Ethanol Regulations to be challenged by Senator Toomey, et al - JeepForum.com

 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 13 Old 08-23-2013, 02:35 PM Thread Starter
Bruce06Unltd
Registered User
2006 LJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Harrisburg
Posts: 15
Ethanol Regulations to be challenged by Senator Toomey, et al

I don't know whether this belongs here or somewhere else, so moderators, please move it if you must, but I just learned from my good friend Senator Pat Toomey that some members of the Senate want to revoke the ethanol requirements. http://www.toomey.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=1072

I wrote to Pat and told him of the $2500 of documentable damage done to my vehicles from the gas that we are forced to buy with ethanol in it. We all complained about what effects this contaminant has cause and here is the chance to do something about it:

Write your senators now and tell them to get ethanol out of our gas!

Bruce

Bruce06Unltd is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 13 Old 08-30-2013, 09:42 PM
Chewtoy
Registered User
1976 CJ5 
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Post Falls
Posts: 926
Garage
good call. Passed it on to my senators.

With a great Jeep comes an empty wallet.
Chewtoy is offline  
post #3 of 13 Old 09-01-2013, 05:11 PM
freeskier93
Registered User
1997 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Highlands Ranch
Posts: 7,199
What vehicles had issues with ethanol? There's a lot of problems with ethanol, but damage to passenger cars running 10% isn't one of them.
freeskier93 is online now  
post #4 of 13 Old 09-01-2013, 08:15 PM
tjkj2002
Registered User
2002 KJ Liberty 
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Colorado
Posts: 8,388
Quote:
Originally Posted by freeskier93 View Post
What vehicles had issues with ethanol? There's a lot of problems with ethanol, but damage to passenger cars running 10% isn't one of them.
x2

'02 Liberty sitting on 35" tires,HP44,RockJock60,and AtlasII t-case
tjkj2002 is offline  
post #5 of 13 Old 09-02-2013, 03:14 AM
bondosgto
Registered User
2006 LJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Concrete
Posts: 400
Quote:
Originally Posted by freeskier93 View Post
What vehicles had issues with ethanol? There's a lot of problems with ethanol, but damage to passenger cars running 10% isn't one of them.
Older ones, pre 90.
Honestly, I've never been a fan of "E" any thing. It takes 2 gallons of ethanol to equal the energy of one gallon of gas. So how does using ethanol make sense when it isn't as efficient?
bondosgto is offline  
post #6 of 13 Old 09-02-2013, 04:36 AM
rebelbowtie
Registered User
2000 XJ Cherokee 
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Daphne
Posts: 3,178
If youre vehicles have issues with Ethonal blended fuel there are other underlying problems. I havent experienced any problems in my boats, ATV, lawn equipment or passenger vehicles in the past 10 years or so that ethanol blended fuels have become mainstreamed.

He's an angel dressed in oilskins; he's a saint in the "Sou'wester,"
He's a pluck as they come, or ever can;
He's a hero born and bred, but it hasn't swelled his head,
For he's just the U.S. Government's hired man.
rebelbowtie is offline  
post #7 of 13 Old 09-02-2013, 08:52 AM
ancientspear
Registered User
2013 JK Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 496
Shelf life blows. All our vehicles, small or large engine, run like garbage if you use ethanol blended fuel that's been in a Jerry can for a while. Buy non-blended fuel and it's better. Not sure if that's because the petrol station is adding stabilizer with all their other additives in the non-blended premium but we've resolved ourselves to only run premium unblended fuels in boat engines, small motors, and anything that goes into a jerry can. And yes we reform winter using/summarizing (depending on vehicle) maintenance during off seasons. That being said, daily driven vehicles have been fine... Even my dad's 1969 triumph spitfire.
ancientspear is offline  
post #8 of 13 Old 09-02-2013, 09:01 AM
Burlbook48
Trial By Trail
 
Burlbook48's Avatar
1995 YJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Mendocino County, CA
Posts: 1,192
I've got enough problems dealing with todays unleaded fuel in my '56 Chevy's factory stock 265 V8. At least in California, ethanol isn't one of them...yet.

If Congress is going to mandate running something my engine wasn't designed for, they should pay to retrofit the old car. ALL old cars. Or just leave the gas alone.

Good call on S. 1195.

You have to start somewhere to get to the middle of nowhere.
Burlbook48 is offline  
post #9 of 13 Old 09-02-2013, 11:38 AM
freeskier93
Registered User
1997 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Highlands Ranch
Posts: 7,199
Quote:
Originally Posted by bondosgto View Post
Older ones, pre 90.
Honestly, I've never been a fan of "E" any thing. It takes 2 gallons of ethanol to equal the energy of one gallon of gas. So how does using ethanol make sense when it isn't as efficient?
Even older vehicles shouldn't have issues with 10%. I think people sometimes forget 1990 was 23 years ago, what do you expect from a vehicle that old? Blaming ethanol is a bit absurd IMO.

The efficiency issue is true, but if it's cheap enough it doesn't matter. Currently though it's cheaper due to massive government subsidies to farmers and makes food/livestock feed prices higher.

If ethanol could be produced legitimately cheaper, and sold 100% ethanol, it has potential. The issue is the 10% blend and E85 crap. An engine built purely for ethanol can be really awesome. Ethanol has a very high octane rating which means you can run high compression. High compression means more hp/torque and better fuel efficiency (compared to low compression E100).

Based on BTU output ethanol is 34% less efficient, but in the real world, when you consider other fuel efficiency factors, a high compression ethanol engine may only be 20-30% less efficient, in terms of fuel CONSUMPTION. Currently E85 is the biggest scam out there. A low compression flex fuel car is going to see at least 34% increase in fuel consumption but probably more like 40%. Around here gas is about $3.40. E85 is about $3.00. That's only 12% cheaper. That's a pretty big disparity, 12% cheaper but 34% higher fuel consumption.
freeskier93 is online now  
post #10 of 13 Old 09-03-2013, 02:05 PM
Maverickxeo
Registered User
2002 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Wetaskiwin
Posts: 2,373
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by freeskier93 View Post
Even older vehicles shouldn't have issues with 10%. I think people sometimes forget 1990 was 23 years ago, what do you expect from a vehicle that old? Blaming ethanol is a bit absurd IMO.

The efficiency issue is true, but if it's cheap enough it doesn't matter. Currently though it's cheaper due to massive government subsidies to farmers and makes food/livestock feed prices higher.

If ethanol could be produced legitimately cheaper, and sold 100% ethanol, it has potential. The issue is the 10% blend and E85 crap. An engine built purely for ethanol can be really awesome. Ethanol has a very high octane rating which means you can run high compression. High compression means more hp/torque and better fuel efficiency (compared to low compression E100).

Based on BTU output ethanol is 34% less efficient, but in the real world, when you consider other fuel efficiency factors, a high compression ethanol engine may only be 20-30% less efficient, in terms of fuel CONSUMPTION. Currently E85 is the biggest scam out there. A low compression flex fuel car is going to see at least 34% increase in fuel consumption but probably more like 40%. Around here gas is about $3.40. E85 is about $3.00. That's only 12% cheaper. That's a pretty big disparity, 12% cheaper but 34% higher fuel consumption.
But vehicles DESIGNED for E85 (NOT a factory tune to accept it and regular fuel; but a tune JUST FOR E85) is VERY efficient. Ive known a guy who was able to get around 650WHP or so on a z31 300zx using E85; while still getting 20+ MPG. If he was set up for just 'regular' fuel he would need higher octane fuel and have lower MPG (he actually was for a bit).

In short, if ALL we had was E85 and EVERY vehicle was setup JUST for it, it would be a good thing; but because vehicles have to take BOTH fuels, its not efficient AT ALL.
Maverickxeo is offline  
post #11 of 13 Old 09-03-2013, 02:55 PM
freeskier93
Registered User
1997 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Highlands Ranch
Posts: 7,199
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maverickxeo

But vehicles DESIGNED for E85 (NOT a factory tune to accept it and regular fuel; but a tune JUST FOR E85) is VERY efficient. Ive known a guy who was able to get around 650WHP or so on a z31 300zx using E85; while still getting 20+ MPG. If he was set up for just 'regular' fuel he would need higher octane fuel and have lower MPG (he actually was for a bit).

In short, if ALL we had was E85 and EVERY vehicle was setup JUST for it, it would be a good thing; but because vehicles have to take BOTH fuels, its not efficient AT ALL.
Sorry, when I said E85 I should have specified E85 Flex vehicles.
freeskier93 is online now  
post #12 of 13 Old 09-06-2013, 05:30 AM
Corbie
Registered User
1997 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: No longer Western KY
Posts: 111
Here is a web site I find helpful.
http://pure-gas.org/
it lists the gas stations that have 100% gas. That being said I use what ever gas station is closest when I get gas, and only fill up with pure gas when I am close to that station 15 miles away.

In my wife's Acura we get 50 to 75 miles more on a tank of gas along the same route same driving
conditions when we use 100% pure.

I hope the website helps if you want to run good gas.

"Tires are like boobs. They always look big until you have played with them for a while. Then you just want a bigger set!”
-"YEEP” from Virtual Jeep Club
Corbie is offline  
post #13 of 13 Old 09-06-2013, 06:02 AM
jp360cj
Registered User
1977 CJ7 
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Greenville
Posts: 1,807
Other than the mileage, the only issue I've had with the blended gas is in my boat, jet ski, lawn mower. Really anything that sits long periods without being used (including my Jeep sometimes). I run pure gas in my toys, bit its too expensive to run everyday. The only pure gas is 90 octane and the same price as 93 blended which is $0.40 higher per gallon.

77 CJ-7- AMC 360, Edelbrock cam, MC2100, Fenderwells, CJ T18/D20, Chevy D44/EB 9" rear, Trutrac f/r, 4.11, SOA, 1.25 lift shackles, 35x12.50 BFG KM2s, Shackle Reversal
jp360cj is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the JeepForum.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid e-mail address for yourself.



Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome