Like Tree0Likes

Regarding the worsening Ethanol Fuel situation - a DIY solution

Reply
Old 11-07-2011, 05:05 PM
  #31
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Trade Score: (1)
 
articfriends's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Frankenmuth
My Boats: EX 99 MPH 272 Baja owner, 1999 Scarab 33 AVS NOW
Posts: 6,072
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Audiofn View Post
Why involve a Lawyer in something like that? Just do the small claims thing. They would have a hard time defending it if you can show that the ethenol was over the 10% mark. Now instead of blowing a sled motor that costs you a grand or two to fix what about some of these guys motors that have huge money in then. I did do a search and there seem to be a few going but no results posted.
Your right I should have, big thing too was logistics, 400 miles away, Mom and Pop gas station, they just gave me stupid looks when I came back and sampled there fuel the next day and showed them. I guess the first warning clue I should have paid attention to too was they were heating the place with a wood burner and there house was attached to the store/gas station!!!
articfriends is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2011, 07:56 AM
  #32
Charter Member #232
Charter Member
 
Audiofn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Carlisle, MA USA
My Boats: 1979 Formula 302, 99 Formula 353, 81 Donzi 18 2+3 with 454
Posts: 18,379
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by articfriends View Post
Your right I should have, big thing too was logistics, 400 miles away, Mom and Pop gas station, they just gave me stupid looks when I came back and sampled there fuel the next day and showed them. I guess the first warning clue I should have paid attention to too was they were heating the place with a wood burner and there house was attached to the store/gas station!!!
I was not thinking a sled. I blew up both mine and I am convinced it was bad gas because both times I filled up at the same stationa nd both times I made it the same distance and blew up. I now need to rebuild them both. SUCKS!!! Especially the Rev 1000 that is like working on the space shuttle. Time lost in the suite is better spent just putting the damn things together ourselves..... I was more thinking all these guys with huge buck boats and huge repair bills after getting screwed by this stuff. Hell even just the disposal of the fuel must be an expensive undertaking.

$600-1000 to fill up. Pump out the bad fuel. pay to get rid of the bad fuel. 600-1000 to fill up again. So that is possibly 3 grand and we have not even talked about the blown up parts.....
__________________
Put your best foot forward!

Last edited by Audiofn; 11-08-2011 at 07:59 AM.
Audiofn is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2011, 05:59 PM
  #33
Registered
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 62
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by carcrash View Post
3) they get the global climate change effects for free (everyone will pay an awfully large bill soon for this
This one cracks me up!
djkool99usa is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2011, 09:27 PM
  #34
Registered
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lake Dallas, TX
My Boats: PQ 260/Laveycreft 29MCOB/ Now Boatless :-(
Posts: 1,087
Default

We're not going to beat them, so you might as well join them. It is the move of the future between being on the sidelines complaining or being in the game.


Quote:
Originally Posted by C_Spray View Post
Strike back. Buy stock in the oil companies and collect your share of the profits.

Last edited by bert4332; 11-08-2011 at 09:31 PM.
bert4332 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2011, 02:13 AM
  #35
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
My Boats: 32' MCOB
Posts: 38
Default

I just bought a new eco brand weed wacker, the warranty info states to use minimum 89 octane to keep the warranty valid due to the ethanol content. Apparebtly 87 eats up the seals, i now buy 89 always
Sunsation0032 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2011, 01:57 PM
  #36
Registered
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Rochester, NY
My Boats: 1990 Baja 250 sport
Posts: 235
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Audiofn View Post
I was not thinking a sled. I blew up both mine and I am convinced it was bad gas because both times I filled up at the same stationa nd both times I made it the same distance and blew up. I now need to rebuild them both. SUCKS!!! Especially the Rev 1000 that is like working on the space shuttle. Time lost in the suite is better spent just putting the damn things together ourselves..... I was more thinking all these guys with huge buck boats and huge repair bills after getting screwed by this stuff. Hell even just the disposal of the fuel must be an expensive undertaking.

$600-1000 to fill up. Pump out the bad fuel. pay to get rid of the bad fuel. 600-1000 to fill up again. So that is possibly 3 grand and we have not even talked about the blown up parts.....
i blew up my bone stock 2008 skidoo 800R last season,so did lots of other guys, ethanol has a big part to do with it IMO.

i sold it and bought a 1200 4 stroke for this year, honestly i cant trust a high performance 2 stroke with the **** fuel they are selling us nowadays so 4 stroke was my only choice. sure its not quote as fast but it beats losing a weekend of riding or being stranded in the middle of fuggin nowhere at -15f......
gsxr1216 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2011, 03:11 PM
  #37
Registered
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: central NY
My Boats: '95 Wellcraft Nova 23
Posts: 696
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sunsation0032 View Post
I just bought a new eco brand weed wacker, the warranty info states to use minimum 89 octane to keep the warranty valid due to the ethanol content. Apparebtly 87 eats up the seals, i now buy 89 always
I just bought a leaf blower with a 4 cycle engine. Manual says no less than 89 octane and NO MORE than 10% eth. So does that mean when they force 15-20% on us, I gotta by another leaf blower??

It's apparent to me that; the politicians are forcing this crap on us knowing that it's harming our engines, be they boats, sleds, bikes, yard equipment.....whatever. Yet, they persist in forcing the eth on us, regardless. Our representitives are being paid off, plain and simple.
Kidnova is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2011, 11:01 PM
  #38
Registered
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
My Boats: '83 Sea Ray SRV-260 DA
Posts: 141
Default

Ray: as I re-read your first post in this thread, I'm left a tad frustrated from its disparaging tone.

Was such a swift denouncement of these top cylinder lubricators really necessary?

I've read so many insightful posts that you've made about engines, and am most surprised at your immediate dismissal of these lubricators as a waste of time and energy.

I would have thought you of all people might see their value.

What gives?

Last edited by JP-8; 11-13-2011 at 01:37 AM.
JP-8 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2011, 01:36 PM
  #39
Registered
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 2,777
Wink Ethanol is the problem not additives

JP-8:
I did not think my comments were negative on additives and top cylinder lubricators. I was just pointing out that they will not necessarily take care of all the issues that ethanol laced gasoline will develop in marine engines. The real effects of ethanol especially in the storage of fuel and the hydroscopic effects of ethanol in fuel especially the new E-85 blends the EPA wants to mandate have not even come to the forefront yet. For many years there have been many products that came to market , some with "end all, be all" claims and solutions to engine wear and manitenance issues. Some and most did not make it so.

If one really studies all the effects of ethanol fuel in marine engines and read the resutls of many tests on the damages done by this fuel blend, one will see that currently there does not appear to be one single additive or even a group of two orthree that will solve all the problems that will arise with the use of this fuel over the next few years.
You obviously believe very strongly in the efficacy of this additive and you are certainly entitled to that belief and support.

I on the other hand am more concerned about the fact that we as boaters and engine builders are being forced to use a fuel type (without good pollution effect statistics) that is currently and will in the future lead to significant damage and cost for boaters so a small industry can make new profits at the expense of the fuel users. Remember these are the same agencies that forced the use of MTBE additives in gasoline and then came back a few years later and told us it was very dangerous, poisonus and had to go!

Additives can be wonderful products when they are well researched, tested, used and proven to improve engine operation, maintenance and life. I am not telling anyone not to use them nor am I criticising anyone for using any of these products. That's a choice each consumer has to make and its obvious that some products help offset some of the damaging effects of ethanol in fuel for marine use.

What I was trying to say in my previous posts is that I believe its wrong for our government agencies to put new fuel mandates in place without good research and testing. I believe that the boating community is especially being used as a "lab guinea pig" on this with the in use situation that is now in place. I know over the next few years a lot of this potential engine and fuel system damage will appear and accelerate in boats. Raylar as an engine builder I guess it will make for business for my company and others, however its new business I would rather not have or see.

If additives either one or a few can help eliminate this damage then that's great! I just feel its wrong for us to have to pay for someone else's (mandated ethanol use in marine engines) mistakes and add addtional costs to the already expensive cost of boat ownership and use!
Sorry if I seemed to be speaking negatively about an additive you believe in, I was not trying to do that.

Best Regards,
Ray @ Raylar

Last edited by Raylar; 11-13-2011 at 01:42 PM.
Raylar is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2011, 03:34 AM
  #40
Registered
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
My Boats: '83 Sea Ray SRV-260 DA
Posts: 141
Default

Certainly, these oilers aren't an end-all solution, but it would seem that the presence of a light oil might serve to lessen some of the harmful effects ethanol presents (perhaps hold those combustion byproducts in suspension), with the additional lubrication as a bonus.

I've never been a purveyor of additives, and only make exception for MMO due to its highly useful properties, and as a means of extending engine life.

Ethanol has done some terrible things to several of my engines, leaving me rather disgruntled, and thus willing to try a less conventional approach.

The concept of auxiliary lubrication appeals to me, and I do believe it will prove a worthwhile investment.

Owing to the relative obscurity of these things, I've noted quite a bit of negativity tends to get leveled at them by default. Usually, by those considered an authority on engines.

In any case, you've made some fantastic points, Ray. There isn't much regard for what impact Ethanol will have on existing marine engines in particular. It could be looked upon as generating more business with the need for more frequent repairs and all-out replacements, but the individual gets the short end of the stick, as per usual.

It seems that in these discussions of Ethanol, some variation of the phrase: "the point everyone keeps missing is..." will get invoked, and then the subsequent effort to enlighten always turns to pointing fingers at politicians and the like.

People are blaming the mechanism of implementation rather than the root cause.

The fuel we buy is already overpriced. The engines that burn it have not only been designed to wear out quickly, but are intended to be needlessly inefficient so as to consume enough fuel to generate the sort of profit margins to which the big oil companies feel entitled to.

This is often too harsh a revelation for your average motor enthusiast to come to grips with.

When the usual "well... if that were true, then how come: <insert garden variety closed-minded reasoning here?>" attempts fail to dispense with such nonsense, there's always the age-old standby of simply labeling someone a delusional conspiracy theorist.

I started a thread about the subject here back in April. While there was a fairly even divide between those who understood and the obligatory naysayers, the greatest opposition came from folks who had formal engineering backgrounds.

An engineering degree isn't necessary to comprehend that with the addition of Ethanol, the potential energy of the fuel is lessened, thus reducing the engine's already dismal efficiency to a level so ridiculous that it almost makes the horse and buggy look sensible.

Ethanol fuel has been forced upon us, to be sure. But then again, petroleum fuel has been forced upon us right from the beginning.

We always hear of the need to switch from petroleum to a more reliable (and honest) source of fuel. The technology has existed for over 150 years, and is being refined all the time, yet no efforts are ever made to implement it.

Here is just one example of something we could be using today that would bring an end to the oil age, and the control it has over everyone:

A great read and excellent primer

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ql-PfwuHFoY[/YOUTUBE]

The latest version of the concept:

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1MifFKgWC0g&feature=player_embedded[/YOUTUBE]

Last edited by JP-8; 11-14-2011 at 05:50 AM.
JP-8 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Reply



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:37 AM.


Copyright 2011 OffShoreOnly. All rights reserved.