I think 10% ethanol kills mpg alot more than they advertise
 

here's the thing, after driving back from PAX East (in boston) to NYC, I noticed that I was able to get 280 mpg on a full tank of gas, I also noticed that Mass actually had gas stations that don't say 10% ethanol (which made me giddy).

now when I got back, I used up 220 miles on the Odometer, and I still had a quarter tank left (finished it with some driving from queens to brooklyn, hit 280).

now going to philadelphia and back, using gas in NYC and Jersey (all of them going 10% ethanol) I noticed the drop in MPG is significant. almost where I almost an only hit the max of maybe 200/230 miles (depending on how I drive it).


has anyone ever ran a test to see if our engines tend to use up more gas than advertised when it comes to the 10% ethanol mix (they say you should only lose around 10% of your mpgs)?

should we run some tests?

I thought it was common knowledge that ethanol has less power than gasoline. You would therefor require more to run a 10% mix than straight gas.
Many here have sought out gas that didn't contain an ethanol mix. When MTBE was banned from being added to gas, ethanol was used as an alternative. This, along with government subsidies, caused ethanol to be used outside of the farm states.

I filled up my tank 3 times with 93 octane no ethanol gas and got an average of 250 miles before the light turned on. Over the next couple weeks driving the same route and everything i filled up 3 times with 89 octane and 10% ethanol and only got an average of 215 miles before the light turned on. Is it the octane level that gets you better MPG or is it the no ethanol factor that gets better MPG?

MPG has been going down in NYC, cuz I swear when I got my car new I can get 200 per tank driving around in the city. but now I'd be lucky to get around 160?

they said up to 10% but its a known fact that lots of station actually has more than 10% GARBAGE in the mix.

I love how we're paying (taxes) for garbage (ethanol) but the EPA which is running by bunch of lobbyist kept telling me what I can/cannot use.

we know that ethanol has less power, it's even stated by the companies that it is. but, the big question I'm trying to bring up is, is ethanol in gas even worse for rotaries? like do we end up losing even more MPG vs Piston engines?

Saw a report locally on the news where they tested all types of stations for advertised 10% ethanol content and some companies/stations came back as much as 32%!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I'll see if I can find it, but that was the bottom line.

Whereabouts in MA did you find ethanol free gas? Only thing I see is the ethanol shit. I've actually thought about driving over to the harbor in New Bedford to see if they carry any ehtanol free fuel I'd be able to fuel up with lol. Also, just because you don't see the sticker doesn't mean that it's ethanol free. I was under the impression it was a state mandate to have at least 10% at the pumps... bastards.

I'm not sure, I'm not from that area.

it's somewhere in between north Connecticut/south Massachusetts

about 3%

32% ? ...

I am just gonna jump off the bridge.

I really really hate the government (or is it the lobbyist?) is telling me (don't know about you guys) that what I can/cannot use to fill my car up.

Where's your American spirit?

Even in Texas, we at least put a barrel of that shit gas in our Cessna before we give it back to the Govmint. ;)

Cessna?

So you're from SA, but didn't hear about Joe Stack's IRS feud in Austin Feb 2010.

Joe was careless with his IRS forms and payments (bought into the "it's my money and I can do what I want" mentality), so before the hammer came, he ran his family off to a hotel.

Then, the next morning he torched his house, went to the airpark to prep his Cessna with a 55 gal drum of gas, and rammed the IRS business offices in North Austin.

It was quite the tantrum, and pretty much the same thought we all have when we think about the thieving Govmint.