Mileage Differences Between Gasohol & Regular Gasoline?

[absolutelyBangkok]

Anybody kept book about mileage with gasohol and non-gasohol?

The energy-content of gasohol is not as high as of the regular gasoline.

You pay less at the gasoline station, but at the end you may end up paying more because of a worse mileage with gasohol.

Anybody made some tests?

Only had experiences with my old 01 CRV. Gasohol definitifely gave me a worse output, not only mileage-, but also acceleration-wise.

[tom yum goong]

my very unscientific research tells me i average about 10% less mileage on gasohol than i do on 91. i also feel less power when i put my foot down. so my conclusion is that the 10% saving at the pump is a false economy.

would be interested to hear other people's experiences.

[samatrob]

Its like all fuels petrol /diesel /bio it all comes down to ajusting the NUT behind the steering wheel

[Crossy]

When I was using gasohol, there was a definate falling-off of performance as well as a slight increase in consumption, not 10% probably more like 5-7%.

I also noted the occasional 'bad' tank of fuel, which got sucked up at a prodigious rate accompanied by really awful running, possibly as a result of water being absorbed whilst in storage.

[absolutelyBangkok]

Those few replies so far convinced me enough not to even think about giving gasohol a try with my new car.

Thanks - how I like that peace of mind.

[Gary A]

My Ford Focus doesn't know the difference. If there is any difference in performance it is not noticeable. I used to put only 95 octane gasoline in it but sometimes it was impossible to find. I have since used whatever 95 octane is available. I have checked kilometers per liter between fill ups and found that the car computer tells the truth and is more accurate than I would have believed. Maybe older cars have problems with gasohol but my Ford doesn't.

[Hog Head]

In controlled conditions 95 E-10 gives anywhere from 2-5% less than gasoline. In the real world however it will range from 10 - 20% less depending on the vehicle and the driver.

Cars designed for ethanol fuels will show little difference with E-10, however this is not the case as ethanol levels increase. Note the government has stated that they intend to introduce E20

At current pump prices for the average older car and driver , E-10 is no cheaper.

The question of compatability remains.

Stay tuned for the government to fiddle with taxes and subsidies to increase the cost of gasoline in order to support the ethanol companies who have added capacity far in excess of market demand. The government will be under great pressure from powerful individuals behind these ethanol companies to soak up their capacity, or allow export of ethanol.

[lotus eater]

My Ford Focus doesn't know the difference. If there is any difference in performance it is not noticeable. I used to put only 95 octane gasoline in it but sometimes it was impossible to find. I have since used whatever 95 octane is available. I have checked kilometers per liter between fill ups and found that the car computer tells the truth and is more accurate than I would have believed. Maybe older cars have problems with gasohol but my Ford doesn't.

My Mazda3 (14 months old) does show a slight difference when given 95 petrol and 95 gazohol. Curious, because I thought it was essentially the same car as a Ford Focus. (Nor does it have a fuel consumption computor - as your Focus apparently does.)

[Gary A]

My Ford Focus doesn't know the difference. If there is any difference in performance it is not noticeable. I used to put only 95 octane gasoline in it but sometimes it was impossible to find. I have since used whatever 95 octane is available. I have checked kilometers per liter between fill ups and found that the car computer tells the truth and is more accurate than I would have believed. Maybe older cars have problems with gasohol but my Ford doesn't.

My Mazda3 (14 months old) does show a slight difference when given 95 petrol and 95 gazohol. Curious, because I thought it was essentially the same car as a Ford Focus. (Nor does it have a fuel consumption computor - as your Focus apparently does.)

I think Ford calls it a versa fuel engine or something like that. I can't find the information. It explains how Ford designed the engine to run on gasoline with 10 percent and higher amounts of ethanol. I don't know if Mazda has the same engine.

I'm not familiar with fuel economy comparisons between different brands. I do know that my Ford Ghia has a 1.8 liter engine and it is NOT overly powerful. The 13 kilometers per liter of 95 octane is disappointing especially when it drops to about 9 kilometers per liter with local driving. The car computer gives liters per 100 kilometers rather than kilometers per liter along with average speed and other information. It is much more accurate than I would have thought. I'm hoping the fuel economy will get better after everything is loosened up. If there is any difference between gasoline and gasohol it is so minor that I can't tell. I think there is more difference between brands than between gasoline and gasohol.

[lotus eater]

My Ford Focus doesn't know the difference. If there is any difference in performance it is not noticeable. I used to put only 95 octane gasoline in it but sometimes it was impossible to find. I have since used whatever 95 octane is available. I have checked kilometers per liter between fill ups and found that the car computer tells the truth and is more accurate than I would have believed. Maybe older cars have problems with gasohol but my Ford doesn't.

My Mazda3 (14 months old) does show a slight difference when given 95 petrol and 95 gazohol. Curious, because I thought it was essentially the same car as a Ford Focus. (Nor does it have a fuel consumption computor - as your Focus apparently does.)

I think Ford calls it a versa fuel engine or something like that. I can't find the information. It explains how Ford designed the engine to run on gasoline with 10 percent and higher amounts of ethanol. I don't know if Mazda has the same engine.

I'm not familiar with fuel economy comparisons between different brands. I do know that my Ford Ghia has a 1.8 liter engine and it is NOT overly powerful. The 13 kilometers per liter of 95 octane is disappointing especially when it drops to about 9 kilometers per liter with local driving. The car computer gives liters per 100 kilometers rather than kilometers per liter along with average speed and other information. It is much more accurate than I would have thought. I'm hoping the fuel economy will get better after everything is loosened up. If there is any difference between gasoline and gasohol it is so minor that I can't tell. I think there is more difference between brands than between gasoline and gasohol.

The Mazda's range of km per litre is about the same. (I think the engine is a shade more than your 1.8 litre.) I would have liked my car to have the computor. I recall having one in a Saab I owned in London some 17 years ago, referring to it all the time - even if for entirely inconsequential reasons.