More and more servos are no longer selling ULP (91). Instead they have 91 with 10% ethanol. They even try to hide the fact that it is e10 (small print). A while ago it was e5. Is this a govt plan to force us to use ethanol blends or just the biggies oil companies (Shell and Caltex) making more $. It seems it won't be long before 91 will no longer be available. My TJ does not have a knock sensor, unlike the old TS. so using 95 will not be beneficlal, only more costly. I guess it won't be long and I will have to choose between 95 and e10. E10 can cause problems (water etc) and the jury is still out regarding whether performance falls or drops. Can 95 cause any problems in cars that are meant to run on 91 and don't have knock sensor? With my wife's Pulsar it is easy, we will take to using 95, because the car is made to use 91-95. I know 95 gives slighlty better performance and slighlty better economy, but not quite in line with cost increase. Comments please.

i REFUSE point blank (out of PERSONAL OPINION) to use E10 fuel in my car/s at any time.

If my ownly choices at the bowser are:
91E10 - 95 - 98
i will always pick up the 95 hose.

(well now... i have no choice - i have to pick up the 98, but thats for different reasons)

The whole idea of E10 fuels, is its ment to be seens as renewable.
never mind the fact you use more to go the same distance as you would in regular 91, and it reduces engine power too.
I believe that i read a short while ago, that the governments wanted to bring in all fuels being E10, im not sure how true that is and if itl ever happen though - please correct me if im wrong.

95 will not cause any damage to your engine , you just wont get the extra potential performance and econ from it due to no knock sensor.
at least its not ethanol and eating the fuel lines and rings etc (again - personal opinion there!)

Same, I too refuse to use E10 in my car as it was not designed from the beginning to use it. So my option is 95.
Although I use E10 in my wifes Yaris as it was designed to use it. Plus she wants to use it. In the Yaris I felt no difference between 91 and E10.
In the Rada however, my wife accidently filled up with E10 and I felt a difference straight up. To me it was sluggish and got less per tank, around 70km less compared to std 91.

The V8 Supercars used ethanol blended fuel last year for all races. I haven't seen or read any feedback about benefits or damage that it did to their vehicles. Anyone heard anything on this?

Yep never have used E10 in a car I cared about. Used to use in my thankfully dead excel but never in any of my magnas and especially never in the VRX. I usually only fill up at Shell Servos but every now and then I'll rock up and they'll have those out of use covers on all the yellow unleaded bowsers so I just keep driving till I find a place that doesn't.

Premium is far too expensive when the magna can't tell the difference but I'd turn to it if it came down to choosing E10 or the good stuff.

The V8 Supercars used ethanol blended fuel last year for all races. I haven't seen or read any feedback about benefits or damage that it did to their vehicles. Anyone heard anything on this?
Race cars are a bit different because they will be specifically designed and tuned for the one particular type of fuel.

The V8 Supercars used ethanol blended fuel last year for all races. I haven't seen or read any feedback about benefits or damage that it did to their vehicles. Anyone heard anything on this?

They used E85 and yes the engines had to be modified to accept the high ethonol content

Haha, I haven't seen 91 since I've started driving 3-4 years ago.

The V8 Supercars used ethanol blended fuel last year for all races. I haven't seen or read any feedback about benefits or damage that it did to their vehicles. Anyone heard anything on this?

this is correct but they did not use e10, they used e85.

Alcohol is a bloody great fuel and ethanol is a very good alcohol to use but it is not a cure to the oil crises only a bandaid. It is also not a cure for the environment as its still emmits carbon when combusted. Yes much better then ulp litre per litre but to run pure ethanol (or even e85 like the v8 supercars) you need to run roughly 2 times asmuch fuel. So ethanol would have to be half the price or less per litre for it to be beneficial to the wallet (not going to happen) at thsi times2 rate it is only very slightly better then ulp in emmissions and ethanol is predomiently from corn and sugar, which farming of has massive enviromental impacts, so imagine everyone having to use it..

this is mostly the reason e10 is about, it doesnt really help anything but slowly and surely it brings people around to the idea of renewable, cleaner energy and if the changes are small enough it wont impact our lives...but to small and we face waiting to long to change things for the better.

Ethanol does not like sitting in fuel tanks or lines very long, and it absorbs water very easily (from the air even) this i what corrodes fuel lines and pumps, believe it or not but alcohol is actually a solid, its just impossible to produce 100.0% alcohol, thus all alcohol fuels contain trace amounts of water.

Performance benefits ive seen from e85 where without ethanol a gtr owner had maxxed out injectors, 18psi of boost and 240kw. He upgraded to a 2 fuel pumps, 100L tank and 2.5x larger injectors. He had this combination tuned and at 20psi on maxxed out injectors on ethanol was nudging 300kw on the same dyno. now the 2psi would of gained him around the 15-20kw mark, so in relaity the other 30ish kw was a gain from having a much better fuel. But id hate to have his fuel bill after that

this is correct but they did not use e10, they used e85.

Alcohol is a bloody great fuel and ethanol is a very good alcohol to use but it is not a cure to the oil crises only a bandaid. It is also not a cure for the environment as its still emmits carbon when combusted. Yes much better then ulp litre per litre but to run pure ethanol (or even e85 like the v8 supercars) you need to run roughly 2 times asmuch fuel. So ethanol would have to be half the price or less per litre for it to be beneficial to the wallet (not going to happen) at thsi times2 rate it is only very slightly better then ulp in emmissions and ethanol is predomiently from corn and sugar, which farming of has massive enviromental impacts, so imagine everyone having to use it..

this is mostly the reason e10 is about, it doesnt really help anything but slowly and surely it brings people around to the idea of renewable, cleaner energy and if the changes are small enough it wont impact our lives...but to small and we face waiting to long to change things for the better.

Ethanol does not like sitting in fuel tanks or lines very long, and it absorbs water very easily (from the air even) this i what corrodes fuel lines and pumps, believe it or not but alcohol is actually a solid, its just impossible to produce 100.0% alcohol, thus all alcohol fuels contain trace amounts of water.

Performance benefits ive seen from e85 where without ethanol a gtr owner had maxxed out injectors, 18psi of boost and 240kw. He upgraded to a 2 fuel pumps, 100L tank and 2.5x larger injectors. He had this combination tuned and at 20psi on maxxed out injectors on ethanol was nudging 300kw on the same dyno. now the 2psi would of gained him around the 15-20kw mark, so in relaity the other 30ish kw was a gain from having a much better fuel. But id hate to have his fuel bill after that

Evo crew are seeing similar results. 30-40kw atw with just E85. BUT, you need at least 2.5-3x larger injectors (read: about 1400-2000cc) and sedate driving will net around 250-300km to a full tank (read: about 20L/100km)

In answer to the original question, if I was you, I'd be picking up the 95 or 98 pump.

The V8 supercars had the advantage of stripping and rebuilding engines after each race..Somehow think we will not be doing that..They also lost a heap of distance per fuel load.For eg at Bathurst they used to be able to do between 32 and 36 laps first tank of fuel.Craig lowndes had the best economy and was sniffing fumes at lap 26.some of the lesser were coming in lap 22.So the E85 burned about a third quicker than the original fuel used..

just use the 95 or 98 people.... get the more mileage for a little more at the pump. and be happy in knowing the car is running aswell as i can.

As far as the big Oil companies go, they dont want the stuff either.
Government regulations say that they have to produce ever increasing amounts of blended fuel.
Ethanol producers , Like CSR, only have to produce the Ethanol, and receive the subsidies. (that we also pay for. so it is actually a hidden additional fuel cost)
It is then up to the Oil companies to add it to their product, add the necessary additives to make it work, and then cop the flack when someone has a problem.

just use the 95 or 98 people.... get the more mileage for a little more at the pump. and be happy in knowing the car is running aswell as i can.

From what I've read on here, I don't think this makes a difference in 3rd gens as far as mileage goes, and only modified engines (higher compression or advanced timing) would benefit from the higher octane. Because there is no knock sensor and no automatic advancing from the ecu, there is no benefit in running more expensive fuels.

My old Daihatsu used to get better mileage on Premium, so it was worth paying 15% more. But now with the Magna the only difference to me would be the loss of 1 day's food money each week!

Ethanol does not like sitting in fuel tanks or lines very long, and it absorbs water very easily (from the air even) this i what corrodes fuel lines and pumps, believe it or not but alcohol is actually a solid, its just impossible to produce 100.0% alcohol, thus all alcohol fuels contain trace amounts of water.


Wrong. Alcohol is not a solid. A solid is defined as matter that stays solid (i.e. does not conform to the shape/size of the container it is in) at standard temperature and pressure.

ill accept the not a solid arguement but alcohol is the secretions of yeast that have used the medium (sugar,bali whatever) to feed and live on. Effectively yeast crap. Still tastes good in the right bottle though ahah

According to an article in todays Newcastle Herald normal 91 Unleaded will be phased out next year (however, the article failed to note whether this would be NSW or Nation wide). The NRMA have raised concern as this will create more expense for motorists. I won't touch the stuff, but if I have my Feroza next year (21 years old when using ethanol for road vehicles in Australia was unheard of) I'll definitely have to pay the extra for the 95 - which a full tank of is probably worth more than the actual car :) However, using the 95 will be a lot cheaper than replacing a motor etc.

I can't see how E10 is justified as renewable as most of the foreign ethanol is produced by corn - which could feed a crap load of people. It kind of creates an ethical issue whether we need food first or fuel for our cars. For example, within Brazil they've been using ethanol for ages, however poor to low middle class can't afford to buy corn / crops as using it for ethanol has jacked the prices up. Not to even mention that Australia will soon probably experience a food crisis...happy days lol

From what I've read on here, I don't think this makes a difference in 3rd gens as far as mileage goes, and only modified engines (higher compression or advanced timing) would benefit from the higher octane. Because there is no knock sensor and no automatic advancing from the ecu, there is no benefit in running more expensive fuels.

My old Daihatsu used to get better mileage on Premium, so it was worth paying 15% more. But now with the Magna the only difference to me would be the loss of 1 day's food money each week!

Pretty sure Trotty meant use 95/98 instead of E10. I know if i had the choice i would do the same.
Using E10 i notice i lose fuel economy and power.
You will find you will probably notice a slight increase with 95 over standard 91, purely because the fuel is better quality. Probably not enough to warrant the extra cost. 95 - 98 would see no difference.

yeah i use 95 now as i get slightly better economy out of it. 91 here is @ $1.79 p/l and 95 is @ $1.84.9 (last i looked) oh and due to it been related , in another thread im asking about the fault codes the ecu puts out including one for "knock sensor" according to haynes manual, and after looking in the wiring diagrams the is a variable resistor between air flow sensor and throttle position sensor that says in brackets (on pacific exports only), i am wondering if this could be a knock sensor, and we kiwis got it. not sure if a variable resistor suites the application though.

I think the thing that is being completely ignored is not cars, it is that boaties cannot use E10 due to water issues, they would be stuck putting 150L+ of inflated price premium in their tanks, which I think is a lil bit bull.

Ethanol blends are bad ethically - they take land away that could be used for useful crops and food aid. Effectively poor countries will grow ethanol crops (like canola) to feed the developed worlds insatiable appetite without regard to the environment.