Two men’s opinions

-
Rat Bastid said:
Did you read the article?
Click to expand...
yes. When folks that have E-85 vehicles, such as mini-vans, the E-85 is cheaper to fill up, but gets worse gas mileage and the vehicle has less power. Gas eats a foam cup, we've known that for decades. But when a fuel system is made for that product, it lives fine. Years in fact. There is a list that can be argued, and I can ask "what changes have to be made to the mini van so it can burn E85 ?"
 
318willrun said:
yes. When folks that have E-85 vehicles, such as mini-vans, the E-85 is cheaper to fill up, but gets worse gas mileage and the vehicle has less power. Gas eats a foam cup, we've known that for decades. But when a fuel system is made for that product, it lives fine. Years in fact. There is a list that can be argued, and I can ask "what changes have to be made to the mini van so it can burn E85 ?"
Click to expand...
... and I'll follow ^^ this post up with Ethanol has less energy than gasoline, and also causes harder starts in cold weather, not to mention shelf life. The biggest advantages of ethanol you can run more timing and compression with knock.
 
318willrun said:
... and I'll follow ^^ this post up with Ethanol has less energy than gasoline, and also causes harder starts in cold weather, not to mention shelf life. The biggest advantages of ethanol you can run more timing and compression with knock.
Click to expand...


That’s why I said 20-30% not 85%.
 
Rat Bastid said:
That’s why I said 20-30% not 85%.
Click to expand...
I know, but I'm saying the symptoms are present, the % only dictates how much the symptoms pronounce. 10%, very mild... 30%, definitely more present, etc etc
 


Practical test shows some significant drawbacks to ethanol. Namely, corrosion during long term storage. Which we kind of know about.
 
Unless your running 12-14 to one with boost. Ethanol is a big nope for me.

Just the smell of it.... god..... it wont even wash off..


You wanna be around that?...
 
one thing to think on, is in the "old days", a car that sat for several years could be made to run off the "old gas" that was in it. Nowadays, seems folks are replacing gas tanks on cars that just sat a few years because of the junk inside.
 
318willrun said:
one thing to think on, is in the "old days", a car that sat for several years could be made to run off the "old gas" that was in it. Nowadays, seems folks are replacing gas tanks on cars that just sat a few years because of the junk inside.
Click to expand...

Right. That’s the additives in the fuel, not the ethanol.
 
Harley riders love our area, however, they always ask "where can I get non-ethanol gas?"
Harley-rider-stereotype.jpg
 
The "Gasoline vs Alcohol" discussion has been going on for over 100 years. Unfortunately both have pluses. Which means both have minuses. A blend does offer some compromise. But of course it's a sin to the Purist crowd.

The internal combustion engine was first designed to run on Alcohol. But when petroleum based fuels became more economically viable? That discussion went moot. But performance crowd knew ultimately that more managed power can be produced from Alcohol? It dominated the fuel of choice in racing for decades.

Today? With variable timing engines and today's quench control? Gasoline can compete in most formats. But there is a new player on the horizon.

EV is better than both. Electric torque curve is just flat out superior to that of any internal combustion design. The only problem? Storage. As a gas tank is energy storage for liquid fuel. Battery is for EV. The other problem with EV? It does lack the "Cool factor." It just isn't sexy. Silence is not always golden.

But in my humble opinion? It is going to win the future. Higher performance, lower maintenance costs and more efficient energy use. I know this scares many. But the future always has.
 
cojohnso said:
The "Gasoline vs Alcohol" discussion has been going on for over 100 years. Unfortunately both have pluses. Which means both have minuses. A blend does offer some compromise. But of course it's a sin to the Purist crowd.

The internal combustion engine was first designed to run on Alcohol. But when petroleum based fuels became more economically viable? That discussion went moot. But performance crowd knew ultimately that more managed power can be produced from Alcohol? It dominated the fuel of choice in racing for decades.

Today? With variable timing engines and today's quench control? Gasoline can compete in most formats. But there is a new player on the horizon.

EV is better than both. Electric torque curve is just flat out superior to that of any internal combustion design. The only problem? Storage. As a gas tank is energy storage for liquid fuel. Battery is for EV. The other problem with EV? It does lack the "Cool factor." It just isn't sexy. Silence is not always golden.

But in my humble opinion? It is going to win the future. Higher performance, lower maintenance costs and more efficient energy use. I know this scares many. But the future always has.
Click to expand...


I disagree. EV’s are not better. For anything. They are an environmental disaster.
 
318willrun said:
one thing to think on, is in the "old days", a car that sat for several years could be made to run off the "old gas" that was in it. Nowadays, seems folks are replacing gas tanks on cars that just sat a few years because of the junk inside.
Click to expand...
When I went with my best friend in high school to look at a 69 Chevelle he wanted, it had sat in a field since probably about 72. This was in either 80 or 81. We started that car and drove it home on the same gas, plugs, wires, cap, rotor and points it has in it. It actually ran pretty good. There's no doubt in my mind that ethanol destabilizes fuel. I also think though that it doesn't affect everyday vehicles like it does small engines that might sit for longer periods.
 
Rat Bastid said:
That’s not from ethanol.
Click to expand...

Then what's it from? The BTEX are still there, the only variable is the ethanol. If it wasn't, the "pure" non ethanol would have done as bad or worse. Any amount of water added made things worse, and ethanol cannot be kept dry even under lab conditions, it quickly absorbs at least 4.4% water by volume.

It's not that I think I know for sure, but none of the article explained it clear enough and the rest of the internet has even less trustworthy info..
 
Rat Bastid said:
I disagree. EV’s are not better. For anything. They are an environmental disaster.
Click to expand...
Lithium has been problematic. But that's just the battery of choice today. Next generation has far more storage capacity. Charge time efficient and far less environmentally impactful. The problem today? They're not yet economically viable. (There is that word again? It's always the ultimate factor.) But they will be. Grandma's grocery getter easily out performing our beloved muscle. Today's muscle also out performed.
 
cojohnso said:
Lithium has been problematic. But that's just the battery of choice today. Next generation has far more storage capacity. Charge time efficient and far less environmentally impactful. The problem today? They're not yet economically viable. (There is that word again? It's always the ultimate factor.) But they will be. Grandma's grocery getter easily out performing our beloved muscle. Today's muscle also out performed.
Click to expand...

What's the next generation? So far, nothing is even within an order of magnitude of chemical fuels.

I'd rather use photosynthesis to make ethanol than use toxic solar panels to turn 20% of that sun into 30% transmission losses and 50% thermal loss going into and out of a battery...
 
Phreakish said:
Then what's it from? The BTEX are still there, the only variable is the ethanol. If it wasn't, the "pure" non ethanol would have done as bad or worse. Any amount of water added made things worse, and ethanol cannot be kept dry even under lab conditions, it quickly absorbs at least 4.4% water by volume.

It's not that I think I know for sure, but none of the article explained it clear enough and the rest of the internet has even less trustworthy info..
Click to expand...
That's always been a problem with alcohol. Almost needs sealed systems? But that of course is not easily consumer friendly functional.
 
cojohnso said:
That's always been a problem with alcohol. Almost needs sealed systems? But that of course is not easily consumer friendly functional.
Click to expand...

Brazil apparently has a good system, but in sure they deal with some amount of moisture content. High and frequent turnover with very short storage times and short transit distances for the finished fuels would seem to the systemic fixes. Not sure how we could do that in the USA when no one wants anything remotely industrial in their neighborhood, no matter the facts.
 
over 2/3 of the planet is water, and water never goes away. time to burn steam or hydrogen :)
 
Phreakish said:
What's the next generation? So far, nothing is even within an order of magnitude of chemical fuels.

I'd rather use photosynthesis to make ethanol than use toxic solar panels to turn 20% of that sun into 30% transmission losses and 50% thermal loss going into and out of a battery...
Click to expand...
Toxic solar panels? Lol. What is toxic? Burning of fossil fuels. The list of compounds and complex toxic molecules created is more that can be listed. (Or even pronounced)

I know it's scary. Same fears Henry Ford heard from the horse and buggy crowd. But it's the future.

But this thread is not to argue the EV. It's Alcohol vs Gasoline. And I'm not sure sure any blend is in the future? At least for daily use?
 
318willrun said:
over 2/3 of the planet is water, and water never goes away. time to burn steam or hydrogen :)
Click to expand...

Photosynthesis will always beat solar panels for efficiency. Solar electrolysis isn't as green as one would think. The waste from purifying sea water is atrocious. Just ask Australia.

My bet is on gmo algea making biofuel in the long term.
 
cojohnso said:
Toxic solar panels? Lol. What is toxic?
Click to expand...

Look up pm2.5 emissions that come from making the materials that produce the panels, or wind mills for that matter. More cancer per unit energy than the dirtiest fossil fuels.

But sure, keep up the delusions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top