Date: 27 May 97 08:45:30 PDT
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@vanagon.com>
From: CARVER_JEFFREY@aphub.aerojetpd.com (Jeff Carver)
Subject: CA new gas formula info
Kevin Toney provided this to the Type3 list over the weekend. I just
cleaned up some typos, and here is some interesting info.
- - - - - - snip - - - - - (well a really small snip) - - - -
You may
recall my assertion that the new formulation of gas used in California
(which is different and more extreme than those used in other states)
caused significantly lower mileage. I finally tracked down the article
and references.
This is also to help explain to the rest of you why we Californians seem
to be whining about our gas. It's because we really do have something
to complain about.
Kevin Toney
bodhran-man@bigfoot.com
________________________________________________________________
'70 Sqbk/Variant
'71 Sqbk/Variant
'85 Golf
'85 Vanagon (Dead)
Ed Note: This article, originally published in the fall edition of the
California Automotive Teachers (CAT) Association newsletter has been
reprinted with the permission of the author Rick Escalambre. A member of
the CAT Board of Trustees, Mr. Escalambre is on faculty of San
Bruno-based Skyline College's Automotive Technology department. For more
information about the CAT, write to the group 3574 Hatfield Circle ,
Oceanside, CA 92056.
In the San Francisco Bay Area, reformulated gasoline (RFG) has created
a quite a controversy Since last May, it has become an issue that has
stirred up considerable media attention. After receiving numerous
complaints from local viewers, KGO-TV an affiliate of ABC, began an
investigation into reformulated gasoline. The investigation included
Skyline College's Automotive Technology students, the California
Resources Board (CARB), K N Filters, an independent Smog Check station,
an expert on rubber hoses. Background: What Is RFG?
The reformulation gasoline (RFG) program is one of the latest in a
series of measures taken to provide leaner burning automotive fuels. RFG
is often confused with oxygenated gasoline. While both contain
oxygenates, such as ethanol and MTBE, they are not exactly the same.
Oxygenated fuels are simply conventional gasolines with an oxygenate
added. Oxygenated fuels are sold during the winter months to reduce CO
emissions. RFG gasolines contain oxygenates but undergo other
compositional and property alterations to reduce ozone forming
emissions. RFG is a year round program. The primary differences
between RFG and conventional gasoline are as follows:
1. Benzene is limited to 1% in RFG.
2. Volatility is reduced in summer grades of RFG.
3. Every gallon of RFG must contain oxygenates. An oxygenated
gasoline is oxygenated by the addition of an alcohol or ether. The
most commonly used alcohol is ethanol and the most commonly used ether
is MTBE.
The primary oxygenate used in RFG is MTBE (Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether).
MTBE is used as an octane enhancer, It is not as sensitive to water as
are alcohols and does not increase the volatility of most gasolines.
At the same time, it is the additive that is creating much of the
controversy. Reports indicate that it is the additive responsible for
removing the compounds in fuel hoses responsible for preventing leaks.
Independent Tests: MPG Test
The process was initiated at my college. KGO-TV asked if we would
conduct a dynamometer test using a reformulated and non-reformulated
fuel. We gladly g accepted the challenge. They provided us with two
gallons of non-reformulated fuel purchased from Nevada and two gallons
of California's reformulated.
Using my class of advanced engine performance students and our Clayton
Dynamometer, we conducted a series of steady state fuel economy tests.
The vehicle used was a well maintained 1990 Oldsmobile - front wheel
drive, 3800 V6 engine, and four-speed automatic transmission.
All fluid levels were checked and tire pressure was set to 32 psi The
vehicle was run until it reached operating temperature. The vehicle was
prepared as if the fuel injectors were to be cleaned. We used an OTC
injection cleaner canister, disconnected the fuel pump and pressure
regulator, and set fuel pressure to 32 psi. This was lower than
specifications, but it assured us that no fuel would be returned to the
fuel tank.
All tests were conducted by the same driver. Another student monitored
the data stream using a Monitor 4000. This allowed the driver to achieve
the same throttle position and mass air flow during each test.
The dynamometer load was set to ten horsepower at forty-five miles per
hour. This was equivalent to a light load cruise.
The results were very obvious, The non-reformulated produced a 26.49
mpg and the reformulated fuel produced 24.91 mpg, or 1.58 mpg less.
This equated to a 6% difference, almost double CARB's prediction of a 1
to 396 decrease in overall mpg.
What better way to conduct the test? We weren't concerned with radical
changes in acceleration and deceleration, air conditioning and power
steering loads, or extended idle conditions. While this is not as
scientific as Federal Test Procedures (ETP), it was a good comparison of
two different fuels tested under identical conditions.
Horsepower Test
A few days later, KGO visited K & N Filters in Southern California. K &
N conducted an inertia dynamometer horsepower test using both types of
gasolines. Their tests produced a 5% decrease in horsepower using
reformulated fuel.
Further investigation by KGO showed that consumers were flocking to the
parts stores to buy fuel tank additives in an attempt to regain fuel
economy and horsepower.
BAR '90 Smog Check
At this point in time the test results show 6% decrease in mpg and a 5%
decrease in horsepower to the drive wheels.
Overlooking the decrease in MPG and horsepower, KGO-TV attempted to
identify the main goal of reformulated fuel, which is to reduce air
pollution.
A BAR '90 two-speed idle Smog Check was conducted at our facility using
the same 1990 Oldsmobile used in the MPG test. Both types of fuel were
tested and the results were almost identical. Idle and 2500 rpm produced
6 ppm HC and O% CO. Obviously, the converter was doing its job.
During the following week KGO-TV visited an independent repair shop
licensed to perform Smog Checks. They performed the smog test using a
1974 BMW without a catalytic converter. The differences were
appreciable. The non-reformulated gasoline produced 101 ppm HC and 3.94%
CO at idle and 54 ppm HC and 2.52% CO at 2500 rpm. The reformulated
gasoline produced 82 ppm HC and 3.54% CO at idle and 64 ppm HC and 4.19%
CO at 2500 rpm.
Obviously, the reformulated gasoline produced lower HC readings, but CO
reading at 2500 rpm was significantly higher. Keeping in mind that the
new fuels aimed at reducing emissions. it has also failed this test.
CARB officials claim the new gasoline was tested in over 800 vehicles
driven five million miles using 500,000 gallons of gasoline. CARB
reports the new fuel will reduce toxic air pollution by 15%. In
addition, it will reduce cancer causing Benzene by 50%. CARB sources
claim it is the world's cleanest burning gas.
John Dunlap, Chairman of the Air Resources Board, also stated that the
new fuel is the equivalent of removing 3.5 million vehicle from our
roads. It is also 25% of CARB's plan for ozone reduction and will remove
300 tons of air pollution from our atmosphere.
Mr. Dunlap reports that complaints of decreased mileage and performance
are related to poor vehicle maintenance and driving habits and not the
reformulated gasoline. He claims that some of the complaints might have
been caused by the warm weather and the use of air conditioner which can
reduce MPG by as much as 20%.
Impact on Rubber Lines
Another investigation by KGO-TV dealt with the impact reformulated
gasoline have on rubber fuel lines. Mr. Dunlap states the new fuels
will not damage an engine or create fuel leaks that might cause a fire.
If this is the case, why has Chevron posted signs on their pumps
warning that the new gas may cause fuel leaks? KGO-TV also reported that
Chevron has warned their retired employees of the new fuel leak
problems.
Another report indicates that car fires are up 10% this year compared
to the same time year. Nissan currently has a recall campaign for many
of their mid 1980 fuel injected vehicles. This because the MTBE in the
reformulated gasoline attacks the elastomers used in the rubber hoses
causing them to leak.
The Rubber hoses in question are made of Nitrile which is used in
vehicles prior to 1991. In California, this equates to 15,000,000
vehicles that are equipped with this type of fuel lines.
Independent tests have shown that MTBE attacks Nitrile parts in the
fuel pump, fuel filter, fuel tank, fuel injectors, fuel pressure
regulator, and fuel rails. While CARB denies these reports, their own
field investigators report that many of the problems they are seeing
are directly related to the fuel leaks.
A spokesman for the American Chemical Society and Rubber Manufacturers
Association reported that MTBE increases the chances of fuel leaks in
vehicles built prior to 1990. SAE, Dupont, 3M, and Zeon Chemicals have
all confirmed that MTBE does breakdown Nitrile rubber parts. How much
Nitrile is in a complete fuel system? It is difficult to tell because
manufacturers will not release this information.
Reports show that aftermarket rubber parts may still contain Nitrile.
Summary
The tests conducted at our college, K & N Filters, and the independent
repair shop were performed, at the request of KGO-TV in an attempt to
validate consumer complaints. The complaints registered by consumers
were verified by the 6% decrease in mpg, the 5% decrease in horsepower,
and the increase of 1.5% more CO, during a 2500 rpm smog test.
It is evident the CARB has become very defensive and somewhat hostile
about the new gasoline. This is probably because they want to avoid
another "Diesel Fiasco" which occurred in 1993-94.
- Jeff
