I agree it can be a PIA to get around the E10 content. What I do here in MI where we store them half the year anyway is use the E10 because it's convenient in the summer. Then I use a $10 drill powered transfer pump to suck the tank down to the bottom at the end of the season, and pour 5 gallons of pure gas in it for the storage period and run it for ten minutes or so. I just pick up a 5 gallon can of it when I'm out on a drive anyway. It cuts my damage risk at least in half and totally eliminates the separation and varnish issues. Keith - On 11/2/2011 6:29 PM, Bob Jasinski wrote: > > I've seen the clip before. I agree I'd rather be using 100% gasoline in my > 300G but I must say I haven't run into the extremes of issues shown on > that > video. California has been putting ethanol in gas for close to 20 years > now, and if it was as bad as that video claims it to be, I think I would > have seen more problems. I do have to change out my rubber fuel lines from > time to time, and fuel pump diaphragms last about 10 years, but that's > about > it. > > There simply is no practical alternative for getting 100% gasoline for me. > As far as marine or aviation gas, give me a break. That stuff is so > expensive and so far to drive for, I'd rather sell the car than go through > that hassle. It's $70+ a tank now to fill up! > > I'm all for getting rid of ethanol, but I just don't see it happening, > especially in CA where we have these "boutique fuels" forced on us. The > government doesn't want us driving our old cars, and they could care less > about the problems we have with gasohol.. > > Bob J > > From: Chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > <mailto:Chrysler300%40yahoogroups.com> > [mailto:Chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > <mailto:Chrysler300%40yahoogroups.com>] On > Behalf Of Keith Boonstra > Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2011 2:46 PM > To: Tony Rinaldi > Cc: Chrysler 300 Club > Subject: Re: [Chrysler300] Resending Gasohol additive article > > > And here's the clincher on the havoc that ethanol is visiting upon your > vintage fuel system. Watch the video in this link: > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZtqWT8ZfG5Y > > Keith Boonstra > > - > > On 11/1/2011 7:27 PM, Tony Rinaldi wrote: > > > > > > Hope this comes thru: > > > > COMPARATIVE EVAULATION OF PREVENTION OF GASOHOL PHASE SEPARATION BY FUEL > > ADDITIVES > > by Benjamin Kellogg > > > > October 31, 2011 > > > > The Lundt Brothers gas station in Blair, Nebraska, in 1934. Their sign > > emblazoned with ³Buy Corn Alcohol Gas Here² proves that gasohol is > an idea > > that has been around for quite some time, at least in Nebraska! > > > > > > Do ethanol fuel additives really deliver what they promise and help save > > your engine from the ravages of E10? In this article, some popular fuel > > additives are put to the test. > > > > Did you know that certain fuel additives can increase the stability of > > fuels > > containing ethanol? Author and chemist Benjamin Kellogg discusses > several > > readily available additives and how they can make modern fuels less > > harmful > > to your historic vehicles. This article, which first appeared in the > Fall > > 2011 issue of Army Motors, presents the results of an objective > experiment > > designed to prove or refute the benefits of ³fuel stabilizers.² --The > > Editors > > > > > > Introduction: > > > > To design a simple, yet reproducible experiment to test the ³storage > > enhancing² properties of fuel stabilizers, I decided to test the > > ability of > > these additives to alter phase separation points. Two additives were > > compared by a simple titration experiment. > > > > Background: > > > > E10 gasohol is an inherently hygroscopic (absorbing and retaining water) > > solution due to the chemical nature of the ethanol (ethyl alcohol) > > added to > > the petroleum gasoline. The hygroscopic character of the ethanol means > > that > > gasohol will contain water. The actual amount of water that can be > held in > > solution in E10 varies directly with temperature. At 20° C, E10 can > > contain > > as much as 0.5 ml of water per 100 ml of E10. At -10° C, E10 can > only hold > > 0.3 ml of water per 100 ml of E10. > > > > Once the water content exceeds these limits, the phenomenon of ³phase > > separation² will occur. Gasohol phase separation happens when the > ethanol > > and water components separate from the petroleum gasoline; i.e., the > > ³phases² of the E10 gasohol solution ³separate.² > > > > During phase separation, the more dense ethanol and water components > > settle > > to the bottom of the container (i.e., the fuel tank), while the less > dense > > gasoline components rise to the top. The process is essentially > > irreversible. If phase separation happens in a fuel tank, corrosion can > > occur in the lower aspects of the tank exposed to the ethanol and water > > component. Fuel stabilizers purportedly allow a greater amount of > water to > > remain in solution in the gasohol before phase separation occurs. This > > claim > > could be tested. > > > > Methods: > > > > Two Eastwood ³Fuel Guard² products were obtained for these tests: Fuel > > Guard > > Protection formula to be used for every fill-up and Fuel Stabilizer > > formula > > for fuel stored up to 12 months. These fuel additives were mixed > > separately > > and in combination into 50 ml of E10 gasohol according to manufacturer¹s > > instructions. The amounts of each that were added to 50 ml of E10 are > > given > > in the following table: > > CONTROL > > No additive > > Fuel Protection Formula > > 0.15625 ml > > Fuel Stabilization Formula > > 0.15625 ml > > Fuel Protection Formula > > and > > Fuel Stabilization Formula > > 0.15625 ml and > > 0.15625 ml > > Additive total = 0.3125 > > > > These solutions were placed in flasks and cooled to 10° C in an ice > bath. > > The solution in each flask was stirred with a magnetic stirrer while > > distilled water was titrated in. The end point of each titration was > > visually determined upon noting the occurrence of phase separation. > > > > > > Results: > > > > E10 with no additives underwent phase separation with the addition > of 0.30 > > ml water. In contrast, addition of either the Fuel Protection or Fuel > > Stabilization formulas delayed phase separation until the addition > of 0.50 > > and 0.49 ml of water, respectively. Finally, the addition of both > the Fuel > > Protection and Fuel Stabilization formulas to 50 ml E10 delayed phase > > separation until 0.69 ml water was added. > > > > Discussion: > > > > When used separately, either the Eastwood Fuel Protection Formula or > Fuel > > Stabilization Formula increases the amount of water that can be > > retained in > > solution by E10 gasohol by 66% before phase separation occurs. > > Furthermore, > > the combination of both additives in E10 increases resistance to phase > > separation by 133 percent; a significantly better result than when > either > > product was used alone. > > > > These results demonstrate that the risk of phase separation is reduced > > when > > these products are used in E10 gasohol. The reason for the increased > > effectiveness of the combination of the two formulas is unclear. Product > > information available to the consumer states that both additives contain > > exactly the same chemical ingredients: napthenic oil, hydroethylated > > aminoethylamide, and petroleum naptha. The proportions of these > > ingredients > > in the different products are not given (nor were they provided to me > > despite a direct request to Eastwood). It is possible that the advantage > > derived from combining the Fuel Protection and Fuel Stabilization > formulas > > represented a mere doubling of the ingredients rather than some other > > enhancement derived from combining the two products. > > > > Conclusions: > > > > Eastwood Ethanol Fuel Protection and Fuel Stabilization formulas > > significantly increase E10 gasohol resistance to phase separation and > > decrease the probability that phase separation will occur in the > fuel tank > > of stored vehicles. > > > > Epilogue: > > > > Given the results of the foregoing experiment, I will incorporate > the fuel > > additives into the gasohol that goes into my HMVs. The additive¹s cost > > will > > be insignificant compared to the cost of repairs that could result > > from the > > use of E10. In addition, tanks of fuel last a long time in my historic > > military vehicles and thus increases the risk of gasohol related > problems, > > so I have decided to keep a minimal amount of fuel in their tanks so > that > > the fuel is replenished frequently with new fuel and the > > now-proven-effective anti-alcohol additives. The fuel additives > worked in > > the lab, so they should work in the tank. > > Results: > > > > E10 with no additives underwent phase separation with the addition > of 0.30 > > ml water. In contrast, addition of either the Fuel Protection or Fuel > > Stabilization formulas delayed phase separation until the addition > of 0.50 > > and 0.49 ml of water, respectively. Finally, the addition of both > the Fuel > > Protection and Fuel Stabilization formulas to 50 ml E10 delayed phase > > separation until 0.69 ml water was added. > > > > Comments > > . Steve Beurkens > > Grand Rapids, Michigan > > > > Great news. I have been using Stabil in my 1973 Triumph TR6 for the > > past 15 > > winters. The car is stored from mid-October until the snow/salt is > > gone...usually the first week of April. I have NEVER had a starting > > problem > > in the spring...1 turn of the key and away we go! I have great faith > > in fuel > > stabilizers, so it's nice to know that faith is scientifically founded! > > > > . Paul Aruda > > Cedar Hill TX. > > > > I use a product called Sea Foam and it has worked very will in my > cars. I > > put it in every 3-4000 miles. Ethanol is not a good product for any > of our > > cars. It may help the farmer but not our cars. Paul Aruda > > > > . landis aden > > mesa, az > > > > How about high temps like here in AZ? any studies done on that? Also, > > folks > > have claimed that marvel mystery oil can do much the same any > research on > > that thx > > > > . Brian R Adams > > Reno, NV > > > > It seems likely the two products are largely the same, and all you > did was > > double up the dosage. Presumably this will do no harm. Why didn't > you run > > the same experiment using only a double-dose of either one of the > products > > to prove they are equivalent? Why couldn't someone set up a sort of > > settling > > still, where on could add water to E10 until phase separation > occurs, then > > drain the ethanol/water out the bottom, leaving 99+% gasoline behind? > > > > . Alex > > Seattle, WA > > > > Better than additives, why not get ethanol free gasoline? pure-gas.org > > is a > > website that list stations selling ethanol free gas > > > > . Rocky Faulconer > > Yakima, WA 98902 > > > > There are so many fuel stabilization additives out on the market from > > sta-bil Eastwood, and many more. Eastwood is a mail order thing for > us and > > freight is costly - and just remembering to order it is hard. Does > > Benjamin > > have a suggestion for a fuel stabilizer that is more common and > easyer to > > get at the local part store? like sta-bil Rocky > > > > . Todd > > VA > > > > Good article! > > > > . Ron Maurer > > Iowa > > > > I run an auto repair shop and occasionally I see older cars that > have been > > stored for years and won¹t run. I will end up with the carburetor > apart & > > cleaning & the fuel tank off and cleaning. I have found all the ones I > > have > > seen with bad problems had Sta-Bil fuel preservative and E-10 fuel > (90% of > > the fuel sold in Iowa) and have been stored for several years. The tanks > > look like they have a growth in them. I have seen Microbial growth in > > Diesel > > fuel tanks and it may be somewhat similar but different. I had to > > throw some > > tanks away. I had a Dodge with a plastic fuel tank that the brass > float on > > the gas gauge sender was ate away. Draw your own conclusions. I have > been > > storing my Grand Prix for the winter for 25 years and put it away with > > very > > little fuel and NO additive and have never had a problem. When I drive > > it in > > the summer I add only enough fuel that I think I will use for the day in > > order to keep the fuel fresh. Ron Maurer ASE Master Tech > > > > . bluen0te > > Ct. > > > > I'm wondering if the writer has any connection to Eastwood. I'd feel > a lot > > stronger about these results if a few more products such as Startron and > > Staybil had been mentioned in the test. > > > > . Roger Sitterly > > Des Moines, Iowa > > > > It would have been nice if he'd tested the combination of "fuel > > protection" > > and "fuel stabilization" formulas against 10% gasohol with .3125 ml of > > "fuel > > protection" in it and against 10% gasohol with .3125 ml of "fuel > > stabilization" in it. If he found that doubling the quantity of just one > > product in the gasohol delayed phase separation until 0.69 ml of water > > content, that would be useful knowledge for those of us concerned > > about the > > deleterious effects of using E10 fuel in our older vehicles. Has > > anyone done > > any similar tests with other fuel stabilization products on the market > > (ie, > > Stabil, which I use in my lawn mower over the winter and my snow blower > > during the summer)? > > > > . J.L. Hamilton > > TEXAS > > > > Wish the test had used some of the more readily available products like > > Sta-Bil or Phazer. Eastwood products have to be ordered from the > > catalog or > > internet to get them in most of the country. > > > > . D Yaros > > United States > > > > For more info on the effects of E10 in collector cars, see the Nov 2011 > > issue of Car Collector Chronicles, found online at > > http://www.scribd.com/people/view/7936333-dave > > > > . Brian tremblay > > British Columbia, Canada > > > > I've seen the effects of ehanol gasolines on related fuel parts ie; > rubber > > lines, aluminium components but what about aluminium gas tanks that > > alot of > > car builders are getting for their hobby these days? > > > > . JR. > > Greenwich NY. > > > > How about testing "Sta-Bil" fuel additive? It is much more readily > > available > > to the consumer as they can pick it up at any auto parts and hardware > > stores. I also have a big jug on my shelf, have had no bad effects > in the > > past, and was wondering if it was due to this product. Thanks, JR. > > > > . Bob Foster > > Bishop, GA > > > > All good information. There should have been a cost per tank or cost per > > gallon for the use of the additives included in the report. I guess I > > could > > go to Eastwood and do the cost analysis myself. > > > > . Rudy Pyrek > > Warren, Michigan > > > > While I find this report most helpful, I can't stop thinking that a > better > > solution to would be to offer classic vehicle owners "real" 100% > > gasoline. I > > know that in every state there are several stations that still have > access > > to this product. Ref. web-site (pure-gas.org). Not only would it > eliminate > > this problem, it would also increase mileage by nearly 50%. I know > this is > > true through my own records on my 2004 Buick Le Sabre with a 3800 v-6 > > engine > > (Auto-trans.) My milage has dropped from: 31mpg hwy. to 25mpg. And 25mpg > > city to 18mpg. Who's fooling who! Ethenol isn't making less dependant on > > foreign oil, it's just made us increase our use. In the long run, > foreign > > oil and subsidized corn growing farmers get rich and we ,the consumers > > take > > a bath again! I am sure that new technologies would increase milage in > > gasoline engines to a point where foreign oil dependency would not be an > > issue. Thank you for letting me vent. > > > > . C J Davis > > Central Michigan > > > > After reading this article I would surmise that a good way to help > > save your > > fuel tank would be to litterally run your vehicle out of fuel, prior to > > putting it away for any extended period of time. [winter in the northern > > areas]. > > > > . John Engfehr > > Wyandotte > > > > I'm a retired engineer who tested fuels and oils for many years. I could > > write a book on the adverse effects of ethanol on engines. The real > > problem > > is during combustion where it forms acid in the combustion chamber and > > etches the bore and rings. It degrades oil as it gets wiped into the > > crankcase and can lead to extreme wear throughout the engine. It was > only > > approved by automakers because it gave them fuel economy "credits" (CAFE > > credits) with the EPA that allowed them to sell more high end vehicles > > (profit). It is not safe to use in any engine in amounts over 15%. Oil > > change intervals must be shortened from 5000 miles to 3000 or less with > > ethanol use. There is big money pushing to hide the facts and ignore the > > long term implications. > > > > . David Allison > > St Simons Island > > > > There is a simpler way for those of us near marinas and ports.Marine > > gas is > > offered at the marinas and in the last year or two several local gas > > stations have installed "Marine pumps" I have used this gas in my > historic > > vehicles and can sleep soundly with no worries of H2o sneaking into my > > tanks > > as this fuel is alchohol free. Check with the major fuel distributors in > > your area to find this friendlier fuel in your area. > > > > . S Mcnutt > > indiana > > > > Nice to see a correctly done scientific evaluation. > > > > . Arlene Walker > > Pasadena, Maryland > > > > I have a 1982 Corvette which I rarely drive. I usually keep a full > tank of > > gas in it and occasionally use a fuel additive, so if I understand the > > article correctly should I only leave a small amount of gas in the > > tank over > > the winter? I was always told to fill the tank so condensation does not > > form. Any advice? > > > > . Eric White > > Lapeer, MI > > > > Very informative test. My question to Mr. Kellogg is, if the two > additives > > are chemically identical, why didn't he continue with his testing to > > determine if doubling the dose of each additive on its own resulted > in the > > same increase of water retention as the combined effect revealed? > Also, if > > doubling the dose resulted in increased retention of water in E10, would > > increasing the dosage continue to increase the effect? At what point > would > > increased dosage become ineffective? > > > > . Ernie > > Atl. Ga > > > > An increase in the water content of fuel also decreases the effective > > octane > > in the fuel, so, care should be taken on higher compression engines > > that are > > close to the verge of octane requirements. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------------------ To send a message to this group, send an email to: Chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to bob@xxxxxxxxxxxxx or go to http://autos.groups.yahoo.com/group/Chrysler300/join and select the "Leave Group" button For list server instructions, go to http://www.chrysler300club.com/yahoolist/inst.htm For archives go to http://www.forwardlook.net/300-archive/search.htm#querylangYahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Chrysler300/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Chrysler300/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: Chrysler300-digest@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Chrysler300-fullfeatured@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: Chrysler300-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/