Hi,
Just wondering if anybody knows about the effect of using ethanol blended (E10) fuel in Alfas.
Specifically I drive a 1989 75 2.0 Twin Spark, but also interested to know how it works, or doesn't work, in other models. We also have a 2005 GT 3.2V6 and 1977 Spyder 2.0 fuel injected in our family.
Cheers!
Alfa's website dictates that all cars since Alfa's reintroduction in 1999 are fine to run on Ethanol blended fuels to a maximum of 5%, otherwise known as E5. Here is what AR say officially.
Ethanol
All Alfa Romeo vehicles imported since 1998 must run on minimum 95 R.O.N. fuel (premium unleaded petrol), but will operate satisfactorily on E5 (5% ethanol blended petrol European Standard EN228). Note E5 is not available in Australia at present. E10 (10% ethanol blended) petrol, however, is not recommended except in emergency situations as there are material compatibility and drivability issues. E10 ethanol blended petrol is not recommended for earlier model Alfa Romeo vehicles due to material incompatibility.
So, you basically cant run E10 in any of your vehicles, although E5 will most likely be fine for the GT and 75. I still wouldnt run it in the Spyder. Be aware also that Ethanol changes the specific gravity and calorific value of the fuel enough to mean your mileage on a tank of ethanol blend will be lower than that of normal stuff. It may turn out then that any benefit you gain from the price differential of Ethanol blended fuels maybe negated by poorer mileage.
Hope that helps.
As a postscript, the Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries says that pre-1998 Alfas are not suitable for running on E5 or E10.
.More from FCAI
OLDER VEHICLES
Introduction
The following information outlines the key reasons why vehicle manufacturers do not recommend the use of any ethanol/petrol blended fuels in vehicles made before 1986. This information is also applicable to post-1986 vehicles listed as unsuitable to use ethanol blended petrol. Ethanol has a number of important chemical and physical properties that need to be considered in a vehicle's design.
Carburettor Equipped Engines
Vehicles made before 1986 vehicles were predominantly equipped with carburettors and steel fuel tanks. The use of ethanol blended petrol in engines impacts the air/fuel ratio because of the additional oxygen molecules within the ethanol's chemical structure. Vehicles with carburettor fuel systems may experience hot fuel handling concerns. This is because the vapour pressure of fuel with ethanol will be greater (if the base fuel is not chemically adjusted) and probability of vapour lock or hot restartability problems will be increased.
As a solvent, ethanol attacks both the metallic and rubber based fuels lines, and other fuel system components. Ethanol also has an affinity to water that can result in corrosion of fuel tanks and fuel lines. Rust resulting from this corrosion can ultimately block the fuel supply rendering the engine inoperable. Water in the fuel system can also result in the engine hesitating and running roughly.
Fuel Injected Engines
In addition to the issues mentioned above for carburettor equipped engines, the use of ethanol blended petrol in fuel injection systems will result in early deterioration of components such as injector seals, delivery pipes, and fuel pump and regulator. Mechanical fuel injection systems and earlier electronic systems may not be able to fully compensate for the lean-out effect of ethanol blended petrol, resulting in hesitation or flat-spots during acceleration. Difficulty in starting and engine hesitation after cold start can also result.
Exhaust And Evaporative Emission Levels
Lean-out resulting from the oxygenating effect of ethanol in the fuel may affect exhaust emissions. Of more concern is that fuel containing ethanol can increase permeation emissions from fuel system components, particularly those that have aged for nearly 20 years. Therefore the increased vapour pressure of fuel with ethanol (if the base fuel is not chemically adjusted at the refining stage) will lead to increased evaporative emissions.
Hi All,
Just noticed this thread, as a chemist I have to take issue with some of the points in the above statement.
Oxygen in ethanol is in atomic, not molecular form.
The oxygen in ethanol is analagous to double bonds in the hydrocarbon chain (the hydrocarbon is said to be "unsaturated" or oxidised, even though it contains no oxygen). As an example, consider the reaction of ethanol by comparison to xylene (a component in high octane fuel) and octane;
2C8H10 + 21O2 => 16CO2 + 10H2O (toluene conbustion)
8C2H5OH + 24O2 => 16CO2 + 24H2O
2C8H18 + 34O2 => 16CO2 + 18H2O
so as you can see when the equations are balanced for carbon ethanol provides some oxygen for the combustion process, it falls between the high and low oxygen demand for components in fuel. As such, with properly made fuel the AF ratio should be the same.
As for the vapour pressure thing, mixtures of liquids behave differently from the pure compounds, just because the vapour pressure of ethanol may be higher (an assumption I haven't checked) than the components of petrol, doesn't necessarily mean that the vapour pressure of ethanol/petrol mixes will be higher, look up azeotrope in wikipedia. Physical chemistry can be a bugger.
"As a solvent, ethanol..." Toluene, xylene, and petroleum spirits are all also solvents, known as paint thinner, in my experience (several years as a paint chemist) I'd rather wash up in ethanol than paint thinner.
Ethanol has an affinity for water, correct, in fact it'll dry out your fuel system by carrying the water through the system, eventually out the exhaust. Large quantities of water will make the engine run poorly, but you'd have to have to add water to the tank to get enough in to cause trouble, then add some ethanol to get it out!!
Rust is an electrochemical process it requires several things to work. Iron is necessary, given it's a steel fuel tank that's rusting away, we'll say that's there. An electrode attached to the iron, in the smelting process of making steel small particles of carbon are embedded into the steel structure, instant electrode. Water, or more correctly an electrolyte, water in this case will do. Last thing we need is oxygen, but molecular oxygen i.e. O2, generally dissolved in the water. If the oxygen is consumed in the oxidation process, which in this case it is then it needs to be replenished from the air. A closed fuel tank would have virtually no oxygen in it, the act of refilling the tank would purge the air from the tank leaving fuel vapour, no oxygen available. So your fuel tank can't rust from the inside out, just because of ethanol, in fact it may help. Try this out yourself. Get two steel wool pieces, wet both and leave one under water, the other open to the atmosphere, but keep it wet, see the diffrence.
As for the early deleterious effects of ethanol, I think the jury is still out on this one, how would you know it was due to the ethanol, not just the change in blend of the fuel? Hard to say really, but some of the rubber components may swell in contact with ethanol. I'm yet to be convinced either way on this one, wait for more testing.
As for the exhaust and emmisions, I've lready stated that the evaporative thing is a myth, and the oxygenation is scientifically unfounded, so the exhaust emissions will be similar. Fuel system components that are permeable to fuel should be REPLACED, regardless of the type of fuel you use, they're dangerous.
I think Alfa Aus are covering their respective arses by not recommending that you can use the 10% if they say that the 5% is OK. That said, I also wouldn't recommend it, you pay extra for it (at Shell) and if your car can't be tuned to take advantage of the extra octane, your wasting money. The environmental benefits of ethanol blended fuels is also debateable.
Cheers
Stuart
Ha - first thing you've said on this forum in 6 months Stuart :-)
Yeh, well im just the messenger from FCAI, Im no chemist :)
Still, the most convincing argument for me is that you dont save any money by getting it even though its cheaper because it increases fuel consumption - so in the end if you're all square anyway whats the point in potentially causing damage to your fuel system and engine.
A bit of a no brainer.
BTW, I saw that in the latest Alleggerita Barry Edmunds was looking for info on Ethanol fuels to present to the club, perhaps someone could point him over here for some education.
Ciao
Pete
Took me a while to see this post :-).
I'd like to add that I used ethanol based fuel the other day and tuned to it (shell 100 octane). In a 2l engine, with 11.8:1 compression. I popped it in my Alfetta gtv with PACE motor. It was sensational, allowing a lot of advance, due to the MON number being another 4 points higher than premium...not to mention RON of 2 points higher. Engine loved it......Patched fuel tank however did not. About 1 week after useing the fuel I noted a slow leak from the tank. I put two and two together, gave the patch a tap...and it fell to the ground :-)
Not the fault of the fuel IMO (well it is I guess), but rather the stupid user (me). I understand that ethanol impacts on some polymers, and therefore should have had the tank repaired properly via brazing....which I am now.
My 2 cents on the topic, is that if you dont mind paying and tuning for it (ideally via increased compression and ignition advance), then shell vpower WILL improve HP, I've seen back to back proof on this in lab testing.
Bog stock base fuels with 10% E dumped on top (and not modified) WILL give a reduction in energy content in the fuel, resulting in a reduction in fuel economy that you could not measure due to changing driving styles and tyre pressures making a larger difference....still in theory, you'll get less km's/tank. How you going to work out if you get less miles/dollar then?.....you're probably not, so buy what makes you feel good....or if you think you've got water in your tank, run a few tank fulls through and dry it up :-)...theres a real benefit...consider it free water injection..heh heh...without control ;). On a serious note, if your manufacturer tells you you cant run it (and your components are standard), I'd listen to them, there WILL be a good reason for it ;)
I love it when Stuart talks dirty....
I do not want to generalise, but based on what I have heard (and experience in my 3lt), Shell high octaine with or without ethanol does not seem to produce the desired benefit with Alfas (or BMW's).
The car seem to lose its willingness to rev in comparison with BP Ultimate or Caltex, does not have as much 'get up and go'. Don't know why.
Strange; but same was agreed by a few other club members.
Cheers.
that's interesting. I put half a tank of Shell in yesterday, on top of a quarter tank of BP. Some of the time during the drive I was wondering why it felt a bit sluggish. But then I'd give it some welly again and think "nah, that's alright, it was just my imagination before". Hmmm, I wonder......
I always assumed there'd be two-fifths of bugger-all difference between the fuels, but usually get BP because someone I trust assured me it was the best.
Crickey ! Strange but believable.
Well try and fill her up from empty and taking her for a spin, ...... most dissapointing.
I understand that a Shell Rep did a presentation on a club night last year?
Wasn't this discussed ?
Hi All,
I only just saw this ad and thought, I have the answer to this. I bought my 3L 98 GTV from David Noble who was the chief mechanic for Alfa Brisbane when Alfa's started returning to the country. He warned me from the get-go , don't use anything but premium as you will blow the oxygen censor in the motor. A little repair that can cost big bucks. For me i'll pay the extra and use premium. When i bought it he had a 156 in getting the oxygen sensor replaced because someone used standard unleaded. I was told and i don't know if he was trying to scare me, but it was $1000 for the repair.
Cheers
Tony
Sounds a bit extreme, not sure exactly which sensor that car runs but a wide-band lambda sensor should only cost around $200-$300 (and are comming down in price as more and more cars use them), and there not exactly hard to swap over.
I agree with the bits of Stuarts post I knew & learned from the rest. We used to add ethanol to the rally car so we COULD add water! When water turns to steam it increases volume 11 times, so small amounts of water increase power. Some rally cars actually have water injectors.
My main concern is the base fuel - Stuart has assummed that all fuel is good. There are 4 oil companies that refine fuel in Australia and only 3 of them refine 98 octane. All other fuel is imported. Typically bought on the spot market with varying levels of quality. Typically also sourced from Singapore. A big querstion is: Who adds the enthanol? How? and How accurarely? The danger of the witches brew that might come out of an independant fuel station is too big for me. I buy from the biggest highest volume dealer I can find with a multinational brand on the pole. I'm not completely confident, but I believe that only 91 & 98 octane is refined and 95 octane is a shandy. For my old Alfa's I want all the octanes I can get since they were made for super leaded and for the new ones I want the best refined most consistent which I reckon is 98 coming out of a yellow green or blue pump.
Doug Gould
I'll risk running out of fuel in the GTA until i find a certain global service station chain, some pommy place originally i think :P
Ed the pommy company you refer to started life as Commonwealth refineries in a little outpost of the empire about 4000k to the west of New Zealand.
Quote from: TurboGTV on February 03, 2008, 12:48:14 PM
HOWEVER! If the oxy sensor fails, then on a vehicle with adaptive learning and fuel trim (not sure if thats Alfa or not), the computer can continually detect a lean condition, and starts to richen up the fueling a bit. This will then affect the catalytic converter(s), by overloading the materials which are supposed to absorb various things (but cannot handle too much unburned fuel). A faulty air flow meter will cause the same effect, and if you've ever driven behind or had go past you a late model car which absolutely stinks of sulphur, that is the smell made by a catalytic converter being poisoned. Cats can be very expensive, especially if talking genuine parts.
So if you notice that your car smells like sulphur when you get out of it, book it in to find out why. It'll be costing you fuel economy anyway, and could cost you more in parts if you don't get it checked.
Hmmm...
Sulphur doesn't smell. What you can smell is hydrogen sulphide or rotten egg gas. This comes from the sulphur compounds in the fuel, a car running rich will smell that way, but so also does a car which has recently been accelerating as this sends the mixture rich as well. So if you've just been out for a blast don't worry too much.
Also Catalytic converters do not "absorb" anything they are a catalyst bed to enhance the rate of firstly a reduction reaction to convert NOx to Nitrogen and Oxygen, then an oxidation reaction to convert CO to CO2 and unburnt hydrocarbons to CO2 and water. Chronic overrich conditions can heat the catalyst up to the melting point of the catalyst thus destroying it by plugging the cat.
So to wrap up, a slight H2S smell is normal and actually indicates that the reduction part of the catalyst is still working (as H2S is the reduction product of SOx). If your car is running really rich then the cat can heat up to extreme temperatures, the car's electronics should pick up a failed Lamda sensor, but you'll notice it in the hip pocket as well.
Cheers
Stuart
Stewart is a great asset to have on this subject. I wonder what fuel he uses in his race car.
I also concur with Mike, my 1960's 1600's allow me a higher advance and more appreciable power from my higher comp motors when I use 'Shell V-power Racing' (100). No other brands seem to have the same benefit. On longer runs such as Alfesta in South Australia my use of 'octane boost' in a bottle also gave me the desired result but cost a bit more per tank than V-power Racing does. Because of all this voodo, I frequently look at all components of the fuel systems on my cars including dismantle of the carbs, filter unit, fuel pump, hoses and fuel gauge unit, and can not find any evidence that my use of Octane Boost in a bottle or V-power Racing has caused. Unless someone like Vin Sharp (or Stuart) tells me I'm doing damage, I will continue to enjoy the benefits of the higher octane blends that these cars were made for, thanks to Ethanol.
Keep in mind my heart, my passion and my cars are from the 60's and 70's.
Ok, slightly off topic but Stuey, what all this then.......does this all make sense or not....
The development of the range of Martini Race fuels is the product of extensive laboratory research to develop a superior blend of hydrocarbons and oxygenates that will provide smooth and rapid combustion to significantly boost power output.
As part of the engines normal combustion process, oxygen from the air intake is combined with the fuel to ignite in the combustion chamber. If this ignition process is not smooth, knocking or pinging will occur thereby causing loss of power, poor fuel economy, over heating and possibly even engine damage due to detonation.
Martini has developed a superior method to improve this combustion process by chemically adding oxygen to our race fuel formulations. By increasing the oxygen level in the combustion zone we have now changed the stoichiometric ratio and this creates a denser "fuel charge" which can significantly increases power.
Martini Race fuels are designed for competition, high performance and elite motor sport applications. Martini Race fuels have been extensively proven in both track and dynamometer testing. They are equally well suited to modern high performance normally aspirated engines as well as those that are turbo-charged or super-charged and with sophisticated computer controlled engine management systems. These same characteristics also make them suitable for older technology carburettor motors including those with with up to 16:1 compression ratios.
Now I know what Scott does with that bottle of Vermooth that I see him walking around with at track days. I thought he was just an alcho.
Quote from: Scott Farquharson on February 11, 2008, 02:12:47 PM
Ok, slightly off topic but Stuey, what all this then.......does this all make sense or not....
The development of the range of Martini Race fuels is the product of extensive laboratory research to develop a superior blend of hydrocarbons and oxygenates that will provide smooth and rapid combustion to significantly boost power output.
As part of the engines normal combustion process, oxygen from the air intake is combined with the fuel to ignite in the combustion chamber. If this ignition process is not smooth, knocking or pinging will occur thereby causing loss of power, poor fuel economy, over heating and possibly even engine damage due to detonation.
Martini has developed a superior method to improve this combustion process by chemically adding oxygen to our race fuel formulations. By increasing the oxygen level in the combustion zone we have now changed the stoichiometric ratio and this creates a denser "fuel charge" which can significantly increases power.
Martini Race fuels are designed for competition, high performance and elite motor sport applications. Martini Race fuels have been extensively proven in both track and dynamometer testing. They are equally well suited to modern high performance normally aspirated engines as well as those that are turbo-charged or super-charged and with sophisticated computer controlled engine management systems. These same characteristics also make them suitable for older technology carburettor motors including those with with up to 16:1 compression ratios.
Can't comment on the amount of research done at the Martini labs, but if you can get me a sample of the fuel I can analyse it and regular fuels to see the difference.
"Chemically adding oxygen" to me means they've put alcohol in there, doesn't have to be ethanol though.
Chemistry is chemistry, the amount of oxygen required is determined by the amount of carbon, so if the fuel is more dense (i.e more weight per volume) then you may be able to get more fuel into the charge, but it then requires more air to burn properly if the intake can't do it then your wasting fuel. I don't really know what give fuel it's antiknock, but it's related to octane number, I assume this stuff is high octane, so obviously with one you get the other. Of course the only real test is a dyno, if it works, it works, if not, then no amount of hype will make it.
Cheers
Stuart
Martini, elf, philips and others have fuel that somehow adds oxygen. When I last rallied (about 10 years ago) we ran an elf fuel that cost $14 per litre.
At the end of the war (as piston engines hit their peak of tecnology) they were experimenting with 400 octane fuel to get more power out of the urbo compound radial engines. Then Sir Frank Whittle found you could get more thrust with a funnel a fan and kerosene!!
Doug Gould
Quote from: Gary Pearce on February 11, 2008, 02:48:57 PM
Now I know what Scott does with that bottle of Vermooth that I see him walking around with at track days. I thought he was just an alcho.
Nah, I was drinking it...