VCCA Home Forums GENERAL DISCUSSION General Discussions Warning: Ethanol mixtures must be banned from gas!

Solan, you are right ,I dont know much about the petroleum scene in the European countries, only what I have read which stated that Sweden hoped to be free of fossil fuels by 2020. Maybe this information is incorrect or out of date. I dont know. I do know however that I have driven both my 1935 Chevs for hundreds of miles at a time at speeds of around 50 mph on ethanol with no problems whatsoever. As stated in a previous post I do store my cars with non ethanol fuel but if I didnt have this luxury I would take precautions just in case. Its no big deal. I really cant see what problems would arise if ethanol content went to 15%. I remember when unleaded was about to be introuced. All the local old car enthusiasts claimed the sky would fall in but the sun came up the next morning and they are stilldriving them with no problems.Ethanol is not just made from corn. Here in Australia we have three processing plants. One usesthe waste from sugar cane. Another the waste from wheat and the other from sorghum. I dont know whether the USA uses the ears of corn or just the stalks (waste). Perhaps someone can help here. The point is ethanol does not have to be made from a crop that was grown solely for food.

There are three ethanol plants that use corn within 35 miles us with one that will use corn stalks that is under construction. There are also plants in Iowa that use soybeans for biodiesel.

Well, I've read plenty of articles, both pro and con, about ethanol-laced gasoline. However, being an engineering type, I'm still a big fan of proof obtained by "empirical evidence" -- in other words knowledge and/or proof acquired by means of observation or experimentation. In other words, "show me!"

Well, unfortunately, all the "proof" I need showing ethanol added to motor fuels, even at a modest 5%, is unhealthy to engines and fuel delivery systems not designed to cope with the stuff has come at personal high cost. As of this point, the tally at my garage is two Honda lawnmower carburetors, an NOS Q-jet from my wife's '72 Cutlass that is now unrebuildable, and one completely restored and, now, completely undrivable '52 Fleetline. Up until recently, both the Cutlass and the '52 were smooth, reliable drivers that I could drive anywhere with confidence.

Then, first, the Cutlass started having problems with hard starting, intermittent rough idle, stumbling under acceleration at normal cruising speeds. All systems other than the carb checked out fine. After buying a kit and rebuilding the Q-Jet, I saw only minor improvements, so I packed it up and sent it off to a rebuilder who is practically "The Carb Whisperer." He returned it to me unrebuilt, along with a note explaining that the under magnification, the castings and some of the internal components were corroded past the point to where they could be made functional.

Perplexed, I took several of these parts into work with me and examined them under our machinist's microscope, and what I saw shocked me. Under high magnification, even a polished journal will have a "texture" to its appearance, but what I saw was WAY beyond anything I expected. The internal brass parts had such heavy corrosion that, in places, the surface looked the way an old iron bar does when it rusts to the point that it begins to delaminate. As for the main castings, the internal surfaces that were in constant contact with the fuel look like lava rock; I've inspected a lot of aluminum alloy die castings in my time, but I've never seen anything like this. The surface is actually porous, allowing both fuel and air to be drawn past the components meant to meter their flow.

When the same thing began to happen to the '52 Fleetline, I knew exactly where to look -- same thing again, and also with what was a NOS Model B. This time, I didn't even bother trying to rebuild the carb myself, and I sent off for a carb from one of our better known vendors. After installing the replacement carb, I filled the bowl through the vent, pulled the choke and 216 started almost immediately. After a proper warm-up and some final adjustments, I took it for a test drive. It stumbled off the line. I visually checked the accelerator pump for function -- it produced a nice, solid stream of fuel. I tried giving it a bit of choke to see if enriching the mixture would help -- again, it stumbled. Upon harder acceleration, it stumbled and bucked, while under light acceleration, I was able to get the car up to road speed without too much drama. So then, I checked the fuel pump pressure -- 4.5 psi -- no problem there. I took the top off the carb and checked the float level and needle valve -- both perfect.

Then I hooked up the vacuum gauge and restarted the engine. The gauge kept intermittently dropping back 3 to 5 inches, usually an indication of a sticky intake valve. My brother-in-law, who is a mechanic, thought the same thing. Finally capitulating to the inevitable, I pulled the head and proceeded to pull the valves. When I rebuilt the engine, I had the shop installed hardened seats and stainless valves for the exhausts. Stainless intakes weren't available for the long-stemmed intake valves, so on the advice of the shop, we left these valves and their guides stock. All of the exhaust valves dropped right out onto the bench upon pulling the keepers, while several of the intake valves had to be "helped" out. All of the intake valves had some varnish on the lower parts of the stem, but the worst ones were in Nos. 3 & 4 cylinders, closest to the inlet on the intake manifold. These not only had a lot of varnish, but also showed some galling towards where they ride within the bottom portion of the guide.

So far, I have seen nothing in either instance that fails to correlate with the information in the published in the numerous articles warning of the potential hazards and likely results of using ethanol-laced gasoline in our old cars.

PS - When I moved to this area in 1998, it was still very rural. It wasn't until several years after I arrived that the local filling stations even began selling gasoline mixed with ethanol. However, as the population has grown, so has the the percentage of ethanol being added to gasoline in the past several years. My '99 Silverado pickup was the first to notice the difference, as I have seen my average gas mileage drop by a hair over 5 mpg in the past 3 years. I did record a drop on gas mileage in the '52 over the past 2 seasons prior my current troubles -- I guess the poor old gal was trying to tell me something....

I go to non ethanol gas stations for old cars!

"Well, I've read plenty of articles, both pro and con, about ethanol-laced gasoline. However, being an engineering type, I'm still a big fan of proof obtained by "empirical evidence" -- in other words knowledge and/or proof acquired by means of observation or experimentation. In other words, "show me!""

Scott,

"Being an engineering type is not evidence of anything associated with ethanol.

More you have given us no empirical evidence.

Please give us evidence that ethanol has solely cause the problems you have experienced with you lawn mowers, 72 Cutlass and 52 Fleetline. You did not state any.

Moreover the problems you mentioned could have happened with or without ethanol. The Cutlass could have suffered the symptoms mentioned with any gasoline. The 52 sounds like a timing problem or something else associated with the ignition system.


You whole argument fails to hold water and is not a very sound position. Do you own a Fulton?

The retoric is just another example of smoke and mirrors the Solon goes on and on about.

Ethonal is easy to blame for faults our minds are not able to grasp and find a solution to. Minds is the key word here. Have you been talking to the 47-48 crowd? Now there is a brain-trust that boggles the imagination.

Anything else goes wrong down there in "Cracker Land" -peanut crop failure, too many boll weevils, Vidalia onion crop failure - too many Carpetbaggers- just blame it on ethanol.

Best,
Charlie

While the above is a bit off track I agree with it completely.

Some notes from a Pontiac shop manual.
Gum is harmful;
Gum will produce a stickey substance
in a very short time. Gum firmation in gas is accelerated by temperature, intimate contact with air....For this reason it is especially important to see that new cars in stockare not left in storage with gasoline in their tanks for any length of time. To be on the safe side, any car in storage for more than 30 days should have their gas tanks drained.
If gasoline contains just slightly more gum than is normal it will deposit on the underside of the intake valves, inlet manifold. and carburetor parts under normal driving conditions
It also mentions any sulfur in gas attacking carburetor parts.

Bt the way this is from the 1941 Pontiac shop manual

Contains much much more intresting gas info. including the seasonal change in the mixture for summer and winter use and vapor lock caused by using winter gas in summer. And the same rules apply today.

In 1941 they couldn't blame ethanol.

WOW, Gene you nailed it right there! Charlie, you have it right, a lot of ordinary and age related problems get blamed on ethanol.

Some of the problems with modern gasoline are a result of either ethanol or the unsaturates. Since most of you don't have a clue what are unsaturates, ethanol gets the blame for all those problems as well. I could write an extensive discussion of the problems with both ethanol and unsaturation but will save y'all the pain on subjects that you don't completely understand.

Chipper,

As for me, I am grateful that you choose not to write an extensive discussion of the problems with both ethanol and unsaturation. I sure don't need the extra pain. I only have a undergraduate degree in industrial technology and a Masters in Counselor Education, so you can see that my educational background is not heavy in the chemical and engineering disciplines. Thanks for saving such as I the pain of reading something on subjects I won't completely understand.

Having said that, however, I'm sure that others may have the educational capacity to understand what you may write on the subject. In such cases, it may be considered a quantum leap to assume that they will not understand.

While it may be possible to find 47-48 Fleetliners willing to hold a pig up to an apple tree for a right good spell so it may leisurely munch on the fruit thereof simply because of the fact time doesn't mean nothing to a pig, please do not assume that all of us fit that mindset.

Your reply on the matter may have insulted the intelligence of many who would have understood your explanation. Maybe it would have better served to have just kept quite if you had nothing informative to add. Simply posting that you did but we wouldn't understand it, may not sit well. I mean that in a nice way. Your many technical and intelligent posts on many matters speaks for itself.

I look forward to the pain. Well, maybe not.

With great respect,
Charlie

Morning Gene, and others...I had a question...My '47 has been sitting for a few months now...Covered in the shade ( as if it matters, it's was still hot out ) Now, I have additives and Stable as well as a bit of two stroke oil...

I was wondering if this was going to slow down the build up of gum in the tank much, if at all...Just haven't had the time to drain it...Thanks

I would start the engine and drive as normal. There should be no problem in that short of amount time.

Thanks, Gene...I'll be able to sleep tonight...

This monthly message from The Filling Station, Lebanon, Oregon:

Each year, as leaves start falling and winter approaches, it is necessary to prepare our vintage cars & trucks to be inactive during the cold time of year. There are many items to be considered when storing a vehicle for extended periods - Gas, Oil, Water, Brakes, Tires, Tune Ups, Humidity Control, Windshield Wipers, Battery, and Miscellaneous Items.


GAS - Most fuels today contain ethanol and ethanol fuel breaks down in a shorter period than non-ethanol fuel. For collector vehicles, this is a big problem. When fuel goes bad in the gas tank, it can gum up the gas tank, fuel lines, fuel pump and carburetor. This problem will also show itself in other equipment at home, like lawn mowers, tractors, weed eaters, leaf blowers, etc. Preventing breakdown of the fuel is a vital part of protecting vehicles and equipment during inactive periods. For long term storage, draining the fuel system is recommended. However, be sure to run the motor until it quits from lack of fuel. This will insure that there is very little fuel still in the carburetor. An alternative is to find a source for ethanol-free gas - aviation gas is usually non-ethanol. The "shelf life" of ethanol-free gas is much longer than ethanol type fuels. This non-ethanol gas can be left in the tank for 3-5 months without breaking down.

Use of a fuel stabilizer such as Sta-Bil is another method to prevent problems...

Just a short note here.

Quote from the engine manual (Briggs and Stratton) 18 HP overhead valve produced in 2003 on my DR Chipper.

CAUTION: Some fuels, called oxygenated or reformulated gasoline, are gasoline blended with alcohols or ethers. Excessive amounts of these blends can damage the fuel system or cause performance problems. If any undesirable operating symptoms occur, use gasoline with a lower percentage of alcohol or ether.

Jim.

I was just reading the storage recommendations from the "Filling Station"...

And one caught my eye...And that was about not leaving the parking brake on during storage...I can attest to that...You will or can come back to find that the brake shoe(s) is stuck to the drum...Vehicle will not move...You will have to move the car back and forth to unjam it...No fun at all...Leave the parking brake off...! For the winter months...Or any length of time...!

Sorry, this is not ethanol related...Just a word from the un-wise...

Have you all noticed that over time, the argument against ethanol has become weaker and weaker?

Charlie

Charlie,
I have noticed just the opposite particularly with small engines and old car owners that drive and work on their vehicles. More people are stepping forward with personal problems that are definitely related to ethanol. I am one of them!

I very much agree with Chipper here. There is no longer doubt as to ethanol making real and in some cases dangerous trouble too for older vehicles and small, even newer engines. Also marine engines can easily be seriously damaged when adding ethanol to the gas due to they often are hard working on high revolutions over long time.

Let ethanol/gas only be allowed used in combination with engines specially built for that blend. Is that so difficult to understand?

I have no problem understanding that the cars racing in NASCAR use ethanol without trouble. They are exactly built to highest performance and tolerance using precisely that mixtion.

Another thing:
I have not seen any comments here from others on an area which should be alarming for most people along the American highways (and the railway lines). The trucks loaded with E 95 ethanol are comparatively more hazardous transports than trucks carrying f.ex. explosives, because they are so many, many more on the roads. I cannot believe you really want to accept such transports through your neighbourhood without any doubts.

Or is the reason that you have not yet seen an ethanol fire, even some distance away? Study the final result of the fire and you should be really frightened.

Luckily a lot of the fire brigades around have already taken steps to reduce the possible worst scenarios in their districts. Even so most of them will need a lot more powerful equipment to fight the nearly invisible flames and the heat.

Solan,

Regarding the above, that is one a number of reasons (and not by any means the least of them) that NASCAR switched from carburetion to fuel injection. By doing so, they rid themselves of the most problematic part of the entire fuel delivery system where the use of ethanol is concerned, even when the components are all made from alloys selected for their chemical compatibility with ethanol fuels. These alloys contain no zinc, or only minute amounts of this element.

Unlike modern fuel system components, the die castings of our old carburetors and fuel pumps contain significant amounts of zinc, as do the brass alloys of the internal components within. These alloys are therefore prone to anodic corrosion* when constantly bathed by moisture-laden ethanol, a reaction which is exacerbated in the presence of the heat being transmitted to these parts through direct contact with the engine itself, and from the superheated air within the engine compartment. The end result is that the zinc is gradually stripped out of the castings and brass components, leaving porous and pitted surfaces and, in the case of the carburetor, a useless metal lump that has been rendered one giant internal vacuum leak that is incapable of delivering a properly metered fuel mixture at any speed.

*Any of us that has either owned a boat or has worked on someone else's for "fun" or profit, will understand this reaction all too well; that's why those sacrificial anodes, or "zincs" as they are often called, are attached to the drive unit, or rudder and propeller shaft.

Scott,

Thanks for the lesson on NASCAR carburetors and the effect that ethanol may have on them. While I doubt that you can back up your claim that the use of ethanol is the sole reason for a switch from carburetors to injection, it makes little sense to get into that here. We do not have NASCAR sanctioned vehicles in the club. Sort of like mixing apples and oranges.

Solan,

Your last epistle was a stretch for even you. Mercy. Now we have to form a committee to study the effects of ethanol being transported throughout the country. Not only that but we have to contend with the hotter than he-- heat from an ethanol burn. There is one good thing that comes out of your scare tactics, if true. If we were to have a tanker full of ethanol burn a hole in the ground we can then go to its edge, lean over and order Chinese take=out direct from the source.

How long will this smoke and mirror stuff go on. I washed some parts in 10 percent ethanol gasoline the other day. My doctor now claims I have a low zinc disorder. Danged ethanol.

Charlie

Charlie ...Eat more oysters...The missus will thank me...lol

Okay, I believe I've been tolerant up until now, but for cryin' out loud, Charlie, that is NOT what I said at all! following is a direct quote from my own post:


Now, would you please explain to me how you managed to interpret my comment as a claim that ethanol "is the sole reason" for NASCAR's adoption of EFI?! You seem to be so totally invested in the use of ethanol that you're now rendering your own interpretations of the statements made by other people. What's the deal here? Do you have all your money invested of biofuel stocks, or do you work for Archer Daniels Midland or BP Biofuels NA? Geezus!

Perhaps someone who can download detailed photos on this site could suspend a piece of diecast and a piece of brass in a gallon of ethanol blended fuel and show us the results in say three to four weeks. (before and after photos).

Scott,

You did not say that the sole reason was ethanol. The inference was so strong, however, that I took it that way. My mistake.
Sorry,
Charlie

You learn something new every day! I hadn't know this before, but there's also a biologic component at work in running ethanol-blended fuels through fuel system components that are made of materials that weren't engineered with exposure to ethanol as part of the design criteria. The following is a quote from an article published in the trade journal "Equipment World":


The entire article may be viewed on line here

Note: I chose to emphasize the very last sentence in that quote, because I believe this might very well be the "smoking gun" for those of us who have had first-hand experience with fuel system problems with our less-frequently driven old cars, hot rods and motorcycles, as well as our power lawn equipment which are often refuel from a container that might be filled only once or twice during the entire season. It very well may not be the ethanol causing the problem directly; instead it might be the fallout from the acidic "poop" produced by bacteria that breed and feed in environment ethanol provides.

By the way, I find it fascinating that the biological process described above is exactly that same thing that occurs within improperly stored bottles of wine, turning the contents into vinegar!

PS - I apologized in advance to anyone who is upset by the author's "swipe" at the EPA; someone may find that as being too "political," but those are not my words -- they are author's words, unedited.