Honda CR-Z Hybrid Car Forums banner
1 - 20 of 24 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
47 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
So there is only one gas station near my house (luckily) that still sells pure gasoline (at like 40 cents a gallon more expensive). They make a claim that it is more efficient than E10...like 25% more efficient. Does anyone know if there is truth to this, and if so I honestly wouldn't mind paying an extra 5 dollars for an increase in 25% fuel efficiency. 25% probably is an overstatement. Any thoughts?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
106 Posts
So there is only one gas station near my house (luckily) that still sells pure gasoline (at like 40 cents a gallon more expensive). They make a claim that it is more efficient than E10...like 25% more efficient. Does anyone know if there is truth to this, and if so I honestly wouldn't mind paying an extra 5 dollars for an increase in 25% fuel efficiency. 25% probably is an overstatement. Any thoughts?
Yes...

Our choices are running out.

Pump with 100% gas...



What does Honda say in our owners manual pg. 231...



I personally use 100% gas.

Here is an old news story several years back, I feel it's repeating itself...

Gas price decline: Day 25



Try both ways, that is my recommendation.

If the letters are to small here is a tip: Hold down the ctrl key and then press the plus + key, to make smaller press and hold the ctrl key, then press the - minus key.

Did someone say history repeats itself. Then there is no reason for us to make the same mistakes.

Yours truly,

-Roger
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
239 Posts
The mileage isn't a biggie with ethanol, Id worry more about any seals/gaskets. I push stabilizer on everybody that I sell small engine products too. Its too expensive for cars, but on a small engine (w/ carburetor that can get gummed up) its a life saver as not as much gas is used.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32 Posts
E10 (10% ethanol 90% real gas) has about 3% less energy per gallon vs 100% pure gas. Depending on the time of year, you'll see 2-4% lower MPG with E10.

E85- has about 25% less energy content per gallon - so the FE is huge.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
151 Posts
I'd much rather use ethanol-free gas, but unfortunately there are only 3 or 4 stations in the entire Tampa bay area that sell it. And there are both far away and charge about 30 cents more per gallon, so it's not worth it for me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,702 Posts
I know this thread has been dead for almost 2 years but I want to know if anyone else still try's to use pure gasoline vs. E10 and if so what grade is it how much more it is about the E10 equivalent grade.

I have one gas station very close that still sells pure gas at 89 Octane and is about $0.03 more than the E10 89 Octane equivalent, which is a hell of a deal IMO.
 

·
Volunteer Admin
2011 CRZ EX, and 2011 CRZ Mugen 060/300
Joined
·
6,184 Posts
Only 3 cents more?! Yea go with the pure gasoline while you can! It's true that there's less energy content in E10 when compared to pure gasoline. I first learned of this when the dean of my college mentioned it. He is a chemical engineer.
 

·
BANNED
Joined
·
3,501 Posts
I know this thread has been dead for almost 2 years but I want to know if anyone else still try's to use pure gasoline vs. E10 and if so what grade is it how much more it is about the E10 equivalent grade.

I have one gas station very close that still sells pure gas at 89 Octane and is about $0.03 more than the E10 89 Octane equivalent, which is a hell of a deal IMO.
How is 3 cents cheaper a "hell of a deal"? You saved 30 cents a tank.. That's nothing.. especially since your going to get worse MPG's with it. Use the pure gas. Ethanol is crap.
 

·
Volunteer Admin
2011 CRZ EX, and 2011 CRZ Mugen 060/300
Joined
·
6,184 Posts
Ethanol is crap.
Yea I wish they would stop using corn for the majority of it's creation. I remember when my parents first started complaining of rising food costs. But at least they use some grasses, too, to produce ethanol.

The other thing is, if we're going to do this, at least go all out with 90-100% ethanol. Don't fiddle with the 10% crap which lowers mpg's. The 10% aint helpin anybody, it's just a tease :box:
 

·
CR-Z Forum Librarian
Joined
·
7,161 Posts
The real irony is that we appear to be heading toward a shortage of ethanol, as a number of producers have shut down as drought has driven upthe price of corn and limited supply. i think it is still too costly to make it from other materials like plant stubble, and supply of that is not consistent either. Plus, fuel demand has probably fallen under expectaitons owing to extended poor economic conditions generally. The volumes aren't there, to make production profitable. So, mandated ethanol content may be at risk of low supply. Wouldn't it be ironic if fuel prices rose because of a shortage of corn, instead of oil???
 

·
CORRUPT
Joined
·
2,351 Posts
Ethanol is not crap.

Ethanol is an excellent fuel because it's renewable and it can be used in existing internal combustion engines. Burning a finite resource, like fossil fuels, for energy is very short sighted, especially when it is necessary for other things. Sure, ethanol isn't perfect, but it is one of the better solutions out there. People complain about the reduced fuel economy without understanding why is this is the case and will simply shrug it off as a lower quality fuel. The reason for this lower mpg, is that the air/fuel ratio is 9:1, as opposed to 14.7:1 for gasoline, requiring a higher volume of fuel to be consumed for the same amount of air. Other than that, it has some very redeeming qualities, such as a higher octane rating and is very clean burning. However, when ethanol is taken to it's max potential, the fuel economy disadvantage can be negated with higher compression ratios better suited for ethanol. Brazil has already sorted out all the issues of an ethanol economy; there's no reason we can't do the same.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
169 Posts
My experience with 100% gas vs. 10% ethanol is that I average 41MPG even on the coldest of days on 100% gas. On winter gas (10% ethanol) I only avg. 38MPG (about a 7% drop). Where I buy 100% gas it's 20 cents more a gallon. But the way I figure it, since I usually fill up with 8 gallons, that's what, $1.60? Well worth it IMO.

What I find really funny is all the people I know who are willing to drive 10 miles out of their way to save 3 cents a gallon. They don't even consider that they are only saving 30 cents on a 10 gallon fill-up.
 

·
CR-Z Forum Librarian
Joined
·
7,161 Posts
Ethanol is not crap.

Ethanol is an excellent fuel because it's renewable and it can be used in existing internal combustion engines. Burning a finite resource, like fossil fuels, for energy is very short sighted, especially when it is necessary for other things. Sure, ethanol isn't perfect, but it is one of the better solutions out there. People complain about the reduced fuel economy without understanding why is this is the case and will simply shrug it off as a lower quality fuel. The reason for this lower mpg, is that the air/fuel ratio is 9:1, as opposed to 14.7:1 for gasoline, requiring a higher volume of fuel to be consumed for the same amount of air. Other than that, it has some very redeeming qualities, such as a higher octane rating and is very clean burning. However, when ethanol is taken to it's max potential, the fuel economy disadvantage can be negated with higher compression ratios better suited for ethanol. Brazil has already sorted out all the issues of an ethanol economy; there's no reason we can't do the same.
Technical points aside (which I willingly concede), I would suggest that ethanol from food stock is NOT a particularly bright or far-sighted solution to fuel supply or emissions problems. Besides being horribly polluting when you consider the entire cycle (including non-renewables like fertilizers), it is obscene to divert land use and/or food to fill your gas tank when it could be put to better use to feed the other 7 billion mouths on the planet. It may not be "crap" as fuel, but as policy, it sure smells like that.

E10 or E85 are no more than stop-gap measures - neither is going to make the world a better place in the long run.

Time, money, and energy would be better spent on converting to a hydrogen-based fuel source that could be used for vehicles, home heating, and industrial applications. At some point, the problem of prohibitive cost and energy-input to create H2 will be resolved. Only then will we have a long-term solution to a renewable and non-polluting fuel supply.
 

·
Volunteer Admin
2011 CRZ EX, and 2011 CRZ Mugen 060/300
Joined
·
6,184 Posts
Time, money, and energy would be better spent on converting to a hydrogen-based fuel source that could be used for vehicles, home heating, and industrial applications. At some point, the problem of prohibitive cost and energy-input to create H2 will be resolved. Only then will we have a long-term solution to a renewable and non-polluting fuel supply.
Its stuff like that that I want to work on someday! I'm doing an internship right now at laboratory, where the whole point of everything we do here is to make fusion a viable source of energy. It's cleaner and wayyyy safer than nuclear fission.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
886 Posts
Bah, they can't even make the target ignite/explode, after a lifetime of failed attempts.. Then they have to figure out how to actually harness the power.. Learn from the past, things take MUCH longer than anyone ever hopes, so we're looking at another century. (that's about fusion.. I was told we'd have fusion by the 90's and power plants by this century! hah.. We were taught lots of silly things in the 80's. Burning hydrogen is much like banging rocks, so I have no doubt we can make the switch to that)
 
1 - 20 of 24 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top