MG-Cars.net

Welcome to our resource for MG Car Information.

Recommendations

Parts

MG parts spares and accessories are available for MG T Series (TA, MG TB, MG TC, MG TD, MG TF), Magnette, MGA, Twin cam, MGB, MGBGT, MGC, MGC GT, MG Midget, Sprite and other MG models from British car spares company LBCarCo.

MG Midget and Sprite Technical - Ethanol

Here's a topic for discussion:
The current issue of MASCot alerts that in the UK the new E10 fuel may now be coming as early as 2013, with dire warnings about problems this gives for classic cars. FBHVC advise that "steps need to be taken to proof fuel systems for E10 fuel"

So, what EXACTLY needs to be done? I understand that the E10 fuel "eats" certain types of rubber (and nitrile?) components but how can one tell which ones are susceptible or how does one obtain Ethanol resistant alternatives?

On an A series Spridget the potential problems would seem to be:
Flexible hose connections either side of fuel pump
Diaphragm in the fuel pump?
Fuel hose connection to carb.
Fuel hose connection between carbs (assuming original twin SU setup)

In my case I have a single HIF44, so no hose to second carb, but there is an "O" ring on the choke mechanism I believe.



Guy W

There is also an O-ring on the bottom of the float chamber IIRC.

There is a thread on the MGB V8 BBs at the moment
Dave O'Neill2

Yes, quite right Dave. Add one large O ring for the HIF carb.

Does anyone know who supplies Ethanol compatible replacements like this?
Guy W

Sounds like a call to Burlen Fuel Systems is in order to see if they have plans.
richard boobier

Yes, good idea. I will try them tomorrow. It would be good to have a definitive answer and list of what needs sorting and what to buy for the average Spridget
Guy W

We have E10 here, it has the best octane properties available ex-pump (98RON but a point higher motor octane than BP 98RON) so we've been using it for a few years, though not exclusively.

Used in our MGB, 1275 midget and K Midget. No problems thus far. We will be using it almost exclusively now as our local petrol station has changed to it (used to be only 96RON so the high compression fleet always filled elsewhere).

I plan to run a diary on our experience with it on our website, though this probably won't happen until the new year.
Paul Walbran

Hi Paul,
Are you saying in your experience none of the standard rubber materials in the fuel system suffer? So no "Ethanol proofing" needed for E10?
Guy W

Gents,
I can not advise regarding rubber parts in your fuel systems but have been faced with E10 here in Florida, USA for several years. Have not noted any failures on my 1953 TD but E10 is very susceptible to accumulation of water if your car is not used frequently enough and stands with a partial tank of fuel. We use a product called Stabil to overcome this problem. The marine version works best for me. Hope your auto parts people carry a like product.

Regards,

Jim H.
J. M. Haskins

Noting that we run Burlen rather than aftermarket seals etc in the carbs and pumps (even K Midget has SU pump for low pressure feed) and the braided hoses available from Moss and others: yes, no sign of problems on those components from E10 so far.

I've just checked back and it is definitely 4 years and probably 5 since the E10 was available here. There is one event we do where E10 is the only 98RON available in the region, which is why we first started using it. Now we seek it out so you could say we are pretty confident with it at this point in time. It will be interesting to see if our "exclusive use" test throws up anything different.
Paul Walbran

Jim's post has reminded me of two other aspects:
Yes, we had water contamination once, it came from a filling station down to its dregs. But we have had that experience from other fuel as well. Only the other fuel never reimbersed us a couple of tanks worth of fuel like the E10 man did!
We have yet to experience absorbtion into the fuel, but the cars are in a garage with a dehumdifier in it (for other reasons) so that probably has an effect.

Definite downside is that spillage affects (Dulon) paint more, leaving faint permanent pale spotting. It only happened once. we have been more careful since.
Paul Walbran

The MASCot article says "The BSI committee is working on the E10 fuel specification for the UK". Suggests scope for some variation in the composition of E10 in different countries so it is possible that Paul and Jim's experience of no problems won't necessarily be applicable to the UK.

It also quotes the FBHVC as saying "we are aware that E10 is not suitable for historic vehicles" but this rather begs the question as to what age they mean by historic vehicles. Maybe Spridgets are too "modern" for there to be problems.

Just trying to pin down the real facts for the UK.
Guy W

The AA has the same not suitable message here, but whether it's evidential or driven by personal views is a matter of conjecture.
Paul Walbran

Have a look at this web site
http://fbhvc.co.uk/bio-fuels/

After the introduction there is a lot about diesel, but scroll down and you will find information on E10 petrol, including a table of materials NOT suitable for use with E10. If this is true, all old cars are in trouble. The FBHVC are monitoring the progress of this legislation.

A friend who has a Type 2 VW camper, has learned of several vehicle fires caused by fuel hoses rupturing. Whether the very hot rear engine of these vehicles makes it more likely I don't know.

Personally speaking, if half the world hasn't enough to eat, what are we doing growing crops to feed cars?
Mike Howlett

FBHVC is for pre-1973 cars as it was partly formed by the lot that had cars eligable for the 'historic' cars that aren't required to pay 'road tax'

but as there's not that much difference between most 1972 cars and the later model years I think they might get blanket coverage(?)
Nigel Atkins

No problems in more than 20 years of E10 here. Such things as hoses deteriorate over time anyway, and all new ones have been ethanol tolerant for years. No problems with pumps or carbs. There were problems late 80s, but they were clearly something else in the fuel, as it has gone away but E10 has certainly not - now near universal in the US.

FRM
FR Millmore

Whilst on holiday in France recently I found an increase in the sales of 95E10 fuel. Notices on the pumps stated that the fuel was not suitable for pre 2000 cars.
Alan
Alan Anstead

Foolish me! I was hoping for a clear answer to this!

On the one hand we have first hand reports from Aus and USA of no problems, whilst on the other hand we have FBHVC (Sorry, that's the Federation of British Historic Vehicle Clubs)issuing dire warnings for the UK and now this French pump disclaimer notice for pre 2000 cars.

So, perhaps the E10 fuel in Australia and USA is to a different formulation (inhibitors included?). I cannot believe that with global manufacturing and markets as they are, that the suppliers of fuel hoses, O rings etc are making batches of special non-tolerant E10 products for shipping to the UK!

I guess that the information that new cars (post 2000??) are manufactured to be E10 tolerant means that any new fuel hose sold in the UK is going to be OK. So the simple answer would be to buy a yard or so of new fuel hose and replace that. Then just leave any other stuff like O rings until they actually cause a problem. That would be a reasonably safe compromise I think.
Guy W

"A friend who has a Type 2 VW camper, has learned of several vehicle fires caused by fuel hoses rupturing"

IF E10 has the potential to cause this, then I suspect it's being looked into very carefully.

Is it likely that E10 will be introduced into the UK, with a notice to all owners of cars older than the year 2000, to either scrap or modify their cars? I doubt it.

I rather think it will be formulated not to cause this kind of problem. Otherwise I can see quite a bit of legal action headed in the direction of HMG/DOT.
Lawrence Slater

My guess is that E10 does cause problems with certain types of "rubber" components manufactured over the years. Who knows what formulation was used in every case, particularly pre and especially post war when sourcing of materials was particularly difficult. The warnings put out by the fuel companies are probably more by way of legal disclaimers to protect them from claims should any individual cases arise than a prediction that every pre 2000 car is necessarily going to suffer problems.
Guy W

Guy,
I'm sure you remember me mentioning on the odd occasion about the problems I've had with rubber fuel hose over the last 6 years

on my carbs at the moment I've got some Goodyear stuff I got from Halfords, it fits the carbs better than the 1/4" stuff I had before (but it might be a bit thinner than the old clips)

G4509 Goodyear Fuel/Emission - DIN 73379-1 - 6.0mm X 3.00mm - 2B>NBR/PET/CSM

yes I picked up the off-cut as I had to go to the shed

you'll have to check if it's E10, E15, E20+ resistant
Nigel Atkins

Certainly I remember your rubber problems!
But as E10 isn't (generally?) available in the UK they were not down to E10 fuel, but poor quality imported products.

I have contacted Burlen to see what they have to say on the matter.
Guy W

What about metals in the fuel system?

I have aluminium tank and copper fuel lines.
d cusworth

"if half the world hasn't enough to eat, what are we doing growing crops to feed cars?"

That is a very good question, and it does have a simple, clear answer: Money.

The MPG that you get from fuel that has been diluted 10% with a much lower energy liquid is not completely offset by the lower cost at the pump (this is done on purpose). As a result, you buy more product, so the oil company comes out ahead, and the government gets more taxes, because they get that paid to them by the gallon. Not a conspiracy, just simple math.

Us end users are not involved in any part of that equation, except in that we pay and don't realize how we are paying more.

Now that E15 is being introduced in some states, sold side x side with E10, it is very easy to comparison shop between the two and then do the math for your own car, to see that you are being cheated. Luckily for the folks who are benefiting from this, most people don't bother or make the effort, and instead are happy to "pay less at the pump".

Kind of like the slot machines at the casino. People are entertained by the noise and lights and they don't mind being the main source of income for the house.

Or, kind of like when CDs were introduced. People were happy to pay more for a product that was actually cheaper to produce. But, at least in that case, they DID get a better product!


Norm
Norm Kerr

If you really want to go into this, The MGCC V8 Register published a link to a Government study carried out by QuinetiQ two years ago. Here is the link
http://www.v8register.net/articles/QuinetiQ%20bioethanol%20study%20report%20291010.pdf

The study is very comprehensive and is worth scanning. QuinetiQ looked at the experience of other countries where ethanol fuel has been available for some time. It contacted vehicle manufacturers and other organisations, including the FBHVC. The summary is reproduced below.

"The extent of the problem
Discussions with OEMs and other industry organisations and reviews of available literature have identified very little historical data regarding the materials used in vehicle fuel systems. Without this historical data, determining the detailed extent of the problem is not possible.
Reports from France following the introduction of E10 there indicate many vehicles ten years old and older are not compatible with E10.
In Germany 3.4 million vehicles are thought not to be compatible with E10 and the introduction of this fuel has been postponed.
Two documents identifying passenger cars and motorcycles that are compatible with E10 (one for the German market and one for the French market) have been identified [168, 169]. However some of the information contained in these lists is contradictory.
It is widely accepted that vehicles ten years old and older will not be compatible with E10 blends, though of course there will be exceptions to this. There are approximately nine million petrol passenger cars and light duty petrol vehicles in the UK that are ten years old or older, this equates to about 38% of the total petrol vehicle parc [116]. In addition to these vehicles there are thousands of relatively new first generation petrol direct injection vehicles in the UK, the last new vehicle probably being sold in 2007, that are not compatible with E10.
The average age for a petrol passenger car at the end of life is 13.13 years while that of a petrol light commercial vehicle is 15.09 years [117]. This essentially means that approximately half these vehicles will still be in use in 2013 when the proposed phase out of petrol blends containing 5 % of ethanol occurs.
It is reported that the majority of carburettored vehicles (passenger cars, light duty commercial vehicles and powered two wheelers) will not be compatible with E10. Again there will be exceptions to this. However at least 1500 new carburettored powered two wheelers are imported into the UK per annum. According to the manufacturer, these powered two wheelers are not compatible with E10. The average life of these vehicles is at least five years [118]. Again thousands of these vehicles will still be on the road in 2013 when the proposed phase out of E5 will occur.
The number of carburettored vehicles in the UK is unknown but 6000 new carburettors are manufactured in the UK each year. Approximately 75 % of the carburettors produced are for the UK market, fitted not only to historic and vintage vehicles’ but also to relatively new vehicles, reportedly to enhance the latter vehicles performance. This business has grown by 10 % in the last 18 months [23]. Carburettored vehicles will continue to be present on the roads for the foreseeable future. These new carburettors are compatible with E10 as are the repair kits being supplied by the same manufacturer. However cheaper pattern parts are still being imported that are not compatible with petrol/ethanol blends.
If E5 is phased out by 2013 it is expected that the resulting problems will include:
•
increased vehicle maintenance (replacing leaking hoses, cleaning of blocked filters),
•
reduced vehicle life (for example fuel tank beyond economic repair) and
•
possible catastrophic failure (fuel fires due to leaking hoses, piston seizure etc).
Table 4 summarises the potential vehicle problems, potential solutions and indicative costs. It should be noted the costs do not include labour, where an OEM or dealership have not supplied data the costs have been taken from an internet parts supplier. A systematic survey of costs has not been undertaken. The table is not exhaustive.
It should be emphasised that for some older vehicles, or small market value, the required modifications to make the vehicles compatible with E10 or repairs after damage by E10 will be such that the vehicle is beyond economic repair. Hence the effect of will fall disproportionately on the poorer members of society who run these older vehicles and cannot afford to purchase newer more expensive vehicles."

Mike Howlett

Here is the link to an article about VW camper fires
http://www.volksbolts.com/faq/fuelhose.htm
Mike Howlett

Guy, "reports from Aus" - you know how to wound a Kiwi!!!

There is the general pattern on this sort of thing, whether here or elsewhere: rumours abound and companies cover their ar*es which in turn fuels the rumours. Understandably comapnies are always reluctant to give assurances about products in case someone tries to sue them over it further down the track so their responses shopuld be viewed in that light.

So don't expect Burlen to say anything positive on it.

When lead was phased out here in the '90's, there were lots of shock-horror media stories about fires in cars with leaky fuel components. At the end of the first year after the change the fire service did an analysis of what had happened over the year, and found that the incidence and causes of the fires were no different from that occuring before the change-over - they were just more widely reported.

There is a lesson in that somewhere.

The fact is that fuel systems deteriorate over time whatever fuel is used, and if not properly maintained will leak and present a fire risk. A relevant question to ask Burlen at this time is how many diaphragms and seals do they sell now. Ditto Moss, B&G etc regarding fuel hoses. Apart from underlining that the deterioration rate on current fuel is a long way from zero, it will also give a base line against which any change can be properly assesed.

It is fair enough to be cautious about a new product but you have to assess the facts on evidence and not rumour. In the long experience in the (very litigious) US and in my own much shorter (but still 4 years min) experience in NZ the concerns expressed above haven't eventuated. If they were there at all in the US there would have been no shortage of law suits about the matter.

We have had exactly the same sorts of warnings from bodies like the FBHVC here, and from ar*e-covering companies. But given the lack of any adverse effects thus far I am left with the very strong impression that these warnings are not evidentially based.

In my observation, the principal difference in this fuel is the ethanol content; certainly it's what everyone is concerned about being potentially too agressive for fuel system components. In my book ethanol is ethanol and will have the same chemical properties wherever it's made, so the experience here and in the US is directly relevant.

The one proviso I'd add to all this is that I'm talking here of the effects on OE-spec components. I've seen no shortage of dodgy aftermarket copies not cope with present and previous fuels, so I wouldn't expect them to fare any better on E10.

So I'm completely confident enough on E10 to run our fleet mainly on it. "Mainly" but not quite exclusively because I'm a lazy bugger who doesn't go out of the way for fuel if I can help it. I'll start posting progress on my website www.mgparts.co.nz in the new year. And if anything does show up you guys will be the first to know, I quite like the taste of humble pie :-)

BTW I have an aluminium tank too, and a copper fuel line in the B.
Paul Walbran

Guy,

>>Certainly I remember your rubber problems!
But as E10 isn't (generally?) available in the UK they were not down to E10 fuel, but poor quality imported products.<<

yeah that was my point, the odd fill up with E10 doesn't matter that much when 'normal' petrol eats through the some rubber hoses in a matter of weeks anyway

just reminding you to be care of what you buy - perhaps all of those hoses have cleared through the system by now(?)
Nigel Atkins

Aus / NZ Sorry Paul. Certainly didn't mean to offend anyone with that! Just brain running in neutral!

I was just wanting to resolve if there was a problem, and if necessary how to fix it. No way am I going to start running around looking for "special" fuel supplies. I just fill up at whichever station is most convenient or best priced locally on the day.I think I will just stick some new good quality fuel hoses on sometime this winter and go back to sleep on this one!

And Nigel - yes I see your point there! The quality of the hose - or lack of quality - is currently likely to be more of an issue than whether the fuel has ethanol in it or not!
Guy W

Re. "vehicles over 10 years old": if you have replaced your fuel lines (and fuel filter) in the last 10 years, then, that part of your car is in the OK side of that question.

Once you've used modern materials for the rubber parts of the system, then E10 should not cause you more trouble than it would in a new car, except that it has a shorter shelf life (not a good thing for an occasional use vehicle), and it costs more that E0 (because of the lower MPG that you get).


Norm

Norm Kerr

On the issue of E10 having a shorter shelf life.

On the assumption it will definitely cause major problems if left in the tank for a period of time. -- Just for arguments sake, even if problems aren't absolutely certain.

On the further assumtion, you are one of those that doesn't use the car all year round, and also that you use it so seldomly, that you will definitely get a problem if you leave E10 in the tank.

In which case, if you remove all the E10 from the tank, what should you put in the tank in it's place, to stop internal condensation rusting the tank?
Lawrence Slater

"The MPG that you get from fuel that has been diluted 10% with a much lower energy liquid is not completely offset by the lower cost at the pump"

Norm

I can't imagine that fuel companies in the UK will sell E10 at a lower price.
Dave O'Neill2

Is the use of an additive such as one of the Miller's range too simplistic, or just too expensive?
JB Anderson

No offence Guy, just a good bit of friendly sibling rivalry :-)
Paul Walbran

Nobody knows?
Lawrence Slater

If Ethanol eats rubber? I thought that is the reason for the topic? You've lost me now.
Guy W

Fuel sitting in things - cars, cans, small engines - around here 4 or more years - no additives, no problems.
I do run a can of "fuel injection system cleaner" through everything once a year, or when firing up something that has been sitting, purely preventative.

FRM
FR Millmore

The fact that ethanol and water are miscible is actually good. Any water that gets in the tank from condensation will not form a separate phase of concentrated water. And I don't believe that the ethanol will attract any more condensation than plain petrol, its a thermal thing after all. BTW gas line de-icer fluid is also an alcohol.
Art Pearse

As at the moment you can avoid ethanol by using premium unleaded I wonder if this will still be the case when E10 comes along. I've not seen anything at the moment to clarify if this will be the case or not.

Trev
T Mason

in the US, the best way to avoid ethanol is to buy your fuel from a marina or a small airport using airport transfers sevenoaks, but those are sometimes too far away

there are some gas stations that sell, "racing fuel", but, often, the high octane is achieved by the ethanol, so it can work against you!

There is a website which helps:
http://pure-gas.org

Norm "leave my gas alone!" Kerr

Norm Kerr

Norm said,
" -- then E10 should not cause you more trouble than it would in a new car, except that it has a shorter shelf life (not a good thing for an occasional use vehicle), -- "

So I asked, if it has a shorter shelf life, and you are one that only uses your car very infrequently, should you remove the E10 from the tank?

Then, from what Art Pearse says of the miscibility of water and E10 fuel, removing the E10, and leaving the tank empty, could aggravate any condensation problem. In which case, what should you put in the tank to prevent condensation rusting the inside of the tank, if you remove the E10?
Lawrence Slater

Lawrence - what are you thinking of as "inferquently" - once a week, once a month or parked up over winter?

I think hte conditions you keep your car in are likely to be relevant in that aspect. A warm dry garage would be much different from being parked outside in a damp environment. (It is in other espects such as body structure too of course. As I found to my cost, living in a rain forest area as I do. I worked it out after the second body rebuild of my B and sorted more garging for the fleet.)
Paul Walbran

Hi paul. Not me, I drive all year round. However some only drive in the summer, and the car then sits for 8 months without use. --- Summer being only 2 weeks in the UK, irrespective of global warming, or is that because of it?. :)

So say infrequently is at least 6 months lay up. Does E10 last that long?
Lawrence Slater

Yes, a question worth pursuing. I can't test that here but very relevant for my UK-domiciled Midget!
Paul Walbran

summer may be two weeks but we've had mostly sunny days here since SORN season started (1st October)

drove mine yesterday and thought how much better the engine seems to go in the cooler temperatures, no good for fuel economy though as you extract the extra fun

I think global warming is now called climate disruption (and previously climate change) to save confusion, I think it means warmer, wetter and more extremes of weather for us in the UK

for 20+ years we hardly saw any snow here (where I live in the UK) and had very few really cold spells for any length of time, we've two weather stations with 3 miles the nearest one because of it's location always shows colder than here although it's less than half a mile away and even the other station shows slightly worse than here and we're at quite a high point of the town

a freind from Cumbria would never believe me when in winter he'd got snow and I said it was sunny here and we rarely had snow stop overnight, I sent him a photo of when it did snow, the photo was taken in the morning the snow had mostly gone by the afternoon

during those 20+ years I think we averaged about 3-5 nights a year where the snow laid overnight
Nigel Atkins

"summer may be two weeks but we've had mostly sunny days here since SORN season started (1st October) ------ drove mine yesterday and thought how much better the engine seems to go in the cooler temperatures, --- "

Yup I agree with you Nigel, I was just joking about the summer. Actually, I've enjoyed quite a few great days with the roof down.

Interesting observation you make about improved cool weather performance. So I'm going to start a thread to discuss it, since this one's about fuel.
Lawrence Slater

Hi
We've had E10 down here for quite a few years, as an option
Apart from the rubber problem there are other issues
I ran it in my Mazda turbo for a while to give it a go
It went from around 450klms a tank on ordinary unleaded down to 250-280 on E10 Couldn't get to 300 no matter how easy I went on it
A mate ran it in his Sprite, He had to richen it a tidle to get it to idle properly, it wasn;t very economical and felt like it was down on power a bit.
Also it took a fair bit longer to warm up , there was a lot of hesitating and not performing till it had done two or three kilometers more than usual
The cars that really suffer on it are the pre mid eighties era fuel injected cars with no oxygen sensors to adjust fueling
These cars pump the same amount of fuel through regardless of what it is and tend to run lean/hot on E10
I have seen a Porsche 911 with the rear plastic bumper bar all melted caused by the muffler running red hot
At least here E10 is optional and normal (if you can call it that) unleaded is still available.

For your sake, when it gets to the UK, I hope you will have it as an option and still be able to get real petrol as well

Willy
William Revit

I'm with Willy on this one, I agree you lose power & economy and I've heard stories (take with a pinch of salt)that some new cars that have run on it from day 1 have had premiture engine issues along with stories of lawnmower & brush cutter failures due to E10. Personally I always run anything but E10 and a service manager I know reccomends to his customers not to use E10. I guess is all down to personal preference but for me its 95, 98 or 100 octane that includes my lawn mower !
Ed
Ed H

What you believe seems to depend on which publication you read.
In Classic Car Weekly dated 17th October, probably after Mascot had gone to press, under the heading "Ethanol the truth",it states that it had interviewed most of the leading UK fuel suppliers and that amongst them there was no strategy to introduce E10 before 2015,as per Government plans. Esso's Richard Scrase said that one of the main reasons for the majority of its stations stocking ethanol free super unleaded was to cater for classic cars and that they had no plams to introduce E10 at this time.
Put all that together with the anecdotal evidence of our American and Antipodean friends, then ask are we getting our knickers in a twist a bit prematurely? Also, as the advent of E10 approaches, there will no doubt be more research into protective additives and ethanol proof products.
Regular maintenance would obviously involve checking all parts of the fuel system anyway, as fuel is pretty volatile without the Ethanol factor and without such maintenance you are driving a mobile bomb.

Bernie.
b higginson

(reposted from another thread)

>>is anyone concerned with the proposed E-10 (UK), E-15 ethanol (USA) that could really harm our M.G.'s, and possibly harm our modern gasoline car/s. Here's a link to a recent article from USA Today to start it off.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2012/11/30/aaa-e15-gas-harm-cars/1735793/

Regards,

Larry C.<<
Nigel Atkins

Larry,

I think the E 15 here in the states should definatly be a concern...ive pulled my hair out dealing with its effect of E 10... The worst part, E 10 is BAD after about 3 weeks ...you have to ither add stabilzer or other additives with each fill up or drive it almost daily...its okay to use if you burn a gallon a day....but if you let it sit for weeks at a time, your screwed

Ive gone to using primium in all my motors.. lawn and car but it must say its ethonial free at the pump... Priccy ??? Yepp, but knowing my lawn mower will work and not need a 2 hour fuel system clean out and rebuild is so worth it

Im thinking if we ever loose ethinol free fuel, then ill make the conversion to compressed natral gas or propane, and say good by to the high priced gasoline

Prop
Prop and the Blackhole Midget

This thread was discussed between 01/11/2012 and 07/12/2012

MG Midget and Sprite Technical index

This thread is from the archive. The Live MG Midget and Sprite Technical BBS is active now.