Last post on Feb 16, 2013 at 1:31 PM
You are in the BMW 3-Series
What is this discussion about?
BMW 3 Series, Sedan, Wagon
#21 of 51 Re: A Clarification [jongould]
May 04, 2011 (10:50 am)
E85 (which has been talked about in this thread) is fuel comprised of 85% ethanol and 15% gasoline. Most gasoline sold in the U.S. these days can be called E10 (10% ethanol, 90% gasoline mix), and good old gasoline can be called, for lack of a better term, E0 (my invention, not a convention used in discussions like this).
#22 of 51 Re: A Clarification [jongould]
May 04, 2011 (1:26 pm)
Sorry to be such a dope. What's E85? And how would it be added to my gas tank?
Well, I would say we now understand your problem.
At some point, you (or another person) most likely filled your tank (maybe multiple times) with e85 instead of regular 10% blended gasoline. That would explain your situation perfectly.
However, I'm a bit surprised that you didn't notice the significant hit it would have had on reducing your mpg... since ethanol only has about 65% of the energy content of 100% gasoline.
#23 of 51 Re: A Clarification [busiris]
by kyfdx@Edmunds HOST
May 05, 2011 (6:45 am)
Or... maybe he just has a defective fuel pump.... or the fuel lines went bad for some other reason..
Blaming it on ethanol is just a convenient excuse, I think... that absolves them from blame...
#24 of 51 Re: A Clarification [kyfdx]
May 05, 2011 (7:06 am)
Either way, I don't see this as being a fleet wide problem as has been suggested.
#25 of 51 Re: A Clarification [busiris]
May 05, 2011 (7:44 am)
I wish that was my problem -- at least it would explain something. But no, none of the places I buy gas sell anything like this e85 product that you're describing, and BMW has never suggested that that is what caused this problem. I live in New York State, and I've never seen the product for sale. Who would buy it, anyway? I'm afraid the e85 angle is a red herring.
#26 of 51 Re: A Clarification [jongould]
by MrShift@Edmunds HOST
May 05, 2011 (8:05 am)
I thought they told you that "alcohol" in the fuel deteriorated the fuel lines?
#27 of 51 Re: A Clarification [Mr_Shiftright]
May 05, 2011 (9:00 am)
Yes, by which they meant an "elevated" percentage of ethanol. But not this e85 fuel that people have been posting about. The notion of "deterioration" (their word) suggests a process that happened over time, not an infusion of the wrong kind of fuel.
#28 of 51 Re: A Clarification [jongould]
by MrShift@Edmunds HOST
May 05, 2011 (10:26 am)
Okay so they are saying that E15 caused this then?
"In October 2010 the EPA granted a waiver to allow up to 15% of ethanol blended with gasoline to be sold only for cars and light pickup trucks with a model year of 2007 or later, representing about 15% of vehicles on the U.S. roads. In January 2011 the waiver was expanded to authorize use of E15 to include model year 2001 through 2006 passenger vehicles. "
"The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) conducted tests to evaluate the potential impacts of intermediate ethanol blends on legacy vehicles and other engines. In a preliminary report released in October 2008, the NREL presented the results of the first evaluations of the effects of E10, E15 and E20 gasoline blends on tailpipe and evaporative emissions, catalyst and engine durability, vehicle driveability, engine operability, and vehicle and engine materials.This preliminary report found that none of the vehicles displayed a malfunction indicator light as a result of the ethanol blend used; no fuel filter plugging symptoms were observed; no cold start problems were observed at 24°C (75°F) and 10°C (50°F) laboratory conditions"
#29 of 51 Clarification of the Clarification
May 05, 2011 (11:02 am)
I guess so. But they're not being all that definitive about anything. They've just told me: this is what happened (fuel pump failed), this is how it happened (deteriorated fuel lines), and this is why (high levels of ethanol in the gas). Does that mean 10%? 15%? 20%? I don't know.
#30 of 51 Re: Clarification of the Clarification [jongould]
by MrShift@Edmunds HOST
May 05, 2011 (11:09 am)
On what basis can they demonstrate "high levels of ethanol"? did they do a chemical test or something?
If not, why can't we say "no, the fuel lines were a manufacturing defect". Prove THAT wrong if you can't prove excessive ethanol correct.
My personal opinion, based on what's been posted, is that no one has a clue why the fuel lines disintegrated, and since you apparently haven't seen them, even IF they deteriorated.
Also I've never heard of throwing away a fuel tank because the fuel pump inside of it is defective. If that were true, why do they allow you to extract the fuel pump at all?