Various Topics on Subaru

.... .. ..lland..

My 1999 Sub legacy St.Wgn(4 cyl,Not an Outback),allows use of 10% Ethanol by
the book.Allstations here have 15% ethanol,could I use this ??

..lu.. ..rpora.. ..20,3.. ..ploy.. .. .. .. .. ..

On Thu, 22 May 2008 15:56:13 -0400, "Aage M Hollander"
<homa@localnet.com> wrote:

>My 1999 Sub legacy St.Wgn(4 cyl,Not an Outback),allows use of 10% Ethanol by
>the book.Allstations here have 15% ethanol,could I use this ??
>

What other choice do you have?

..c.. ..n

On May 22, 3:56*pm, "Aage M Hollander" <h...@localnet.com> wrote:
> My 1999 Sub legacy St.Wgn(4 cyl,Not an Outback),allows use of 10% Ethanol by
> the book.Allstations here have 15% ethanol,could I use this ??

I don't know why the car manuals say that. Brazilian cars all use
ethanol up to 24% without a problem.

My manual (1999 OBW) says the same thing, but I'm running E60 (60%
eth) after an after-market conversion and plan to go to E85. I think
the lawyers make them say that.

Try it and watch your check-engine light. If it doesn't go on after
100 miles, forget about it and enjoy the improved acceleration. You
will probably get fewer mpg but more mpd (miles per dollar).

Ben

..a.. .. ..yd.. ..t ..tar.. ..t ..na..

On Thu, 22 May 2008 13:53:34 -0700 (PDT), Uncle Ben <ben@greenba.com>
wrote:

>On May 22, 3:56Â*pm, "Aage M Hollander" <h...@localnet.com> wrote:
>> My 1999 Sub legacy St.Wgn(4 cyl,Not an Outback),allows use of 10% Ethanol by
>> the book.Allstations here have 15% ethanol,could I use this ??
>
>I don't know why the car manuals say that. Brazilian cars all use
>ethanol up to 24% without a problem.
>
>My manual (1999 OBW) says the same thing, but I'm running E60 (60%
>eth) after an after-market conversion and plan to go to E85. I think
>the lawyers make them say that.
>
>Try it and watch your check-engine light. If it doesn't go on after
>100 miles, forget about it and enjoy the improved acceleration. You
>will probably get fewer mpg but more mpd (miles per dollar).
>
>Ben
And without conversion most cars will NOT see any better
accelleration. ANd with E15 being the only game in town, it will sell
for the same price as any other gasoline-type fuel, so no improvement
in miles per dollar.

Here in Ontario E10 or E15 or E0 all sells for the same price, and in
many cases you have no way (short of the phase separation test) to
know WHAT you are buying.


If burning Ethanol makes you feel good, fine - but in MOST cases in
Canada and most of the states, expecting any fuel savings or improved
performance is a pipe dream.

I just wish you didn't expect the rest of the country (and the world)
to pay for your "elixir" in higher food prices.
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

..lu.. ..rpora.. ..20,3.. ..ploy.. .. .. .. .. ..

On Thu, 22 May 2008 17:46:22 -0400, clare at snyder dot ontario dot
canada wrote:
>And without conversion most cars will NOT see any better
>accelleration. ANd with E15 being the only game in town, it will sell
>for the same price as any other gasoline-type fuel, so no improvement
>in miles per dollar.

Great point.

"Miles per Dollar" is something that should be promoted more. In my
eyes it's _the_ way for the driver to look at fuel economy. It's very
common to look at aircraft efficiency via MPD, because pilots can
choose between max power, max range, or something in-between throttle
settings.

I have a Toyota pickup that gets better "MPD" on 92+ octane premium
(based on actual 10 tank tests), and I'm tired of explaining it to
people. The year my truck was built, Toyota "recommended" premium
fuel, but didn't require it. So I did some 10 consecutive tanks
tests and did the math, and by golly, premium is cheaper to run.

Many vehicles get awful mileage on E85. Some hybrids carry a hefty
purchase premium. Sometimes the math works, sometimes it doesn't, but
many don't bother to do the math.

The important thing is to do the math and skip the style... <G>

..c.. ..n

On May 22, 5:46*pm, clare at snyder dot ontario dot canada wrote:
>
> I just wish you didn't expect the rest of the country (and the world)
> to pay for your "elixir" in higher food prices.
>

The cost of food world-wide has risen mainly because of the cost of
energy, mainly gasoline and diesel. These fuels have doubled in price
in only a few years.

The US Dept. of Agriculture estimates that diversion of corn to
ethanol production is at most responsible for a 5% rise in the cost of
food.

Clare, look further ahead! The price of oil is not going to go back
to where it was. The world is running out of cheap oil. We need
alternative liquid fuels in order to mitigate the disaster that is
approaching as production from the world's oil wells slow down. It
may already be happening. What will happen to world food prices when
gasoline is $15 per gallon?

Ben

..c.. ..n

Clare, I see by another of your posts that you are not opposed to
ethanol as long as it is not derived from food sources.

We can agree on that. Cellulosic ethanol is hard to make cheaply, but
maybe that will change. On the other hand, methanol is not hard to
make cheaply from sawdust, old newspapers, and the like. I hope FFV's
can run on methanol as well.

May it come along soon!

Cheers,
Ben

..a.. .. ..yd.. ..t ..tar.. ..t ..na..

On Thu, 22 May 2008 20:34:32 -0400, "Valued Corporate #120,345
Employee (B A R R Y)" <DwightSchrute@DunderMifflin.com> wrote:

>On Thu, 22 May 2008 17:46:22 -0400, clare at snyder dot ontario dot
>canada wrote:
>>And without conversion most cars will NOT see any better
>>accelleration. ANd with E15 being the only game in town, it will sell
>>for the same price as any other gasoline-type fuel, so no improvement
>>in miles per dollar.
>
>Great point.
>
>"Miles per Dollar" is something that should be promoted more. In my
>eyes it's _the_ way for the driver to look at fuel economy. It's very
>common to look at aircraft efficiency via MPD, because pilots can
>choose between max power, max range, or something in-between throttle
>settings.
>
>I have a Toyota pickup that gets better "MPD" on 92+ octane premium
>(based on actual 10 tank tests), and I'm tired of explaining it to
>people. The year my truck was built, Toyota "recommended" premium
>fuel, but didn't require it. So I did some 10 consecutive tanks
>tests and did the math, and by golly, premium is cheaper to run.
>
>Many vehicles get awful mileage on E85. Some hybrids carry a hefty
>purchase premium. Sometimes the math works, sometimes it doesn't, but
>many don't bother to do the math.
>
>The important thing is to do the math and skip the style... <G>


Yes, MANY vehicles will get better fuel economy on premium, and back
when the difference was 5 or 10 cents a gallon it was OFTEN cheaper to
run these vehicles on premium fuel. With the price difference here in
ontario at 5% from 87 to 89, and another 5% more or less from 89 to
91, you need to get at least a 10% improvement in fuel economy for the
price to work out to a savings. I've almost never seen a 10%
improvement in fuel economy on an unmodified OBD2 equipped vehicle, or
even on an ALDL or OBD1 system. If you can buy premium for a 6% price
penalty, you win ( or, as in the case with Shell in Ontario, where
their Premium (Gold) gas has NO ethanol, and their regular is E10,
+/-, the 5% loss in fuel economy from using ethanol 87 R+M/2 means you
only need 5% improvement from the 4 points of octane to make it make
sense.

On my 3.8 Pontiac (1994, so pre OBD2, but still a rather sophisticated
SEFI system) premium reduces my knock count significantly, but since
even on 87 I'm not seeing any spark retard from the knock count
premium isn't likely to make a noticeable difference. I've got a tank
of 91 in right now trying to diagnose a light throttle surge at about
90kph (1600 rpm in 4th gear) and that's how I've gotten the knock
count info. Still surging on premium, no anomolies on the scanner
(data-streaming)but the surge SEAMS to go away when I disconnect the
single pintle electrically controlled EGR valve - so I suspect it's a
programming problem where the factory dialed in the EGR too early.
(the truck had had the problem as long as I've owned it - which means
the brand new engine installed when I got it has ALWAYS had the
problem - 100,000 km now on the engine and 368000 on the van). P***es
DriveClean with flying colours too. Better now than when the engine
was new (all 3 readings down to about half what they were when the
engine went in)

If I could get rid of that surge the gas mileage might improve from an
average of 13.5 l/100km.
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

..a.. .. ..yd.. ..t ..tar.. ..t ..na..

On Thu, 22 May 2008 17:36:28 -0700 (PDT), Uncle Ben <ben@greenba.com>
wrote:

>On May 22, 5:46Â*pm, clare at snyder dot ontario dot canada wrote:
>>
>> I just wish you didn't expect the rest of the country (and the world)
>> to pay for your "elixir" in higher food prices.
>>
>
>The cost of food world-wide has risen mainly because of the cost of
>energy, mainly gasoline and diesel. These fuels have doubled in price
>in only a few years.
>
>The US Dept. of Agriculture estimates that diversion of corn to
>ethanol production is at most responsible for a 5% rise in the cost of
>food.
>
>Clare, look further ahead! The price of oil is not going to go back
>to where it was. The world is running out of cheap oil. We need
>alternative liquid fuels in order to mitigate the disaster that is
>approaching as production from the world's oil wells slow down. It
>may already be happening. What will happen to world food prices when
>gasoline is $15 per gallon?
>
>Ben
If the price of Gasoline was $100 a gallon and we were producing
ethanol from non-food crops, and particularly from low fertilizer
intensive non-food crops(like legume straw) and waste, food prices
would not be as high as they are today (***uming the cost of natural
gas used to produce fertilizer did not follow the gasoline price)

The USDA estimates re the cost of feedgrains due to ethanol production
WILL be found to be grossly understated. I have farmer friends. The
fuel price is not NEARLY the whole picture. The fertilizer price
definitely comes into it - but vast increases in the production of
corn means a LOT more fertilizer is required - which puts the price up
even more than it would be just because of the oil price.

Using foodgrains for fuel is criminally irrisponsible in today's
world.Particularly as in-efficient a plant as corn.
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

..a.. .. ..yd.. ..t ..tar.. ..t ..na..

On Thu, 22 May 2008 18:38:52 -0700 (PDT), Uncle Ben <ben@greenba.com>
wrote:

>Clare, I see by another of your posts that you are not opposed to
>ethanol as long as it is not derived from food sources.
>
>We can agree on that. Cellulosic ethanol is hard to make cheaply, but
>maybe that will change. On the other hand, methanol is not hard to
>make cheaply from sawdust, old newspapers, and the like. I hope FFV's
>can run on methanol as well.
>
>May it come along soon!
>
>Cheers,
>Ben
Methanol has other SERIOUS problems as a motor fuel. All of which
could likely be minimized with proper development.
First of all, it is extremely toxic (if swallowed)(but so is gasoline
- which is, however, much less palatable). Second of all it is
extremely agressive against most common materials used in automotive
applications.(read that as extremely corrosive)(it contributes to
oxidation).
Also, methanol fire is invisible. EXTRENMEly dangerous.

This is partly counterbalanced by the fact that methanol (the simplest
of all alcohols) breaks down very quickly, and other than by ingestion
is non-toxic. It is also less LIKELY to burn as it requires a lot more
heat to ignite, and has a higher lower flamability limit.

This also means cold staring on neet methanol is extremely dicey.
Ether starting is almost the standard for methanol engines (even for a
hot restart in many cases)

The beauty of Methanol is it can be produced from CO2 and Hydrogen.
Just think - combining hydrogen economy with greenhouse gas reduction
(although burning Methanol produces CO2.)

Production of methanol by the now common processes using natural gas
would obviously be a non-starter.

It mixes freely with water in any ratio, which can be good or bad.


** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **