1 minute ago, cjay1 said:

For an e5 sticker to be on the pump ethanol content must be between 0% and 5% and e10 must be between 5.5% and 10% so if it says e10 on the pump that is what you will get.

Research suggests small turbo engines could see up to 13% less mpg compared to e0 so 10% reductions some are reporting could be accurate. If so it could be cost effective to use super unleaded.

How is it possible to get less MPG than the amount of Ethanol present, that doesn't make sense.

Some models compensate for the ethenol by using more fuel per combustion cycle 

Yeah that's always how it works, because the ethanol has about 1/3rd less energy by same volume of petrol.

But that means the E0 compared to E10 is about 3.3% less energy, so that's how much it should affect the mpg. E5 to E10 should be 1.67%.

It can take a fill up or two for the car to adjust to use it in the most effecient way, the same when switching between Super and Regular due to the different octanes.

The main issue the ethanol in the fuel is the damage to pipes and components on old cars that aren't designed for it and it can also attract more water if left for long periods.

I see that the press today are reporting that it appears up to 20% of filling stations - probably the smaller ones in remoter areas - will not be selling E5, only E10. That figures, as it's sometimes difficult now to find the various "super" grades outside urban areas and the smaller outlets only stock 95 octane. Asda only sell 95 anyway, as do most Morrisons sites.

At the same time, they are quoting Ethanol Europe, the industry group, as saying ethanol does no harm to older vehicles anyway. Presumably this is what they are referring to:

https://www.introducinge10petrol.co.uk/introducing-e10-petrol/e10-compatible-all-cars

1 hour ago, cjay1 said:

For an e5 sticker to be on the pump ethanol content must be between 0% and 5% and e10 must be between 5.5% and 10% so if it says e10 on the pump that is what you will get.

Do you have a source for the above information please? All the sources I have seen say that E10 can contain up to 10% Ethanol, I can't find any source claiming that it must have at least 5.5% Ethanol.

15 minutes ago, pcaouolte said:

Do you have a source for the above information please? 

See The Motor Fuel (Composition and Content) and the Biofuel (Labelling) (Amendment) (No 2) Regulations 2021. 

This defines E10 as petrol having more than 5% ethanol (minimum 5.5% by volume) and E5 as petrol with 5% or less ethanol. E10 must contain at least 5.5% ethanol all year round. So it looks as if E10 could actually only be E5.5 and still be within the regulations.

I have fully read the 64 page manifesto of the Conservative party in 2019, leading them to power. Not ONCE in it did it state anything about changing the quality of petrol we would be mandated to use.

On P55 it DOES state the following, "We will consult on the earliest date by which we can phase out the sale of new conventional petrol and diesel cars."

A blatant lie as there was NO consultation whatsoever, and Boris chose to unilaterally select an arbitrary date to cease the sale of Petrol & diesel cars by 2030.

I'm old enough to have been governed by many incompetent governments in the last 4 decades, but this is the first one I have ever been genuinely scared of. The freedoms they have removed from general citizens in the last 18 months, and their 'nanny state' mentality, scares the bejesus out of me!

3 minutes ago, StephenFord said:

On P55 it DOES state the following, "We will consult on the earliest date by which we can phase out the sale of new conventional petrol and diesel cars."

A blatant lie as there was NO consultation whatsoever,

Erm.......

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/introducing-e10-petrol

5 minutes ago, Eric Bloodaxe said:

Erm.......

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/introducing-e10-petrol

That's a consultation for E10 fuel, not 'battery' cars. There was no mention in their manifesto about changing fuel to E10... The impact of mandating battery cars will be infinitely more far reaching than changing the content of petrol at the pumps.

Give us our cars back and scrap these electric ones,lots of money gone into electric ones so that will never happen.

An Hybrid car with E10 there you go best of all as still have an engine and low pollution when still or going slow.

18 minutes ago, StephenFord said:

That's a consultation for E10 fuel, not 'battery' cars. There was no mention in their manifesto about changing fuel to E10... The impact of mandating battery cars will be infinitely more far reaching than changing the content of petrol at the pumps.

Lol, sorry I mis quoted your quote!  I was trying to stick on the topic for a change!😀

An earlier consultation (issued July 2018) was already running at the time of the election so that might be why it wasn't mentioned. And believe me, I'm not making excuses for politicians here!😀

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/e10-petrol-consumer-protection-and-fuel-pump-labelling

But on the sales ban:

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/consulting-on-ending-the-sale-of-new-petrol-diesel-and-hybrid-cars-and-vans

 

 

Please keep general covid discussion in a dedicated thread such as this one, thanks.

 

used my high performance motorcycle on e10 for a tank full and not noticed any diffference in  performance. economy i have no idea . just fill up and thrash it. 🤣🤣🤣

From what I've read online unless the engine has a turbo economy loss should be less than 2%. Some small engined turbo cars are reporting losses of up to 11.5%. for the ecoboost ford state its designed/optimised to run on unleaded petrol but capable to run on blends of up to e10. For me capable and optimised are not the same thing so question is what is the economy penalty of e10 over super e5 and is the price difference justified for a 1.0 ecoboost.

1 hour ago, cjay1 said:

. Some small engined turbo cars are reporting losses of up to 11.5%. 

Didn't that come from an Autocar/What Car fuel test in 2014 that was discussed on another thread? Iirc they were comparing E10 with E0 "super" which seemed an odd comparison.

Recent comments from both seem to stick to the official line of minimal loss of mpg.

Only way we'll know for sure is monitor our own results over an extended period. (Or fairly short period of you're on your bike like @iantt - I used to get through a full tank on a Sunday morning, no problem!😀)

 

my partner will be the first to complian about fuel economy in her fiesta 1.0 ecoboom . havent said anything about e10 so theres no underlying thoughts about potential running performance or economy in her head. 

no-one has mentioned wether aircon was on or not ? the whole subject is a minefield BOOOOOOOOM there goes another lol

Just filled up with E10.   I'll report back in two weeks.

Second fill up with E10 from asda (didn't see E5) the pump i used just had the 2 E10 and diesel and that's on a massive shopping complex,pay by card at pump.

Mine is the 1.6 engine and seem to run fine and MPG seems the same,well if less not a lot and that's mainly very local stop/start driving.

2 minutes ago, jace1969 said:

Second fill up with E10 from asda (didn't see E5

Afaik Asda don't sell the "super" grades, only 95 octane which would now be E10.

3 hours ago, JImpster said:

no-one has mentioned wether aircon was on or not ? the whole subject is a minefield BOOOOOOOOM there goes another lol

does having my visor open a little count as air con on? 🤣🤣

43 minutes ago, iantt said:

does having my visor open a little count as air con on? 🤣🤣

Careful with that Ian - I once got a wasp inside my helmet!

or god forbid your eye 

 

3 hours ago, Eric Bloodaxe said:

Careful with that Ian - I once got a wasp inside my helmet!

I had one up my sleeve last week! 

Filled up at local Shell with E5, but Gov't website does say my Mk2 Mondeo 1.8 is compatible with E10.