E10 Facts or fiction

[fussydave]

With the arrival of E10 fuel I would like to sort out facts from fiction, so maybe the knowledgeable people on here can answer the following questions:


1 Is E10 really bad for our cars? Surely if there is ethanol in E5 this must be doing harm already?

2 If E10 is bad, if I have half a tank of E5 and top up with E10, would this be the equivalent to E7.5 and would this be less harmfull? Could I say do three tanks of E5 to one of E10?

3 Is there any additives that can be put into the E10 fuel to reduce the harm? A chap on the news last night from a classic car organisation suggested there was.

4 If it is harming our cars, what components are at risk, tank, pump, pipes, filter, carburettor, inlet manifold, inlet valves? What can be done to protect them from E10?

5 What has the club been doing to assist its members with regard to advise and help with this issue?

6 And a cynical one – I heard that fuel consumption increases with E10 therefore, if it supposedly reduces the equivalent of 350000 cars per year of pollution off the roads, surely the fact that fuel consumption increases negates the gains? Further, forcing older cars to switch to 97 octane must actually increase their pollution output? Is this a back handed way for the government to shorten the life of older cars and get them off the road or is it a way to raise more revenue by forcing older cars to pay 15p/litre more as more environmentally unfriendly electric cars appear on the roads?

Dave

[RobinLegin]

You might find some of the answers to your questions at the Federation of British Historic Vehicles Club. https://www.fbhvc.co.uk/fuels
I already suffer fuel vapour lock in the 1955 Alvis on E5 and carry an old domestic spray bottle with water. In the event of a total failure to restart, say after filling up, I spray the fuel pipes and carburettors with water mist. As the water evaporates in the heat, it cools the said carburettors and fuel lines allowing me to restart. I suspect we may have similar problems with our Stag unless run on more expensive 97/99 Octane with E5.

[DJT]

There are a lot of keyboard warriors out there who claim that it is the deathknell for old cars, just as there were when 4-Star was being replaced by unleaded. Personally, I have driven over 110,000 miles in Stags (over 60,000 in my first and over 45,000 in my current) all on 95-octane supermarket unleaded with no adverse reactions except a burnt out exhaust valve on my first Stag. This was with a head that had been rebuilt (by a main supplier) with cheap valves .

As for you questions:

1. Good point, and I agree. I can't see how increasing the ethanol content by such a small amount is going to make a drastic difference. R9 fuel hoses have been available for many years and should be used with E5/E10.

2. Yes to the first part of your question.

3. Yes. Just as there are lead replacement additives for unleaded. Still used by some Stag owners, but totally unnecessary.

4. Let's start at the fuel cap and work forward:

Fuel cap rubber seal: Mine has not been affected by E5 since I replaced it 13 years ago. If concerned, give it a smear with petroleum jelly, which is good for lubricating it anyway.
Fuel tank: Welded steel. They are prone to rusting through the bottom, but this can be just as much from damp in the boot as from inside. Ethanol is said to attract water which settles out, but this would be true of E5.
Fuel float and sender: If it can survive constantly in contact with E5 for many years, is E10 going to dissolve it overnight?
Fuel Pump: I have had confirmation that the ECCO pump is safe to use. Still waiting for response from Burlen.
Fuel pipes: Any rubber flexible hoses should be changed to R9. Good idea to change them periodically anyway. Other pipes are plastic which is impervious to ethanol. Some may have been replaced with copper or cunifer. Copper may be affected, but I hardly think the additional 5% is going to dissolve them overnight.
Fuel filter: Change annually.
Carburettors: There are stories about that ethanol attacks aluminium. Really? Is the additional 5% going to dissolve aluminium that seems impervious to 5%? Diaphragms aren't in direct contact with fuel and seem to last for many years using 5% (I haven't had to change one between carb rebuilds - 10 years) but are cheap and easy to change periodically anyway. Other carb components and gaskets bought from a reliable supplier should have been tested. As above, I am still waiting on a response from Burlen.

E10 has been in use in the USA for about 20 years.

5. The club refers us to the FBHVC website. This, as befits a major organisation, prefers to err on the side of caution suggesting we use Superunleaded if in doubt. They cannot give advice on every classic car out there.

6. No comment.

I use my Stag regularly and throughout the year. I have no intention of changing from using supermarket 95-octane unleaded unless I encounter a problem I haven't expected.

As usual, the above is my opinion and worth exactly what you paid for it. It is based on over 30 years of Stag ownership, maintenance and repair, as well as a good dose of common sense.

[Roy_S]

Agreed, I think the Stag will have less issues than say the older cars out there. As for fule pipes, I've fitted new ones recently and not happy with them as they seems to smell of fuel and so will be replacing again with new. Might look for plastic this time.

[trunt]

I have run my Classic cars on E10 for approaching 10 years. In this part of USA it’s all that is easily available. All of my cars had new fuel lines installed as part of the restoration, not because of E10, but because I don’t keep 50 year old rubber fuel line. My MGB has the SU pump from when I bought it about 8 years ago and it was far from new then. The Fuel cap seal on the Stag, probably original, is fine. I have never had vapour lock even in the high temperatures we get here, but to be fair my Stag has features to run the fan and pump after switch off.

I have not personally experienced any issues I can directly attribute to E10. The only precaution I take is to use up the tank at the end of the year and fill to the brim with fresh fuel before putting them away for the winter to reduce the chance of condensation in the tank. I do not believe that there is an additive specifically for E10, but should you use one ensure that it does not contain more ether, many do! I use STA-BIL

I have many classic car friends over here and it’s not something we stress about, yes the lawn mowers and chain saws sitting in the damp sheds (my 25 year old mower was fine until the wheel fell off!) but not really the cars, except ones that have sat idle for years, not months.

[bullstarz]

It’s a bit of scaremongering, but the increase from 5-10 % ethanol is quite a big jump, 100% more in reality. The difference between a strong Beer and wine when compared to alcohol. It will have some effect but possibly won’t be noticeable from a drivers perspective. It will be problematic for any hoses or fuel related parts that are not designed for it. What happens to that part in the way it might fail again up for debate. Some will loose the flexibility and become hard and brittle while other will start to turn onto a sticky substance other will just get eaten away.

But a lot of the fuel lines that have been made over the 20 years or so will not have any issue as they have a wide spectrum of uses. But if you have some 40-50 year old original hoses fitted to your car it time to change them anyway.

[flying farmer]

I noticed the mixture ran weaker when travelling in France using E10 (Ihave a wideband lambda fitted) so tweaked the mixture a bit richer before I went the following year.

Some of the fuel hose I have fitted on my EFI system over the last few years has been pretty poor quality cracking on the bends after only 2-3 years, both the old R6 and the newer R9. I had a hose split last weekend and spray a jet of fuel over the engine, fortunately it was on the low pressure return side and I decided to wash the car before I went on a Club triumph run. Could smell petrol as I washed it, I'm glad it was filthy or I might just have driven off without noticing

I have tried sourcing different makes of fuel pipe in the hope of finding something better.

Neil

[Markvh]

[QUOTE=fussydave;n824505]With the arrival of E10 fuel I would like to sort out facts from fiction, so maybe the knowledgeable people on here can answer the following questions:


1 Is E10 really bad for our cars? Surely if there is ethanol in E5 this must be doing harm already?

2 If E10 is bad, if I have half a tank of E5 and top up with E10, would this be the equivalent to E7.5 and would this be less harmfull? Could I say do three tanks of E5 to one of E10?

3 Is there any additives that can be put into the E10 fuel to reduce the harm? A chap on the news last night from a classic car organisation suggested there was.

4 If it is harming our cars, what components are at risk, tank, pump, pipes, filter, carburettor, inlet manifold, inlet valves? What can be done to protect them from E10?

5 What has the club been doing to assist its members with regard to advise and help with this issue?

6 And a cynical one – I heard that fuel consumption increases with E10 therefore, if it supposedly reduces the equivalent of 350000 cars per year of pollution off the roads, surely the fact that fuel consumption increases negates the gains? Further, forcing older cars to switch to 97 octane must actually increase their pollution output? Is this a back handed way for the government to shorten the life of older cars and get them off the road or is it a way to raise more revenue by forcing older cars to pay 15p/litre more as more environmentally unfriendly electric cars appear on the roads?

I think the reduction in carbon pollution is gained by the extra crops that are to grown to produce the additional ethanol absorbing 750,000 tonnes of carbon per year so it is an offset really. See extract below from the BBC so it must be true.

How green is this really?

Introducing E10 could cut carbon emissions by 750,000 tonnes a year, the DfT says, the equivalent of taking 350,000 cars off the road.

That's a matter of some debate.

Ethanol is seen as a carbon-neutral fuel, since the plants absorb carbon dioxide from the air while they are growing, offsetting the CO2 emitted when the fuel is burnt.

However, no-one is quite sure whether the two really cancel each other out.

And some people have moral objections to using food crops to produce fuels.

They say it could cause food shortages or increases in food prices.

There have also been reports E10 is a less stable fuel, the RAC says.

And this could make it more difficult to start a car that has not been driven for quite a while.

Other motor industry analysts say E10 might be a less efficient fuel than E5, meaning cars would burn more of it to achieve the same effect and running costs rise as drivers fill up more often.

[fussydave]

Thanks guys for your responses. DJT your comprehensive replies to my points has eased my mind somewhat. Trunt your live experience also gives me some comfort. And Mark, I think the analysis you mention is right, the benefits may not be as good as made out. My concern over this was that I am considering selling the Stag and need to be prepared if a potential purchaser is concerned about the fuel change. I have replaced my pipes in the engine bay with braided pipes and the pump is an LD Parts ECCO type so I think I have already taken fair precautions. The carbs were rebuilt last autumn so new seals, etc. fitted.

I had expected more debate and response to this subject, clearly though people are not that worried.

Dave

[RNF]

Some of us are not concerned as we have easy access to non-ethanol fuels too.