive and i will read them.

 

[FlexRex]

@Gruber.. just so we clear, i disagree with your numbers nothing else. Following is yet another source disagreeing with your ron/mon numbers.

https://iea-amf.org/content/fuel_information/ethanol/e10/ethanol_properties

 

[MuffinMcFluffin]

Sorry all, I wasn't getting post notifications for my own thread.

I have blended 1 gallon of E85 on two separate occasions. I figure doing this from time to time isn't bad, and in fact could possibly even be helpful?

My question is why OP needs 110 rated fuel if there are no plans for racing?

I looked at the posting for the 110 fuel by OP and it has lead. Can’t be used. Will destroy catalytic converters. It’s dyed purple. The dyes are used to tell if the fuel is taxed and if used correctly. I read there’s a hefty fine if caught. The SDS shows there is no ethanol. It also shows toluene. I know the higher octane rating is due to Toluene which has a rating of 118 by itself after google searching a list.

OP could buy 5 gallon containers of toluene, pay the hazardous shipping fee, and blend his own fuel. Gasoline from the pump already has toluene and xylene as aromatics that contribute to knock resistance.

He can order barrels of ethanol to be delivered too, 85% by volume.

Yes, What is the intent?

The link I posted was an accidental one, meaning I accidentally posted one with lead in it. The representative at the station I mentioned in the original post had brought up four unleaded fuels (at 95, 98, 100, and 110), so I was trying to find their product online and that was the only one I could find that was actually 110. I didn't read the leaded part to begin with, that was my mistake.

What is the intent, you ask? I wouldn't mind my car performing better, that's all. Every other state but mine seems to allow 93, the TSP Stage 1 tune (and probably the Phearable tune) recommends 93 for peak performance, and I'm sitting here saddened that California has to be a big bitch about ethanol content and they don't allow that at the pump, for the most part. People here in the past have mentioned blending different octane, and my question was why the price differences that I discovered were what they were and why unleaded 110 wouldn't be the logical choice for me should I go for 93? I still don't know that answer.

It also sounds like E85 is the cheaper option in the long run, but I just don't know if it's the safer option in the long run. I'll be honest, I read the back-and-forth between a couple of members on ethanol twice now, and I can't even tell who is for or against using it in these DI engines.

I'm pretty car-illiterate, dontchaknow.

 

[FlexRex]

Keep adding 1-2gal of e85 to otherwise 3/4+ at least of 91oct. Id start with 1gal to rest 91oct then run 93oct tune and see if there is knock. If there is add 2gal next time and retry. I wouldnt go to 3gal cuz then youre already getting into e25%+ if your e85 is high in ethanol content, do you even know what it is out of the pump?

 

[MuffinMcFluffin]

Keep adding 1-2gal of e85 to otherwise 3/4+ at least of 91oct. Id start with 1gal to rest 91oct then run 93oct tune and see if there is knock.

Looks like I have to work in the Honda Hack pretty soon one of these days, but I'll try some things ASAP. Thanks.

However, it sounded like people said that the fuel systems won't be good with running E85 long-term because of some gunk buildup or whatever whatever.

I wonder what the flex fuel kit is even for if it's unsafe to run E40 in our engines? Would it even help somebody who is trying to do what I'm doing?

Sponsored