Notices
Non Scooby Related Anything Non-Scooby related

104 Ron anyone

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 15 March 2006, 02:23 PM
  #1  
MattW
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
 
MattW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 8,021
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default 104 Ron anyone

http://www.pistonheads.com/news/defa...?storyId=13356

Morrisons supermarket will today open the UK’s first bioethanol E85 filling pump. This follows Tesco's launch of its 99 Octane fuel last November, containing five per cent bioethanol (see link below). The fuel will be branded Harvest BioEthanol E85, with the pumps featuring a new butterfly logo and a blue filling hose.
Old 15 March 2006, 02:27 PM
  #2  
Kyl3cook
Scooby Regular
 
Kyl3cook's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 610
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Looks interesting....but can Evo's/Scoobs use it?? If so, I have a morrisons just round the corner. Also, will it be detrimental to use this over optimax. These should be decided before I plonk it in my car.
Old 15 March 2006, 02:34 PM
  #3  
OllyK
Scooby Regular
 
OllyK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Derbyshire
Posts: 12,304
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Kyl3cook
Looks interesting....but can Evo's/Scoobs use it?? If so, I have a morrisons just round the corner. Also, will it be detrimental to use this over optimax. These should be decided before I plonk it in my car.
I'm guessing you didn't read the article then?
Old 15 March 2006, 02:42 PM
  #4  
ALi-B
Moderator
Support Scoobynet!
iTrader: (1)
 
ALi-B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: The hell where youth and laughter go
Posts: 38,034
Received 301 Likes on 240 Posts
Thumbs down Potentially bad for your engine

That's worrying...I thought current road cars were only safe with upto e15 ethanol (with e30 as an absolute maximum)

Pure and high concentration ethanol fuels attacks certain rubber and plastic materials and cannot be used in unmodified car engines without suffereing consequences in the long term. Only cars specifically manufactured under new guidelines to run on biofuels are safe ruling out older vehicles (I have no specific dates, sorry).

Also there is a surious issue of what happens when it gets in the sump. And the effect it has on the oil (causing Formic Acid, Acetaldehyde and Acetic Acid).
This could cause havoc with acid etching of bearings, journals and corrosion unless a oil with suitable neutralising detergents is used.

Finally, some good remapping would be needed as I doubt any road car not designed for biofuel has fuel and ignition mapping to take advantage of fuel over 100RON

Conclusion don't use it until you have proof it doesn't perish your fuel injector seals and fuel line and contaminate your oil with volatile acids.

AB.

Last edited by ALi-B; 15 March 2006 at 02:50 PM.
Old 15 March 2006, 02:47 PM
  #5  
Kyl3cook
Scooby Regular
 
Kyl3cook's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 610
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by OllyK
I'm guessing you didn't read the article then?
It does however say it won't work on all petrol cars?!...and the saab biofuel can use it with no intervention from the driver....so if I haven't got a saab biofuel, do I have to interfere with my car, as that sounds wrong.
Old 15 March 2006, 02:50 PM
  #6  
OllyK
Scooby Regular
 
OllyK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Derbyshire
Posts: 12,304
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Kyl3cook
It does however say it won't work on all petrol cars?!...and the saab biofuel can use it with no intervention from the driver....so if I haven't got a saab biofuel, do I have to interfere with my car, as that sounds wrong.
The way I read the article was that unless your car has been specifically designed to use this fuel, don't use it. It's a bit like when unleaded came out, don't use it unless you've got the hardened valve seats etc.

Last edited by OllyK; 15 March 2006 at 02:52 PM.
Old 15 March 2006, 02:52 PM
  #7  
ALi-B
Moderator
Support Scoobynet!
iTrader: (1)
 
ALi-B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: The hell where youth and laughter go
Posts: 38,034
Received 301 Likes on 240 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by OllyK
The way I read the article was that unless your car has been specifically designed to use this fuel, don't use it.
Yes it does say "not all cars can use it" but it doesn't state specifically why it cannot be used on cars not designed for it. Which is a bit naughty IMO.

Thus my worry some Subaru onwer will go "Durrr Look 104RON, dat's good 4 me turbo innit!!" and fill up without realising.

Trending Topics

Old 15 March 2006, 02:53 PM
  #8  
Kyl3cook
Scooby Regular
 
Kyl3cook's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 610
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by OllyK
The way I read the article was that unless your car has been specifically designed to use this fuel, don't use it.
Me too, but then surely it seems odd to release it eventually to the whole country. Or will it be similar to lpg, and cars will have to be converted.
Old 15 March 2006, 03:03 PM
  #9  
ALi-B
Moderator
Support Scoobynet!
iTrader: (1)
 
ALi-B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: The hell where youth and laughter go
Posts: 38,034
Received 301 Likes on 240 Posts
Default

I was trying to find teh official US document on this. But can't find it now:

So you'll have to put up with a blatant copy and paste from Wikipedia (sorry, not really bonafide as a source - but it illustrates the point)

Use in standard engines

Experimental
E85 has a considerably higher octane rating than gasoline — about 110 — a difference significant enough that it does not burn as efficiently in traditionally-manufactured internal-combustion engines.

Use of E85 in non-FFV vechicles is generally experimental, with some users recommending light blends as low as 20%, while others have successfully run 100% E85. The main attraction of burning E85, of course, is the lower price per gallon at the pump of E85 versus gasoline. Other advantages include the common benefits of renewable energy sources, such as less environmental impact and less reliance on foreign energy.

Modern cars (i.e., most cars built after 1988) have fuel-injection engines with oxygen sensors that will attempt to adjust the air-fuel mixture for the extra oxygenation of E85, with variable effects on performance. All such cars can burn small amounts of E85 with no ill effects.

Operating fuel-injected non-FFVs on more than 50% E85 will generally cause the check engine light (CEL) to illuminate, indicating that the ECU can no longer maintain closed-loop control of the internal combustion process due to the presence of more oxygen in E85 than in gasoline. Once the CEL illuminates, adding more E85 to the fuel tank becomes rather inefficient. For example, running 90% E85 in a non-FFV will reduce fuel economy by 33% or more relative to what would be achieved running 100% gasoline. (This example is again for the same 1998 Chevy S10 pickup for which the fuel economy was studied in the controlled experiment mentioned previously.) Even more importantly, continuing to operate the non-FFV with the check engine light (CEL) illuminated may also cause damage to the catalytic converter as well as to the engine pistons if allowed to persist. It just does not make good economic sense to run a non-FFV with amounts of E85 high enough to cause the CEL to illuminate.

Under stoichiometric combustion conditions, ideal combustion occurs for burning pure gasoline as well as for various mixes of gasoline and E85 (at least until the CEL illuminates in the non-FFV) such that there is no significant amount of uncombined oxygen or unburned fuel being emitted in the exhaust. This means that no change in the exhaust manifold oxygen sensor is required for either FFVs or non-FFVs when burning higher percentages of E85. This also means that the catalytic converter on the non-FFV burning E85 mixed with gasoline is not being stressed by the presence of too much oxygen in the exhaust, which would otherwise reduce catalytic converter operating life.

Nonetheless, even when the CEL does not illuminate on the non-FFV burning E85, proper catalytic operation of the catalytic converter for a non-FFV burning higher percentages of E85 may not be achieved as soon as necessary to prevent the emission of some pollution products resulting from burning the gasoline contained in the mixture, especially upon initial cold engine start. This is because the catalytic converter needs to rise to an internal temperature of approximately 300 degrees C before it can 'fire off' and commence its intended catalytic function operation. When burning large amounts of E85 in a non-FFV, the cooler burning characteristics of alcohol fuel than gasoline fuel may delay reaching the 'fire-off' temperature in a non-FFV as quickly as when burning gasoline. Any additional pollution, however, is only going to be emitted for a very short distance when burning E85 in a non-FFV, as the catalytic converter will nonetheless still 'fire off' quite quickly and commence catalytic operation shortly. It is not known whether the small amount of pollution emitted prior to catalytic converter 'fire off' may actually be reduced even during the cold startup phase, as well as once catalytic operation commences, when burning E85 in a non-FFV. Likewise, even once the catalytic converter 'fires off', operation with the CEL illuminated will still result in excess amounts of nitrous oxide being released, greater than when operating the engine on gasoline. The solution is simply to add gasoline, and extinguish the check engine light (CEL), at which time exhaust pollutants will return to within normal limits .

For non-FFVs burning E85 once the CEL illuminates, it is the lessened amount of fuel injection than what is needed that causes the air fuel mixture to become too lean; that is, there is not enough fuel being injected into the combustion process, with the result that the oxygen content in the exhaust rises out of limits, and perfect (i.e., stoichiometric) combustion is lost if the percentage of E85 in the fuel tank becomes too high. It is the loss of near-stoichiometric combustion that causes the excessive loss of fuel economy in non-FFVs burning too high a percentage of E85 versus gasoline in their fuel mix.

E85 gives particularly good results in turbocharged cars due to its high octane [2]. It allows the ECU to run more favorable ignition timing and leaner fuel mixtures than are possible on normal premium gasoline. Users who have experimented with converting OBDII (i.e., On-Board Diagnostic System 2, that is for 1996 model year and later) turbocharged cars to run on E85 have had very good results. Experiments indicate that most OBDII-specification turbocharged cars can run up to approximately 39% E85 (33% ethanol) with no CEL's or other problems. (In contrast, most OBDII specification fuel-injected non-turbocharged cars and light trucks are more foregiving and can usually operate well with in excess of 50% E85 (42% ethanol) prior to having CEL's occur.) Fuel system compatibility issues have not been reported for any OBDII cars or light trucks running on high ethanol mixes of E85 and gasoline for periods of time exceeding two years. (This is likely to be the outcome justifiably expected of the normal conservative automotive engineer's predisposition not to design a fuel system merely resistant to ethanol in E10, or 10% percentages, but instead to select materials for the fuel system that are nearly impervious to ethanol.)

Fuel economy does not drop as much as might be expected in turbocharged engines based on the specific energy content of E85 compared to gasoline, in contrast to the previously-reported reduction of 23.7% reduction in a 60:40 blend of gasoline to E85 for one non-turbocharged, fuel-injected, non-FFV. Although E85 contains only 72% of the energy on a gallon for gallon basis compared to gasoline, experimenters have seen much better fuel mileage than this difference in energy content implies. Many automotive writers and columnists suggest that because of the lower energy content, you should expect an equivalent 39% increase in fuel usage. This has not been observed in practice when running gasoline and ethanol blends. Some of the newest model FFV's get only about 7% less mileage per gallon of fuel of E85 compared to their gasoline fuel mileage.

The reason for this non-intuitive difference is that the turbocharged engine seems especially well-suited for operation on E85, for it in effect has a variable compression ratio capability, which is exactly what is needed to accommodate varying ethanol and gasoline ratios that occur in practice in an FFV. At light load cruise, the turbocharged engine operates as a low compression engine. Under high load and high manifold boost pressures, such as accelerating to pass or merge onto a highway, it makes full use of the higher octane of E85. It appears that due to the better ignition timing and better engine performance on a fuel of 100 octane, the driver spends less time at high throttle openings, and can cruise in a higher gear and at lower throttle openings than is possible on 100% premium gasoline. In daily commute driving, mostly highway, 100% E85 in a turbocharged car can hit fuel mileages of over 90% of the normal gasoline fuel economy. Tests indicate approximately a 5% increase in engine performance is possible by switching to E85 fuel in high performance cars.

Experimenters who have made conversions to 100% E85 report that cold start problems at very cold temperatures can easily be avoided through adding 1 - 2 gallons of gasoline to the E85 in the tank, prior to the arrival of the cold weather.

No significant ignition timing changes are required for a gasoline engine running on E85.


Risks:
Prolonged exposure to high concentrations of ethanol may corrode metal and rubber parts in older engines (pre-1988) designed primarily for gasoline. The hydroxyl group on the ethanol molecule is an extremely weak acid, but it can enhance corrosion for some natural materials. For post-1988 fuel-injected engines, all the components are already designed to accommodate E10 (10% ethanol) blends through the elimination of exposed magnesium and aluminium metals and natural rubber and cork gasketed parts. Hence, there is a greater degree of flexibility in just how much more ethanol may be added without causing ethanol-induced damage, varying by automobile manufacturer. Anhydrous ethanol in the absence of direct exposure to alkali metals and bases is non-corrosive; it is only when water is mixed with the ethanol that the mixture becomes corrosive to some metals. Hence, there is no appreciable difference in the corrosive properties between E10 and a 50:50 blend of E10 gasoline and E85 (47.5% ethanol), provided there is no water present, and the design was done to accommodate E10. Nonetheless, operation with more than 10% ethanol has never been recommended by car manufacturers in non-FFVs.

Operation on up to 20% ethanol is generally considered safe for all post 1988 cars and trucks. This equates to running a blend of 23.5% of E85. Starting in 2010, at least one US state (Minnesota) already has legislatively mandated and planned to force E20 (20% ethanol) into their general gasoline fuel-distribution network. Details of how this will work for individual vehicle owners while maintaining automobile manufacturer warranties, despite exceeding the manufacturer's maximum warranted operation percentage of 10% of ethanol in fuel, are still being worked as of late-2005. However, the choice of transitioning to a 20% ethanol blend of gasoline is not without precedent; Brazil, in its conversion to an ethanol-fueled economy, determined that operation with up to 22% ethanol in gasoline was safe for the cars and trucks then on the road in Brazil at the time, and the conversion to a 20% blend was accomplished with only minor issues arising for older vehicles. Recently, conversion to a 24% blend was accomplished in Brazil.

In addition to corrosion, there is also a risk of increased engine wear for non-FFV engines that are not specifically designed for operation on high levels (i.e., for greater than 10%) of ethanol. The risk primarily comes in the rare event that the E85 fuel ever becomes contaminated with water. For water levels below approximately 0.5% to 1.0% contained in the ethanol, no phase separation of gasoline and ethanol occurs. For contamination with 1% or more water in the ethanol, phase separation occurs, and the ethanol and water mixture will separate from the gasoline. This can be simply observed by pouring a mixture of suspected water-contaminated E85 fuel in a clear glass tube, waiting roughly 30 minutes for the separation to occur (if it does), and then inspecting the sample. If there is water contamination of above 1% water in the ethanol, a clear separation of alcohol (with water) and gasoline will be clearly visible, with the colored gasoline floating above the clear alcohol and water mixture.

For a badly-contaminated amount of water in the ethanol and water mixture that separates from the gasoline (i.e., approximately 11% water, 89% ethanol, equivalent to 178 proof alcohol), considerable engine wear will occur, especially during times while the engine is heating up to normal operating temperatures, as for example just after starting the engine, when low temperature partial combustion of the water-contaminated ethanol mixture is taking place. This wear, caused by water-contaminated E85, is the result of the combustion process of ethanol, water, and gasoline producing considerable amounts of formic acid (HCOOH, also known as methanoic acid, and sometimes written as CH2O2).

In addition to the production of formic acid occurring for water-contaminated E85, smaller amounts of acetaldehyde (CH3CHO) and acetic acid (C2H4O2) are also formed for water-contaminated ethanol combustion. Nonetheless, it is the formic acid that is responsible for the majority of the rapid increase in engine wear.

Engines specifically designed for FFVs employ soft nitride coatings on their internal metal parts to provide formic acid wear resistance in the event of water contamination of E85 fuel. Also, the use of lubricant oil (motor oil) containing an acid neutralizer is necessary to prevent the damage of oil-lubricated engine parts in the event of water contamination of fuel. Such lubricant oil is required by at least one manufacturer of FFVs even to this day (Chrysler).

For non-FFVs burning E85 in greater than 23.5% E85 mixtures (20% ethanol), the remedy for accidentally getting a tank of water-contaminated E85 (or gasoline) while preventing excessive engine wear is to change the motor oil as soon as possible after either burning the fuel and replacing it with non-contaminated fuel, or after immediately draining and replacing the water-contaminated fuel. The risk of burning slightly water-contaminated fuel with low percentages of water (less than 1%) on a long commute is minimal; after all, it is the low temperature combustion of water contaminated ethanol and gasoline that causes the bulk of the formic acid to form; burning a slightly-contaminated mix of water (less than 1%) and ethanol quickly, in one long commute, will not likely cause any appreciable engine wear past the first 15 miles of driving, especially once the engine warms up and high temperature combustion occurs exclusively.

For those making their own E85, the risk of introducing water unintentionally into their homemade fuel is relatively high unless adequate safety precautions and quality control procedures are taken. Ethanol and water form an azeotrope such that it is impossible to distill ethanol to higher than 95.6% ethanol purity by weight (roughly 190 proof), regardless of how many times distillation is repeated. Unfortunately, this proof ethanol contains too much water to prevent separation of a mixture of such proof ethanol with gasoline, or to prevent the formation of formic acid during low temperature combustion. Therefore, when making E85, it becomes necessary to remove this residual water. It is possible to break the ethanol and water azeotrope through adding benzene or another hydrocarbon prior to a final rectifying distillation. This takes another distillation (energy consuming) step. However, it is possible to remove the residual water more easily, using 3 angstrom (3A) synthetic zeolite pellets to adsorb the water from the mix of ethanol and water, prior to mixing the now anhydrous ethanol with gasoline in an 85% to 15% by volume mixture to make E85. This absorption process is also known as a molecular sieve. The benefit of using synthetic zeolite pellets is that they are essentially comparable to using a catalyst, in being infinitely reusable and in not being consumed in the process, and the pellets require only re-heating (perhaps on a backyard grill, in a solar reflector furnace, or with heated carbon dioxide gas collected and saved from the fermentation process) to drive off the water molecules adsorbed into the zeolite. Research has also been done at Purdue University on using corn grits as a dessicant. [3] Once the ground corn becomes water logged, the corn grits can be processed much as the zeolite pellets, at least for a number of drying cycles before the grits lose their effectiveness. Once this occurs, it is possible to run the now water-logged corn grits through the natural fermentation process and convert them into even more ethanol fuel.

Running a non-FFV with too high of a percentage of ethanol will also cause a lean air fuel mixture. A lean mixture, if allowed to persist over considerable periods of time, will cause overheating of pistons and will eventually cause engine damage. It will also cause premature catalytic converter failure. This is also why the check engine light will illuminate if you mix more than around 50% to 60% E85 by volume with your gasoline in a non-FFV. If this happens, just add more 87 octane regular grade gasoline as soon as possible to correct the problem. (Some premium blends contain up to 10% ethanol; to correct the problem as quickly as possible, always add regular grade gasoline, not premium grade gasoline.) These lean mixture problems will not happen in a properly-converted vehicle.
BTW: FFV= Federal fleet flex-fuel vehicles (i.e cars suitable for biofuel)




Last edited by ALi-B; 15 March 2006 at 03:13 PM.
Old 15 March 2006, 03:33 PM
  #10  
TonyFlow
Scooby Regular
 
TonyFlow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Posts: 1,293
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Bugger - My local Morrisons is supposedly 1 of the first to trial it as well!
Almost good news!
Old 15 March 2006, 07:52 PM
  #11  
highlander68k
Scooby Regular
 
highlander68k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Not recommended for use by Subaru Australia or Hyundai (IIRC).

I'm sure there are some press releases floating around the internet.
Old 15 March 2006, 09:36 PM
  #12  
carl
Scooby Regular
 
carl's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 1999
Posts: 7,901
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Wikipedia article seems to be heavily US-biased. Remember, their engines run to about 25bhp/litre so the article may be wrong for more highly-tuned stuff. Not sure I'd run it in an M3, for example.
Old 15 March 2006, 10:21 PM
  #13  
ALi-B
Moderator
Support Scoobynet!
iTrader: (1)
 
ALi-B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: The hell where youth and laughter go
Posts: 38,034
Received 301 Likes on 240 Posts
Default

That's because it is US based. They are ahead of us with biofuels and creating federalised standards for manufactureres to adhere to (probably down to California's strict emissions policy).

It gives a good balance of Pro's for FFV vehicles (vehicles made to run on Biofuel) And cons with issues affecting vehicles not designed or converted for such use.

And why you should NOT use it in your current car without making modifications.

As things stand (from current news reports), only the new Saab and a forthcomming Ford is 100% compatible with this fuel.
Old 15 March 2006, 11:12 PM
  #14  
fast bloke
Scooby Regular
 
fast bloke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 26,619
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

This stuff is only 5% bioethanol - I can't see a big problem - not recommended by Subaru Australia is the same as 'we are not sure if it works and we can't be arsed testing it cos we don't get it here so we can't recommend it'



Disclaimer - we once destruction tested an Austin maxi on Avgas..... did you know an Austin Maxi can do 17000 RPM (very briefly mind you )
Old 16 March 2006, 12:08 AM
  #15  
stevem2k
Scooby Regular
 
stevem2k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Kingston ( Surrey, not Jamaica )
Posts: 4,670
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

'neat' E85 is 85% bioethanol , 15% petrol

Tesco's is 5% ethanol , 95% petrol
Old 16 March 2006, 06:42 AM
  #16  
hoskib
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
 
hoskib's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: gravesend, kent
Posts: 4,721
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

gives lower CO2 emmisions, should be handy at MOT time
Old 16 March 2006, 10:45 AM
  #17  
john_s
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
 
john_s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Preston, Lancs.
Posts: 2,977
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Don't MOT's monitor CO and HC levels, not CO2?

John.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Abx
Subaru
22
09 January 2016 05:42 PM
Littleted
Non Scooby Related
6
02 October 2015 11:31 AM
tizard99
ScoobyNet General
8
09 March 2001 11:53 PM
Dave Thornton
ScoobyNet General
3
07 October 2000 10:16 AM
petersen
ScoobyNet General
8
05 February 2000 05:13 PM



Quick Reply: 104 Ron anyone



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:18 PM.