E88 gasoline also known as E15, at 70 cents less per gal

[oe542bob]

Couldn’t pass up the 1.99 yesterday, so I filled up my truck. Took 17 gallons, so now I have a modified ethanol blend of around 12%. (33 gal. tank)

 

[benjaj]

Ummm no, I do believe your mistaken, E88 would be 88% Ethanol and 12% gas just like E85 is 85% Ethanol and 15% gas. BTW most of theses type of gas testing about how great Ethanol is, well what they do not tell ya is the fact they do not go out to the local gas station and buy the gas they will use for all those the test in their published report, what they do is they go buy fresh Ethanol direct from the refinery & the gas from a distributor that meets there requirements, they then mix the Ethanol & gas on site... People need to stop and ask why they will not go to the local gas station an buy the same ethanol blend gas that the every day public has to use to do all of there fancy testing? There is a reason they do not use same Ethanol blended gas the public has to use...

This information is not correct. There is no legal fuel for sale that contains 88% ethanol. To further confuse the matter, even e85 is a maximum of 73-83% ethanol content (yes, e85 is a silly misnomer - e85 is a max of 83% ethanol).
I believe the retail fuel being discussed in this string is typically referred to as "Unleaded 88" (not "e88") and, as noted in other posts in this string, contains 15% ethanol content (aka, e15). All automobile engines sold in North America have been approved to use e15 fuels since 2001 (https://www.epa.gov/fuels-registration-reporting-and-compliance-help/e15-fuel-registration). E15 does not damage fuel system or engine components and is fully warrantied by most auto manufactures for MY 2011 and newer.

I can't speak to the theory described on fuel testing at the station but I can tell you that nearly all finished fuels (99%) are blended with additives and ethanol at the bulk terminal as they are being loaded into the tanker that delivers to the underground tanks at the fuel station. At most terminals, the samples are taken automatically and are retained for each fuel type loaded onto a truck (many trucks are multi-compartment and haul multiple fuels types).

FWIW, ethanol is inline blended with RBOB gasoline and additives about 100' upstream from the tanker truck using ultra precise metering hardware and blend "recipes" that can alter the ethanol content between 9.45% ethanol (rounds up to e10) and 10.44% (round down to e10), depending on ethanol's price relationship vs. RBOB.

 

[PGTB]

I have had several new ram 1500 trucks. 2014 Laramie, 2017 limited and now a 2024 limited etourque. All had 5.7 hemi with automatics . I run only 88 octane. It has upto 15% ethanol. I put a lot of miles on these vehicles. Mostly highway miles. The first two had the 3.21 diff and I got better mileage with the E15. I do not do any towing. I did not notice any loss of power. The only way for you to know for sure is to try it in your vehicle and see for yourself. I also have a 2021 jeep gladiator Mojave that I only use the E15 in when available.

 

[benjaj]

Looks like gasoline threads are taking over where oil threads left off!

2016 5.7 Laramie. For the first 4 years of its life this truck made runs from UT to SD, 1k miles to my Mom’s front door from home then back. i am not a fan of alcohol fuels in vehicles for myriad reasons so avoid it when possible, so on my SD trips I always managed fillups (32gal) so I would only have to fill once in SD, where non-alcohol fuels can be hard to find. Mileage results were very consistent, running at 5mph over posted everywhere except the interstates. Pure gasoline always yielded better mileage—18.5-19.5 on gasoline, 16.5-17 on gasahol, hand calculated always. But as they say, YMMV.

Whomever posted that attitudes on gasahol don’t change is right, and the arguments don’t change much either. Alcohol fans decry oil subsidies, pure gas fans decry alcohol subsidies, and both sides ignore the environmental impacts of their fav fuel and the health risks and costs of polluted air (if you were breathing the air in Denver or LA back in the 70s you know what I mean). In the end, they will both succumb to a temporary transition to electrics and hybrids on their way to long-term transition to hydrogen-fueled vehicles. And finding gasoline for your vintage vehicles will be like trying to buy kerosene for a wick lamp…

best,
DG

The IRS's $0.45/ gallon blender credit (Volumetric Ethanol Excise Tax Credit (VEETC)) sunset in 2011. https://afdc.energy.gov/laws/399. There are not currently any federal or state ethanol subsidies for this fuel component, although there may be local tax abatements or other indirect tax credits for ethanol producers and there are a couple fuel distribution system capital investment matching grants out there.

Love the "gasohol" reference!

 

[392DevilDog]

Wow. I glazed over most of the posts.

I use Unleaded 88 in all 3 of my vehicles. All 3 are 2015 model year. A Jeep Cherokee with 3.2l V6 a RAM 2500 with 6.4l and another with the 5.7l. They have 78k, 178k and 135k miles.

At this point I refuse to pay for 87 E10.

There is so much misinformation in this thread, I am not even going to discuss the conspiracy.

We are not talking about flex fuel, yellow handle, yellow gas cap E85. That is not what this is

I can only mention for PA.

This is Unleaded 88...sometimes called E15...and is a blue handle at Sheetz and Rutter's stores. It is currently 1.99 while 87 is 3.65.

I tow with it in the heat of August and the gas lines haven't froze into the zero temps of winter.

I noticed an increase in MPG over 87 and from my few tests early on with my 6.4l, zero reason to run 89.

It has truly been a savings. As performance and mileage has been the same to better. Still true that only your ability to control your right foot and braking applications are the only way to fudge fuel consumption.

I do not use it in lawnmower, chainsaw or dirt bike. I get the 90 non ethanol for that...it is a red handle here in PA.

 

[benjaj]

It’s not E88, it’s UNLEADED 88 or E15 as per the Minnesota Fuels article you referenced. E88 would be an 88% ethanol fuel. Most gasoline sold in the US and Canada contains up to 10% ethanol making it E10. Ethanol is an alcohol and just like when we humans drink alcohol it dehydrates. On old vehicles with rubber seals the ethanol dries out the seals. Fuel with ethanol that sits for extended periods absorbs water and gets “gummy”. Outdoor power equipment is prone to ethanol fuel clogging up the small carburetors. Don’t take my word for it, Google it. As for your references, fuel economy dot gov takes me to their home page not any specific article and the California testing results takes me to a “tweet” by Robert White who is the president of the Renewable Fuels Association. MNFuels and the RFA are in business to sell bio fuels so of course they will espouse all the benefits of ethanol mixed fuels. Your Bio says you have a 2016 truck, have you checked the owners manual to find out if your vehicle can use E15? I own a flex fuel Pentastar V6 and I’ve tried E15 and E85. I have no long term usage data as I only find E85 available in Pennsylvania when visiting my sister. The few times I’ve used it mpg was poor but the motor “felt” peppier which is subjective at best. E15 fuel I’ve used on long highway trips and I’ve been pleased with the mpg versus price compared with regular 87 octane. Mpg’s were the same as per the dashboard mpg readout. Again no long term data as these fuels are not available in my home area.

All auto's 2001 and newer are able to use e15.

 

[benjaj]

Wow. I glazed over most of the posts.

I use Unleaded 88 in all 3 of my vehicles. All 3 are 2015 model year. A Jeep Cherokee with 3.2l V6 a RAM 2500 with 6.4l and another with the 5.7l. They have 78k, 178k and 135k miles.

At this point I refuse to pay for 87 E10.

There is so much misinformation in this thread, I am not even going to discuss the conspiracy.

We are not talking about flex fuel, yellow handle, yellow gas cap E85. That is not what this is

I can only mention for PA.

This is Unleaded 88...sometimes called E15...and is a blue handle at Sheetz and Rutter's stores. It is currently 1.99 while 87 is 3.65.

I tow with it in the heat of August and the gas lines haven't froze into the zero temps of winter.

I noticed an increase in MPG over 87 and from my few tests early on with my 6.4l, zero reason to run 89.

It has truly been a savings. As performance and mileage has been the same to better. Still true that only your ability to control your right foot and braking applications are the only way to fudge fuel consumption.

I do not use it in lawnmower, chainsaw or dirt bike. I get the 90 non ethanol for that...it is a red handle here in PA.

The Sheetz guys were very early adopters of e15 in their buildout of new storage on the east coast. That pricing vs 87 is aggressive! Fill'er up!

Also
All small engines are required to be e10 compliant and manufacturer warrantied. I believe these compliance standards came into effect with EPA's Phase 3 exhaust emissions standards took effect in 2011 or 2012 (depending on the size of the engine), although it may have been a later law that required the small engine compliance.

This required warranty caused some small engine manufactures to develop extended warranties if you purchased their branded non-ethanol fuel from them (Husqvarna). I view this a playing on fears and creating a new revenue stream rather than demonstrated pattern of hardware failure but... your milage may vary!

 

[benjaj]

Like I would believe anything that is stated as fact coming out of CA (the guys that want to ban ICE's).

Just look at the BTU/g rating of the gasoline vs ethenol. BTU's (or the energy rating) are what is needed to create heat / energy. Gas is 125,000 BTU/g and ethenol 84,530 BTU/g. The math is pretty simple and VERY obvious

Agree with your statement of caution about "fact" coming from the Cali folks!
There is more to the situation than simply BTU's per unit mass - I do not believe it is "that simple". I acknowledge that energy density is a piece of the fuel economy story but octane for higher compression engines and post-combustion, cooling in the cylinder and exhaust manifold are known phenomenons that will lead to improved ICE performance in future engine design.
Further, even if energy density with the only obvious factor, wouldn't cost per mile driven still be most important attribute?

 

[metalchewy]

All auto's 2001 and newer are able to use e15.

Just a little caution for statements like this, If your Ram Hemi 5.7 manual says you can only go up to 10% ethanol, you can have your warranty voided by your dealer for using E15 with 88 octane. Especially if it is related to degraded fuel system components from using higher alcohol percentage than allowed by the warranty. Regardless of whether it is designed to use it or not.

Warranty already expired? Do as you want.

 

[rvance]

I have the V6 that's rated for E85. If I run a tank for the computer to get used to it, it's the same as regular when running unloaded. I notice no difference in power or mileage. If I'm pulling a trailer it's very noticeable.

 

[Gary Hill22]

I can not believe the amount of bad/wrong information presented here, even the weatherman is more accurate.

 

[benjaj]

Just a little caution for statements like this, If your Ram Hemi 5.7 manual says you can only go up to 10% ethanol, you can have your warranty voided by your dealer for using E15 with 88 octane. Especially if it is related to degraded fuel system components from using higher alcohol percentage than allowed by the warranty. Regardless of whether it is designed to use it or not.

Warranty already expired? Do as you want.

There is certainly some knit-pick warranty risk.

My guess is 10% vs. 15% ethanol content in fuel is the least of the worries. Frankly, I'm unsure how this would be able to be detected by a dealer if a claim were to be contested. Additionally, I suspect a rather high percentage of the dudes on this forum already have aftermarket (oversized) tires and may not ALWAYS "Ultra" 0w40 for their 6.4L (many forum posts on THAT topic). These actions are far more detectable to a dealer seeking to get out of a warranty claim.
I would also suggest that economy-grade 85 octane gas in mountain areas, as well as aftermarket fuel additives like stabilizer (Sta-bil) & octane boosters are generally not specifically called out in an owner's manual. Use of these non-mentioned fuels & additives typically do not void a vehicle warranty.

I'm certainly understand the point and many people are probably going to be following all (most?) of the rules if driving a bone-stock Ram with less than 60k miles. Although I have heard there could be considerable mechanic-level discretion when warranty claims are performed (not an expert on this)...

For me, that ship sailed when the 35's were bolted on. Maybe I was lucky...but I would do it again. Wish e15 was available locally.

 

[benjaj]

I have the V6 that's rated for E85. If I run a tank for the computer to get used to it, it's the same as regular when running unloaded. I notice no difference in power or mileage. If I'm pulling a trailer it's very noticeable.

That's impressive. My experience in other FFV's has been 8-15% fuel economy drag.
No doubt I am an ethanol supporter but when I had an FFV, if e85 was 15% cheaper at the pump, I would buy e85. Cost per mile driven is the economic rationale for this fuel (at the consumer level).

There are also GHG emission reduction/ air quality benefits, lower cost fuel constituent and domestically produce product benefits that drove the implementation of fuel ethanol but the consumer generally doesn't take this into consideration.

 

[pacofortacos]

I hope you use a good gas stabilizer if gas in your tank sits that long, especially if its contains ethanol...

I try to, I also try to use a fuel system cleaner yearly when driving it.

 

[04fxdwgi]

Agree with your statement of caution about "fact" coming from the Cali folks!
There is more to the situation than simply BTU's per unit mass - I do not believe it is "that simple". I acknowledge that energy density is a piece of the fuel economy story but octane for higher compression engines and post-combustion, cooling in the cylinder and exhaust manifold are known phenomenons that will lead to improved ICE performance in future engine design.
Further, even if energy density with the only obvious factor, wouldn't cost per mile driven still be most important attribute?

Understand where you are coming from, as you are a fan of the ethenol. But I am standing on the opposite corner of the intersection and quite a skeptic after seeing the shenanigans (and gross lies) of the past 50 years play out, 1st hand as a driver since the mid '60's. "Lowest cost to the driver" IS NOT the most important attribute of this fuel mix. Politics and greasing the wheels IS. That is all I can say, here on a public forum, about that that.

Interesting points, BUT we are talking exact same engine on different fuels in this context, not engines with different mechanical components in the future. We will see when that time comes, now is now. The compensation is usually done thru the computer to "tune" the engine for the ethenol, over a period of time, such as a tank full and adding some widgets to make it all dance to the tune together. Add one with a shoe missing and it is awful to watch.

Putting in additives to compensate for what is lost by substituting gasoline with ethenol has it's own dark secrets, depending on the additive and just adding another pollutant to replace the gasoline's.

Cost per mile driven is mystical formula that the ethenol folks like to prance around. The difference is the controlled testing that is done vs: real world. Everyone drives differently in varying environments, temperatures and weather, plus loads in vehicles vary, along with wind loads. Oh yeah, don't forget those pesky hills.

Every engine I have had (and the number is quite eye opening for me) since the '75 has gotten better mileage on straight no lead than with ethenol added. Lost mileage = more fuel consumed to go the same distance = higher hidden cost of ethenol. That being said, $2.00 non ethenol is actually cheaper than $2.00 15% ethenol.

My truck (like the last 4 or 5 ) is used for hauling stuff, towing boat, towing equipment, and daily driver, so basically nothing is a constant.

Being a boater, I would NEVER run any ethenol fuel in any marine enviroment.

 

[Rambo71]

I now run the E88 almost exclusively in my '21 Jeep (8k), '09 Dodge (145k) and '15 Ram (125k). No discernible fuel mileage differences from running 87 for years. No fuel related issues. I just like 'less wallet pain' at the pump.

 

[NETim]

Looks like gasoline threads are taking over where oil threads left off!

2016 5.7 Laramie. For the first 4 years of its life this truck made runs from UT to SD, 1k miles to my Mom’s front door from home then back. i am not a fan of alcohol fuels in vehicles for myriad reasons so avoid it when possible, so on my SD trips I always managed fillups (32gal) so I would only have to fill once in SD, where non-alcohol fuels can be hard to find. Mileage results were very consistent, running at 5mph over posted everywhere except the interstates. Pure gasoline always yielded better mileage—18.5-19.5 on gasoline, 16.5-17 on gasahol, hand calculated always. But as they say, YMMV.

Whomever posted that attitudes on gasahol don’t change is right, and the arguments don’t change much either. Alcohol fans decry oil subsidies, pure gas fans decry alcohol subsidies, and both sides ignore the environmental impacts of their fav fuel and the health risks and costs of polluted air (if you were breathing the air in Denver or LA back in the 70s you know what I mean). In the end, they will both succumb to a temporary transition to electrics and hybrids on their way to long-term transition to hydrogen-fueled vehicles. And finding gasoline for your vintage vehicles will be like trying to buy kerosene for a wick lamp…

best,
DGgo

I have no problem with market driven solutions. .Gov shouldn't be in the business of picking winners and losers. I am not a fan of government subsidies in any event.

 

[WaltKowalski74]

Excellent dialog on the effects from alcohol to non-alcohol fuel choices and mileage results. But until a cleanup occurs in aisle 5 from the numerous 2008 Pontiac Grand Prix's or 2001 Chevy Monte Carlos spewing vagisil fumes and ***** weed, blowing through the streets and highways most with dangling rearview mirrors or flirting gun shot wounds, the air will never be as clean as it is today. I will enjoy my HEMI while I'm alive burning 89 and prepare for the Mad Maxx rat circus soon in this country.

 

[melvingeraldmesse]

I have used the E15 88 octane gas in my 2021 power wagon. I had no decrease in milage. I would use it all the time but it's not that common here in southeast Kansas.

 

[RAM_Davis]

Denatured ethanol has 30% less energy than straight gasoline. Because of this, moving from 10% ethanol to 15% ethanol is about a 2% difference in MPG (basically .3 x .05 = 1.5%). I haven't noticed any difference so if it's cheaper, I'm buying it. We have Sheetz all around so it's nice to have the option, though I will say that 87 at Sam's Club is often a similar price.