I think claiming our Mini's were not designed for Ethanol is an odd comment to make from a few people. I agree that this is true, however, our cars were not designed for unleaded petrol. So we're not really using the the fuel the car was designed to use in the first place. But it doesn't seem to make a big difference, my car runs, doesn't blow any smoke and I'm happy.

However, from what I've read, similiar scares happened back when unleaded was introduced (appart from VSR) that certain cars weren't designed for it. Although LRP did exist, that wasn't really leaded petrol was it?

Basically what I'm saying is this sort of thing has occured before and people get scared for reasons that are beyond me. If cars are pinging on SAFF 98 fuel, it's not the fuel, it's the car.

Oh btw for those who don't live here SAFF stands for South Australian Farmers Fuel. As far as I'm aware E10 is to support the farmers and increase local content in fuel. SAFF Diesel, oddly marketed as 'Premium Diesel' is form of "biodiesel".

Usually I don't listen to fuel companies, and well still not this time. I prefer to use chemistry knowledge learned from text books, however for those who would like to read the otherside of the arguement SAFF have a website with pdf brochures on the various fuels they sell. Oddly I have learnt that the 98 contains a lead replacement additive, or so they say.

http://www.farmersfuel.com.au/Biofuel.html

_________________
1964 Morris 850, 1330 Supercharged - 81.8hp atws.
1975 Leyland Mini S 1100S powered - Nice and reliable.
1977 Leyland Mini LS - Project LS-T

as the same thing is happening over here, but its getting a law to have 10% ethanol mixed in the fuel and if your car won't like it there will be a premium fuel with only 5% at a much higher cost, everybody was a bit surprised that NO car manufacturer over here said that the cars will handle it. the "better" ones said that cars build after 2005 will, other said cars after 2009 will do.

_________________
Rover 214 atm ....

Interesting.

I was reading up on this earlier on on wikipedia. But I don't like to use wikipedia quotes as alot of info could be false or incorrect.

If a car maker says that cars before a certain year can't cope with it what is it that makes cars after that date special?

It almost sounds to me like a game of liability, where car makers won't claim their cars will function correctly with E10 because they are not yet ready to say they can. If a car maker says there cars are bioethanol compatible and if issues occur due to the use of bioethanol they have some explaining to do. Whereas if they say it won't work, or may not function correctly they can get away without accepting liablity until they have given a sufficient time to test E10, as in, until 2009 after many, many drivers have fuelled up with E10 and shown it to safe.

Ok, I'm a bit cynical when it comes to corperations and their politics. However, I wonder if it's possible?

_________________
1964 Morris 850, 1330 Supercharged - 81.8hp atws.
1975 Leyland Mini S 1100S powered - Nice and reliable.
1977 Leyland Mini LS - Project LS-T

IMHO I don't think it;s that much to get concerned over in minis. They're pretty agricultural, no sensors, no exhaust gas analyzer, no nothing other than some rubber seals and an aluminium inlet tract on some cars that may in score of years erode away. I need to exclude the later fuel injected cars here of course...

If it pings, change the advance. If a seal fails, replace it with better material if you can. I think there's too much conspiracy theory over these little things. Fuel is not what it used to be, but if the blends ever settle down we might one day look forward to a little consistency. We can tune a lot easier once we know what we are sticking in. But maybe that is the new way...smart ECU's able to deal with whatever crude they manage to suck up from the sump of the earth...

_________________
SooperDooperMiniCooperExpertEngineering

All garage work involves equal measures of enthusiasm, ingenuity and a fair degree of irresponsibility.

thats a great question. but no car maker gives any info away, exept VW. they told the owner who asked that they had to replace all parts in contact with fuel, the valveseats and some other parts and that they don't offer such a conversion.

the most "political" part was that the "Verband Deutscher Automobilhersteller" (don't ask me how you would translate this, maybe Association of German Automobile Manufacturers) said that less than 400,000 cars would be unable to use E10 in Germany. but if you ask the manufacturers there are some million cars not tolerating E10. so who is right? and if the big manufacturers, offering flex fuel cars in other countries, are saying it's not ok to use E10 over here, maybe they know something.
or just want to force selling new cars?

only time will tell, i think

_________________
Rover 214 atm ....

The handbook for my 1984 Austin Montego says that it is not to use Ethanol fuel. This is with a 1275 and a HIF44 carby.
I know that the HIF44 choke O-rings don't like modern fuel and you can run better O-rings made from viton. I don't know if the O-rings are the problem for ethanol or if there is another reason.

I think that ethanol fuel is something that we are going to have to live with.

My brother's 998 Clubby suffered from a tank of E10 -- the fuel dissolved the float boal / jet seal, which then clogged the jet making it kaput.

If you've got the 'right' seals, E10 shouldn't cause any problems, but I won't use it myself.

_________________
Simon

The adventures of an owner builder in the Tallarook Ranges

A response I got from a scientist at the SAFF company direct:
Hi Peter

Ethanol has been used as an octane extender in fuels for many decades and predates lead, and there is no obvious reason that I can think of not to use it in carburettor cars. Certainly there are many modern carburettor engines that openly state in the warranty books that E10 is suitable.

Because ethanol has a cleaning effect on the fuel system, you may need to change your fuel filter as it may loosen deposits from your fuel system. Also there may be some incompatibility with seals or hoses in the system that we are not aware of (this would possibly be an issue with the other 98 octane products on the market too). It depends what components are in your system, and how degraded they may already be. However, I would not expect there to be any significant issues, and you should get good performance from the fuel. But please seek independent advice from RAA or another such body, as we are not familiar with the intricacies of your vehicle's fuel system.

Pinging is directly related to the octane rating, and our 98 has the same rating as any other 98 on the market - so I don't know why your engine would ping more with our product... Please let us know if this continues. Have you compared our product to, say, United's 98 octane E10 (which is a similar formulation)?

Regards,

The party line?? But some of the comments do concur with posting on here, without actually condeming his own product (which you would expect of course...).

_________________
1969 Mini Cooper S MKII (1330)
1972 Honda 750/4 (his),1976 Honda 400/4 (hers)
1982 Honda CB1100RC (ours)

The organic chemistry people will appreciate this:- Shows you can't believe the Oil Company advertising.

Years ago when I was in my second year of Organic Chemistry (Pharmacy) and my best mate Greg was in his second year of Organic Chemistry (Chemical Engineering) (so we figured we new something about it ) Greg's brother, the penultimate salesman, worked for Mobil, and came home one night all excited. He had been to a sales meeting detailing the launch of a "new" product. This "new" product was the result of the clever scientists at Mobil turning the long chain molecules in their petrol into benzene rings. Now according to the glossy brochures and pretty coloured pictures, this meant that their petrol now flowed more freely through the cars pipe work and into and through the carburettor because the round rings rolled along like ball bearings instead of the long chain molecules meshing up in clumps and blocking everything with log jambs

Well Greg and I rolled on the floor laughing, Mal got all offended and was pointing at the artist impression pictures as proof it worked which just made us laugh all the more.

Guess you need a good imagination in the advertising department of an oil company

_________________
David L


My greatest fear in life is that when I die my wife will sell my Mini and tools for the price I told her I paid for them!

Just like these two adverts from 1966....

Love the jump test!

Here is another response from the man at SAFF. I was trying to absorb the info and look intelligent, but my head started to hurt and I gave up..... Maybe you smart ones out there can understand it.....

Hi Peter

Thanks for the detailed response. My main concerns would be with the older fuel lines and fittings, as they would already be old and degraded.

While ethanol is hygroscopic (absorbs atmospheric water), this will not lead to any complications as the water will be dissolved into the fuel rather than becoming free droplets. It is free water that causes problems in pumps and injectors (or jet nozzles).

As ethanol requires a lower air fuel ratio, higher ethanol blends are expected to cause enleanment but at 10% retuning is not necessary (although you would certainly benefit from a retune).

Rvp (Reid vapour pressure) increass with ethanol blends up to around 15% and then drops off again. Around 22% ethanol has the same vapour pressure as straight unleaded petrol. Higher concentrations of ethanol have lower vapour pressure than petrol (pure ethanol has very low vapour pressure). But we are limited by legislation to selling 10% max. At 10% ethanol there is about a 7.5kPa increase in Rvp over the base petrol used in the blend. That said, we are still within vapour pressure guidelines for summer grade petrol in SA (see attached). But you will notice the difference.

On the upside, the ethanol content should substantially lower your tailpipe emissions, as well as your greenhouse emissions (as the ethanol we use is produced from agricultural waste: grape marc from Nuriootpa and wheat starch waste from NSW).
Regards,

I'm just gonna change back to Ultimate, and take some Panadol.....
Peter.

_________________
1969 Mini Cooper S MKII (1330)
1972 Honda 750/4 (his),1976 Honda 400/4 (hers)
1982 Honda CB1100RC (ours)

it is good that he admits the issues with ethanol are not just "hype"

i did give E10 a good go with a few tankfulls on a 2007 plate vehicle.

the ambient temperature was high
and i experienced very strong fuel vapours.
i noticed the smell every time i got in and out of the vehicle or when idling.
I had to switch the air-con to recycle.

other people may not experience that, but
this is why i choose not to use the petrol.

The risks with my mini may be very small, but why take the chance?running lean can cause severe damage to an expensive boosted engine like mine.

if i choose to use E10 in the future on modern vehicles,
i would use it in winter and every 2nd tank or mix with 1/2 tank of regular.

I think that the Methyl Benzine ad prooves that black cars are heavier than white ones

_________________
David L


My greatest fear in life is that when I die my wife will sell my Mini and tools for the price I told her I paid for them!

I like the way that Neptune contains "Toluol" and Shell contains "Methyl Benzine"
Could there be a coincidence in this?

They are the same thing...

_________________
DrMini- 1970 wasaMatic 1360, Mk1S crank, 86.6HP (ATW) =~125 @ crank, 45 Dellorto (38 chokes), RE282 sprint cam, 1.5 rockers, 11.0:1 C/R.