|
|
Cruiser
Posts: 105
Columbia, TN United States | Just a little FYI on gasoline. This past summer, I decided to get another gas card for my trips to have more than one choice for fuel. I had a Phillips/Conoco card and obtained a Shell card.
My local Phillips stations have gasoline with no ethanol. The local Shell has ethanol.
This is before my Vision and was on my 2004 Nomad 1500. With the Phillips on the road one up, I averaged between 50 - 55 mpg highway and 40 - 44 in town. When I started running the Shell, it went to 40-46 highway and 32-36 in town. That is around a 20% decrease in fuel economy. I have discovered when traveling that it is difficult to find non-ethanol fuel. I did not notice any performance difference, only less fuel economy. I have discussed this with other riders in the Columbia, Tennessee area. We have discovered that there are 8 stations in the area that have non-ethanol fuel and try to fill up at those, but when traveling, it is hard to find non-ethanol fuel. The Phillips/Conoco in southern middle Tennessee seem to have no ethanol, but as you go west to Memphis and northern Mississippi, Phillips has ethanol. I have yet to find any Shell that does not have ethanol. Has anyone else noticed this in fuels? After I get a few more miles on the Vision, I am going to do the same test. I am quite sure the results will be the same as it was with the Kawasaki. The guys I ride with on the Hondas and the H-D's have noticed similar results. In my opinion corn is for eating and not making fuel, yet out government pays subsidies to the oil companies to use the ethanol. |
|
| |
|
Tourer
Posts: 576
, IA | i belive u r way wrong my opinion |
|
| |
|
Cruiser
Posts: 96
Oswego,, Illinois,USA | I like Real fuel,Remember leaded premium fuel? Good stuff......My Truck takes E-85,85 is 85 % ethanol,It has a high octain ...BUT...It has a low BTU rate.That is what makes your mpg go down.My truck will learn and make it work better in a few tanks. But still not saving me any money in the long run .I understand our need to run good fuel in the bikes.I have not even sean a station around here that has ethanol free fuel. Northeast Illinois |
|
| |
|
Cruiser
Posts: 104
Plainfield Illinois | If you run "mileage with ethanol" and read the differences in the statements made and which party makes them, you'll find that the government sites, the corn grower sites, and some others claim that ethanol addition is a way to reduce reliance on imported crude oil.
However, the university and agriculture sites only claim a 25% btu gain in the conversion process (distillation) to convert the biomass into ethanol. Besides the conversion, there is also all the diesel consumed in planting, cultivation, harvesting, and transportation to get the grain to the distiller. All the above costs are at least partially funded by tax dollars; without the subsidies the ethanol addition to gasoline would end immediately. It is a net loser.
Try googling and see. Besides, why would any American trust their government to effectively use their tax dollars in this program when they BLOW our money in every OTHER program ever conceived?
and that is just my humble opinion. |
|
| |
|
Visionary
Posts: 1632
Jasper, MO | I get 1 1/2 to 2 MPG less on ethanol enriched gasoline with my Vision, when compared to straight gasoline. All the points made so far are valid, except the numbers showing a net energy loss in ethanol production. The proponents of that side of the argument always conveniently leave out the fact that all the grain is completely utilized and does not subtract from the food supply. After the ethanol is extracted, the remaining product, known as "cake", is loaded back onto the trucks and fed to livestock, all the protein still intact. Only the sugars are converted to ethanol. The tonnage going into an ethanol plant is equal to the tonnage going out. While there may be valid reasons for ending the use of ethanol as a motor fuel (I personally think that biodiesel is a much better alternative), a reduction in the total food supply is not one of them. My comments are based on personal experience gained from the ethanol plant at Garnett, Kansas.
I'm all in favor of reducing this country's reliance on imported oil. I would rather use straight gasoline in my bikes. Why is this country so far behind other countries in the use of diesel powered vehicles? Diesel technology has greatly advanced in the past few years, and biodiesel is a very viable alternative. Why are we not using LNG or LPG in our spark ignition vehicles? Again, the technology has greatly improved in the past few years, and this continent has huge supplies of natural gas. The infrastructure already exists to to supply the product to the end user, except for updating the filling stations. Updating the filling stations would only require replacing, or adding, the storage tanks and the metering pumps.
Ronnie |
|
| |
|
Iron Butt
Posts: 725
Reno County, KS | I've noticed this as well. I'm starting to think that the exhaust decel popping I have is partially due to this. I found out that the local station is using Ethanol enriched fuel at the pump for premium. It makes sense because I was experiencing more problems with the premium fuel than without it. Victory recommends premium fuel for my bike's setup the way it is. A renowned wrench told me premium was not necessarily the way to go. I made the switch to reqular (which I am sure has no Ethanol) and it's made positive difference, that's all I know for a fact. I haven't tried going back to "normal" premium fuels yet. BTW; I live in the Ethanol belt, we have very polarized opinions of this. Basically its either made your corn cash crop demand better or it's killing you because you have to buy and run it. I'm the latter of the two. I hate the stuff. My pickup runs it fine except it drops the MPG about 5 on the highway. They offer a substantial discount for fuel locally if you buy Ethanol regular. I don't use it. I now fuel up about 40 mi. from where I live (in the sticks) because of the local Ethanol fuel pumps are the only thing available after 5pm. |
|
| |
|
Cruiser
Posts: 105
Columbia, TN United States | All opinions are welcome, agree or disagree. Here are a few links, if interested. One of them states that there is only a 1% loss in fuel economy. I am anal about my miles per gallon, so I always check the figures carefully. Could it be the computer adjusting itself ? Did I not give it enough time before switching back to non-ethanol? 1% would not be that big of a deal, but with the subsidies a gallon of premium at $3.00/gallon and then add the $0.51 subsidy funded by me and you, the taxpayer, that is $3.51 a gallon. Of course, I could be looking at that wrong. Discussion is good, it makes us less like sheep that blindly follow their shepherd.
http://zfacts.com/p/63.html
http://www.slate.com/id/2122961/
http://www.bipac.net/gma/Ethanol_Analysis_ELAM_FINAL%209_19_07.pdf |
|
| |
|
Visionary
Posts: 1340
Gainesville Fl Home of the Gators | There is no such thing as straight gasoline. Ethanol is not added to to decrease the dependency on foreign oil. It is added to eliminate MBTE; an additive used to raise the octane level in fuels. While MBTE[MTBE?] was/is very effective as an octane booster, and fuel stabilizer; it was some pretty harsh stuff.
Edited by kevinx 2010-01-06 12:30 PM
|
|
| |
|
Visionary
Posts: 1436
| I try to run Shell whenever I fill my Vision, mainly because I get better mpg from Shell than I do others. |
|
| |
|
Visionary
Posts: 1484
LaPorte,Tx. | It's the nitrogen they put in that makes it better!!  |
|
| |
|
Visionary
Posts: 1632
Jasper, MO | kevinx - 2010-01-06 12:29 PM
There is no such thing as straight gasoline. Ethanol is not added to to decrease the dependency on foreign oil. It is added to eliminate MBTE; an additive used to raise the octane level in fuels. While MBTE[MTBE?] was/is very effective as an octane booster, and fuel stabilizer; it was some pretty harsh stuff.
As usual, you're right Kevin. When I referred to "straight gasoline", it was in the context of with, or without ethanol added. As you know, gasoline has a lot of different chemicals added to the base stock. These additives vary from one part of the country to another, and from summer to winter even in the same parts of the country. Comparing fuel economy of vehicles in one part of the country to the fuel economy of vehicles in another part is basically pointless. As different states and cities have mandated various "designer fuels" be used in their jurisdictions, the cost the consumer pays has necessarily increased due to the increased production, transportation, and storage costs mandated by these myriad rules. As an example, I haul fuel to the Harrisonville, Missouri area, among many other places. Harrisonville is on the border of two different jurisdictions. The retailer I deliver to has customers both in the Jackson County (Kansas City) area and Johnson County area, as well as across the line in Kansas. In the winter, Jackson County prohibits the use of the same fuel that is sold in the other counties. The retailer has to have separate storage tanks for regular gasoline (of the same octane, but different RVP) for the Jackson County customers to be serviced out of. This "special" fuel often has to be hauled further from the supplier, increasing transportation costs, and often costs more from the supplier too, since it costs more to make and store (extra tanks needed). The envirowackos win again and we all pay higher fuel costs.
Ronnie |
|
| |
|
Visionary
Posts: 1632
Jasper, MO | Teach - 2010-01-06 5:47 PM
I try to run Shell whenever I fill my Vision, mainly because I get better mpg from Shell than I do others.
If it makes you feel better, then use the brand you like. I haul the stuff for a living. I go to Shell stations, Conoco stations, Phillips stations, Union 76 stations, and unbranded stations. It ALL comes from the same tank and comes through the same pipe. There is NO difference in the gasoline ( as long as we are talking same octane and same RVP, that's another can of worms that has nothing to do with brands) from one brand to another, except for the additive packages that the various brands use. Each of the major brands have a proprietary additive package, which are all made up of the same base package, and one or two different chemicals, so they can all claim that their's is "the best". Even at that, all these different retailers are only required to buy a certain percentage of the branded fuels to maintain their brand franchise. They all buy a percentage of the cheaper generic gas too, to help keep costs down. The generic additive tank is the big one at the loading terminal.
I also do not waste my money on premium fuel. All my vehicles, including my Vision, run fine on regular 87 octane. There is a very good chance that when you pay for premium, you are getting something less anyway. Yeah, yeah, yeah, laws say blah, blah, blah. I live in the real world.
Ronnie |
|
| |
|
Visionary
Posts: 1350
| When I ride I really don't give a rats asre about price or a couple MPG difference, I ride for the pleasure. I stopped riding with a guy cause all he thought about was finding a station with 5 cent cheaper gas. We rode an hour so he could save 20 cents. I can ride 70 miles in an hour. My time worth a lot more than 20 cents an hour.
As far as natural gas, Forbes has stated that an "OPEC" group is in the works for that so it won't be cheap for long.
I don't have the info but I believe that personal diesels got caught in the EPA rules because the largest polluters are the trucks running across out nation at 17%. We all know how the gov't just does blanket rules. There is no way to screw all the hookers in DC and make intelligent laws and regulations plus there lawyer friends would loose work.
Yes, I tend to follow Forbes and The Wall Street Journal than the everyday press.
Back to subject, everything I read corn mash gets less MPG so all your studies confirm everyone else data. Good job? |
|
| |
|
Cruiser
Posts: 140
| I run regular and pour a half pint of vodka in every tank. Works great! |
|
| |
|
Tourer
Posts: 332
Dale, Indiana | I run Shell gas most of the time.
WHY?
The closest gas station is a Shell and the people are nice.
That being said; I never analyzed my bike since I just think some people analyze more then they ride.
However, I don?t use fuel additives as well as not joining the winter fuel stabilizer cult.
I don?t do battery tenders either.
I just start the bike up and ride.
I have never heard a pop.
Never had to crack and crack the starter.
Never had a hesitation
Me often wonders why so many riders take a prefect running bike and screw with it! It seems the factory folks know how to set it to run without problems. It also seems the more riders analyze their bike the more problems they have with mileage and throttle response.
Call me stupid but I rather ride the damn thing.
Now if I could just keep the damn radio working right!!!
(I just want to turn it on a ride too)
|
|
| |
|
Iron Butt
Posts: 763
Anderson, IN (48mi NE of downtown Indianapolis) | rdbudd,
Your are correct. Premium fuel is not required. At least not for a stock Vision. Production cars, motorcycles, lawn mowers, weed wackers, etc. are designed to run on 87 octane (regardless of what owners manuals recommend). Higher octane is generally needed on high performance or modified motors...typically when the compression is increased. If your motor isn't knocking you may be wasting money on premium fuel.
Rule of thumb: Run the lowest octane gasoline your motor can stand without detonating. The stock Vision is happy with 87 octane.
Common misconception: More octane means more power. This is false. More octane than your motor requires does nothing. So, premium fuel for a stock Vision is money needlessly spent. |
|
| |
|
Tourer
Posts: 332
Dale, Indiana | I run the type of gas that the owners manual calls for.
Figure the folks who engineered and built my engine knew I was smart enough to know I didn't think different octane?s give me more power.
BTW
My Vision aren?t like any weed eater or lawn mower I ever owned!
(do folks who ride lawn mowers do the mower wave?)
|
|
| |
|
Tourer
Posts: 506
Woodland Hills, CA | Teach - 2010-01-06 2:47 PM
I try to run Shell whenever I fill my Vision, mainly because I get better mpg from Shell than I do others.
DITTO....... |
|
| |
|
Visionary
Posts: 1436
| rdbudd, yes I think most folks are aware that one truck may service several different stations, BUT in my area of the country we only have Shell, Kwikfill, and the convenience store stations. The Kwikfill stations only get fuel from a local refinery, and Shell here only gets its fuel from a specific refinery, that services only shell distributors. You'll see the trucks delivering fuel to the other outlets from the same outlet but not KwikF & Shell.
My bike runs well on the KF gas (refined about 80 miles from me) but mileage definitely decreases to around 42 mpg. With Shell I get around 48 mpg and if I buy at the convenience shops it ranges from 42 mpg to 45 mpg. So when riding in home territory I try to keep her filled with Shell, on the road I don't much pay attention and go with whatever is conveniently at hand when I need to fillup.
Your info is a handy reminder though for when I'm roaming around the country. |
|
| |
|
Visionary
Posts: 1324
So Cal | Can't buy fuel in Ca. without ethanol. In fact, Ca. requires it's own special blend, diffrent from all other states in the nation. Which makes it more expensive too. All a political crock if you ask me. But don't get me started about Ca. politicians. |
|
| |
|
Tourer
Posts: 550
Tacoma, WA | I aways get less MPG with ethanol blends. It is easy to tell when they switch to the "winter" blend here, because even with no temp drop, the mileage sufferes in everything I ride/drive. Hey, if you wanna up your octane, just pour some toluene in the tank. But don't blame me if your hoses deteriorate! (Or if you mess up your bike...)-----Metalguy |
|
| |
|
Visionary
Posts: 8144
New Bohemia, VA | it has to be a regional thing as if I go below the recommend octane for my Vision it pings like mad... |
|
| |
|
Cruiser
Posts: 238
SF Bay Area | I get 10% lower fuel mileage with California gas (any brand) compared to, let's say, gas from Nevada.
sux, but I get to ride all year round, tho.... |
|
| |
|
Iron Butt
Posts: 619
Southeast Iowa | Real world test in my car and truck show 7% less mileage when I use a 10% ethanol blend (89 octane) compared to regular unleaded(87 octane) Ethanol gas in my area is 10 cents a gallon cheaper but is actually more expensive to run when you figure the gas mileage loss. At current gas prices Ethanol would have to be 18 cents per gallon cheaper to be a break even. So why would anyone spend more money to make more trips to the Gas Station? As for my Vision...........she does not like 87 octane gas and will ping and knock under a heavy load. Ethanol is a bad buy as I stated before, so when possible I give her premium whether she needs it or not and she is always happy. |
|
| |
|
Cruiser
Posts: 105
Columbia, TN United States | Thanks to everyone for their input. It makes me feel better to see that I am not the only one that noticed the difference. With the weather I have not been able to ride my new Vision. I picked it up from Shoals Outdoor Sports on 12/29/09. The computer on the 80 mile trip home showed an average of 42 mpg, but as I have seen in this forum, it may not be accurate. Hopefully I will get to ride more as the forecast here for this coming week looks good.
|
|
| |
Gasoline with/without Ethanol mpg
