United Fuels 100 octane

[noosacuda]

Short story.....new engine in my Chrysler, 500 stroker with my six pack, so for its first long run i went to the Sunshine Coast from Bundaberg and thought i'd try United Fuels 100 octane, ie 98+10% Ethanol. Well any ways, only just made it to Cooroy, with about 3 litres to spare! 88+ litres to fill up with BP Ultimate. Drove into Tewantin and around then got back home with 1/4 and a little bit in the tank! Wont bother using United Fuels 100 octane sugar in my car again! 8 MILES PER GALLON!

[just_pazz]

yep it's not very good at all.

[Squish]

I tried it twice. I didn't think it was anywhere near as good as BP Ultimate. Interestingly enough, even though adding ethanol increases RON, it actually decreases overall potential energy in the fuel. Also one of the reasons I steer clear of E10.

[xisled]

Originally Posted by Squish

I tried it twice. I didn't think it was anywhere near as good as BP Ultimate. Interestingly enough, even though adding ethanol increases RON, it actually decreases overall potential energy in the fuel. Also one of the reasons I steer clear of E10.

With prices of E10 in Melbourne, it is only 2 cents a letter cheaper than ULP. That is a saving of $1 dollar when you fill up 50 liters, so IMO it is not worth it, you will use more E10 in the long run and the saving will be lost.

[xisled]

Good thread. I have been thinking about using this in the GT. Stay away from it.

[Noddy]

A friend of mine has been using it in his 97' laser and raves on good it is.
He's apparently dialed up the timing and says throttle responce is much sharper and so on.

He wants me to try it in my cars, don't think I will though.

[blueoval]

without tuning the car to it, the benefits will be worse than 98. On a whole, with the car tuned to it, you will net better power results.

[irish2]

Originally Posted by blueoval

without tuning the car to it, the benefits will be worse than 98. On a whole, with the car tuned to it, you will net better power results.

Yes you will net more power, but still have a less energy dense fuel. You will therefore burn more of it to achieve the same result.

[Olbucko]

Filled my XM with it by mistake, no warning on pump to say it contains alcohol, car became very hard to start when hot and idled roughly and stalled when hot. All problems went away when the car was refilled with ethanol free petrol.
Bad news in an old carburetor fed engine!

[atec77]

Originally Posted by noosacuda

Short story.....new engine in my Chrysler, 500 stroker with my six pack, so for its first long run i went to the Sunshine Coast from Bundaberg and thought i'd try United Fuels 100 octane, ie 98+10% Ethanol. Well any ways, only just made it to Cooroy, with about 3 litres to spare! 88+ litres to fill up with BP Ultimate. Drove into Tewantin and around then got back home with 1/4 and a little bit in the tank! Wont bother using United Fuels 100 octane sugar in my car again! 8 MILES PER GALLON!

Used it once in the Bimmer and it ran very well BUT had some in a can and the mower played up badly until drained and back on regular

[Vesper Martini]

Originally Posted by atec77

Used it once in the Bimmer and it ran very well BUT had some in a can and the mower played up badly until drained and back on regular

The missus filled up the fuel can for the mower with it I didnt know and used some for the chainsaw, it did not like it at all. I thought the colour was a bit wrong at the time.
Territory seems to run ok on on it but i dont use much Petrol to get a good idea about its consumption

[The Yeti]

I've only used it the once out of eagle hawk near Canberra, well what can I say I had to tow the car home, I wont even consider it again

[LTDHO]

Unsure why anyone would put sugar fuel in their car. I have an XF and avoid it.

Also as most people never read the advice that United provide, their ethanol is not suited for small vehicles, water craft or air craft.

[noosacuda]

Only tried it because i now have 11.23:1 compression. And i always said
"i don't have sugar in my coffee so why the hell would i put it my car?"

[You Yangs]

Originally Posted by noosacuda

Only tried it because i now have 11.23:1 compression. And i always said
"i don't have sugar in my coffee so why the hell would i put it my car?"

There is NO sugar in Ethanol!!! Yes it is made from sugar cane mostly in Australia but it is the stuff you will find in your alcoholic drink (vodka) NOT your coffee.

[prasac]

i know alot of people that run it and have never had issues, i have used it for months in my daily and i have averaged at least 50km more than i get with BP or Caltex.

[that guy]

I've used it before on a trip from Ballarat to Melb in my BA XR8 ute and received the best fuel economy that I have ever achieved. Managed to get under 10L per 100. I regularly fill up with their Plus ULP 95 octane (also E10) and have no horror stories to tell. At worst there is a slight moment of hesitation under load when the engine is cold.

[Vesper Martini]

There’s no sugar in it, if there was then they would be getting rid of the product they wanted to produce in the first place. it’s a higher octane fuel and some old dinosaurs can’t be tuned to it. let alone my 2 stoke chainsaw
We should be embracing this technology
It should be more than 2c/L cheaper though

[VICFPV]

E10 or other mixed petrol is the biggest scam ever. Its designed to burn quicker so we use more of it so more pain at the petrol pump. Only use 95 or 91ULP where possible. This the reason they want to ban 91ULP. As it will better profit margins for the government and oil companies. Good for the environment but bad for the pocket.

[Vesper Martini]

Originally Posted by VICFPV

E10 or other mixed petrol is the biggest scam ever. Its designed to burn quicker so we use more of it so more pain at the petrol pump. Only use 95 or 91ULP where possible. This the reason they want to ban 91ULP. As it will better profit margins for the government and oil companies. Good for the environment but bad for the pocket.

I would like to know how it can be designed to burn quicker? any technical explanation.
& who wants to ban 91 ?

[VICFPV]

Originally Posted by Bevsta007

I would like to know how it can be designed to burn quicker? any technical explanation.
& who wants to ban 91 ?

What I am quoting is my experience with these types of fuel. The state governments want to ban 91ulp.

[KIWI-1]

Originally Posted by Bevsta007

I would like to know how it can be designed to burn quicker? any technical explanation.

V-Power high density. Ethanol low density?

BTW V8-Supercars run fine when tuned to run on Sucrogen BioEthanol.

[Vesper Martini]

Originally Posted by KIWI-1

V-Power high density. Ethanol low density?

Sorry still doesn’t help me, I’m not even sure if burning quicker should be perceived as a negative.
I think VICFPV was trying to imply that its less efficient

[my_gxl]

Originally Posted by KIWI-1

V-Power high density. Ethanol low density?

BTW V8-Supercars run fine when tuned to run on Sucrogen BioEthanol.

They use a lot more of it, which means extra fuel stops.

Then there is the issue of getting away from stationary in the pits.

[ratter]

Originally Posted by VICFPV

E10 or other mixed petrol is the biggest scam ever. Its designed to burn quicker so we use more of it so more pain at the petrol pump. Only use 95 or 91ULP where possible. This the reason they want to ban 91ULP. As it will better profit margins for the government and oil companies. Good for the environment but bad for the pocket.

I would like to know how it can be designed to burn quicker? any technical explanation.?

I would also like to see this

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by VICFPV

E10 or other mixed petrol is the biggest scam ever. Its designed to burn quicker so we use more of it so more pain at the petrol pump. Only use 95 or 91ULP where possible. This the reason they want to ban 91ULP. As it will better profit margins for the government and oil companies. Good for the environment but bad for the pocket.

I actually did a comparison of 95 e10, 91ron, 95 ron and 98 ron a month for each fuel in my normal days.

What I found was the following:
95e10 and 91ron gave me the same economy except the 91 felt sluggish.
95ron really gave no real benefits compared to 95e10 except it gave maybe 10k's more a tank in economy
98ron (BP ultimate) gave about 40k more in a tank. The car did go better and felt smoother then all the other fuels.

My results will differ from other peoples hence why people should actually test the different fuels (that are appropriate for their car) and come to their own conclusions.

[The Yeti]

Originally Posted by Bevsta007

There’s no sugar in it, if there was then they would be getting rid of the product they wanted to produce in the first place. it’s a higher octane fuel and some old dinosaurs can’t be tuned to it. let alone my 2 stoke chainsaw
We should be embracing this technology
It should be more than 2c/L cheaper though

What???? why couldnt an engine be tuned to a margenly higher octain fuel than it was orginaly designed for

[Burnout]

No complaints here either, I use it with my 98 tune. Runs nice.

[Vesper Martini]

Originally Posted by The Yeti

What???? why couldnt an engine be tuned to a margenly higher octain fuel than it was orginaly designed for

sorry what I meant was, engines that are beyond tuning

[2011G6E]

All that needs to be said really...


You'll never avoid the fact that like the miracle fuel hydrogen, it's an energy-negative fuel...it takes far more energy to produce than you ever get out of the final product. Until some massive leap in technology is discovered that makes ethanol production cheap and astoundingly plentiful, it'll always come out backwards.

I've yet to see also why it's "environmentally friendly" to deliberately make your car get worse fuel economy by using the stuff either...