vitesse
Member
This was posted by mistake, will not do it again.
Last edited:
Phuel phenomenon
- Thread starter vitesse
- Start date
Hank
Well-Known Member
I don't know why the non ethanol of the same octane would improve mileage, but I am no engineer. The ethanol problem is the water it brings.
90 v. 87 or so octane would matter.
90 v. 87 or so octane would matter.
vitesse
Member
this was a mistake
Last edited:
If you do the math based on BTU content of pure gasoline and ethanol, you'll find a 10% ethanol blend will have 3% less potential energy content than straight gasoline. I experimented with this a while back using a Ninja 250, and found an actual real world mpg difference of 3%, so the math held true.
Energy equivalents here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gasoline_gallon_equivalent
Filling up with 74 miles on the tank is way, way too small of a sample, and subject to the variation in how full is full. Run at least 1000 miles on the pure gas before even thinking about drawing any conclusions. The 3% variation is going to be hard to pick out amongs the other variables such as temperature and riding style.
The octane level has nothing to do with it as the NC would not benefit from a higher octane than recommended (86 R+M/2, AKA pump octane, if I recall correctly).
I get 80+ mpg quite often on 10% ethanol, but it's my riding style that gets me the good mileage. The price difference for pure gas in my area is way higher than 3%, so it's not worth it to me to buy it, if I can even find it anymore. We have been using "gasohol" where I live for probably 15-20 years.
Energy equivalents here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gasoline_gallon_equivalent
Filling up with 74 miles on the tank is way, way too small of a sample, and subject to the variation in how full is full. Run at least 1000 miles on the pure gas before even thinking about drawing any conclusions. The 3% variation is going to be hard to pick out amongs the other variables such as temperature and riding style.
The octane level has nothing to do with it as the NC would not benefit from a higher octane than recommended (86 R+M/2, AKA pump octane, if I recall correctly).
I get 80+ mpg quite often on 10% ethanol, but it's my riding style that gets me the good mileage. The price difference for pure gas in my area is way higher than 3%, so it's not worth it to me to buy it, if I can even find it anymore. We have been using "gasohol" where I live for probably 15-20 years.
Last edited:
showkey
Super Mods
The NC does not have a knock sensor so no spark timing adjustment based on fuel octane.
We have been down the premium vs regular gas many times before and the NC does just fine on regular and likely gets no benefit from premium.
The likely difference is 100% pure gas vs 90% gas.
One fill does not make a perfect test as there can be many other variables.
I regularly use regular non- ethanol fuel that is about .20 more per gallon. I see a 10-15 % gain in MPG but it's often a wash on the value.
In a vehicle with a knock sensor 10-20% gain would be possible with the octane change and no ethanol.
No ethanol premium often is .50-.90 more per gallon which makes any gains too high based on the cost.
Many areas or regions no ethanol gas is just not available.
The real value on non-ethanol fuel is seasonal storage. All my small engines ( chain saw, weed wacker, generators, mowers, blowers, tillers, outboard, ATVs) get non ethanol gas ( with stabilizer) all the time every time.
We have been down the premium vs regular gas many times before and the NC does just fine on regular and likely gets no benefit from premium.
The likely difference is 100% pure gas vs 90% gas.
One fill does not make a perfect test as there can be many other variables.
I regularly use regular non- ethanol fuel that is about .20 more per gallon. I see a 10-15 % gain in MPG but it's often a wash on the value.
In a vehicle with a knock sensor 10-20% gain would be possible with the octane change and no ethanol.
No ethanol premium often is .50-.90 more per gallon which makes any gains too high based on the cost.
Many areas or regions no ethanol gas is just not available.
The real value on non-ethanol fuel is seasonal storage. All my small engines ( chain saw, weed wacker, generators, mowers, blowers, tillers, outboard, ATVs) get non ethanol gas ( with stabilizer) all the time every time.
Last edited:
dduelin
Site Supporter
Join Fuelly and track tanks for a while. An average over time will be accurate enough to draw conclusions.
Hank
Well-Known Member
Interesting information, thanks. B
Wcmike
Member
Saw this the other day. U.S. Drivers Waste $2.1 Billion Annually on Premium Gasoline | AAA NewsRoom
For my miles per dollar, I'm sticking with a good regular gas.
Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk
For my miles per dollar, I'm sticking with a good regular gas.
Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk
TN Thunder
Site Supporter
I run ethanol 87 octane in my NC and get in the very high 70s to 82mpg and this includes some interstate riding. I have put one tank of 100% gasoline and could not tell any difference. In my cruiser I run 87 octane and locally use 100%. On a trip I use whatever 87 octane is cheapest. Runs good on either and it has 6 cylinders along with six carbs. When setting up for a week or two I always put in 100%.
TigerDude
Active Member
It's the sample size, not the gas. At least measure a full tank's worth.
vitesse
Member
this was a mistake
Last edited:
vitesse
Member
this was a mistake
Last edited:
StratTuner
Site Supporter
For what it's worth, here's my data: (screen captured from Fuelly)
448 Fuel Ups, 75,000 miles,
65.0 MPG (last 10 fuel ups)
65.9 MPG (448 fuel ups)
and even more data (mpg for the UK crowd)
Last edited:
GunNut37086
Site Supporter
It wouldn't surprise me if you rode more conservatively for those 74 miles, even if you weren't consciously trying to, just because you wanted to see results.
showkey
Super Mods
Well here's hoping they do NOT push E15 or E20 down our throats ( filler necks).
dduelin
Site Supporter
There will be all kinds of unaccounted variation is what some of us are saying. Besides the small fuel burn you would have to ride the same route, same speed, same temperature,same shift points, same humidity, same wind, same traffic, same pump, same gasoline sample, filled to exactly the same point. That's why there are standardized methods like the WMTC or EPA test cycle to remove as much variation as possible.
It is expected that non ethanol with more BTU per volume would return slightly better mpg. Nobody disputes that and your results are still interesting.
vitesse
Member
Sorry I started this, just an observation and sharing that, not stating this as a norm or constant, if anything I filled the tank over what was originally used. Next time I'll just keep it to myself.
I think you are taking this the wrong way. As dduelin suggested, few people, if anyone, doubts that the fuel mileage is better with non ethanol gas. That is to be expected. But I, for one, feel your mpg improvement could be better verified and quantified with a larger sample size. Please report back with your findings over a longer time period. It will be interesting to note what difference you achieve with pure gas vs. 10% ethanol blend.
Whatever though, it's your thread.
Similar threads
