Fuel Type Observation

[OasisInTheDesert]

Bike is a 2024 Trail 125, bone stock mechanically, 6k miles.

Over my life, I've found that smaller engines get better fuel mileage with ethanol-free (Blue/Clear) fuel. For example, my Nissan Versa (Which I hated!) was rated for ~40 MPG on the highway, and it would get that running ethanol-free. The second I put a tank or two of E10 gas in, that highway mileage would drop to ~30 MPG. It doesn't seem to be as big an effect on larger engines. Neither my V6 Lexus and V8 beater F150 seem to suffer worse gas mileage when running E10.

Being a small engine, I just always ran the Trail 125 on ethanol-free since it was new. Also, my Trail always seemed to have a difficult time cold starting if it was < ~40 degrees out. 6-8 cranks at least.

Was on a recent long-distance trip and had to fill it with E10, and I've since put in a second tank. Ever since, regardless of how cold it gets outside (It's been 15-ish recently) the Trail 125 cold-starts almost instantly. Maybe 2 cranks.

Just curious if anyone knows the why? Do you think there is something mechanically wrong with my Trail? Have you experienced the same?

 

[dmonkey]

None of that sounds unusual to me. Ethanol-free gets better mpg than E10, ranging from around 3-10% difference in mpg. When I am riding in the boonies with distant gas stations I often opt for ethanol-free if it's available for that little peace of mind of more range. As for starting easily with E10, especially with a winter blend it should vaporize easier.

Though in the USA only up to E10 (10% ethanol) is approved for use in motorcycles, in Thailand where this bike is manufactured they run on E20 (20% ethanol). These bikes were designed and built to work well with E10.

 

[Cpd419]

I’m usually wot and can’t tell much of a difference. I don’t store mine long enough to worry about using it in the winter. And just because it say it can have 10% ethanol doesn’t mean it does. I think a lot if that is the time of year and availability and the cost of crude at the time. Ethanol is a scam btw. Huge gubment money scam.

 

[OasisInTheDesert]

I’m usually wot and can’t tell much of a difference. I don’t store mine long enough to worry about using it in the winter. And just because it say it can have 10% ethanol doesn’t mean it does. I think a lot if that is the time of year and availability and the cost of crude at the time. Ethanol is a scam btw. Huge gubment money scam.

I haven't measured a mileage difference between the two. Either way, I'm not that concerned.

But there is a noticeable, measurable difference in how easily the bike cold starts between the two fuel types.

 

[m in sc]

in Nevada i can believe it. here on the southern east coast, it really doesn't matter. ya'll get some weird fuel blends out there. 1st time i saw 85 octane was out there. I mean if it works better for you, for sure run it. i run 93 e10 in all my bikes, and most are carbureted, never have an issue.

 

[dmonkey]

Good point on the "up to 10%".

As for ethanol being a money scam, my 2cents is that varies by country. Thailand for example make their ethanol from byproducts of sugar production, much different than the corn ethanol we have in the USA. Japan really get scammed and import their ethanol from the USA and Brazil. Would still rather have the corn ethanol than MTBE.

 

[Cpd419]

Without government subsidies ethanol wouldn’t be in any of our fuel. It takes more fuel to produce than the energy it returns.

 

[m in sc]

true. its the 'tubers' of fuel cost wise.

 

[dmonkey]

That may have been true in the past, but there have been "improvements" in agricultural efficiencies to corn ethanol production in the USA. You can look up the EROI (Energy Return on Investment) of various ethanol feedstocks to learn more about that. I'm more concerned with the carbon footprint potentially being (much) higher than that of gasoline production, read: greenwashing. https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2101084119
I've never seen energy efficiency or cost used to justify ethanol in our fuel here in the USA, maybe it has, but the prevailing narrative I've encountered has been energy independence and reduced emissions. With one of the primary justifications for corn ethanol in our fuel disputed, personally I'd rather not have it subsidized, incentivized, or mandated here either. Don't forget that other fuels aren't without subsidies here and across the world though. Brazil probably has the best-case-scenario of ethanol made from sugarcane having an overlapping EROI with gasoline and reportedly lower life cycle co2 emissions, that's why I think it being a money scam varies by country. We don't have the climate in the USA to replace corn ethanol production with sugarcane ethanol production, so we're SOL on that.

 

[Cpd419]

Gasoline forever! -DF.

 

[m in sc]

i agree, just switch back to 100% fuel. they need to rotate the crop types more... the strictly corn crops are terrible for farmland over time. remove the subsidies and it goes away here. but i digress, its also not the satans piss everyone makes it out to be for vehicles either, and actually helps inhibit detonation.... (cue the 'ethanol ruined my lawn mower' stories)

 

[BaldRider]

Ethanol production is the reason pork quality has gone down, particularly the fat. They use a lot of distillers grains leftover from the ethanol process as hog feed and the quality hasn’t been the same.

My source is a meat science professor at Iowa State and I saw the quality of pork since my factory processed a lot of it.

Wait…this is a motorcycle forum.