ethanol in gasoline

[westnek]

hello riders = ive read articals  on here  about ethanol and what it leaves in the tank and harm it do's to carbs etc.etc. I use sea foam and stabilizer's in tank and at storage times and during general riding. I'm in Ontario Canada and I understand regular gas here has 10% ethanol and hi-test or premium gas  doesn't contain ethanol. my  question is -would using  prem' gas in valks be better than reg' gas  and also continue to use cleaner additives? also at storage time begin to fill up with prem gas. using  hi test  or premium, if not using this grade of fuel on a regular basis,  would this harm the piston tops over time they way it ignites in the cylinder. Would this practice of using hi -test gas keep a cleaner fuel system ??   thanks  again West

[bentwrench]

Using premium  fuel in an engine that doesn't require it won't do any harm(except to your wallet).If I could find non-ethanol hitest around here I would use it.

[highmiles]

Been using 93 non ethanol for the last six years. have has no carb or fuel line problems. The price for the gas is worth it.

[Patrick]

I don't worry about that. The more the bike is ridden the better in that respect. When putting it up for the winter just run the tank low and start using non-ethanol prior to that and fill the tank just before it goes into hibernation [also add Sea-foam].
If one isn't ridden much, every few years I remove the tank and flush it out.

[Led]

I do pay for the "premium" no ethanol gas for my bike.  Same goes for all my small engine powered things (lawnmower/snowblower).  If I do not use them that often, they get the better fuel.........

[Valkorado]

Our small town has a station selling ethanol free in all grades.  I run the 87, my bike seems to like it more than the 85.  Yes, the ethanol free stuff costs more.  No, I don't care.

[Bighead]

My 97 bee has never had anything less than 93 octane unless I was about to be stranded and it wasn't available. As far as ethanol never think about it,I just ride it. So many pull carbs to "CLEAN" them when nothing is wrong. I think too many feel the need to tinker. My 97 is over100k and has never had the carbs touched and at one point it did sit a long time.

[hubcapsc]

Been using 89 ethanol for the last six years. have has no carb or fuel line problems. 

I also run whatever regular grade they have wherever I stop... I choose non-ethanol
if it is there, but that is unusual. Riding often enough to keep stuff from getting plugged
up seems to do the trick... I haven't ridden the LogTruck since last Friday, might need to
do so today  ...

-Mike

[F6Dave]

I hate ethanol.  It's a huge scam that enriches a small group of farmers, raises food prices, and has no environmental benefits.  It damages older vehicles and small engines, especially those that sit for long periods and those near water, like boats.

Having said that, in newer engines (even the 29 year old GL1500) it won't do any harm if ridden regularly.  When I need to store one of mine, I try to fill it with pure gas, though that isn't always easy with the nearest station over 30 miles away.  So as a last resort I make sure the tank is full.  This allows for the smallest concentration of water and minimizes surface area of gasoline in contact with the air.

BTW, I use the lowest octane gas I can run on.  My '98 Tourer likes the crappy 85 octane regular the sell here.  My 99 Interstate knocks in hot weather with that stuff (due to the ICM?) so it gets the 87 octane 'mid-grade'.  Higher octane fuel not only costs more, it has less energy content.  This is due to a lower flash point which reduces the spontaneous combustion (detonation) heard as knocking or pinging.  It's a waste of money unless your engine needs it.

[Paladin528]

In Ontario some premium gas "May" contain up to 10% ethanol.
Regular gas will contain up to 10%
She'll v-power has no ethanol. And petrol canada 93 contains no ethanol but the 94 does.(old Sunoco formulation)
All other brands can be hit and miss.
Personally I can find no performance difference between regular 87 and the 93.  If you ride a lot it makes zero difference
Also in Canada our fuel formulation is different and the phase separation does not occur as readily as American gas. You may also note you get better gas mileage in the U.S.

[Firefighter]

Way down here at the bottom of the world in south Texas everything has ethanol. I run regular gas as I can't tell a difference in mileage or performance with my Valk. I fill the fuel tank after every ride to the brim if I can to keep water from infiltrating my fuel. I keep the bike in a garage and out of direct sun to slow the condensation of water into the tank. I am blessed to be able to ride at least once a week to keep fresh gas in the carbs. I have never had any trouble if I do this.

My chainsaws I run at least once a month but still have trouble with fuel lines rotting.

I would run my engines once a week if possible instead of storing them. Gasoline is a natural cleaner if it stays clean and fresh. Air and high heat seem to be its enemy. 2 cents, maybe.

[Steve K (IA)]

I don't understand all the ethanol hatin' in this group.  I bought my I/S new in 2000.  It's had 10% ethanol in it except 1 or 2 times when it wasn't available when I was traveling.  My '97 that I picked up in 2004, same thing, only 10% ethanol since I've had it.  No carb problems with either bike.  They both run strong and smooth.   

[Tfrank59]

"Higher octane fuel....a waste of money unless your engine needs it."

I totally did not know this.   I thought it's always better to have higher octane, and I've been running the 89 (midgrade here in Washington state) for about the past six months, since I downgraded from the 92.  Now that I know where one ethanol free station is here in my city, I will fill up with that on occasion.

[art]

Hitest, waste of money? Yes, I had 160000 on my valk and ran it every day even in the winter and It ran great on 87 octane.  Ethanol in garden tools and generators is a very bad idea. I had to replace a carb in a gen. because the needle was so frozen in place I couldn't knock it out with a punch. It was all corroded in place. Now I use either no ethanol or race fuel in my generators. Patrick is right.

[fudgie]

I don't understand all the ethanol hatin' in this group.  I bought my I/S new in 2000.  It's had 10% ethanol in it except 1 or 2 times when it wasn't available when I was traveling.  My '97 that I picked up in 2004, same thing, only 10% ethanol since I've had it.  No carb problems with either bike.  They both run strong and smooth.   

I get it all the time when I go west. Have for 10 yrs straight. No probs here either. Seems to run better with it.

[fudgie]

It's a huge scam that enriches a small group of farmers,

Wrong.

[F6Dave]

It's a huge scam that enriches a small group of farmers,

Wrong.

You are wrong -- it's a scam.  The mandate passed under GW Bush in 2005, and was expanded in 2007.  It has sent billions of taxpayer and motorist's dollars to corn farmers and ethanol producers.  It has cost us billions in reduced mileage and inflated food costs.  Billions more have been needlessly spent repairing all kinds of vehicles, especially older cars, boats, and snowmobiles.  The corn converted into biofuel each year is enough to feed over 400 million malnourished people in developing nations.  Do some research.

[F6Dave]

Hitest, waste of money? Yes, I had 160000 on my valk and ran it every day even in the winter and It ran great on 87 octane.  Ethanol in garden tools and generators is a very bad idea. I had to replace a carb in a gen. because the needle was so frozen in place I couldn't knock it out with a punch. It was all corroded in place. Now I use either no ethanol or race fuel in my generators. Patrick is right.

You make the case for an important exception to the octane issue.  These days ethanol-free gas is often only available in the higher octanes.  So, even though it costs more and has a lower BTU content, it is still preferable to the lower octane ethanol fuels for small engines and vehicles that are stored for long periods.

[Firefighter]

Ethanol has been around since the 1800's. We already had up to 10% ethanol in most areas by the late 70's, even before Bush, look it up.

[Steve K (IA)]

It's a huge scam that enriches a small group of farmers,

Wrong.

Exactly.  The scam is being perpetuated by big oil.  They want it all.  The billions of tax dollars that our government gives them every year obviously isn't enough. 

[F6Dave]

Ethanol has been around since the 1800's. We already had up to 10% ethanol in most areas by the late 70's, even before Bush, look it up.

Re-read my post.  I already said ethanol is no problem in newer vehicles that are run frequently.  The damage is done to older vehicles, and engines that sit around for long periods of time.  And ethanol costs far more, with no benefit whatsoever, other than to enrich crony capitalists.  It also uses vast amounts of land and water.  Even the radical environmentalists are beginning to figure this out.

How stupid is it to burn food in our vehicles?  REALLY stupid!

[F6Dave]

It's a huge scam that enriches a small group of farmers,

Wrong.

Exactly.  The scam is being perpetuated by big oil.  They want it all.  The billions of tax dollars that our government gives them every year obviously isn't enough. 

Oil closed at $42.13/BBL today.  Yep, big oil is really in control!  BTW, do you have a clue who big oil is?  Here are the top 5:

1 - Saudi Aramco
2 - Gazprom
3 - National Iranian Oil
4 - ExxonMobil
5 - PetroChina

Note that 4 of 5 are GOVERNMENT oil companies.

[salty1]

Ethanol has been around since the 1800's. We already had up to 10% ethanol in most areas by the late 70's, even before Bush, look it up.

Re-read my post.  I already said ethanol is no problem in newer vehicles that are run frequently.  The damage is done to older vehicles, and engines that sit around for long periods of time.  And ethanol costs far more, with no benefit whatsoever, other than to enrich crony capitalists.  It also uses vast amounts of land and water.  Even the radical environmentalists are beginning to figure this out.

How stupid is it to burn food in our vehicles?  REALLY stupid!

  It does not make any sense to burn food when there are so many going hungry.

[fudgie]

It has sent billions of taxpayer and motorist's dollars to corn farmers and ethanol producers. 

Guess I'll have to go thru our farm records and look for a check from our tax dollars. 

[Steve K (IA)]

It's a huge scam that enriches a small group of farmers,

Wrong.

Exactly.  The scam is being perpetuated by big oil.  They want it all.  The billions of tax dollars that our government gives them every year obviously isn't enough. 

Oil closed at $42.13/BBL today.  Yep, big oil is really in control!  BTW, do you have a clue who big oil is?  Here are the top 5:

1 - Saudi Aramco
2 - Gazprom
3 - National Iranian Oil
4 - ExxonMobil
5 - PetroChina

Note that 4 of 5 are GOVERNMENT oil companies.

Taxpayers currently subsidize the oil industry by as much as $4.8 billion a year, with about half of that going to the big five oil companies—ExxonMobil, Shell, Chevron, BP, and ConocoPhillips—which get an average tax break of $3.34 on every barrel of domestic crude they produce.

[Patrick]

The farming and agriculture industry now gets 90 billion of our tax dollars yearly.  I don't know how its divided up, but, farmers in my area get a piece of it and have been doing so as long as I can remember [ 60s]. It seems the larger the farm, the more they get.

At one time they were paid not to plant a percentage of their acreage. But, now the government sets the price they can sell their milk for and they mandate what and how much medication has to be in the dairy herd feed. This statement pertains to our state laws, I don't know about Fed requirements.

[Red Diamond]

Gentlemen, this is not a scam. When any of my bikes are low on fuel, I look for gas, any gas. Owned Valkyries for 13 years now, no carb, fuel line or peacock problems. Went over the Continental Divide and the power felt the same as it did in the flatlands of Texas, and that was on that low octane 85 stuff. Ethanol burns pretty good for me.

[hairyteeth]

Ethanol while not perfect replaced MTBE as an oxygentate for gasoline formulations. It's use has been critical in lowering smog levels. Is there something better for less? All of the etnanol plants that I'm aware of waste nothing and actually the brewers grain coming as a by product of ethanol still is animal feed. If you have ever seen the waste passed thru a steer from feeding corn... not real efficient.
Around me not many farmers want or need to be subsidized by the government, however not participating isn't an option either. In other words if I don't play the game and my neighbor does he can drive me out of business. The government feels a need to have this control over commodities saying it provides a way of ensuring food for Americans... not sure why Tobacco is on that list though. HT

[Bighead]

The farming and agriculture industry now gets 90 billion of our tax dollars yearly.  I don't know how its divided up, but, farmers in my area get a piece of it and have been doing so as long as I can remember [ 60s]. It seems the larger the farm, the more they get.

At one time they were paid not to plant a percentage of their acreage. But, now the government sets the price they can sell their milk for and they mandate what and how much medication has to be in the dairy herd feed. This statement pertains to our state laws, I don't know about Fed requirements.

They are still paying some farmers not to plant a percentage of their land. I have an uncle that has several plots that goes unplanted. One thing that bugs me about that is he can't even cut it for hay as they are paying him to not use this land. He can mow it but it can't be bailed and used for cattle.
( but sometimes it is )

[MP]

The farming and agriculture industry now gets 90 billion of our tax dollars yearly.  I don't know how its divided up, but, farmers in my area get a piece of it and have been doing so as long as I can remember [ 60s]. It seems the larger the farm, the more they get.

At one time they were paid not to plant a percentage of their acreage. But, now the government sets the price they can sell their milk for and they mandate what and how much medication has to be in the dairy herd feed. This statement pertains to our state laws, I don't know about Fed requirements.

They are still paying some farmers not to plant a percentage of their land. I have an uncle that has several plots that goes unplanted. One thing that bugs me about that is he can't even cut it for hay as they are paying him to not use this land. He can mow it but it can't be bailed and used for cattle.
( but sometimes it is )

Not quite right.  Sounds like the Conservation Reserve Program. The US wanted to set aside fragile lands.  They offered, in effect, to rent the land from the farmer for a period of time, and he has to abide by their rules.  It is not really being paid not to plant. You are being paid to keep grass on fragile lands to stop erosion.  You are required to mow some years, control weeds and erosion.

[MP]

The farming and agriculture industry now gets 90 billion of our tax dollars yearly.  I don't know how its divided up, but, farmers in my area get a piece of it and have been doing so as long as I can remember [ 60s]. It seems the larger the farm, the more they get.

At one time they were paid not to plant a percentage of their acreage. But, now the government sets the price they can sell their milk for and they mandate what and how much medication has to be in the dairy herd feed. This statement pertains to our state laws, I don't know about Fed requirements.

Haven't been "paid to not plant a percentage of their acreage" since the 80's.  Been gone a LONG time, yet it keeps resurfacing.  There are  very low subsidies available anymore for farmers.

The total 2015 USDA budget was $140 Billion.  Of that, 11% went to farm programs, or about $15 Billion.  A far cry from your $90 Billion to Farmers.  The vast majority of USDA budget goes to Food Stamps, WIC programs, etc.  NOT to farmers.

Source, USDA itself:

http://www.obpa.usda.gov/budsum/FY15budsum.pdf

You are off by a factor of 6X in your figures on how much farmers get.  And, of those dollars, only a small percentage are direct payments to farmers themselves.  Most is eaten up, as usual, by "overhead" of paying employees, office space, etc.

There is soooooo much misinformation out there among non farmers about what farmers do and do not "get".  Or, what the government REQUIRES them to do!

MP

[Bighead]

The farming and agriculture industry now gets 90 billion of our tax dollars yearly.  I don't know how its divided up, but, farmers in my area get a piece of it and have been doing so as long as I can remember [ 60s]. It seems the larger the farm, the more they get.

At one time they were paid not to plant a percentage of their acreage. But, now the government sets the price they can sell their milk for and they mandate what and how much medication has to be in the dairy herd feed. This statement pertains to our state laws, I don't know about Fed requirements.

They are still paying some farmers not to plant a percentage of their land. I have an uncle that has several plots that goes unplanted. One thing that bugs me about that is he can't even cut it for hay as they are paying him to not use this land. He can mow it but it can't be bailed and used for cattle.
( but sometimes it is )

Not quite right.  Sounds like the Conservation Reserve Program. The US wanted to set aside fragile lands.  They offered, in effect, to rent the land from the farmer for a period of time, and he has to abide by their rules.  It is not really being paid not to plant. You are being paid to keep grass on fragile lands to stop erosion.  You are required to mow some years, control weeds and erosion.

Call it what you will but they pay him not to plant it and there is nothing fragile about those lands at all.

[MP]

I am not calling it anything.  The US Federal Gov't named it. They are renting the land for Conservation purposes.  Why is that so nefarious?

[Ramie]

If you want to read a good book that deals with the effects of Government farm programs pick up this book. 
http://www.amazon.com/The-Time-It-Never-Rained/dp/0765360586
It's fiction but based on some real events.

[Firefighter]

Ethanol does not produce as much power as gasoline, so you can't get the mileage of 100% gasoline. Wait till they increase the ethanol percentage!
Same thing with natural gas. Our school district switched all it's bus fleet to natural gas, didn't take long to realize the loss of power/mileage, had to switch back.

[F6Dave]

Ethanol while not perfect replaced MTBE as an oxygentate for gasoline formulations. It's use has been critical in lowering smog levels.

'Oxygenated' gasoline may have made a bit of sense decades ago when we nearly all drove carbureted vehicles that tended to run rich.  MTBE and ethanol tended to lean these engines out a bit and may have cleaned the air a little.

Today's FI engines with onboard computers and O2 sensors on the manifolds completely compensate, and lean or richen the mixture as needed to feed the engine an ideal air/fuel ratio.

[Patrick]

The farming and agriculture industry now gets 90 billion of our tax dollars yearly.  I don't know how its divided up, but, farmers in my area get a piece of it and have been doing so as long as I can remember [ 60s]. It seems the larger the farm, the more they get.

At one time they were paid not to plant a percentage of their acreage. But, now the government sets the price they can sell their milk for and they mandate what and how much medication has to be in the dairy herd feed. This statement pertains to our state laws, I don't know about Fed requirements.

Haven't been "paid to not plant a percentage of their acreage" since the 80's.  Been gone a LONG time, yet it keeps resurfacing.  There are  very low subsidies available anymore for farmers.

The total 2015 USDA budget was $140 Billion.  Of that, 11% went to farm programs, or about $15 Billion.  A far cry from your $90 Billion to Farmers.  The vast majority of USDA budget goes to Food Stamps, WIC programs, etc.  NOT to farmers.

Source, USDA itself:

http://www.obpa.usda.gov/budsum/FY15budsum.pdf

You are off by a factor of 6X in your figures on how much farmers get.  And, of those dollars, only a small percentage are direct payments to farmers themselves.  Most is eaten up, as usual, by "overhead" of paying employees, office space, etc.

There is soooooo much misinformation out there among non farmers about what farmers do and do not "get".  Or, what the government REQUIRES them to do!

MP

I recently watched/heard the 90 billion figure on the news. I did a little looking after your response and you're right. The article I just looked at said 20 billion. Thats a ways off.
Sorry, I don't like posting wrong info. I appreciate your response. Don't get me wrong, I have a lot of respect for farmers, I live in dairy country.

[westnek]

hi riders =west here I'm glad I posted these ethanol  questions and want to thank everyone for the response [very interesting ] my  initial  thought on this was to use hi test and cut back on sea foam and other  carb and petcock maintenance cleaners if possible and  to also keep the fuel system cleaner = I appreciate every ones concern and knowledge on this subject ..    when storing bike over winter I will definitely fill  up tank with hi-test     non ethanol and periodically use  hi test  in the old girl ..again thank you  all so much  for your time and info  -ride safe all  =west

[salty1]

hi riders =west here I'm glad I posted these ethanol  questions and want to thank everyone for the response [very interesting ] my  initial  thought on this was to use hi test and cut back on sea foam and other  carb and petcock maintenance cleaners if possible and  to also keep the fuel system cleaner = I appreciate every ones concern and knowledge on this subject ..    when storing bike over winter I will definitely fill  up tank with hi-test     non ethanol and periodically use  hi test  in the old girl ..again thank you  all so much  for your time and info  -ride safe all  =west

I would use the high test and Seafoam when storing your bike. Even non-ethanol gasoline degrades. FWIW

[MP]

Ethanol does not produce as much power as gasoline, so you can't get the mileage of 100% gasoline. Wait till they increase the ethanol percentage!
Same thing with natural gas. Our school district switched all it's bus fleet to natural gas, didn't take long to realize the loss of power/mileage, had to switch back.

E10 has 96.7% of the energy value of pure gasoline.  So, you can see a 3.3% drop in fuel mileage.  If you are getting 30 mpg, your fuel mileage drop can be down to 29.01.  Very few can measure the drop from 30 to 29, except over a long period.  On any one tank, altitude, winds, speed, elevation changes have a far greater impact.