View Poll Results: 93 E10 vs 91 E0
93 octane E10 (10% ethanol)
![](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/maestro/polls/bar2-l.gif)
![](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/maestro/polls/bar2.gif)
![](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/maestro/polls/bar2-r.gif)
![](https://acurazine.com/forums/clear.gif)
7
43.75%
91 E0 (ethanol free)
![](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/maestro/polls/bar3-l.gif)
![](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/maestro/polls/bar3.gif)
![](https://acurazine.com/forums/images/maestro/polls/bar3-r.gif)
![](https://acurazine.com/forums/clear.gif)
9
56.25%
Voters: 16. You may not vote on this poll
93 octane E10 vs 91 octane E0 for this car?
#1
93 octane E10 vs 91 octane E0 for this car?
Specifically for this car, which is better in your experience? Does anyone have any info/dyno graphs to show any differences if there are any?
I know 91 octane ethanol free will get better mileage due to higher available energy, but I think I read somewhere that the TL has quite an aggressive tune from the factory leading to pulled ignition timings even at high octanes?
So will the 91 octane E0 gas run better power wise for our cars? or will pulled timing kill any benefit over 93 octane E10?
I know 91 octane ethanol free will get better mileage due to higher available energy, but I think I read somewhere that the TL has quite an aggressive tune from the factory leading to pulled ignition timings even at high octanes?
So will the 91 octane E0 gas run better power wise for our cars? or will pulled timing kill any benefit over 93 octane E10?
The following users liked this post:
thoiboi (11-26-2013)
#3
Instructor
#4
Pro
iTrader: (2)
Well, this is kind of one of those hotly debated topics with extremely biased sides and lobbyists on both sides and somewhat bipartisan support for increasing ethanol production to support crop farmers and ag companies like Archer Daniels Midland
If you google you will find a plethora of articles citing that ethanol is a net pollutant. It costs more energy to convert to usable energy than the liquid ethanol can produce in a combustion engine. Adding ethanol supposedly decreases MPG because it's such a sh*tty form of fuel (much like corn is a nutritionally useless food and even worse as a substitute for sugar). So you're polluting more, artificially increasing the price of food, subsidized not only by the govt/taxpayer but also the end food consumer, you, in order to support our ag industry to keep pumping out corn.
They are currently dumping some 6b+ gallons into our fuel annually and in less than ten years trying to bump that to over 35b gallons
It's also to reduce our dependency on foreign sources of oil. Hopefully the fracking boom and these massive shale discoveries will continue to push this country up the map on being a net oil exporter.
Give me 93 octane, hold the liquified corn on the cob bro.
If you google you will find a plethora of articles citing that ethanol is a net pollutant. It costs more energy to convert to usable energy than the liquid ethanol can produce in a combustion engine. Adding ethanol supposedly decreases MPG because it's such a sh*tty form of fuel (much like corn is a nutritionally useless food and even worse as a substitute for sugar). So you're polluting more, artificially increasing the price of food, subsidized not only by the govt/taxpayer but also the end food consumer, you, in order to support our ag industry to keep pumping out corn.
They are currently dumping some 6b+ gallons into our fuel annually and in less than ten years trying to bump that to over 35b gallons
It's also to reduce our dependency on foreign sources of oil. Hopefully the fracking boom and these massive shale discoveries will continue to push this country up the map on being a net oil exporter.
Give me 93 octane, hold the liquified corn on the cob bro.
The following users liked this post:
EvilVirus (11-28-2013)
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post