Many thanks. I was searching on Google for the thread. It would have been hopeless.

The stainless lines still being prone to buildup casts suspicion on our theory about the stock lines being the cause. Still leaves the pump itself though, especially since you are seeing buildup in both.

 

I spoke to our chemist about the repost by Steve93talon. He stated that the NMR was not the machine to use. It should have at least been an IR. The test lacked many needed tests to really find the source. 1) several common unleaded gas samples should have been run from the area to find it's components, 2) E100 should be sampled, 3) then E85 could be sampled from various sites. Buchneri makes several valid points also as does COVO4. This is either 1) poor quality gas used in the 15% portion, 2) an additive in the 15% gas portion that is specific to gasoline and will cook on the injector, 3) or dissolved gums from converted station storage tanks (not new), transport, and or the vehicle's fuel system. It also will affect different injection systems differently depending on injector design, heat, AFR, leak down, and a multitude of other design, aftermarket additives thrown in, and operating conditions.

As the point was made previously-- why are FFV's not doing this? I have approx 650,000 miles on 4 FFV's in my fleet that have never had an injector out. I use unadditized natural gasoline for the 15-30% gas portion of E85 and we go often for months without putting a drop of gas in. Look on the fuel filler door of a GM FFV- it says, "DO NOT USE ADDTIVIES"- there has to be a reason they state this. We do not use additives except for the corrosion inhibitor in our E98. I have never received a complaint from any of my 18 E85 station's customers about injector deposits on E85-- nor manifold deposits on carb'ed race cars.

Buchneri-- if you need samples or more ideas on test set up- let me know. We may have some of this data anyway in our lab. I could also get standard gasoline specifications from my supplier to compare against what you find with the area gasoline. Washed gums, endpoints, ash, and other info would be of high interest.

 

Your Evo has a plastic fuel tank?

- Bryan

 

Very interesting point on the additives in the 15% 93 octane portion of E-85. That is highly suspicious. As stated in one of my previous posts (I am losing count now ) the IR and/or LCMS would be another great test to help prove what is actually in the gunk. NMR analysis is more of an "art" than a definitive answer, you need to have multiple platforms to verify your findings. Even a highly skilled research scientist cannot catch every peak and doublet on the chart, thus leading to incorrect compound solutions.

I will let everyone know what I find. I will attempt to find a 93 octane of which has no ethanol present and 0 additives. Run both forms of the NMR and IR (and/or LCMS) depending on which I find to be the most revealing. Then do similar tests on 100% ethanol (lab grade) and then make my own batch of E-85 with previous said samples. I will test to see if any gunk comes out of that compound under heat. Also a sample of pump gas E-85 will be tested as a challenge to the "lab grade" product.

I will still need a sample of "gunk" in the wet phase to test. I can dry out a small portion and try to isolate the solid phase ridding it of all E-85 that might be present.

So, in conclusion, I think we need to agree that if a solid comes out of the "lab grade" E-85 I make, then it might whole heartedly be the fuel itself (very doubtful). If no precipitate forms then we know something is wrong with the fuel tanks in the ground, pump, or lines in our car. The test of the "gunk" will reveal if any E-85 remains present in the solid phase, or if it is merely random hydrocarbons gunked up in the lines, fuel pump, tank, etc.

Phew. Enjoy reading that one...

 

 

oops, my bad!

I just went out with a magnet and stuck it to the bottom, sure sounds plastic when I tap on it though!

dang japanese cars anyways

John-

 

May I suggest using 87 octane E0 instead of 93? The reason I say this is because a fuel jobber or terminal operator is going to use his cheapest grade to make E85 and the 93 premium E0 may have more additive than base grade. Also- not sure what lab grade E100 you have available to you and what it is denatured with (if at all). If you want a small amount of E100 fuel grade I could help you. We would leave out the corrosion inhibitor and denaturant- but it might be even better to test it as e98 since that is how e85 will be made. This would include the denaturant, be ph balanced, contain corrosion inhibitor, and possibly a trace of fusel oil. Perhaps best might to test both the lab grade and E98. I believe most ethanol plants are using the same corrosion inhibitor.

FWIW- IRL picks up regular fuel grade E100 and puts their own mystery poison in it to be legal- at least this is what they did when they first switched from methanol.

 

I could get my hands on some E-100 fuel grade if necessary, however I am not exactly certain as to the presence of the corrosion inhibitor. Do you have a CAS number or a link to a site showing the exact makeup of the ethanol you use, or do you make it in house at your lab? Makes sense to carry out the test in those respects, also. As for the 93-87 octane debate, you are correct. From what I understand (and have read over the past few days) most E-85 is actually made up of 15% 87 and not 93. This is a measure to keep the cost of production down, and since the octane rating of the EtOH is so high, no one will really notice a difference of the 15% petrol being either 93 or 87 octane.

 

informative thread... subscribed.

 

My source for fuel grade ethanol in either E100, E98, or E85-- it is right in the ethanol plant where I work, LOL !

There are two common basic types of E85 out there- 1) E85 blended at an ethanol plant using the natural gasoline they have for denaturant or 2) E85 blended at an oil terminal using the cheapest gas hydrocarbon they have on hand which can be any of the following; CBOB suboctane, RBOB suboctane, or conventional 87 or 85 octane (the 85 octane is high plains/Rockies). A third type of E85 is far less common- a race only version such as Rockettbrand where the hydrocarbon portion is race gas. The most common is version 2 and based on the regions where I have seen the majority of injector issues in various blogs-- this is the one I would focus on--these are oil rack only zones (CA, NC) or high likely (PA, OH, CO). Even in places like IA, IN, NE, IL, and WI--2/3 of the stations out there pull their E85 from an oil rack rather than direct from an ethanol plant.

 

We are starting to get complicated with all these different variations of E-85 that are possible. Which would you recommend to do? Merely the 85 or 87 dilution with the E100? If all you are referring to is lab grade ethanol (E100) then yes, I have as much of that as I would ever need. It will be difficult if impossible to test a difference in the E-85 that takes place during mixing at a terminal with the "CBOB or RBOB" as you stated. We just don't know what they are doing to mix them, or if their percentages will even be close to E-85. That is precisely why I run an Ethanol sensor in my car so I can see how much EtOH is actually being pumped into the injectors at that moment.

 

Good point. Let's just start with the lab grade ethanol (as long as you know what it is denatured with) and the most common E0 87 octane in your area for the blended analysis. This could be compared to pump E85 also in your area if desired. If you want some fuel grade E98 with corrosion inhibitor to concentrate let me know. I could send you some E78 (Spring blend) also but it is made with natural gasoline which is not what I believe the problem comes from. I also have some Lubrizol detergent and lubricity additives made for ethanol that might be fun to test on the deposits just to see if they work-- they did nothing for me but I did not need them in the first place.

I do think a key test would be to concentrate down to solids/gel some E0 87 to see what hits you get. This could be compared to E98 fuel grade also so that it might be a simple 2 sample deal.

 

Agreed on the decomposition of the 87 to see what is left in the fuels. As many detergent free fuels that we can test as a standard would be helpful. Once it has been determined there are little or no detergent present then it can be added to the E100 to dilute to lab grade E-85. Testing can then take place on that sample and it can be compared to fuel pump E-85. If matter is present in the decomposition of the fuel pump E-85 and not the lab grade fuel, then obviously the problem is either with a detergent present in the 15% petrol they use or it is particulate in the holding tank of fuel pump system. Further analysis of any provided detergent (commonly used in 87-93 octane pump grade gasoline) can be compared to the "gunk" from the residue left over from the fuel pump E-85, for the sake of proving the detergent additive is the culprit.

I am hoping to begin testing this little theory this week. Any other ideas outlaw? I think we are developing quite an accurate little battery of tests.

Many thanks.

 

to OP: Does your car still have EGR system in place?

 

Well. The testing continues! I heated the lab grade ethanol up to evaporation temperatures and 0 gunk left behind. If anything a clear hardened patina on the bottom of the flask. Not sticky or colored. The additive free 87 octane left some discoloration on the bottom of the vial, but also not sticky. I used an oil bath as opposed to open flame heating source to prevent fire, and also to get constant heat throughout the entire sample. Performed tests on lab grade E-85 and 0 gunk also. I am going to obtain a sample of pump grade E-85 tomorrow and try and finish up all of the previously stated tests and post up charts, results, and my conclusions by mid next week.

1outlaw, I am in the hunt for the major additives that are found in common 87 octane. What would you think would be most relevant to test and how would I obtain some? I think you were right on par with your suggestion of additives as the culprit. Now to narrow down which one, and how to avoid that type at the pump....