|
Welcome to the Australian Ford Forums forum. You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and inserts advertising. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features without post based advertising banners. Registration is simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. Please Note: All new registrations go through a manual approval queue to keep spammers out. This is checked twice each day so there will be a delay before your registration is activated. |
|
The Pub For General Automotive Related Talk |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
17-03-2018, 09:34 AM | #1 | ||||
Donating Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,429
|
By Jeff Smith March 16, 2018
http://www.fordnxt.com/tech-stories/...-need-to-know/ Quote:
http://cdn.speednik.com/wp-content/b...-32_427768.jpg Quote:
|
||||
17-03-2018, 10:15 AM | #2 | ||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 5,273
|
Hey S.G!
E85 and LPG both have very similar octane ratings and they also both help cool the intake air/oxygen on the intake stroke which helps make a bigger bang. One good thing i have been noticing lately is that E10 has been 4cents cheaper than 91 (United servo's) which now makes it sort of worth buying as previously i would'nt buy it as it was only 2 cents cheaper than 91. I'm going to start running E10 in my wagon and my bike i think. Will keep an eye on tank ranges and its also 95 octane so you should get a bit more power/performance. |
||
This user likes this post: |
17-03-2018, 10:40 AM | #3 | ||
Donating Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,429
|
Hi CB,
Around here we can't get away from E10 or E15. But the way they formulate it, nothing changes with the octane or the cost. Nothing we can do about it legally. Cheers. |
||
17-03-2018, 10:48 AM | #4 | ||
bitch lasagne
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Sonova Beach
Posts: 15,110
|
It also needs to be said that running E10 in a fair amount of the cars on the road in Australia is a false economy. This is due to the increased fuel consumption more than offsetting the small discount at the pump.
__________________
|
||
6 users like this post: |
17-03-2018, 11:02 AM | #5 | |||
Donating Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,429
|
Quote:
Unfortunately it is incomplete for E10, but still gets the idea across at standard AFR. It drops from 14.7:1 to 14.0:1 ~ 14.1:1 at standard AFR/stoichiometric. For folks not familiar that is a mass ratio not volume of air to fuel. Last edited by solarite_guy; 08-09-2018 at 08:11 AM. |
|||
17-03-2018, 05:03 PM | #6 | |||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 11,325
|
Quote:
Unless E10 is about 10 cents a litre less, it's really not worth considering... |
|||
This user likes this post: |
17-03-2018, 11:20 AM | #7 | |||
BLUE OVAL INC.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 8,676
|
Quote:
We've recently had a Liberty open up in our area which carries e10, at some point in every week the e10 is as much as 30c cheaper than the 91 ulp and as a result is cheaper to run it. We keep our cars above 50% full where possible which allows us to get through the cycle and take advantage of the cheaper e10, 35l in my wifes Camry at 30c less per litre saves around $10pw and only pushes the average consumption out by .5l/100km. In addition, my Sons VE is a flex fuel model and runs much smoother on the e10 than 91ulp. |
|||
17-03-2018, 01:15 PM | #8 | ||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,218
|
A list of material compatibility with E85.
__________________
AUII XR6 VCT ute 20 years and still going strong! Last edited by Bill M; 05-11-2018 at 10:06 AM. |
||
2 users like this post: |
17-03-2018, 01:29 PM | #9 | |||
bitch lasagne
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Sonova Beach
Posts: 15,110
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|||
19-03-2018, 05:31 PM | #10 | |||
Regular Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Sydney/Singapore
Posts: 70
|
Quote:
Other factor to consider is that E10 is 10% renewable. |
|||
This user likes this post: |
19-03-2018, 05:56 PM | #11 | ||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 1,341
|
Great posts Gents. I happily admit I knew little about E85 so I was glad to get some facts. Out of curiosity, I went to a couple of servo's that are listed as suppliers of these fuels to find they are not stocked. It seems that only a handful carry these fuel types which must make it difficult if the car is tuned to run on it?
|
||
19-03-2018, 10:13 PM | #12 | |||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,125
|
Quote:
|
|||
19-03-2018, 10:23 PM | #13 | |||
bitch lasagne
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Sonova Beach
Posts: 15,110
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|||
20-03-2018, 12:32 AM | #14 | |||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,460
|
Quote:
Yes you use up more but also get more killawasps Difference is like 5% or so more usage then comparable 95 but also 50cents cheaper per litre. $1.10 E10 $1.59 95ron all day Even topping up half tank 35litres I can save $17.15 Double that saving for a full tank Oh and use the NSW Fuelcheck app if in NSW and can see prices of favourite stations in area you save as a favourite. Great app Sent from my ASUS_Z00AD using Tapatalk
__________________
Before - ED Falcon Futura (sold) EL XR6 (R.I.P.) VX SS (R.I.P) VE Berlina |
|||
20-03-2018, 11:23 AM | #15 | ||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 1,341
|
Here is an interesting article related to these fuel types in the states.
https://www.hemmings.com/blog/2018/0...el/?refer=news |
||
21-03-2018, 10:21 AM | #16 | |||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 990
|
Quote:
Now in such a case of E10 94 octane most will pick up on performance for sure and as to fuel economy generally no. Now my VY SS could get the same economy on the highway with E10 94 and 91 an 95 and 98 proven time and time again if driven easy, but with air-con on E10 failed badly and if one drove harder E10 fails. Their is a E10 91 getting around as well and I found it still performed a bit better than 91. My wife's Aurion went like a rocket on E10 94 when I drove from Brisbane to Adelaide and back, out west did not have E10 and yep I could feel the difference for sure when flat to the boards over taking, I was really impressed with E10 94 and with the 91 it was like no this is not impressive at all. |
|||
21-03-2018, 12:39 PM | #17 | ||
*barks incessantly
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: SA
Posts: 1,563
|
|
||
This user likes this post: |
22-03-2018, 11:09 AM | #18 | |||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 990
|
Quote:
Even the wife who was not driving made a point of it's performance on E10. I am not a fan of 0 100km/h but of 100km/h and beyond is the practical test. I would say that the car is tuned truly to run on 95 octane and that 91 is just retarding the spark timing. It will spin the wheels easy as on take off with E10 but it will not on 91. These Aurions flog the 3.6L Commodores and the 4.0L Falcons, not the Turbo, but I hate FWD cars myself, but just plodding about on the highway it's fine and good at overtaking not to mention it can do 230KM/H so if you had to go the Darwin it would be ok, you will not be complaining. Dirt roads well forget it, it's just rubbish to drive on that, the understeer and noise of stones being churned up by the front wheels really gets to you. |
|||
This user likes this post: |
17-03-2018, 05:21 PM | #19 | ||
Donating Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,429
|
Sorry, I thought it was self explanatory.
What would you say, 14:1 is roughly 5% less than 14.7:1? Little less. So to roughly break even I would want the E10 to cost about 5% less than the straight petrol. Some times my pit road thinking doesn't translate the way I think it would. |
||
This user likes this post: |
17-03-2018, 10:47 PM | #20 | ||
Wirlankarra yanama
Join Date: May 2006
Location: God's Country
Posts: 2,103
|
The energy derived from burning fuel (which is what an engine does) is heat. Heat/Energy is measured in BTU not in Stoichiometer.
E85 has roughly 72% BTU compared to gasoline. E10 has roughly 98% BTU compared to gasoline. LPG has roughly 80% BTU compared to gasoline. Diesel has roughly 113% BTU compared to gasoline. Using BTU is a high level explanation of what is happening. An engine needs to consume more E10/E85/LPG to create the same energy as it would have to if it ran on gasoline. This explains why diesel vehicles get better mileage than their gasoline cousins too. |
||
5 users like this post: |
17-03-2018, 11:24 PM | #21 | |||
Former BTIKD
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Sunny Downtown Wagga Wagga. NSW.
Posts: 53,197
|
Quote:
__________________
Dying at your job is natures way of saying that you're in the wrong line of work.
|
|||
18-03-2018, 02:20 AM | #22 | |||
Donating Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,429
|
Quote:
That's why I like the standardized tuning references expressed in stoichiometeric value. Of course those are simply baseline references. Each particular engine build will have it's own variation. Last edited by solarite_guy; 18-03-2018 at 02:30 AM. |
|||
18-03-2018, 11:31 AM | #23 | ||
Frankenford pilot
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,052
|
Wish I had read up on E85 before I built my motor. I was asked what fuel I intended using I went with 98.
__________________
Cheers Bretto 73 XB GT Last of the Big Ports |
||
This user likes this post: |
18-03-2018, 01:27 PM | #24 | ||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,125
|
|
||
2 users like this post: |
18-03-2018, 05:46 PM | #25 | |||
Frankenford pilot
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,052
|
Quote:
The local po po have a thing about bald tyres and bonnet scoops
__________________
Cheers Bretto 73 XB GT Last of the Big Ports |
|||
18-03-2018, 11:58 AM | #26 | ||
Donating Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,429
|
It's true, from a power standpoint the E85 has the potential for more power and less chance of damaging detonation, etc. The pita aspect is in the consistency/inconsistency of what you may get from the pump.
What I've seen a lot of folks like better is VPs C85. They keep it sealed in a drum in a dark cool place. Being in drums, the dark part probably doesn't help much. |
||
19-03-2018, 06:15 AM | #27 | ||
The one and only
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Carrum Downs, Victoria
Posts: 9,053
|
It reads like a salesmans pitch.
__________________
1992 DC LTDHO 360rwkw built by me Tuned by CVE Performance Going of the rails on a crazy train Other cars include Dynamic ED Sprint, Dynamic DL LTD, Sparkling Burgundy DL LTD, Yellow, Red & Blue XB sedan & Black XB Coupe
|
||
19-03-2018, 07:27 PM | #29 | ||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 5,273
|
Thers a new LPG system being developed at the moment that will blow the doors off most petrol XR6T/F6310 or V8 GT's. ( And also 6.2 Litre LS3's)
Give me a couple of months and we'll have the new website up to date with all the info on how the system works. We're aiming for 400-500KW's from XR6T/F6310 Barra engines. |
||
20-03-2018, 05:21 PM | #30 | ||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 700
|
I sort of get the feeling a lot of people are against the idea of ethanol, but I for one are all for it.
So let look at it from my point of view. I was travelling to work, same route, same time very day, and My BF Falcon ute was getting 16.3 litres/100km on E10 according to the vehicle average fuel meter. When the E10 was discontinued (it's no longer available here), I switched to premium 95 and was getting 16.1 litres/100km. 0.2liters/100km don't seem much to me but still, lets work it out. Now we need a bit of back ground information here. My ute is designated to run on unleaded 92, E10, or Premium 95. On unleaded 92, it tends to be a little sluggish with a slight deterioration in fuel economy. On E10 and premium 95 it seems to be more responsive. E10 here was 95 octane. And E10 at the time was cheaper than unleaded 92. Today the average price for fuel is- ULP 92 is $1.456 per litre. PULP 95 is $1.592 per litre. Lets do the math- My car was using more E10 and using todays price for ULP92. 16.3/16.1 X $1.456 = $1.474.......approximately for the same distance travelled. But premium is $159.2 for the same distance travelled. So E10 was cheaper in the long run. I never ever had any problems with the fuel, and I must admit I did change to the E10 because I am a bit of save the planet, but I am also an obsessive car enthusiast and it was my way of having it both ways. Peter |
||
2 users like this post: |