Another fuel thread

Discussion in 'General Subaru Discussion' started by kickin_81, Sep 7, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. kickin_81
    Offline

    kickin_81 Well-Known Member

    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    233
    Hey, guys! I just found out that the Amoco gas station (off of County rd 10 and 35W in Mounds Park) where I always get my gasoline at sold non-oxygenated fuel!!! The label on the pump states that the fuel is for old muscle cars and off-road vehicles only (100% fuel for the <font color="red">same price of standard 92 octane</font id="red">).

    Questions:
    What pros and cons associate with non-oxygenated/100% fuel?
    Less cleaning detergents?
    Octane ratings drop as fuel ages, and standard oxygenated fuel does this in a matter of weeks. Should I worry when using a fuel I suspect could be old?
     
  2. Grimm
    Offline

    Grimm New Member

    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Here is a side view.... I am an environmental engineer doing air quality models and state implentation plans. I say.... take off your cats, and use non-oxegenated fuels.

    KEEP ME EMPLOYED DAMIT!

    I am sure someone with much more inteligence about this stuff will answer. If they don't I will give my thoughts.

    I can say for sure that old gas has a drop off of it's power per volume due to the loss of VOC's (volitle organic carbons).
     
  3. Musashi
    Offline

    Musashi Well-Known Member

    Likes Received:
    583
    Trophy Points:
    348
    Mr. F: "Should I worry when using a fuel I suspect could be old?"


    You have absolutely nothing to worry about. Cuz you driving is as fast as a turtle. ;)
     
  4. kickin_81
    Offline

    kickin_81 Well-Known Member

    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    233
    Ok, ignore what I asked about "old gasoline." I know that it is bad to use non-oxygenated fuel due to it's tendency to form more ozone than the standard, earth-friendly gasoline, but on race days, I would assume it is nothing worse than race fuel, correct?

    Are there any side effects besides increased emissions?
    As stated by http://www.cleanfuels.net/article.cfm?id=22, <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">The Auto/Oil study that compared an oxygenated and a non-oxygenated gasoline showed that, while the oxygenated fuel only had 2-3% less VOC emissions compared to the non-oxygenated fuel, it had 5-7% less tendency to form ozone. Also, the oxygenated fuel had an octane value of 2.4 numbers above that of the non-oxygenated fuel. In the real world, octane levels need to match in the marketplace. Had octane balanced fuels in that study matched, the differences in emissions would have been even greater in favor of the cleaner burning oxygenated gasoline.
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    http://www.me3.org/newsletters/me3spr96.html
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">A bill carried by Rep. Alice Johnson on behalf of Amoco and a coalition of snowmobile, boat and classic car owners, was vigorously debated during the session. The street rodders insisted that gasoline with oxygen could harm their vehicles, although no empirical evidence was introduced in the session. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    Although it isn't for cars, it is general knowledge for car storage and fuel. Taken from a snowmobile instruction manual to customers, http://www.xtreme-performance.com/04 rmx manual.pdf: <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">The issue of fuel quality has become a problem. We had a couple of customers that bought 91 octane fuel but still damaged their engines. When the fuel was professionally tested (at a fee of $250 per sample), the fuel came back with an octane of 87-88. Unfortunately if you buy gas from an unscrupulous station and don’t get high octane fuel which causes engine damage, it is going to be nearly impossible to achieve any recompense from the gas station. Therefore, you have a couple of options to ensure you are using safe fuel. First, don’t ever buy fuel on the Front Range or anywhere in the mountains where it is oxygenated, meaning it contains ethanol or MTBE. Second, Xtreme has non-oxygenated, 91 octane fuel available at the north store. Third, running approximately 2 gallons of AV gas per tank of fuel will provide substantial detonation resistance and make up for any lack of octane in the pump gas you purchase...

    Octane is a measure of detonation resistance; detonation is random combustion and the biggest enemy of your engine. 91 octane fuel is required at all times. Non-Oxygenated fuel is required so do not buy gas on the Front Range; it contains at least 10%ethanol or MTBE, which leans the jetting out as the fuel is only 90%gasoline. Always buy fuel at high volume stations; gas that is stored in large tanks for long periods of time will naturally lose octane so even if it’s labeled 91 octane, it may not be. Water in your fuel will also cause problems. Therefore, we recommend that you always store your sled with a full tank of fuel to minimize condensation. If you suspect a large amount of water in your fuel, drain the tank - don’t attempt to pass it through the motor. For small amounts of water in the tank or on serious powder days, it’s okay to occasionally run Isopropyl Alcohol (not from the drugstore). It helps prevent carb freezing, icing, and throttle sticking. Make certain you don’t use more concentration than is recommended because it can also have a leaning effect on the jetting.

    ...Important: At the onset of the next season, all fuel should be drained from the tank and filled with fresh gas to ensure you’re not
    burning low octane, old gas.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    Thought of the day, "Anytime you're going WOT, you're being careless to the ozone."
     
  5. Zola
    Offline

    Zola Well-Known Member

    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    121
    How do you have enough free time to come up with all these things to worry about?? The environment already hates you for driving a car, I doubt a 5% increased likelihood of forming ground-level ozone is going to be a big deal. Heck, look how many of us are catless. I recommend buying a Toyota Prius, or even better, switch to bicycling.
     
  6. Musashi
    Offline

    Musashi Well-Known Member

    Likes Received:
    583
    Trophy Points:
    348
    I think he is trying to prove that he is somewhat witty :D
     
  7. Flipndabrd
    Offline

    Flipndabrd Well-Known Member

    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    203
    There is a station on Highway 13 and I think highway 5 in Burnsville that has non-oxygenated fuel too. Across 13 from Famous Daves.

    I put it in my wifes Jetta one day by and noticed the sticker, so I asked.

    FYI for all you south of the river folk.
     
  8. kickin_81
    Offline

    kickin_81 Well-Known Member

    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    233
    The debate on emissions will never end. It's a double-edged sword that I would rather not try to control.

    I went out of my way to find support for the fact that motors work better/only on this 100% gasoline. Seeing it as Subarus and other cars are powered with high compression/turbocharged motors, I would believe this fuel will benefit cars looking for crisp performance. But then again, I don't know. That's why I'm asking if it's worth the extra pollution to use a fuel without ethanol/oxygen.
     
  9. jprice
    Offline

    jprice Well-Known Member

    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    203
    non-oxygenated fuel burns better, and has more energy per [insert measurement here] than our ethanol oxygenated fuel. All the stupid percentage crap about it burning better is crap IMO. Everyone can swing numbers to mean what they want. I get better mileage with non-oxygenated fuel, so even if oxygenated burned a smidgen cleaner per gallon, I burn less per mile with non-oxygenated, so it's IMO a wash.

    IMO one of the main reasons we have 10% ethanol fuel here is because of the corn growers association. Ethanol is made from corn, so the farmers are getting a sweet deal since 10% of MN fuel must be ethanol. I have also read that the 10% ethanol is required here since we using our refineries at 100% capacity, and without the ethanol, the refineries wouldn't be able to keep up with the fuel consumption. I don't know if I believe that though.

    The only problem that I think can arise fron using non-oxygenated is if no one else is using it at that station, you're getting old crappy gas where lots of the good stuff has evaporated out. For this reason, you're best off finding it where people with boats fill up frequently. Remember, fresh 91 octane is better than old fuel that was once 92 octane.
     
  10. kickin_81
    Offline

    kickin_81 Well-Known Member

    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    233
    So I suppose you use non-oxygenated fuel for your car(s). I understand and agree with your point. The Amoco station I mentioned of has 92 octane at the same price of their standard octane. I will contact the station manager to ask about their demand for that gas at his/her station.

    I think the first signs of bad/old fuel would be first heard from the engine through pinging and knocking. ...just like a lower octane. Maybe even having bad starts or hesitations.
     
  11. jprice
    Offline

    jprice Well-Known Member

    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    203
  12. Grimm
    Offline

    Grimm New Member

    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ok, I will realy put in my 2 cents....

    The octane rating of gasoline tells you how much the fuel can be compressed before it spontaneously ignites.

    now here is where it gets funny....

    Methane has just a single carbon atom. Propane has three carbon atoms chained together. Butane has four carbon atoms chained together. Pentane has five, hexane has six, heptane has seven and octane has eight carbons chained together.

    Eighty-seven-octane gasoline is gasoline that contains 87-percent octane and 13-percent heptane (or some other combination of fuels that has the same performance of the 87/13 combination of octane/heptane).

    MTBE is the acronym for methyl tertiary butyl ether, a fairly simple molecule that is created from methanol, and is another catlyist for reoxigenation. I don't nessisarly mean just for ozone, but for CO2 instead of CO. Supprizingly enough MTBE actualy increases octane rating. so it was used upto 15% (85/15 Octane/MTBE) was sold at 91 I think.

    Since MTBE is a minor carcinogen it is being replaced... Best guess is ethenol will win out from some of the onroad reports I have read, but there are other additives that are being tested. Funny thing is I think minnesota is all ethonal right now... I could be wronge there.

    So basicaly 91 octane fuel with or with out additives should have the same "power" but they will burn differntly hence differnt performance.

    >Kickin_81< - you are actualy generating NOx and other fun things that are precursors to low level ozone, which is a poison. Stratospheric ozone is the stuff that stops you from being sunburned all the time.

    >jprice< - I think you have the right idea there, but I am not going to say that it burns that much worse or better. It would be fun one day to do a few test runs..... but I am positive that you would find out that the performace per emission is better with some types of additive fuels... However if you were strictly looking at the performace of the car non-oxygenated additives would win out even with maps specificaly built for the fuels, but not at the rate that you think.

    Ok had to change this because of an NDA.... An unnamed refinery is not working at 100, Their last PTE (potential to emit) that I did a few months ago indicate that they were not running at full output. So I doupt that is the reason MN is getting more ethonal fuels.
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Remember, fresh 91 octane is better than old fuel that was once 92 octane.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    A total /bump there.

    I am an environmental ENGINEER.... not a tree hugging Environmentalist. I wouldn't have a WRX, and an NSX if I was a tree hugger, and like I said before... keep me employed.
     
  13. Grimm
    Offline

    Grimm New Member

    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
  14. jprice
    Offline

    jprice Well-Known Member

    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    203
    More thoughts on ethanol..

    Ethonal has an octane rating of 113. This means the fuel companies can start with lower octane rated fuels, and when the 10% ethanol is added, it would bring it up to the octane rating they're shooting for (91, 92, 93). This means the fuel has lower sensitivity (read fuel link above).

    Also, Ethanol can separate from gasoline. This isn't really a problem on fuel injection cars, but on carborated cars it can be a problem. For this reason, with carborated cars you should use non-oxygenated fuel. The Ethanol burns at a different rate than the gasoline it's in, and it has much less heat energy.

    I need to research some more.. I still don't understand all the pluses and minuses yet.
     
  15. jprice
    Offline

    jprice Well-Known Member

    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    203
    Grimm,

    Do you ever work with the Department of Weights and Measures? I called them once to see if I could get results from tests they sent out for octane ratings on stations around here. I was interested in the separate RON and MON numbers. The average is useless IMO.. All I really care about is the MON. (Test done with engine under load) They said that they didn't have / couldn't find that info. :-(

    -Jordan
     
  16. jprice
    Offline

    jprice Well-Known Member

    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    203
    Check this out:

    http://www.mda.state.mn.us/ethanol/about.htm

    It's a statement about the purposes and itents of the Minnesota Ethanol Program. Note that the LAST point is about cleaner burning fuels, and every point above that is to support our corn crop. I guess my assumptions were correct :-D I'm sick of all the environmental buzz related to this.. It's all about the corn growers. :-p
     
  17. Grimm
    Offline

    Grimm New Member

    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by jprice

    Grimm,

    Do you ever work with the Department of Weights and Measures? I called them once to see if I could get results from tests they sent out for octane ratings on stations around here. I was interested in the separate RON and MON numbers. The average is useless IMO.. All I really care about is the MON. (Test done with engine under load) They said that they didn't have / couldn't find that info. :-(

    -Jordan
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    I don't think the Department of Weidhts and Measures cars about MON numbers. Actualy I don't think they care about anything other than volume. I only know the rules for the clean fuels act because I did some work on the shell refinery in Long Beach.

    I think it would be best to find an independed group....

    As for the MN state artical... The thing is minnesota didn't realy have to do anything to meet the NAAQS (National Ambient Air Quality Standards), because we are already in compliance.... Fortuanaly because of that they could also remove emission testers (no cats for the win :p).... However the only way in 1999 that they could remove the testing was to self implement a SIP for "clean fuel" use. However there have been some cases of days where the pollution levels in certan area's of minneapolis are getting much worse, which leads back to emission testing or more oxygenated fuels. I would rather have oxygenated fuels than have to have my car inspected for cats every little while. I remember putting cats onto a certin olds Hurst.... back in the day to pass emissions and help remove them in the afternoon.

    As for octane testing... well it isn't a mandated law, and in minnesota, If I remember right:???:... it is only done when there are complaints. I do know that most refineries that I have been in do it every few days, or when process changes are made.
     
  18. WRX1
    Offline

    WRX1 _ Staff Member

    Likes Received:
    722
    Trophy Points:
    348
    Fong, what are you tring to accomplish?? I guess if your car is running on the edge of knock, I would probably give the non-oxo fuel a try. It worked great for all my atv's that I have, but I was also running the ragged edge with the motors.

    Russ
     
  19. kickin_81
    Offline

    kickin_81 Well-Known Member

    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    233
    I want to use a fuel that gives me the edge of performance, yet it still contains detergents that help keep deposits from forming in my engine/lines/tank/etc. I'm thinking if the cons out weigh the pros on using non-oxygenated fuel, I'm going to stick with standard 92 octane for daily driving. Yet, I will use this non-oxygenated 92 octane only on race/performance days to ensure my car is detonation-free and run at its best as a safety measure. I haven't had time to read into the posted links, but I hope it helps me choose between these two for my best interest.

    I was looking for other member's preference (and advice) on their choice of fuel since we're all motor heads to a certain degree. I can safely say that we all want what's best for our cars, and fuel is one way to look at it from an angle.
     
  20. Zola
    Offline

    Zola Well-Known Member

    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    121
    If your tune was done for 91 octane California gas (which if memory serves me correctly it was), I doubt that you would ever detonate on regular old 92 octane. If you want maximum safety and performance for race days, I'd use unleaded 100 octane.
     
  21. kickin_81
    Offline

    kickin_81 Well-Known Member

    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    233
    Thanks for the input, Joel. And yes, you're right. My ECU is tuned on California's 91 octane (Shell gasoline I believe) and I have not heard my motor knock before. *knock on wood*
     
  22. Musashi
    Offline

    Musashi Well-Known Member

    Likes Received:
    583
    Trophy Points:
    348
    Mr. F lets do a little experiment. Lets put my new ecuflash on your car and see if it can fly any faster. :D
     
  23. Zola
    Offline

    Zola Well-Known Member

    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    121
    Well on the other hand, just because you don't hear it doesn't mine it isn't pinging. How about some homemade det cans?
     
  24. Herger
    Offline

    Herger Active Member

    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    91
    Anybody else use Holiday 93? That's the highest octane I've been able to find.
     
  25. Musashi
    Offline

    Musashi Well-Known Member

    Likes Received:
    583
    Trophy Points:
    348
    I've used it before but dont like it.
     
  26. DISCOPOPE
    Offline

    DISCOPOPE Well-Known Member

    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    223
    we sell 91 ethanol free at the marina.
    on boats, and small engines like mowers, trimers, and chain saws, the alcahol eats away at the fuel system components..
    lines get brittle and crack. little paricles of crap clog your filter... it's just a mess.
    in a car you dont have as manny issues. you are chugging through the gas all year round, plus, MOST auto manufacturers use alcahol tolerant components..
     
  27. kickin_81
    Offline

    kickin_81 Well-Known Member

    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    233
    ...unless you find 93 octane nonoxygenated fuel from Holiday, their fuel has more ethanol than others in order for them to claim the "earth-friendly gasoline."
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.