Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The Perfect Line and Other Riding Myths' started by coach03860, Jun 24, 2013.
Well, that's just it. You are not really quoting anything or anybody. You just say to everyone, "your wrong, I'm right". Sorry, you're way of conversing is more akin to a grade 2 sandbox argument. Just because you havn't had any issues, you cannot confirm there are no problems out there. There are tons of evidence of issues. Surely you cannot deny it?
I'd go with the 89, but a bigger concern is:
How do you get around the 4 gallon minimum? or it that only for E15?
Oh no, I'm sure here are issues. There have been issues with every motor fuel ever used.
You're talking math... Here are facts:
I can still find pure gas. One pump left next to the refinery. So when I go that direction I fill up there.
My 03 BMW RT on pure gas gets 49-52 mpg, on E-10 it gets 39-44 mpg. (x-x mpg are worst and best I have had after many fill-ups being recorded)
My 04 Tacoma on pure 22 mpg, on E-10 18 mpg (tha'ts average).
There is a real loss in gas mileage and power when using ethanol laced fuel. In addition to having less energy content than gasoline, ethanol also carries a significantly different stoichiometric ratio. Gasoline, as we all know, burns cleanest, makes the least emissions, and generally gives the best gas mileage at 14.7:1. Ethanol on the other hand, has a stoichiometric ratio of 9:1. ALmost all modern cars religiously target the 14.7:1 ratio that gas loves and they may dip down as low as about 13:1 under heavy load. It's fairly obvious that the ethanol mixed gas causes the air fuel mix to run outside of it's intended operating stoich ratio. This in combination with ethanol's lower energy content gives a reduction in power and fuel economy that doesn't really work in an expected linear fashion.
As preciously mentioned by one of the other posters, many of the auto tuning shops have taken to a liking E85. This is predominantly because of they typically work on forced induction cars that require higher octanes than normal gas in order to increase the boost safely. Race gas is very expensive so their defacto choice is to use E85 which has a similar octane rating but costs much less. To use E85 and make more power requires big injectors, big fuel pumps, and big boost to take advantage of that pesky 9:1 stoich ratio. Unfortunately this also gives abysmal gas mileage, often times getting 2/3 or less mpg for similar power levels with straight gas.
Interesting. It was always my thought that there was more science involved in this issue than the corn lobbies simplistic math.
Also has the added benefit of lower burning temp, which is handy when are heating the intake charge to hell and back with a giant spool. Turbo guys LOVE E86, and they are using gigantic injecters to dump enough of it to keep up.
Great for dyno runs and show cars, not sure I would want to drive like that day to day, talk about passing everything but the gas station.
My motorcycles were designed to run on gasoline, not corn alcohol.
The mechanic at my dealer noted that he could load a map to run a Triumph 675 on Brazilian ethanol, apparently its a requirement to export to Brazil.
That being said the manual specifically states that you aren't supposed to run E15 or greater in the bike.....it also states that the rear shock is "non-user adjustable " so I take all of that shit with a grain of salt.
I should have said at maximum efficiency. Clearly you can make them limp along getting poor fuel mileage, for a while, but the fuel system components are not designed to deal with the chemical properties and impurities of a fuel that is so hydrophilic.
Why are you trying to muddy the waters with facts?:huh
Typical liberal tactic...
Yes, they are.
Water isn't the issue, everything metal gets water in it when the temperature changes, in fact if you look at most hydrocarbon combustion reactions the results are usually some amount of CO/CO2 and whatnot and water. Remember when all bikes were still carb'd? Frozen carb bowls? Yeah, not going anywhere for a minute.
Ethanol is significantly more corrosive, this is the issue with plastic fuel tanks on older Triumphs and Ducatis the ethanol, even in lower ratio blends like E10 eats the resin sealer or plastic and the tank starts to deform.
"Ethanol contains soluble and insoluble contaminants.<SUP id=cite_ref-31 class=reference></SUP> These soluble contaminants, halide ions such as chloride ions, have a large effect on the corrosivity of alcohol fuels. Halide ions increase corrosion in two ways; they chemically attack passivating oxide films on several metals causing pitting corrosion, and they increase the conductivity of the fuel. Increased electrical conductivity promotes electric, galvanic, and ordinary corrosion in the fuel system. Soluble contaminants, such as aluminum hydroxide, itself a product of corrosion by halide ions, clog the fuel system over time.
Ethanol is hygroscopic, meaning it will absorb water vapor directly from the atmosphere. Because absorbed water dilutes the fuel value of the ethanol (although it suppresses engine knock) and may cause phase separation of ethanol-gasoline blends, containers of ethanol fuels must be kept tightly sealed. This high miscibility with water means that ethanol cannot be efficiently shipped through modern pipelines, like liquid hydrocarbons, over long distances.<SUP id=cite_ref-32 class=reference></SUP> Mechanics also have seen increased cases of damage to small engines, in particular, the carburetor, attributable to the increased water retention by ethanol in fuel.<SUP id=cite_ref-33 class=reference>"</SUP>
Yeah no shit.
That wiki pretty much backs exactly what I said, there is ALWAYS water, or at least water vapor in the fuel system, this is why you get frozen gas lines in cars and bikes get frozen carbs. It comes from condensation on metal component.
...also like I said ethanol is more corrosive.
However, you assertation that the fuel system of modern motorcycles have no consideration for ethanol consumption is flat out wrong. The fuel systems are buffed up a bit to deal with the added moisture and corrosion.
There are a hundred other reasons why ethanol indeed DOES suck and they need to do away with it. We are actually on the same side here.
The ability to drive up corn (= food) prices so directly is fantastically unique to ethanol blends.
Thanks to increased vehicle efficiency and sufficient oil production on this continent I think it's time to get rid of a ethanol as a gas additive. Getting rid of ethanol blends is probably the only single issue where "environmentalists" and the oil companies agree.
2 gallons in the motorcycle
2 gallons on the ground
Gasoline is made from crude oil
crude oil comes out of the ground
ethanol is made out of corn
corn grows in the ground
call it "recycling", market it "green".
Go to a different pump or better yet gas station, that doesn't participate in this nonsense.
The 4 gallon minimum is for E10. There is residual fuel in the hose from the last person that filled up on E15, E30, E85. This gives you a higher ethanol percentage than E10 when you are only getting a gallon or two for your bike.
By getting 4 gallons the thinking is, you may dilute it to a safe enough percentage, where it will not harm your bike.
Like I said best bet is just to go on down the road and get it from somewhere else.
My Uncle ,a former Iowa farmer told me once, when we start using Corn to make fuel, we will all pay the price. He was right. Higher food prices and worse fuel. With a abundance of oil in the USA , we need to wake up and shut down Ethanol plants, leave corn for food. Any more questions??
Or better yet, start using plentiful Natural Gas. We have a huge supply of it, more than any other country. I have 11 wells under my land, so use all you can....
There are a number of screwy things that we do.
We can make oil (thus diesel) out of coal, we have metric fuck tons of coal, yet Regan shut down Carter's program back in the 80s because oil was like $20 a barrel. You can make oil by Ficsher-Tropsch Synthesis for an estimated 40-55 a gallon, in fact South African does just that. We are at what, like $92 a gallon does anyone expect crude to go under 50 and stay there for any amount of time? Anyone? Bueller?
Natural Gas has its own issues, namely all of the people in PA that have tap water that is flamable, again it uses FUCKING LOADS of water (for fracking anyway). That being said, methane IS realatively clean burning in comparison to other means of energy, BUT its a not really great for vehicular applications due to high pressure requirements and expensive modifications....not to mention a total and complete lack of infrastructure to deliver to the vehicles.
.....In stead we have Obama preaching about limiting CO emissions from our coal and gas turbine power plants. Which would be fine EXCEPT that we haven't opened a new Nuclear Plant in something like 30 years and the population ISN'T getting smaller. So all that is going to accomplish is to further jack up power prices yippie.
Most of it is counter intuitive, but I'm definitely not an ethanol fan.