UK Buell Enthusiasts Group
https://ukbeg.com/forum/

good fuel or bad E10
https://ukbeg.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=15650		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  barney [ 09 Oct 2012 22:11 ]
Post subject:  good fuel or bad E10
ethonal content to increase early next year to 10%
after having a few winter storage problems
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=15559
was just concerned as to what effect this may have :?:
it would appear that Buell are ok run on this fuel
http://www.fcai.com.au/publications/all ... nd-petrol-
not sure if your car can or how long it would last
http://www.v8register.net/subpages/gate ... index1.htm
IIRC the different chemical make up means less power, less mpg . and if stored a tendency to attract water :o
any tech people on here with advice / comments :?:
Author:  barney [ 10 Oct 2012 20:16 ]
Post subject:  Re: good fuel or bad E10
http://www.standardmotorclub.org.uk/fuelnews4.htm
Author:  birdy [ 10 Oct 2012 20:19 ]
Post subject:  Re: good fuel or bad E10
Stick with super unleaded when this comes in then?
Author:  kevmean [ 10 Oct 2012 20:32 ]
Post subject:  Re: good fuel or bad E10
It's just another government con to make more money out of us ............... global warming etc is mainly natural cycles of the world we live in and nature will always win ................ everything we use came out of this earth and nature will always put it back.
Tree huggers have now infiltrated the government and tax system and the general public is slowly being brainwashed into believing all this crap is for our own good .
Author:  Digger [ 11 Oct 2012 11:15 ]
Post subject:  Re: good fuel or bad E10
kevmean wrote:
Tree huggers have now infiltrated the government and tax system
lOl I think the official term for tree-hugger infiltration is Lib-Dem coalition, Kev lOl
Author:  pash [ 11 Oct 2012 11:21 ]
Post subject:  Re: good fuel or bad E10
Digger wrote:
kevmean wrote:
Tree huggers have now infiltrated the government and tax system
lOl I think the official term for tree-hugger infiltration is Lib-Dem coalition, Kev lOl

Hence the need for Third Party Insurance
Author:  gunter [ 11 Oct 2012 11:24 ]
Post subject:  Re: good fuel or bad E10
My bikes run fine on E10. That's great, as E10 is somewhat cheaper over here also ...
Author:  pash [ 11 Oct 2012 11:36 ]
Post subject:  Re: good fuel or bad E10
E10 is all over Europe (France but interestingly no so much in Spain) and has been for some time, mpg suffers in my experience and although I have suffered no issues over the few thousand miles I have used it for, it is more cost effective to use super unleaded.

When it becomes widespread in the UK, I will be switching to super unleaded.

The motor industry is doing a lot of research into GEM fuels, Gasoline Ethanol Methanol, with interesting control strategies based on injector duration at cruise (AFV) whereby the %G, %E and %M are inferred and hence the ignition timing can be optimised for the burn and mpg can be recovered.
Author:  barney [ 11 Oct 2012 15:16 ]
Post subject:  Re: good fuel or bad E10
pash wrote:
hence the ignition timing can be optimised for the burn and mpg can be recovered.

but now we are talking about modern systems with knock sense capabilities, these continually trying to adjust ignition timing to max advance, when detonation is detected they retard ignition a few degrees and then try to ramp it back up to max advance .

My concern on older vehicles is the effect on internal components, fuel pumps , o rings , fuel pipes/hose and how it may affect the running of the vehicle , different fuel maps :?:
Author:  pash [ 11 Oct 2012 16:00 ]
Post subject:  Re: good fuel or bad E10
I take your point about old stuff, but I am not talking knock sensors cos E10 will increase octane number all things constant, but since the ULP standard only needs 95 octane, they will pull octane promotors out such as Benzene family and stuff like that. This new ECM logic stuff I talk of is to optimise ignition timing at part throttle to recover mpg.

But yeah, be interesting to see what happens to fuel taps, tank linings, pipes even alloys used in carbs...
Author:  gunter [ 11 Oct 2012 16:51 ]
Post subject:  Re: good fuel or bad E10
Isn't E10 standard in the U.S. too? Then I suppose, installing a U.S. model's timing table would be sufficient, or?
Author:  pash [ 11 Oct 2012 16:56 ]
Post subject:  Re: good fuel or bad E10
Is it all E10 in the USA? I get confused with their pumps, not just with the levers and stuff but all the grades. If I have a hire car, the cheapest goes in, which is counter productive if it is E10 :D .

E10 will have a lower flame speed so more advance needed...
Author:  gunter [ 11 Oct 2012 18:11 ]
Post subject:  Re: good fuel or bad E10
Do you have an idea how much timing has to be advanced?

I didn't notice a (noteworthy) change in mileage. My XB9 gets 178 km (110.6 mls) from a tank of fuel, and I remember that number only because I've seen it on the trip meter so often. This is my standard mileage since the day I bought that bike, and it hasn't changed until now (7 years later).
Author:  pash [ 11 Oct 2012 19:07 ]
Post subject:  Re: good fuel or bad E10
I don't know, but reading this makes interesting reading...

http://dspace.mit.edu/openaccess-dissem ... 21.1/66907
Author:  gunter [ 11 Oct 2012 21:14 ]
Post subject:  Re: good fuel or bad E10
Yummi. Scientific publications ...

:-)
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
https://www.phpbb.com/