Welcome to the Australian Ford Forums forum.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and inserts advertising. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features without post based advertising banners. Registration is simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Please Note: All new registrations go through a manual approval queue to keep spammers out. This is checked twice each day so there will be a delay before your registration is activated.

Go Back   Australian Ford Forums > General Topics > The Pub

The Pub For General Automotive Related Talk

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 18-04-2007, 02:51 PM   #1
johnydep
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
johnydep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: S.A.
Posts: 4,611
Tech Writer: Recognition for the technical writers of AFF - Issue reason: Writing tech article(s) 
Default Assessment of the Operation of Vehicles on Ethanol Blend Fuels

Sorry if this has been reported before.

Assessment of the Operation of Vehicles in the Australian Fleet on Ethanol Blend Fuels

This is a must read; http://www.environment.gov.au/atmosp...els-report.pdf

Carburetor vehicls can not use Ethanol fuels, due to incompatable materials in the fuel system, and in some cases very poor performance.

Fuel injected vehicles produced after 1986 are fine, but the deposits left on valves, pistons & rings is a concern.

The photos tell the story, I'll be limiting my use of Ethanol fuel from now on.

Quote:
7 CONCLUSIONS
The objectives of the study as laid out by the Department of the Environment and Heritage (now the Department of the Environment and Water Resources) in RFT 107/DEH2005 were to:

a. Obtain an assessment, based on an experimental study, of the suitability of vehicles in the current Australian fleet to operate on 5% and 10% ethanol blends (E5 and E10); and
b. Obtain accurate and reliable information which could be used to inform future polices relating to ethanol blend fuels, including labelling requirements.

Orbital developed a structured approach to achieve these objectives and have undertaken the necessary testing and analysis consistent with the proposed approach. The key findings from this study are summarised in Table 7.1. The findings are based on assessments of performance/driveability, materials compatibility and durability when vehicles are operated on ethanol blended fuels compared to operation on neat petrol. Three overall grades are assigned in this summary table:

Unsatisfactory: The assessment of a vehicle highlighted evidence of negative impacts which could potentially lead to serious safety concerns and/or issues which would be clearly unacceptable to the average user.

Doubtful: The assessment of a vehicle showed evidence of some level of degradation to the vehicle itself and/or its operability, but the concerns were not sufficient to warrant an unsatisfactory rating.

Satisfactory: No issues sufficient to warrant concern were identified.

In assessing the results for performance/driveability the relative frequency and likely consequence of the issues was taken into consideration. For example, poor starting at -10oC would not alone cause the assigning of “doubtful” or “unsatisfactory” grading. For example, the Toyota Hilux was assigned an unsatisfactory grading due to its tendency to stall or hesitate on acceleration during the hot start tests, and not because of its tendency to occasionally stall on cold starts.
For materials compatibility, both the function of the fuel system component and the implications of a failure of that component were taken into consideration when assigning gradings. For example, with fuel injected vehicles the material compatibility of the fuel regulator diaphragm is critical as this predominantly elastomeric component separates fuel from the outside world. A leakage there would result in unmetered fuel entering the engine or leaking on to hot engine surfaces. With E10, all diaphragms showed signs of distortion (when wet) and stiffening (when dry). The Ford Festiva specimen additionally showed evidence of material breakdown (crumbling of the elastomer) and hence was assigned unsatisfactory rather than “doubtful”. Further the changes to the diaphragm material can also affect the performance of the regulator in terms of metering of the fuel system; however this is a secondary concern compared to potential fuel leakage and would not on its own warrant a grading of doubtful.

For durability results, the implications of a failure for any particular part of the engine or fuel system were taken into consideration when assessing the severity of the issues. Some issues, such as engine deposits, could go unnoticed until the vehicle breaks down, potentially requiring costly repairs. Should some other components fail, for example a fuel filter, the repair costs may be more modest but the sudden failure of the component while driving would represent a significant safety concern.
Reductions to the life of the engine/vehicle were also considered, but on their own would not be sufficient to warrant an unsatisfactory grading.
Carburettor vehicles tested on E5, regardless of age, had either unsatisfactory or doubtful aspects of materials compatibility and issues with their performance or driveability. The carburettor vehicles tested on E10 are not suitable for operation with that fuel.
All three vehicles had unsatisfactory materials compatibility with E10. The vehicles also had either unsatisfactory or doubtful performance or driveability. The carburettor vehicle which underwent durability testing was rated unsatisfactory on both E5 and E10.

The fuel injected vehicles tested are on the whole suitable for operation on E5, although potential durability problems were identified for one vehicle. Given that this is more of a long term issue it has been rated as a “doubtful aspect” rather than being “unsatisfactory” – though it is debatable if reducing an engine’s long term durability is acceptable.
The fuel injected vehicles tested on E10 had either unsatisfactory or “doubtful aspects” in terms of materials compatibility. More than half the fuel-injected vehicles tested also had “doubtful aspects” with regard to durability.
From the above summary of findings it is reasonable to conclude that ethanol blended fuels are not compatible with carburettor vehicles. The vast majority of vehicles built before 1986 are carburettor vehicles. It should be noted that carburettor vehicles also include some of the popular small cars built through to 1994, as well as some medium sized cars through to the late 1980’s and some 4wds and light commercial vehicles built through to 2003. The study results provide evidence against allowing E5 to be sold unlabelled in Australia since there are a significant number of vehicles on the road, effectively all carburettor vehicles, which are not compatible with E5.
The results from this study generally support advice from vehicle manufacturers and importers as published by the FCAI with regard to vehicles which are not listed as suitable for use with ethanol blends, particularly E10.
On the assumption that these results carry across to all vehicles which are not identified by the FCAI as suitable, an analysis of the Australian vehicle fleet’s ethanol suitability has been undertaken. This analysis was based on the current FCAI listing (as updated in December 2006) and the ABS 2005 and 2006 Motor Vehicle Census data.
Using the most recent Motor Vehicle Census, which provides data on the Australian fleet as at March 2006, it is estimated that at least5 59.5% of the petrol fleet would be suitable for use with E10 based on the FCAI advice. This compares with 55.6% of the fleet in March 2005. The increase in suitability in 2006 is a function of both the retirement of unsuitable vehicles (including pre-1986 models), and the entry of new, ethanol-ready vehicles into the fleet.
Based on the FCAI advice, a marginally higher proportion of the fleet, 60.6% using the 2006 ABS data, would be suitable for the use of E5 because some European models listed as not E10 suitable, are suitable for E5.
__________________
The true danger only occurs when you take a potentially dangerous piece of machinery
and place it in the hands of the most unpredictable species on the planet.
Human behaviour, as history has catalogued, cannot account for what any persons actions may be,
especially concerning their love of the motor vehicle.

http://www.fireservicecollege.ac.uk
johnydep is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 18-04-2007, 03:28 PM   #2
The Monty
Just slidin'
 
The Monty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Brisvegas
Posts: 7,791
Default

Ive been using E10 since december 2005, have had no problems other than the flat tyre it caused...
__________________
MD Mondeo - For the family
NP Pajero - For the adventure
The Monty is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 18-04-2007, 03:48 PM   #3
Bill_R
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
Bill_R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,335
Default

Here was i thing this was some ground-breaking news or something.
typically government - spend money on doing an assesment when there is plenty of info out there already.
Most vehicles can handle E10 quite well. For a full list see:
http://www.autoindustries.com.au/eth.../00000005.html
Bill_R is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 18-04-2007, 04:33 PM   #4
Ives
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
Ives's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Sydney, NSW
Posts: 2,368
Default

That's interesting, I'll have a more thorough read tonight.

Thanks for the heads up!
Ives is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 18-04-2007, 04:50 PM   #5
johnydep
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
johnydep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: S.A.
Posts: 4,611
Tech Writer: Recognition for the technical writers of AFF - Issue reason: Writing tech article(s) 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill_R
Here was i thing this was some ground-breaking news or something.
typically government - spend money on doing an assesment when there is plenty of info out there already.
Most vehicles can handle E10 quite well. For a full list see:
http://www.autoindustries.com.au/eth.../00000005.html
I think the Federal Governmant was hoping for an all clear so that 5% Ethanol could be added to all unleaded fuel, with no labeling. :eclipsee_
Quote:
2 INTRODUCTION

2.1 Project Background


In September 2005, the Prime Minister announced that testing of vehicles in the Australian market would be undertaken to validate their operation with E5 and E10 ethanol blends. It was also announced that subject to the results of vehicle testing, consideration would be given to whether to allow E5 blends to be sold without a label.

In consultation with Departments of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, Industry, Tourism and Resources and Transport and Regional Services, the Department of the Environment and Heritage (now the Department of the Environment and Water Resources) sought tenders to assess the suitability of selected vehicles in the current Australian fleet to operate on E5 (5% ethanol in petrol) and E10 (10% ethanol in petrol) blends. The objectives of the vehicle testing study were to:

a. Obtain an assessment, based on an experimental study, of the suitability of vehicles in the current Australian fleet to operate on E5 and E10 ethanol blends; and
b. Obtain accurate and reliable information which could be used to inform future policies relating to ethanol blend fuels, including labelling requirements.

In July 2003 the Australian Government limited the amount of ethanol permitted in petrol to 10%. It has been generally accepted that most new vehicles in the Australian fleet are suitable for operation on ethanol blend petrol (up to 10%).
.....
__________________
The true danger only occurs when you take a potentially dangerous piece of machinery
and place it in the hands of the most unpredictable species on the planet.
Human behaviour, as history has catalogued, cannot account for what any persons actions may be,
especially concerning their love of the motor vehicle.

http://www.fireservicecollege.ac.uk
johnydep is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 18-04-2007, 06:43 PM   #6
vztrt
IWCMOGTVM Club Supporter
 
vztrt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern Suburbs Melbourne
Posts: 17,799
Valued Contributor: For members whose non technical contributions are worthy of recognition. - Issue reason: vztrt is one of the most consistent and respected contributors to AFF, I have found his contributions are most useful to discussion as well as answering members queries. 
Default

Been running the XR on ethanol since Jan 06 and the car goes well, starts well and hasn't given me grief. Also on the BF falcons there is a sticker that says you can run the car on E10.
vztrt is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 18-04-2007, 06:56 PM   #7
4vxc
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,135
Default

there was something on the news last week about the federal govt planning to make a minimum 5% Ethanol contect mandatory. So I suppose we just stop driving old cars overnight?
4vxc is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 18-04-2007, 07:38 PM   #8
ebxr8240
Performance moderator
 
ebxr8240's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: St Clair..N.S.W
Posts: 14,875
Technical Contributor: For members who share their technical expertise. - Issue reason: Always willing to help out with technical advice. 
Default

Stoic air/fuel ratio

Gasoline 14.6
Ethyl t-Butyl Ether 12.1
Amyl Methyl Ether 12.1
Toluene 13.5
Methyl t-Butil Ether 11.7
Diisopropyl Ether 12.1
Butyl Alcohol 11.1
Isopropanol 10.4
Methanol with cosolvent 8.8 0.
Ethanol 9.0
Methanol 6.4
__________________
Real cars are not driven by front wheels,real cars lift them!!...
BABYS ARE BOTTLE FED, REAL MEN GET BLOWN.
Don't be afraid to try something new. Remember, amateurs built the Ark...Professionals built the Titanic!
Dart 330ci block turbo black pearl EBXR8 482 rwkw..
Daily driver GTE FG..
Projects http://www.fordforums.com.au/showthread.php?t=107711
http://www.fordforums.com.au/showthr...8+turbo&page=4
ebxr8240 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 18-04-2007, 08:51 PM   #9
Bill_R
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
Bill_R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,335
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 4vxc
there was something on the news last week about the federal govt planning to make a minimum 5% Ethanol contect mandatory. So I suppose we just stop driving old cars overnight?
Instead they need to regulate to make E10 avaialble at all stations - but label it.
I only heard of the increase to 2% for regular fuel.
Bill_R is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 18-04-2007, 09:07 PM   #10
Tiapan
XF 393 3v CHI heads
 
Tiapan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Perth
Posts: 1,437
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Monty
Ive been using E10 since december 2005, have had no problems other than the flat tyre it caused...
how did ethanol give you a flat tyre?
__________________
XF Falcon, 393 Clevo. 11.01@123mph
"RAZNREVNU"
Tiapan is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 18-04-2007, 09:11 PM   #11
BigAL_250
and that's how it is
 
BigAL_250's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 495
Default

What's in a carby that makes it unsuitable?

I've been using it for a while now, and haven't noticed any problems.

Infact i haven't had to add lead additives when running on E10.
BigAL_250 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 18-04-2007, 09:32 PM   #12
T3rminator
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
T3rminator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 6,936
Default

That looks like some heavy testing there.

Shame they only sampled cars that were listed as unsuitable. I wonder what the combustion chambers and pistons look like for vehicles that have been listed as suitable. Those photos don't look good at all.........

I've been using PLUS95 (E10) for a while now.... notice the car runs better.
__________________
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Rides (past and present)
Current: 2004 Ford Falcon 5.4L 3v Barra 220, Manual
Past: Mitsubishi Sigma (m), Toyota Seca (m), Toyota Seca SX (m), Toyota Vienta V6 (m), Toyota Soarer 4L v8 (a), BA XR8 ute (m), T3 TE50 (m), BMW Z4 (m)

AFF motto - If contrary views trigger, please use ignore button.
T3rminator is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 18-04-2007, 09:43 PM   #13
4vxc
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,135
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigal_1701
What's in a carby that makes it unsuitable?

I've been using it for a while now, and haven't noticed any problems.

Infact i haven't had to add lead additives when running on E10.
gaskets, rubber, eg O rings, P/V's ect.

don't know what your talking about about not needing lead additives. The E10 isn't going to stop valve recession
4vxc is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 19-04-2007, 09:31 AM   #14
johnydep
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
johnydep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: S.A.
Posts: 4,611
Tech Writer: Recognition for the technical writers of AFF - Issue reason: Writing tech article(s) 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigal_1701
What's in a carby that makes it unsuitable?

I've been using it for a while now, and haven't noticed any problems.

Infact i haven't had to add lead additives when running on E10.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4vxc
gaskets, rubber, eg O rings, P/V's ect.

don't know what your talking about about not needing lead additives. The E10 isn't going to stop valve recession
Ethanol is corrosive to Zinc plated steel, some plastics & brass. There's a list in the report.

You'll still have to use a lead substitute, but bigall might mean that the pinging stops due to the higher Octane.

I have an old XC ute and have been using E10 in that for a while. Last year I would have used E10 approximately 60% over standard unleaded, the engine ran smoother & no pinging but early this year the fuel pump rubbers let go and started spraying fuel under the bonnet.
At the time I thought it old age but after reading the report it may have been the E10.
The carby also played up, the idle jet became blocked. This was easily fixed and never occured again, I knew this was caused by the E10's excellent cleaning action and accepted it as part of the process of using the fuel in such an old vehicle.

E10 has a part to play in the needs of our energy industry, but the fuel companies and Government should make the list of compatible vehicles more readily available.
__________________
The true danger only occurs when you take a potentially dangerous piece of machinery
and place it in the hands of the most unpredictable species on the planet.
Human behaviour, as history has catalogued, cannot account for what any persons actions may be,
especially concerning their love of the motor vehicle.

http://www.fireservicecollege.ac.uk
johnydep is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 19-04-2007, 12:52 PM   #15
Chippar
The Ancient Warrior
 
Chippar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: The Qld Border Ranges
Posts: 346
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fullthrottle
That looks like some heavy testing there.

Shame they only sampled cars that were listed as unsuitable. I wonder what the combustion chambers and pistons look like for vehicles that have been listed as suitable. Those photos don't look good at all.........

I've been using PLUS95 (E10) for a while now.... notice the car runs better.
Yes I agee. Why not also test the vehicles in the Govt fleet that are listed as suitable for ethanol blended fuel and then give a comparison between both findings.



2.2 Project Outline
Clearly not all vehicles could be tested. It was assumed unnecessary to test
vehicles which their respective manufacturers had already indicated were compatible for use with ethanol blended fuels up to 10%. Therefore, the test fleet was comprised of vehicles which had not been identified by the FCAI (listing as at May 2006) as suitable for use with ethanol blended fuels.
A selection of 16 vehicles best representing this segment of the current Australian
Orbital Australia Pty Ltd Page 17 of 170 February, 2007
Chippar is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 19-04-2007, 02:47 PM   #16
The Monty
Just slidin'
 
The Monty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Brisvegas
Posts: 7,791
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiapan
how did ethanol give you a flat tyre?

Hehehe, lol. Just an old joke, in other words, it seems like it hasnt done anything to the car. Infact, I hev run a great 1/4mile time and dyno runs, all on Ethanol, and like I said I have been using it over 40000k's and I cant find anything that has gone wrong from using it yet.
__________________
MD Mondeo - For the family
NP Pajero - For the adventure
The Monty is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 19-04-2007, 03:17 PM   #17
sprjenkins
Spr Jenkins
 
sprjenkins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 597
Default

Drag racers have been using ethanol for years to boost octane and swear by it, food for thought
sprjenkins is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 19-04-2007, 04:33 PM   #18
johnydep
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
johnydep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: S.A.
Posts: 4,611
Tech Writer: Recognition for the technical writers of AFF - Issue reason: Writing tech article(s) 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sprjenkins
Drag racers have been using ethanol for years to boost octane and swear by it, food for thought
I think you'll find that Drag racers use Methanol and have to choose their engine oils carefully, as well as change it on a very regular basis.

Ethanol fuel is used mainly for street use, and has a different chemical make-up.

Quote:
Some manufacturers also require a special motor oil be used, particularly in vehicles using methanol fuel http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flexible-fuel_vehicle
Pure Power!® Racing Motor Oil Extreme High Performance SAE 20W/70 CH-4/SJ is specially formulated for Nitromethane/Methanol Fueled Engines. http://www.gopurepower.com/store/lis...?cat=Motor+Oil
This is due to the high rate percentage of methanol;
Accumulation of fuel, water, acids, insolubles, and metals in engine oil is documented and compared for variable-fueled (fuel containing up to 85 percent methanol) and gasoline-fueled vehicles in short-trip service. The oil temperature at which various contaminants are removed is noted. As a consequence of emulsion formation, the viscosity of the oil in the M85-fueled vehicles increased. Due to the presence of gasoline, the viscosity of the oil in the gasoline-fueled vehicles decreased. Equations were developed to explain both the viscosity increase due to emulsion-forming contaminants (water and methanol). http://www.sae.org/technical/papers/922297
__________________
The true danger only occurs when you take a potentially dangerous piece of machinery
and place it in the hands of the most unpredictable species on the planet.
Human behaviour, as history has catalogued, cannot account for what any persons actions may be,
especially concerning their love of the motor vehicle.

http://www.fireservicecollege.ac.uk
johnydep is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 19-04-2007, 04:45 PM   #19
The Monty
Just slidin'
 
The Monty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Brisvegas
Posts: 7,791
Default

I think they do use ethanol as well, not just methanol.
__________________
MD Mondeo - For the family
NP Pajero - For the adventure
The Monty is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 19-04-2007, 05:09 PM   #20
johnydep
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
johnydep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: S.A.
Posts: 4,611
Tech Writer: Recognition for the technical writers of AFF - Issue reason: Writing tech article(s) 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Monty
I think they do use ethanol as well, not just methanol.
Maybe we're talking about two different types of racing.

There are racing unleaded fuels with ethanol added for increased octane, but I automatically thought of this stuff Elf Methanol when racing was mentioned, probably because I had a mate involved in Top Alcohol drag racing.

I've been out of touch for quite a while now, so maybe things have changed.
__________________
The true danger only occurs when you take a potentially dangerous piece of machinery
and place it in the hands of the most unpredictable species on the planet.
Human behaviour, as history has catalogued, cannot account for what any persons actions may be,
especially concerning their love of the motor vehicle.

http://www.fireservicecollege.ac.uk
johnydep is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 19-04-2007, 05:20 PM   #21
The Monty
Just slidin'
 
The Monty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Brisvegas
Posts: 7,791
Default

Im not positive, so you are probably right. Just thought I had read it somewhere is all.
__________________
MD Mondeo - For the family
NP Pajero - For the adventure
The Monty is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 19-04-2007, 06:25 PM   #22
DirtyHarry
Do you feel lucky?
 
DirtyHarry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 268
Default

I have read the report through from cover to cover. It pretty much confirms the unease I have always felt about using ethanol as a fuel additive.

I simply love this line from page 15: “though it is debatable if reducing an engine’s long term durability is acceptable”. A typical fat bummed bureaucrat’s perspective on the real world!!
DirtyHarry is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 19-04-2007, 07:31 PM   #23
Piotr
Non-Regular Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,040
Default

Europe has been using 5% ethanol in its fuels for years now. America sells 85% ethanol fuel which when tuned creates MORE power than petrol. There is nothing wrong with ethanol fuel as long as your car can handle it (and 99% can)
Piotr is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 19-04-2007, 11:46 PM   #24
DirtyHarry
Do you feel lucky?
 
DirtyHarry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 268
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Piotr
There is nothing wrong with ethanol fuel as long as your car can handle it (and 99% can)
On what basis do you arrive at this amazing conclusion?

From page 15 of the report:

Quote:
Using the most recent Motor Vehicle Census, which provides data on the Australian fleet as at March 2006, it is estimated that at least 59.5% of the petrol fleet would be suitable for use with E10 based on the FCAI advice. This compares with 55.6% of the fleet in March 2005. The increase in suitability in 2006 is a function of both the retirement of unsuitable vehicles (including pre-1986 models), and the entry of new, ethanol-ready vehicles into the fleet.

Based on the FCAI advice, a marginally higher proportion of the fleet, 60.6% using the 2006 ABS data, would be suitable for the use of E5 because some European models listed as not E10 suitable, are suitable for E5.
59.5% and 60.6% are a long, long way from 99%.
DirtyHarry is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 20-04-2007, 12:02 AM   #25
Piotr
Non-Regular Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,040
Default

Well obviously 99% was ment to be taken seriously as a figure. But if you look at new cars I would say that the figure would be much higher. Even if you remove the shitbox's that shouldn't be registered the figure would be closer to 70%.

In a few years time I don't see a problem with E5 or more being in all fuels (With current 5% growth it would only take 8 years to be fully converted to E5). If you really love your car you can get it converted to run on E5 without too much hassle.
Piotr is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 20-04-2007, 12:13 AM   #26
DirtyHarry
Do you feel lucky?
 
DirtyHarry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 268
Default

Just out of interest, what are the conequences of leaving ethanol blended fuels in your tank for an extended period. Is there a problem with water absorption?

I run on LPG most of the time, and only fill up the petrol tank about once ever two months. If I refuel on E5/E10, is the ethanol in the petrol going to absorb enough water from the air to cause trouble?
DirtyHarry is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 21-04-2007, 06:59 PM   #27
XRQTOR
Banned
 
XRQTOR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Livin On The Edge
Posts: 7,354
Default

Might be worth a read, remember that thats 85% ethanol.

http://www.theturboforums.com/smf/in...?topic=47094.0
XRQTOR is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +11. The time now is 10:33 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Other than what is legally copyrighted by the respective owners, this site is copyright www.fordforums.com.au
Positive SSL