Over the past four years ethanol has been making its way to our fuel distributors, being sold as E10. It is a colourless alcohol, the same as in alcoholic drinks and is manufactured from grain or sugar. The CSIRO has calculated that an E10 blend cuts overall greenhouse emissions by around 3 per cent. However it’s more costly than petrol to produce and requires special storage facilities. Testing shows that fuel consumption increases by 3-4 per cent when using an E10 blend.
10 per cent ethanol mixed with petrol should not affect the majority of vehicles on our roads. The motor industry’s website advises which cars can use E10, E5 or no ethanol at all. All vehicles manufactured before 1986 are recommended not to use ethanol.
Ethanol is currently rebated at the normal fuel excise, but the rebate will be phased out over 5 years from 2011*, by which time the industry is expected to have reduced the costs of production.
*please note: straight unleaded 91 octane petrol will now be phased out in NSW by 1 July 2012. Vehicles not able to use ethanol will then use premium 95 octane petrol.
What’s your experience with E10? Is your car cheaper to run overall and has E10 had any effect – good or not so good – on your car’s performance or reliability?
Whilst we are talking about petrol, I recently read an article in the Herald that stated that one of the African Nations is running very short of water because 90% of water is being used to irrigate a “medicinal” crop. The irrigation pumps are fueled with Diesel that costs only 17 cents a litre. Thats right only 17 cents a litre. Now who is being ripped off by the fuel companies and the Government? What did you pay for your fuel this week, $1.50+?
I enquired and found out that cars made after 1986 including the 1988 volvo that I had at the time were OK to run on 10% ethanol.
After the fuel came through the line the car ran very roughly both missing and using more petrol than before.
I could not wait to finish what was in the tank and get back to normal.
Due to this experience I would never consider using e10 again on any vehicle.
I have a 1996 VS Commodore and tested ethanol fuel in my car. After running ethanol the fuel economy improved. I continued with it and over several tanks had an improvement of close to 1.5 km/L! I am in the country and the run to work is a 75km round trip so the savings is great. The car runs perfectly and as a test changed back to normal unleaded and the economy did not change.
Have you ever run your finger in your exhaust and ended up with a black finger? Not with ethanol, my exhaust is clean as a whistle. I attribute the improvement in fuel economy to the ethanol fuel cleaning the carbon out of my engine and exhaust.
My wife has an 2003 Magna and running ethanol in it did not see an improvement in fuel economy however like the VS the exhaust was clear of carbon. Being newer with lower km’s the engine would not have had the same carbon deposits thus not gaining the same improvement. Like the VS after the ethanol cleaned it out either fuel returned the same economy.
Long and short I am sticking with ethanol. I certainly surprised me.
VN serII commodore loves E10.
Runs better and gets up to 100k’s a tank full more on the freeway.
Too bad the price search thing in MyNRMA doesn’t work properly!
That is one of the only benefits I would use from being a NRMA member.
I have car that requires RON 95 fuel a Mazda SP20 (never again). First batch of E10 it ran a little rough, subsequent tanks have been okay. The fuel economy from my reckoning isn’t as good, it around 5% less km from a tank.
I recently tried E10 (out of necessity, due to the lack of both premium and normal petrol) in my 1983 BMW 323i. I normally use 95-98 octane premium due to the lack of leaded fuel, as my car needs the added octane to compensate for the lead. (valve recession is apparently not a problem in these cars… or so I’ve been told) on the E10 my car ran particularly poorly with lots of pinging (bad) therefore needing more revs on take-off to off set this, result being much worse economy. I will stick to premium, while I can still afford it…
Would I use ethanol in my car?? Forget it.
To save a lousy few cents a litre, with the possibility of doing my car no good & for what? a feel good feeling about the environment? No way.
If it was 10-15 cents cheaper, i might think about it.
We are being hoodwinked by the greeny climate change brigade.
Give me my premium fuel anytime.
I have used shell and caltex E10 (mostly caltex) in a Holden Statesman WL 5.7 litre and have not noticed any performance or fuel economy penalty. I keep records for the leasing arrangement over the last 2 years. I have also used caltex e10 in a motorcycle (Honda ST1100 V4 1996 model, carburetor) and have not notoced any performance or fuel economy penalty. Interestingly in the motorcycle I have noticed more difference in fuel economy from chnaging petrol brands than using E10.
I just heard that NSW unleaded is now required to be E5. Is that correct? Is the same fuel sold in ACT?
I’ve been using E10 in my ’99 Holden Rodeo 3.2lV6 for a number of years. For some reason Caltex E10 and United E10 results in 40-60Km extra per tank load and I actively try and refill with it if I’m near an available outlet. Other suppliers don’t seem to give the same results. In fact I noticed no real improvement from their E10 compared to basic unleaded.
I have a 2004 camry Sportivo 2.4 litre and it runs great on E10, We had a older Mitsubishi Magna with the Astron 2.6 engine and that vechile did not like it at all as it would back fire at travel along freeways ect for no reason at all .
I drove from Bathurst to Sydney and return 3 times a week over the past 5 years. I found that E10 worked well for my 1999 Outback. I thought with all the hullaballoo that it maybe could have been cheaper than it was. I also used the high octane ethanol which was about as much per litre as regular unleaded. It certainly made a difference to the power and kilometerage of my faithful Subaru.
I have a 2006 Peugeot Cabriolet, and always put Premium fuel in religously. A friend that owns a petrol station recommended I try Ethanol, said he has a few cuistomers with prestige cars that use it. Thought if its good for them why not me. Not only is my car running smoother, but much more fuel efficient and saving up to 10 cents a litre. Better in my pocket than the fuel companies.
Have run E10 in my ’92 V6 Pajero and notice a degrade in performance and an increase in cents per KM but attribute this to the rising cost of petrol over all. Stuck with E10 due to lower percieved environmental costs
I have been using E10 in my 1990 Nissan utility without any problems for the last 2 years. Other than a slight increase in fuel consumption I have experienced no adverse effects. I will continue to use ethanol blends.
I run my Saab 93 Aero, when possible, on ethanol blend fuel (E10 95 octane and United’s E10 98 octane – when I can get it!)
It almost always runs smoother and is more responsive, and I can’t say I’ve noticed any particular change in fuel consumption. I haven’t check the colour of the tailpipe after running a tank, but might do after some of the other comments here.
My observation is that most service stations charge a lower price for E10 (some, but not all!), and 98 octane E10 is not easy to get with United being about the only place I can find it (note – I believe Shell’s V-power Racing 100 octane fuel is also E10; not that you’d think so at 20c per litre more!!)
I’ll certainly continue using it.
I tried E10 in my Prius a couple of times (well I would, wouldn’t I?) and found E10′s poor efficiency more than outweighed any cost savings. Worse than that, consumption was so bad it meant I was pumping more regular, non-renewable petrol into my tank as part of the E10 mix. I calculated a saving of about 3 percent in price, offset by using at least 15% more fuel. With E10, that meant I was using about 13% more non-renewable petrol. It didn’t make sense either economically or environmentally. A Prius, on the other hand …
My 05 Subaru Outback returns 0.4 to 0.6 L/100Km WORSE economy.
I have tried it about 6 tanks to be sure but a saving of 3 cents per litre for
a return worse than regular unleaded doesn’t add up economically.
I fill each week at about 58 litres so I save $1.74. I travel each week, around 550Km and on E10 get 9.4l/100 but on regular, get about 8.8 to 9.0/100. That equates to using an extra 3.3 litres and at $1.34/L, I am $2.68 WORSE OFF. I don’t use it any more. If it was 10c/L cheaper, I would reconsider.
I’ve been using Shell E10 for some months now in my 2001 Holden Vectra 2.2 litre. No negatives as far as I can tell and economy seems to be marginally better.The only problem has been consistent out of stock at my local station.
I have been using E10 for awhile in a 2000 Lancer without any problems – actually fuel consumption is better.
On our trips around Australia we have also used it in our 1993 Mitsubishi L300 with no problems and again better fuel consumption.
My problem now is actually being able to purchase it when I want to – several service stations in the Wollongong area have been out on Monday, Tuesday & Wednesday last week & this week – you do have to wonder?????
E10 fuel is not cost effective ( 3cent saving for a 4% loss in economy), so I won’t use it.
Enviromentally it might be good, however I won’t contribute to the petroleum companies profit by paying more for the E10 fuel.
I use high octane E10 on long trips in my 2004 Holden Astra. Performance and economy are good, perhaps better. The car seems to ‘like it’; it seems to clear its throat.
I’d need to be reassured that it could sit idle, particularly in hot humid conditions, with no side-effects.
i have used e10 in my 98 explorer for about 2 months. in that time my car completely stopped working & had to be towed to a mechanic.
the problem being the computer was adjusting to the different oil mix required & it threw the system out completely. it had to be completely reset. apparently my vehicle should only be run on 95+ rom. my wife drives a hyundai excel & when she uses ep10 she has noticed that the car shudders while at idle. i think i will stick to the premium fuel. more costly at the bowser but cheaper mechanically.
use e 10 in my hyundai,vandguard, and rideon mower . all vehicles run well, start easy, elandra 8L 100 vanguard 10L100 COX 2.5HOURS to tank elandra 65000 k vanguard 49years ?miles mower12years still on original plug and cutting 2 acres .happy user of ethanol blend.
I have been using United 95 octane E10 in my new 07 Territory whenever possible and have been pleased with the results. I get the impression that it runs smoother and more economically than with 91 ULP, and I save a little money. However I tried a tank of Shell’s 91 octane E10 and the car did not seem to run as well.
I drive about 1000 kms a week in the city and the country
My V6 VE Commodore does run noticably better on the 95 Octane E10. probably becuase its on LPG as well the E10 does not loose its ‘bang’ as quickly as normal 91 octane. I noticed that Woolies 91 octane made the car run poorly (when on -petrol) after a few weeks of being in the tank. So dont use Woolies any more. Get my petrol from opne of the E10 outlets while on petrol its noticably better.
I would only be buying E10 where its 95 octane so am dissapointed that Shell took the opportunity to dilute their E10 to 91 RON – essentially its a poorer fuel than any comparable. Bad move shell.
i thought e10 was 3cents cheaper than ulp . not so at all garages in kirrawee nsw. only 2.50 more than ulp . no ones going to buy e 10 @ 2.5cents when uyou can get 4 cents off these garages ulp prices @ woolworths & coles/shell outlets. what happened to petrol policeing?…eh.
I’ve had three vastly different cars recently and tried different fuel in all. Firstly in my 92 EB Fairmont. Depending on where I filled up seemed to vary. woolies e10 was the worst, shell was no different to normal unleaded but united e10 made the car run smoother and more efficiently. Then i bought a slightly older Peugeot. It Hated it and ran rougher than normal with less performance and economy. Now I have a VT Calais. I ran it religiously on e10 untill I had it converted to LPG. The company which installed the converter advised me from not putting in e10 as it doesn’t store well and can sit in the tank for some time. That is the only reason that I still don’t use it and if I have another petrol only car will return to using e10.
All cars seem to respond differently to the various fuels, but I’ve found United’s 95 octane E-10 a good choice for my 1994 Liberty. Other E-10s with 91-92 octane ratings give poor consumption figures and lacklustre low speed engine performance.
Metro advertises its E-10 as “Max” but my email enquiry as to the source and octane rating was not responded to – can anyone shed some light on Metro’s product? I think “Max” maybe short for “Max Con”.
If your car uses premium, then United’s may be the only viable E-10.
you can buy a car that is factory ready for alcohol fuel. In some states (mostly in the Midwest) you can buy E85 (85% ethanol, 15% gasoline). The cars these days are made with variable fuel injection technology, which measures the oxygenate content of the fuel (since alcohol, ETOH, contains an oxygen molecule which makes it burn more efficiently when the timing and air/fuel mix are appropriately adjusted by a computer chip that is factory installed.
In fact, over 2 million cars per year in the USA already are set up to run on E85, and no one told us about this. The oil companies know that oil reserves are dwindling, so the technology is gradually adapting. Experts in the ethanol industry predict 20% of the cars will be fueled by ethanol in just 6 to 8 years (and with ethanol production increasing by 12%/yr., we have the capacity to do this.)
E85 is 102 octane. It burns clean and is better for the engine because it burns cooler, with less carbon buildup.
I find it remarkable that everyone is squabbling over a few cents per litre of fuel and nobody is talking about the hike in food prices. According to many recent studies, including one by the United States Department of Agriculture food prices are going through the roof because of ethanol production; see the following link: http://www.technologyreview.com/read_article.aspx?ch=specialsections&sc=biofuels&id=18173&a=
Both oil and agricultural products are scarce resources. If demand increases and supply doesn’t the price goes up. That is the market place at work not a corporate conspiracy where companies are ripping consumers off.
Oil prices are rising because the demand from a booming world economy (mostly as a result of china) is outstripping the increase in supply. To increase the supply of refined oil, billions of dollars need to be invested in refineries etc. This investment takes time and as result, there will always be a lag in the time that it takes supply to catch up to demand. This will mean that prices will rise in the interim.
In the longer term prices will fall because oil companies invest not for just current demand but for tomorrows demand. So lower oil prices will come once the new old refineries are on-line.
But what about ethanol? Ethanol is made from sugar cane, corn syrup and other agricultural products. All of these are scarce resources and have limited supply. If the demand for ethanol increases but the supply of sugar cane and corn doesn’t then the price of food is going to increase. I wonder… when this happens does mean that the farmers are ripping everybody off?
So next time you save 3 cents a litre by filling your car up with E10 take a look at the price of corn or sugar and other food products. Ask yourself are food prices going up?
Also ask yourself what will happen to the price of E10 the next time we have a drought. The answer… demand for E10 will stay the same but because of the drought there will be a shortage of supply. The price of E10 will increase and we won’t only have high E10 prices but we will also have high food prices. At the moment droughts have no impact on the price of fuel.
Wrong Wrong Wrong, Ethanol is created by Using left overs from making sugar/corn etc. And will soon be made from Rubbish.
Food prices are going up due to world demand for it not because of ethanol.
The only reason I support Ethanol is because we don’t have to rely on the Middle East by 10% for oil and get involved in Endless wars, also the fact that some of the money funds extreme groups. If only every car was flex fuel 100% i would pay extra on food prices if what ur saying is true, as long as the middle east starves of money i am happy. Peace may never be with him
I have been using Ethanol fuel in my 1989 pulsar for about 2 years now and use it when ever i can get some (which you can’t get in Wagga). I have noticed about an extra 10% kms per tank and also a significant reduction in the smell! now when ever I have to use standard I get revolted by the smell of the fuel.
Brazil seem to be doing okay…
I have a 1994 Peugeot 307 and usually use 95 or 98 Premuim unleaded. I find that the economy with the ethanol petrol is lower. 98 Premium petrol is more expensive to buy that’s for sure but when you look at how many kms you get for a tank it actually costs no more. Putting cheaper ethanol petrol in my tank is an illusion of economy.
Jennifer
I have been using E10 for the last 6 months, when I can get it. My local Shell seems to always have a sign saying it is out of E10 and they have many excuses from, it’s hard to get to it requires special filters and we can’t get them.
I have found that using Shell E10 (mostly for other outlets) I actually get better consumption. I have a 2006 Honda Civic 1.8L. My best consumption on 92 is 6.9L/100 – 95 is 6.7L/100 – E10 is 6.3L/100, all done on country trips.
I wish Shell would get serious about fixing the supply issues. I have had no problems closer to the city in obtaining E10. I live at Penrith.
Does anyone have experience with using Shell V-Power Racing (100 Octane, 5% ethanol) in a BMW, specifically a X5 4.4i. The guys at BMW Sydney say it is not recommended because of the ethanol content, but I have found smoother running, noticeably more power and elimination of pinging. However, will it damage the engine in the long-term?
ive used E10 out of necessity and experiment a few times
and every time it has been negative
i drive a honda CRV 2007, which states that E10 is alright but:
-it shudders(knocks) when idling
-drop in performance
-drop in milage
i heard it cleans ur engine but ruins your engine over a longer period of time?
i would rather an extra 4c per litre than a major costly service
I have a motor scooter, its very economical. 5 litre tank does you about 60 or 70 kilometers. I recently on near empty tank filled up with E10 and wow what a difference. Its just feels better to ride. It starts everytime with a broooom. I use to use unleaded and always had problems with it starting etc. Its smoother and only cost $3 to fill up.
N
Dont use E10 on scooters, its not Advised by any manufacture. It will ruin ur fuel lines cos its carby. Not also that but E10 runs hotter and scooters are aircooled which means ur overheating ur engine. Sooner or later the seals will give up.
If u have a GY6 engine chinese scooter expect to break down after 4000kms (check forums).
Premium 98 fuel is the only option for you, even though it will cause a little backfire due to unburned fuel, but you can change ur jet and airfilter and exhaust to avoid the bottleneck
I have a Commodore VT, 1997. Since using E10 fuel consumption has increased. (Was getting 10km/l, now 7km/l). Engine running rough and getting hard to start. No thanks, to hell with the environment. Global warming and carbon trading is a “Business” not a threat.
We run a fleet of hiace vans and all drivers report poorer performance with E10. We also find our private cars, a Toyota Rav 4 and a Hyundai Getz are sluggish if we use E10. Havn’t done a fuel consumption study but I hear you lose 3% consumption. Whats more important is the effect it has on food production. Personally we don’t want to be responsible for contributing to global famine so we’ve decided to give the E10 a miss.
My ’03 Pathfinder goes well on E10 and our ’03 Peugeot 307 also runs OK on it. Bit worried about the Pug though, as it should run on PULP. The Nissan does 18l/100 around town on ULP and is doing 19l/100 on E10. The Pug is doing 14l/100 around town, which is high for a small car.
Having read thru all the postings I have decided not to try E10 on my Hyundai Getz for the following main reasons
1. The use of biofuels (ethanol) seems unjustifiable in a world where so many go starving.
2. The initial cost saving seems more than likely to be offset by a loss of fuel economy thus resulting in equivalent or greater pollution.
The ones that are starving are having 4-8 kids due to religion choice.
And by using E10 i support less of those countries that produce oil to fund extremists.
I know global warming idea is a scam to move away from oil, but i support that scam due to reason i cant mention here but u get my drift.
“The CSIRO has calculated that an E10 blend cuts overall greenhouse emissions by around 3 per cent. [and]… Testing shows that fuel consumption increases by 3-4 per cent when using an E10 blend.”
So if you reduce greenhouse gasses by 3% and then increase fuel consumption by 3-4% What’s the bloody difference?
I don’t see why you would bother.
On average I find E10 about 2% cheaper and if you are using 3-4% more the same argument applies. Not better for the environment and not better for your wallet.
You increase the consumption of E10 over E10 not.
So even if E10 was 5% consumption
lets take 100ltr tank
90 ULP + 10 E10 = 5% consumption more
100 ULP = 3%
Do the math for the enviroment its better but not for ur pocket
I am dumbfounded that the govt plans to eliminate unleaded by 2011 . I have checked the Caltex and Shell websites for my vehicles. they both reger me to the Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries website. this website tells me not to use e10 in 2 of my 3 cars. these cars are just 10years old. are we all expected to change over our cars. the other option after 2011 will be ULP premium at approx 10cents a litre dearer. in my opinion, this change will affect drivers worse than the removal of super fuel. the FCAI website lists a lot of current, reasonably young cars, that are not recommended to run on e10
I have tried E10 & the fuel consumption was very/very heavy. I had run from SYDNEY to PORT McQUARIE & back to just before BULLADELAH where the computer said i should get to within 10/20 ks from home on the tank of fuel. I was using 8.2 lts/100ks at the time. I wanted to go thru PORT STEPHEN so i put in $50 E10 at the caltex garage just before BULLADELAH. I used the $50 plus what was in the tank to get me home.
Therefore it cost me between $50 & $75 to get home via PORT STEPHENS from BULLADELAH. The use of E10 is useless & not greener as reported, because you use so much more fuel for the same distance = more pollution. A reply would be appreciated.
hmmm, i probably wouldnt use ethanol fuels , i work in a servive station, and we water test ,the fuel daily, water in the fuel causes the ethanol to seperate from the fuel, and float to the top which then becomes unuseable,and unsellable,so basicly if you get water inside your fuel tank and your using ethanol fuels the same rule would apply , good luck!
Pingback: Premium Gas? - Page 4 - IH8MUD.com
Have just paid $1000 to have a new airflow metre fitted because added E10 ethanol to our 2005 Vectra V6 even though manual and petrol cap says its accceptable. Dealer says these are European protocols not Australian!
I was wondering about switching over to ethanol for my 2000 rav4, or would that damage my engine? If not ethanol what other fuel alternative could i switch to?
I’ve been using E10 95octane in my ’85 VK commodore and the car loves the stuff!! Normal 91 octane just makes it ‘ping’. The car has been running on it for about 4 years now with no problems at all.
I am old enough to remember when Brake Fluid was a vegetable based product and it absorbed moisture causing Rust Pitting in the master cylinder etc. I can thank Jason 24/10/1009 for his reference to Water in the E10 petrol storage tanks which seems to support Ethonal attracting moisture. There are other references to rough engine performance which also suggests water in the Fuel.
I used it in my hyundia getz and it cost me 500 dollars to get repaired . THE problem is that it rusted my fuel tank because it is hydoscopic that means it attracks water. mind you i was putting it in my tank by mistake.i will never use it .I WILL PAY A LITTLE EXTRA AND YOU get better fuel mileage.
My toyota 2008 hiace loaded with tools uses 12lt\100klms running ethanol,
but I get 9.9lt\100klms with caltex vortex so i try to aviod ethanol at all costs.
I happen to test fuel stations for leaks, and the ethanol eats up the tank cap gaskets, the alloy tank caps, the pump and meter internals, non of which were manufactured for ethanol , and I am finding some of the older sites with corrosion holes in their steel fuel lines probably due to ethanol, this is going to add extra costs to the sites who I am sure will pass them on to consumers.
The NSW State Gov’t in its greater wisdom, which means that it will cost us the taxpayers more, has decided to do away with normal ulp. They state that the reason is because itas a greener fuel and therefore more beneficial to yhe community at large. What they have failed to tell us is that they have done a deal with the ethanol producer which sees then rake more money into the state coffers the more ethanol is used.
I have two vehicles, both listed as being able to run on e10. One doesn’t mind although I loose about 15% in economy, the second coughs and splutters beyond belief and halves its current litres per 100 klms.
The second problem no one has thought about is the flash point of ethanol. It is a lot lower than petrol. Once mixed then all your fuel has the same lower flashpoint. Could this be the reason why so many cars are exploding and catching on fire.
Ethanol also attracts moisture so we can expect to see more water related problems in fuel. And dont forget motorists fuel expnads in the heat, fill up early mornings or cold days to get a more realistic litre for your hard earned money. The Federal Gov’t charges tax on an ambient temp of fuel not on what comes out at the pump
I have just learned from a letter in the latest NRMA magazine that there will be no more plain unleaded petrol from 1 July 2011, only E10 unleaded. Having a 1999 Ford Laser, I contacted Ford for their opinion, and they replied that E10 would be unsuitable for my particular model.
So, what do I do? The car is still in very good nick and I don’t really want to shell out $10,000 + for a replacement car.
I have been told by a friend (not by Ford – yet) that it “might be ok” to use premium petrol. If so, even paying the higher price per litre would be cheaper than buying another car, as I only do about 10,000 km per year.
If not, does anyone have any suggestions?
I own a 1989 Pajero and it’s a ripper… well looked after and runs like a clock.
Now I am distressed to be informed that I will not be able to use E10 fuel when the old unleaded is stopped in mid 2011….
What do I do?… just scrap a perfectly roadworthy vehicle?
What can I do to it to allow me to use E10 fuel? I have been told that there is no conversion kit to achieve this…. anybody know?
There are several problems with forcing people to use ethanol in fuel. The first is that land and water currently used to produce food for humans will be increasingly converted to produce these biofuels. Not such a problem for the affluent and overfed developed nations, but definitely one for the poorer nations because fuel companies will make ethanol where it is the cheapest – which means in developing nations where land and labor is cheap. Think this will help the developing nations? Think again – they don’t own the fuel companies….
Next, it will not be usable in older vehicles – meaning that perfectly good vehicles will become unusable. The problem here is that CO2 and other emissions are much higher in the year that a vehicle is produced, distributed and sold than in any other year of the vehicle’s life. This means that every new vehicle made to replace a perfectly good but no longer usable one contributes a whole bunch more of CO2 to the atmosphere (which could have been put off until the old vehicle had finally worn out). Even worse, the average vehicle sold today is larger, heavier and use more resources to build than those of 20 and 30 years ago. So, by forcing people to junk perfectly good older cars and but new ones we are making the environmental problem worse.
Wake up folks, keep your old car as long as you can, and write to your local Federal member demanding that this stupid law phasing out non-ethanol petrol be repealed.
Havent tried the E10 yet as I’ve done the maths and it hasn’t been worth it yet, some of the comments on the 96VS commodore’s make me think it may be a good idea though in my 93 VR wagon. I’ve got LPG in my commodore and get 11-12lt/100km out of it and the unleaded/E10 is only a back up in case I run out of LPG. Recently drove from Armidale Northern NSW to Luddenham Sydney on 1 tank of LPG downhill most of the way (55 Lts), then from Pennant hills rd where the M2 meets it to the Armidale Airport on 57lts (Uphill). Why spend $1.36/lt on Petrol for 10lt/100km when .72c/lt LPG gets me 1 to 2lt /100km less economy. And I wasn’t kind on the hills either. Have heard that while less volumetrically efficient in filling the engine LPG can go up to 120 octane, never a problem running it and no difference on the highway, 381000kms on the engine and still going strong! Switch to LPG folks
Can I use ethanol mixed fuel in my Vt Commodore
I have reqularily used E10 and regular unleaded in my 2007 Nissan Xtrail. My car has recently become hard to start. Nissan claims because I have used E10 fuel in my car! They told me to use Premium fuel to clean all the E10 out of the car. The car is now fine from using Premium for about a month! So don’t use E10 it will damage your car!
I only started using E10 recently and have noticed a significant difference in my fuel consumption (BMW r1100gs motorcycle) it dropped from a regular 320km per tank to less than 280km/ tank…The engine seems to idle a lot more erratically as well.
I’m not sold….A Current Affair used to chase down petrol station owners who added ethanol to petrol stocks like they were thieves in the night, and now the government is mandating it’s use.
As for it being better for the environment, well what it saves in lowered total carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, sulfur emissions, and particulate matter – we make up for with increased formaldehyde and acetaldehyde emissions.
Some will tell you it’s cheaper to produce, but those figures are usually based on only part of the production costs.
It’s certainly not better for your engine…and because ethanol attracts water particles from the air, I can only imagine the state of most petrol tanks after a few years of use.
So the only real winners are big business and the government who are making a fortune while they have us believe that it’s all better for the environment and our pockets…..not bloody likely.
I havn’t used E10 yet because I don’t think it’s the right way to go. Reasons (a) the energy in ethanol (29.7kJ per gram) is significantly less than that in petrol (47.9 kJ per gram) (b) ethanol absorbs water and (c) it uses almost as much energy to make it as it contains so where’s the environmental value?
10% Less wars in the Middle East! Enviromentally friendly by not sending so many soldiers
I feel extremely outraged that I won’t be given the option of which fuel I will use in my vehicle. I have a friend who is a mechanic and he has seen many vehicles succumbing to the serious and expensive side effects of using E10 petrol, he tells me emphatically not to use it as it just is not worth it to use this rubbish in your car. I want the right to choose!
E10 is a great fuel for your car and is comparatively environmental friendly. Only in Australia do you find the car clubs in bed with the oil industry trying to bad mouth it. Just look at the world picture and you will see the truth. Brazil, Europe, USA and even New Zealand use it and their cars are still on the road and running fine. Brazil even uses E85 and in some cases 100% ethanol. You don’t hear them winging and going on like the backward looking Australian mob. Ethanol definitely burns cleaner and will disperse water and not attract it as some have stated here. In the past before E10 was available it was recommended to use methylated spirits in your fuel tank if you suspected water in the fuel line to disperse it. Guess what? Methylated spirits is Ethanol. Go Green, Go Ethanol. E10 foever!!!
Europe? Umm no i , go to Greece every year and Czech every 2 years, never seen ethanol in any of those 2 nations. By Europe u mean the UK?
I checked the FCAI website and Honda motorcycles are listed as unsuitable for E10. I have a 2009 Honda m/c. If something goes wrong then I suspect my warranty is blown. The government will not pick up the bill. Ethanol is a good thing when used appropriately, but we should have choice.
If ethanol disperses water why do NAScar pit crews use water to extinguish a fire……because it absorbs water and will not burn.
I recently used e10 in my 99 BMW 523i 2.5l on trip from Sydney to Melbourne. I could not tell the difference in performance or economy (compared to my trip from Melbourne to Sydney ) . I had a fully loaded car and was able to do a 800km journey on 1 tank of fuel (computer showing 7.6 l /100 )
If your engine is in good condition then there should be no problem in using it.
I believe that all fuel will be e10 in the next few years.
Independent research has confirmed that when comparing the same car over the same route though using regular unleaded vs E85, the E85 was 25-30% less efficient or essentially the car used almost 1/3rd more ethanol. This additional fuel usage makes the environmental benefit negligible.
Then consider the amount of energy, fertiliser, water (It takes 3 litres of water to produce 1 litre of Ethanol) and good arable land to grow the crops to create Ethanol the benefits quickly turn to disadvantages.
Then consider the fact that using land for growing fuel will mean our food supply will be competing with ethanol farms for space which will push up the price of food. We already wonder how we will feed the planets people without wasting our land to “grow” fuel.
Then lets consider the fact that its scientifically proven to ATTRACT and absorb water so if its poorly stored (as many underground tanks in service station are poorly sealed) it will create significant issues in car engines due to water content in fuel.
Then its also proven to be a cleaning agent which means that old tanks at service stations with built up deposits that would otherwise stay stuck in the tank will be dissolved into the fuel and contaminate your cars engine. This will also be the case for any deposits in your fuel tank which will then find their way through your engine causing further damage.
So the environmental benefit is marginal (at best) to worse when you consider the impact of growing it, then there are significant issues to many car engines.
We should continue to use the fuel that is still readily available whilst developing electric cars. Given the pace we have seen electric/hybrid cars develop in the last 5 yrs, it will not take long before they are a viable alternative and dabbling in ethanol will clearly be more destructive than beneficial.
This is just another scam being pushed onto us by “special interest groups” without sufficient benefit to justify all the negative issues.
In September/October issue of Open Road, page 37 was an Advertorial item by NSW government: Biofuels in NSW. This is at odds with most of the above comments.
I believe the NRMA should research where the truth lies with ethanol together with a table showing which cars will safely use E10. For the cars unsuitable for E10, it be good idea to list their % makeup of registered cars in NSW.
This article should be published in the Open Road & on your website ASAP as it may be important for NRMA members to know & understand if E10 will impact their hip pockets before the next state election.
I have recently experienced leaking petrol tank problems in my motorcycle due to Ethanol attacking sealing products which have been quite satisfactory in the past. As my machine is 13 years old I have now taken the precaution of changing all the fuel lines and O rings using Viton material. No publicity or information was ever given by the Petroleum companies here inBritain warning of possible problems in their efforts to appear GREEN all that has been deliberatelly ignored.
I ran a 1999 Th magna for 3 years on nothing but E10 untill I sold it and the car ran fine average 10/l per 100kms on highway runs and sometimes 9.4l per 100kms .The car was checked by the R.a.c before sale they gave the car a clean bill of health. Maybe some of the station that others got their fuel from had old tanks as I have had many problems with water in normal unleaded from older stations which I now don’t use
I am a motor mechanic now 57 years Old and have been involved with Fuel injection for over 25 years. We have the answer to Ethanol problems which involves using our INTERJECT fuel system chemicals in the tank just once every 3 months as it will remove the water harmlessly and allow it to be burnt in the combustion chamber. This prevents the Ethanol (which is just basically a crude alchohol fuel which attracts the water to itself, but has no protection and will cause fuel rusting) causing any problems in the fuel system.
We also do not recommend Ethanol in older cars (with Carburettors) and using Premium in these as well as any engine will give better fuel economy anyway.
Happy to answer any questions on 0412 399 553 and have a look at our web site http://www.bmfi.com.au (Blue Mountains Fuel Injection)
I just use dynotab does the same thing, been using E10 on my falcon Ef and a dynotab, no probs
I am also searching for the different conversions as on the ethanol in petrol. I am also a scientist and trying for the proper use of ethanol and to maintain our environment good.
We have a Mazda Neo and one of the reasons for buying it was that it is rated as E10 compatible. Our previous Mazda Premacy MK I was not truly E10 compatible.
We get on average 10.9 L/100km – for almost entirely city driving, much of it in peak hours.
The car’s rated City cycle is 11.3 L/100km – so I am not seeing any reason to use other than E10.
The instantaneous fuel economy on the short stretches of motorway is amazingly good with E10.
OK if you have a car with old seals that cannot handle the ethanol, or are subject to corroision from the higher water content than E10 is not for you.
If your car’s ECU is not tuned for E10 then you may have problems also.
If you have a modern car that does not specifically require 95 then you should find E10 is cheaper and close to the same performance, the cost savings should outweigh any slight performance difference.
For those that think this is a conspiracy, well yes maybe, but E10 still will be cheaper for you in NSW, and it is not rubbish fuel, but your old car may not be up to the task.
I await the predicitons of some here – that would mean almost all cars on the road in NSW will die any day now or be spluttering down the road!!!
Well Richard, I,m seeing on average two cars a week spluttering into my workshop with issues relating to E10 and I live in a small coastal town with four other workshops and a population of only 2000 people, so if they are seeing the same numbers as well that means nearly 25% of the local population are experiencing E10 related problems, thats a lot of people. My Mazda SP25 which has a larger engine then a NEO is averaging 7.9Ltrs/100Km running Premium Unleaded and in 5 years time I know which car will be still running fine. Anyway to all those people that think E10 wont cause issues, it seems to take on average 2 to 3 years to cause damage. I might see you in my workshop one day,
Sounds like the average people that dont service cars properly in any population figure.
I have a Suzuki Jimny 2006 1.3L that requires (so they say) 95Ron… I put in 95 Pulp from Caltex, BP or Shell and find that I get the same performance and kilometers as running 91ron… I put in E10 which is rated at 94 or 95 Ron depending where you buy it from, and the car is a ‘joy’ to drive! I can safely say that the engine doesnt ping and that there are genuine truths to the cleaner engine suggestions – as my spark plugs are cleaner and show no signs of carbon deposits! I am getting about 6.5km/L on E10 which is about right for a Jimny, and performance is much better than on 91 or 95Ron?
I just found out that Shell does not supply E10 any more in Qld, and that it is slim pickings at Caltex – however I have had issues with Caltex fuels, so I avoid that supplier at all cost! I have used United fuel (E10) and found that supplier to be fantastic with all benefits of the fuel outweighing any negatives. I haven’t found that I get any less k’s per Liter, however getting more per liter than using the Pulp fuels – why I’m not sure?…
So I am unsure whats going on, but I gotto say let your car figure out whats going on when you put a tank of E10 in and let it adjust to the fuel, and change your plugs if they’re crapped out. Then see if you get any benefits or reductions in consumption. I know I will be running E10 (95Ron) for as long as I can get it locally!!!
I have been a mechanic now for over 30 years and have never encountered so many problems caused by fuel since E10 was introduced in 2007. The problems I have repaired are rusted out fuel tanks and fuel lines, damaged fuel tank sender units, blocked fuel filters, damaged fuel pumps, damaged carburettors and blocked injectors, it also causes poor fuel consumption, lack of power, stalling and hesitations on take off, also overheating and blown head gaskets. Vehicle owners are now having to spend hundreds and sometimes thousands of dollars to fix the damage caused by E10. Any fuel containing Ethanol will do three things, it will absorb water which causes corrosion, it will increase fuel consumption by up to 30% compared with 98 octane fuel due to being less efficient and will also reduce engine life and performance. Have you ever wondered why there is a sign on the bowser that says Do not use in Outboards or Lawn Mowers, these motors suffer damage quicker then a motor vehicle but it still causes damage to your vehicle, it just takes a bit longer. So next time you put fuel in your tank and think you are saving money by using E10, factor in the costs of repairs you will need to make to keep your car running reliably and safely.
I have a 2008 holden captiva and I ran a test for 2 weeks
first week feeled with E10 I used 1 and 3 1/4 tanks
second week feeled up on primiem I used 1 tank
distance and style of driving was the same to and from work so I figure
that by using E10 I was financialy wors of on E10 nearly $2.50 per litre
plus when I first got car brand new I used E 10 like recomended
my o2 sensors only lasted 70000 kms instead of 100000km machanic put to the E10 never again in the long run it cost more for the consumer
Greg the mechanic you shouldn’t be a mechanic mate, I’ve been running united e85 (85% ethanol just so you don’t get confused) for 3 years. I The car is tuned for it and makes 50kw more at the wheels than on 98. You do however loose 30% mileage but at $1.11 it still works out cheaper. I’ve just ripped out the whole fuel system (all of which is factory standard) and no rust to be found, fuel pump, injectors rubber hoses in the pump housing all were perfect. So you guys running 10% ethanol have nothing to worry about, don’t listen to self proclaimed internet mechanics. Do your research countries overseas such as brazil have cars running 100% ethanol without special fuel systems.
Shane, I wasn’t talking about E85 which is 85% enthanol and yes a motor will produce more horsepower if it is tuned to run on it. And this internet mechanic has had lots of experience with alchohol fuel in Speedway car and bike engines and knows what damage it causes if the fuel is not flushed from the system. Also do your research and see what changes Holden made to their engines that were exported to Brazil. Keep using your E85 but do not use E10.
Shane, I was just wondering, “why did you rip out your whole fuel system”, was that for fun or were you having problems, next thing you should check is your engine bearings and cylinder bores for corrosive damage caused by ethanol fuel, remember your driving a road car not a V8 Supercar thats rebuilt after every meeting, you might be in for an expensive suprise, but like I said keep using that fabulous E85
http://www.defence.gov.au/im/policy/technical/ethanal_blended_unleaded_petrol/ethanol.pdf
All the E10 lovers out there should read this, enough said.
The only time E10 can cause any issue is when u mix other fuels with it, and any exposure to Air will create a seperation layer, always using E10 will not cause any issues. Its also a good thing to change the fuel filter, spark plugs etc when deciding to use E10 and start fresh. We should not be scared of it since we depend 10% less on the Middle East for oil, hope one day not even one cent of mine goes there, maybe 20years from now.
greg the mechanic u r spot on i work in a workshop on sunshine coast and c similar problems and shane have a crack at comparing apples with apples not with oranges
We currently have the choice to choose whether we buy fuel with or without Ethanol in it…… Look into the future (using the US as the benchmark) we will shortly have no choice but to purchase fuel with Ethanol, then we will all need to start using fuel additives to negate the negative effects of Ethanol on our engines.
We are a fuel injection speciliased workshop and see problems with our customers cars on a weekly basis and find that there is a lot of ignorance in the market place. We have used ethanol (E10) in the past in an effort to determine the benefits etc. and found that there was a general slight deterioration in engine behaviour and less KMs per tank full. One personal observation that I have made is that E10 used to be 95 octane on the bowser and ordinary ULP was 91 octane, but now that we have lost the ordinary ULP, the stated octane of the E10 is now 91 octane. Go figure? What octane is it really and do the fuel companies have a right to just put up anything they like. I would interpret the previous rating of 95 octane as possibly encouraging motorists to believe thay were buying a better product??
Someone is pulling the wool over our eyes???
As far as cleaning the air emmited from the exhausts, there is no doubt that ethanol does improve the environment.
Our webb site “www.bmfi.com.au” has lots of usefull information that may help the ordinary motorist…
I have a 1999 V6 Vienta (Camry) – A previous post mentions poor fuel quality from Wollies and I suspect I have the same issue with 7-11 fuel even with the normal ULP (I recall that some of these resellers import from Vietnam) . I have been buying ULP and gave up (due to crap performance) on the E10 ages ago. I’m now seeing erratic engine idleing (when the V6 is not under load…give it some juice and then pulls fine …or at least masks the idleing issue) on hot’ish days 28 degrees plus. As the engine cools down (stop for an ice cream) or external air temp is low the mix seems to adjust corretly and idles fine. I’m going to try United again ULP (mobil), and note a previous comment about the current affair shows stopped testing for ethanol now that this is legistlated, but, I would like to see some random audits of what is “actually” in fuel so I think we are still be conned. My 5 cents worth that this is not worth the messing around with E10. Was not so long ago we went through the same transition from the old “Super” to ULP and here we ago again.