Premium gas

yrwei52 said:

Corn should be grown to feed human beings, not to feed cars!

Click to expand...

I'll be blunt and say that about the dumbest argument ever. It's like saying "oil should be used for lubrication, not as a fuel for our cars". Actually we can do both (and make some tires out of it too)! Last I checked corn was 5 ears for a dollar. And that's the most expensive kind of corn, ethanol corn you wouldn't even want to eat.

And what about potatoes, should we reserve them for baked potatoes and freedom fries or can we also use them for vodka and potato guns?

So, are grapes for wine or just grape juice?

I say, let the free market decide.

MikeM. said:

....Misinformed again! I've been running 10% ethanol in a whole slew of vehicles over the previous 20 years and have never had fuel tank corrosion issues. Simply not a concern....

Click to expand...

Auto's have been required (in USA by EPA) to be E10 or E15 compatible since some time in early 00's. Many are E85 (Ford's FlexFuel FE). (I believe there's a move afoot to increase that to 20-25% or something higher (which could be related to the premium fuel rumor being floated earlier.) SMALL ENGINES, however, are where the problem comes in. Many lawnmowers, weed eaters, chain saws, outboard motors, etc. are rush-imported to NA market and don't have rubber parts in the fuel system that are ethanol compatible. The ethanol eats at the rubber and you have problems starting and smooth operation. Around here, back up generators are a very particular problem as they sit idle for long periods and only used when you NEED them, so after a severe storm you get to hear all the sputtering generators (or cursing owners trying to start them LOL).

Also, alcohol is hygroscopic: it will attract and hold water in solution. This a good thing in that it readily carries water through the system (keeping your system water-free) but it's also bad if you don't burn water contaminated fuel quickly as the water can corrode fuel system components as previously noted. Also as noted before: modern auto/truck engines are generally made to handle that (some better than others). BUT, those pesky small engine mfr's are exempt from those EPA rules.

And even so, it only holds so much. If that quantity is exceeded it can drop out of solution in your tank in a gooey mess that clogs filters and pumps, even in cars designed for it. So it's a good idea to keep your tank over 1/2 full all the time unless tripping, especially in winter, just to be sure.

Lastly: alcohol's also a great solvent. It will dissolve varnishes and carry them all the way through the fuel system. Sounds good, but it also evaporates easily and leaves all that stuff right there. And of course that point happens to be at the end of the system: the injectors. This can happen even in cars designed for ethanol, that's why EPA has also specified that ALL fuels have additives to keep fuel systems clean. Still, i think it a good idea to keep them clean with regular efficacious fuel system cleaner use (I like Techron).

Also, if you're going to store your vehicle for a long duration, fill your tank to the top and put the gas cap on TIGHTLY after putting in a storage additive like Sta-Bil.

I'm not kicking ethanol: I think it's great. If it's as cheap and unsubsidized as you say it's even greater! I DO think people should be informed about what it means though, and take appropriate measures to protect small engine investments. What DOES get me angry is I know that ethanol naturally increases octane: so if they have to sell us E15 (by EPA) we're just paying for a marketing ploy when they increase the price $.30 a gallon for 91 octane. It's the same cost to them.

MikeM. said:

yrwei52 said:

Corn should be grown to feed human beings, not to feed cars!

Click to expand...

I'll be blunt and say that about the dumbest argument ever. It's like saying "oil should be used for lubrication, not as a fuel for our cars". Actually we can do both (and make some tires out of it too)! Last I checked corn was 5 ears for a dollar. And that's the most expensive kind of corn, ethanol corn you wouldn't even want to eat.
And what about potatoes, should we reserve them for baked potatoes and freedom fries or can we also use them for vodka and potato guns?
So, are grapes for wine or just grape juice?
I say, let the free market decide.

Click to expand...

Try to feed cars with 95% of corn ethanol in the US? It'd be an impossible task!

Ethanol Factsheet

Ethanol Basics
The primary feedstock of ethanol is corn. Currently 18% of the U.S. corn crop and 15% of the sorghum crop goes into ethanol production annually. The U.S. annually consumes 142 billion gallons of gasoline and now has the capability to produce a record 7.2 billion gallons of ethanol per year. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 mandates production of 7.5 billion gallons per year by 2012 and the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 creates an impossible goal of producing 36 billion gallons of renewable fuels, including 17 billion gallons of corn ethanol by 2022. Achieving this will require approximately 83 million acres almost 90% of the current corn production in the entire United States. This is spawning a massive growth in proposals for noisy, polluting ethanol biorefineries, but will do little to cut oil imports.[/B] A 1997 congressional report concluded, "ethanol's potential for substituting for petroleum is so small that it is unlikely to significantly affect overall energy security."

Industrial Agriculture - Food Vs. Fuel?
Of all crops grown in the U.S., corn demands the most massive fixes of herbicides, insecticides, and natural gas-based fertilizers, while creating the most soil erosion. 85% of U.S. corn is genetically engineered. Ethanol is increasingly derived from biotech corn varieties. USDA Proposes First Ever Industrial GE Crop
Biotech corn comes in two main varieties: one where the corn produces Bt toxin to kill the European corn borer, and one that enables the corn to withstand higher doses of commercial herbicides like Aventis' Liberty or Monsanto's Roundup, with Roundup having been found to be more toxic than previously thought, especially to amphibians. Both Bt and herbicide-resistant corn can lead to the development of resistance in bugs and weeds. Bt is a soil bacteria used as a pesticide of last resort by organic farmers because Bt resistant bugs are a major problem. Both methods also risk genetic pollution, spreading the biotech attributes to nearby crops, wild relatives or weeds.

Meeting the lifetime fuel requirements of just one year's worth of U.S. population growth with straight ethanol (assuming each baby lived 70 years), would cost 52,000 tons of insecticides, 735,000 tons of herbicides, 93 million tons of fertilizer, and the loss of 2 inches of soil from the 12.3 billion acres on which the corn was grown. The U.S. only has 2.263 billion acres of land and soil depletion is already a critical issue. Soil is being lost from corn plantations about 12 times faster than it is being rebuilt.

Wetlands the most productive fish and wildlife habitat there is consume nitrogen and filter out pesticides and sediments, but wetlands are being drained in order to produce surplus corn. The Corn Belt has lost about 70 percent of its wetlands. In some areas, corn has to be irrigated by pumps that suck water from the ground faster than it percolates back in. Moreover, the pumps are powered by natural gas, the frenzied production of which is creating horrendous problems for fish and wildlife.

Corn is grown because it is cheap (subsidizes) and highly profitable. But it is primarily used for processed $hit foods.

yrwei52 said:

The Energy Policy Act of 2005 mandates production of 7.5 billion gallons per year by 2012 and the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 creates an impossible goal of producing 36 billion gallons of renewable fuels, including 17 billion gallons of corn ethanol by 2022. Achieving this will require approximately 83 million acres —almost 90% of the current corn production in the entire United States.

Click to expand...

Be careful where you get your information from:"Impossible goal" of 17 Billion gallons of corn ethanol by 2022? Really?


According to the Renewable Fuels Association, in 2014 the US produced 14.3 billion gallons of ethanol. And that was up by 1.0 billion gallons over 2013. 2.7 billion gallons increase in 8 years doesn't seem impossible, it's inevitable.

http://ethanolrfa.org/pages/monthly-fuel-ethanol-production-demand

It looks like your article was written about 10 years ago. So it's hard to fault the author for not having more foresight but this is the quality of predictions that are thrown out there by people who have an emotional horse in the race or are just philosophically opposed to certain ideas.

This ethanol replaces gasoline made from imported oil at about .75 gallons gasoline for every 1 gallon of ethanol. Which means domestic ethanol production deserves much of the credit for the current glut of oil and gas prices much lower than they were in the 1920's (inflation adjusted).

inlinev said:

Corn is grown because it is cheap (subsidizes) and highly profitable. But it is primarily used for processed $hit foods.

Click to expand...

Subsidies for ethanol corn production ended years ago.

But fossil fuels are subsidized to the tune of billions of $$ every year.

MikeM. said:

yrwei52 said:

MTBE is a much better oxygenate than ethanol for fuel which is cheaper and easier to meet the emission standards.

Click to expand...

Wrong again. It takes almost twice as much MTBE to provide the same oxygenation to gasoline as ethanol takes. Both have less BTU's per gallon but the additional MTBE means the hit to BTU's per gallon is not large. Ethanol has higher octane vs. MTBE as well.

Click to expand...

This article is from American Cancer Society website:

"What is MTBE?

MTBE (methyl tertiary-butyl ether) is a flammable, colorless liquid that dissolves easily in water. It is part of a group of chemicals known as fuel oxygenates. Oxygenates do not occur naturally in gasoline; they are added to increase gasolines oxygen content. MTBE and other oxygenates make gasoline burn better, which lowers harmful carbon monoxide and other emissions from vehicles, reducing air pollution.

MTBE was first used in gasoline at low levels in the United States in 1979 to replace lead as an octane enhancer. Starting in 1992, MTBE was used at higher concentrations in some gas to fulfill the oxygenate requirements set by Congress in the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (CAA). The CAA required the use of oxygenated gasoline in areas with unhealthy levels of air pollution.

Starting in 1995, the CAA required use of reformulated gasoline (RFG) year-round in cities with the worst ground-level ozone (smog). RFG is gasoline that is specially blended to have fewer polluting compounds than conventional gasoline. As part of the CAA, RFG had to have an oxygen content of at least 2% by weight.

The CAA did not specifically require MTBE to be used as the oxygenate in gasoline. Gas refiners could choose to use other oxygenates, such as ethanol. But MTBE was the main oxygenate in RFG in some areas outside the Midwest, mainly for economic reasons and for its blending characteristics. Unlike ethanol, MTBE could be shipped through existing pipelines, and its volatility is lower, making it easier to meet the emission standards.

Problems with MTBE

Despite its potential benefits on air quality, MTBE has some properties that can cause problems. MTBE is much more soluble in water than most other components of gasoline. If it gets in the ground, it can travel faster and farther through groundwater than other gasoline components. This makes it more likely to contaminate public water systems and private drinking water wells if gasoline is spilled on the ground or leaks out of underground storage tanks. Even fairly small amounts of MTBE in water can give it an unpleasant taste and odor, making the water undrinkable. MTBE also does not break down (biodegrade) easily. As a result, it is harder to clean up once contamination occurs.

In the late 1990s, many community drinking water supplies in areas that used a lot of MTBE were found to have detectable levels of MTBE. Since then, MTBE use in gasoline has been phased out because of concerns about groundwater contamination. Although it is not clear what effects MTBE in drinking water might have on health, many states have passed laws limiting or banning the use of MTBE in gasoline.

As part of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, Congress voted to remove the oxygen content requirement for reformulated gasoline. (This went into effect in 2006.) Since then, companies have switched from using MTBE to using ethanol instead in their gasoline for a number of reasons, including state laws banning MTBE use, concerns over possible legal liability, and government tax subsidies for using ethanol. According to the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), MTBE has not been used in significant quantities in gasoline since 2005."

MikeM. said:

yrwei52 said:

The Energy Policy Act of 2005 mandates production of 7.5 billion gallons per year by 2012 and the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 creates an impossible goal of producing 36 billion gallons of renewable fuels, including 17 billion gallons of corn ethanol by 2022. Achieving this will require approximately 83 million acres almost 90% of the current corn production in the entire United States.

Click to expand...

Be careful where you get your information from:"Impossible goal" of 17 Billion gallons of corn ethanol by 2022? Really?
According to the Renewable Fuels Association, in 2014 the US produced 14.3 billion gallons of ethanol. And that was up by 1.0 billion gallons over 2013. 2.7 billion gallons increase in 8 years doesn't seem impossible, it's inevitable.
http://ethanolrfa.org/pages/monthly-fuel-ethanol-production-demand
It looks like your article was written about 10 years ago. So it's hard to fault the author for not having more foresight but this is the quality of predictions that are thrown out there by people who have an emotional horse in the race or are just philosophically opposed to certain ideas.

Click to expand...

I said "Try to feed cars with 95% of corn ethanol in the US?", didn't I? If we run E95 fuel instead of E10 fuel in the US for every car like you preferred, we'd need at least 9 times more of current ethanol production! Not just 17 billion gallons! You also assume we have unlimited land and water to grow corn, which we all know is not the case! Ethanol production spiked from 2007 to 2009 is due to The Energy Policy Act of 2005 which makes refineries switching MTBE to ethanol as fuel oxygenate. As a green advocate, you didn't want mention those concerns, including agriculture side effects and lost of wetlands, by mass increase of corn production in the US? BTW, the article was written 6 years ago.

MikeM. said:

This ethanol replaces gasoline made from imported oil at about .75 gallons gasoline for every 1 gallon of ethanol. Which means domestic ethanol production deserves much of the credit for the current glut of oil and gas prices much lower than they were in the 1920's (inflation adjusted).

Click to expand...

This statement, credited the current low oil price worldwide to corn ethanol produced in the US, makes me speechless...
We have had RFG which contains 10% oxygenate since late '90s. Why is the oil price up and down in wide margin during these years?
Also, we produce more domestic crude oil than imports right now - 3,180,975 K barrels vs. 2,677,911 K barrels in 2014! The domestic oil industry is important to US economy and supports thousands of families!

yrwei52 said:

This statement, credited the current low oil price worldwide to corn ethanol produced in the US, makes me speechless...

Click to expand...

If only you were speaking literally! LOL!

We have had RFG which contains 10% oxygenate since late '90s. Why is the oil price up and down in wide margin during these years?
Also, we produce more domestic crude oil than imports right now - 3,180,975 K barrels vs. 2,677,911 K barrels in 2014! The domestic oil industry is important to US economy and supports thousands of families!

Click to expand...

And you think the domestic ethanol industry is not important and doesn't support thousands of families? (hand)

Look at it this way, if ethanol were suddenly outlawed, a bunch of things would happen. Thousands of Americans that depended upon ethanol for their livelihood would become poor, our country would need to increase the amount of oil we purchase from overseas by 25% further increasing the trade imbalance, refineries would need to figure out how to process 8% more oil into gasoline which would mean the need to import refined product into the US. The price of gas (and oil) would sky-rocket.

yrwei52 said:

We have had RFG which contains 10% oxygenate since late '90s. Why is the oil price up and down in wide margin during these years?

Click to expand...

It's a global commodity with pricing partly controlled by a cartel.

And refined gasoline prices are influenced by supply and demand. Supply is influenced by refining capacity in some regions. It's complicated and nobody really knows how to model it.

littlebear said:

If you go to the SAE site where the engines are tested and achieve official numbers. They used 91 octane to get their peak HP/Torque #'s. I will try and find the link.

Click to expand...

Well, I went to the SAE site but I didn't see anything about them using premium for peak HP testing. Did you post a link and I missed it? Because without a link, I don't believe it.

Buddywh2 said:

SMALL ENGINES, however, are where the problem comes in. Many lawnmowers, weed eaters, chain saws, outboard motors, etc. are rush-imported to NA market and don't have rubber parts in the fuel system that are ethanol compatible. The ethanol eats at the rubber and you have problems starting and smooth operation. Around here, back up generators are a very particular problem as they sit idle for long periods and only used when you NEED them, so after a severe storm you get to hear all the sputtering generators (or cursing owners trying to start them LOL).

Click to expand...

Sigh.... Small engines from any reputable manufacturer have been designed to run on E10 just like the cars. Because, in most areas of the country, ethanol free gasoline is just not available or, is only available at sporadic locations. That's because people don't want to pay the extra $.30 or more/gallon for gas without alcohol when E10 works just fine. I have a Stihl chainsaw that's been running fine on E10 for two decades. My Honda pressure washer is 17 years old and has seen nothing but E10. It's often goes two years between uses and yet it's never been tuned up, it's only had two oil changes and it always starts on the third or fourth pull after sitting all year. I had two 1981 Honda CT110's that only saw E10 for the years I owned them - again, easy starters, super reliable. And I hardly ever started them. They would sit sometimes over a year.

But, when I was younger, in the 1970's, before we had alcohol in the gas, varnish in the carb was a common problem if an engine wasn't used regularly. Sometimes all it took was six months of sitting and it was time to rebuild the carb.

Your anti-ethanol theories do not match up with my extensive experience with small engines.

Also, alcohol is hygroscopic: it will attract and hold water in solution. This a good thing in that it readily carries water through the system (keeping your system water-free) but it's also bad if you don't burn water contaminated fuel quickly as the water can corrode fuel system components as previously noted.

Click to expand...

Nope! Another old wives tale. Back before we had E10, water in the fuel and corrosion was a big problem. You know what the solution was? Go down to your local auto supply store and buy a bottle of pure ethanol to dump in your tank. Some people put a little in each tank to keep water and corrosion issues at bay. Yeah, it cost a little extra but people wanted to treat their babies right. Now it's supposed to be bad? This is funny!

And even so, it only holds so much. If that quantity is exceeded it can drop out of solution in your tank in a gooey mess that clogs filters and pumps, even in cars designed for it. So it's a good idea to keep your tank over 1/2 full all the time unless tripping, especially in winter, just to be sure.

Click to expand...

What? The problems were rampant before we had E10, now this kind of nightmare is as rare as hens teeth.

Lastly: alcohol's also a great solvent. It will dissolve varnishes and carry them all the way through the fuel system. Sounds good, but it also evaporates easily and leaves all that stuff right there.

Click to expand...

Sigh... Modern fuel systems have sealed vapor systems. That means there is generally 100% saturation and nothing is evaporating or getting left behind. Besides, gasoline has components that are a lot more volatile than alcohol. There is nothing special about alcohol that causes problems in this regard.

And of course that point happens to be at the end of the system: the injectors. This can happen even in cars designed for ethanol, that's why EPA has also specified that ALL fuels have additives to keep fuel systems clean. Still, i think it a good idea to keep them clean with regular efficacious fuel system cleaner use (I like Techron).

Click to expand...

Duh! Gasoline needed detergent additives even more before we had E10.

Never have I seen a post so full of completely wrong information. It's like it was all made up by a tooth fairy.

I'm not kicking ethanol: I think it's great.

Click to expand...

Actually, you are.

If it's as cheap and unsubsidized as you say it's even greater!

Click to expand...

Yes, cheaper than gasoline and the petroleum industry is the one with heavy government subsidies.

I DO think people should be informed about what it means though, and take appropriate measures to protect small engine investments.

Click to expand...

It looks like you want everyone to be exactly as informed as you are. Which is to say mis-informed.

What DOES get me angry is I know that ethanol naturally increases octane: so if they have to sell us E15 (by EPA) we're just paying for a marketing ploy when they increase the price $.30 a gallon for 91 octane. It's the same cost to them.

Click to expand...

More fuzzy thinking here. Currently, Federal Law limits gasoline to 10% ethanol. So when you pay $.30 more gallon for premium, it's not because you're paying more for ethanol (ethanol is cheaper than gasoline), it's because oil companies are not allowed to put more than 10% ethanol, they must use more expensive distillates to get to 91 octane. 91 octane would cost less if the feds didn't limit ethanol to only 10%. That's why E85 is about 20-25% less expensive than E10 and has an octane higher than premium.

MikeM. said:

Sigh.... Small engines from any reputable manufacturer have been designed to run on E10 just like the cars. Because, in most areas of the country, ethanol free gasoline is just not available or, is only available at sporadic locations. That's because people don't want to pay the extra $.30 or more/gallon for gas without alcohol when E10 works just fine. I have a Stihl chainsaw that's been running fine on E10 for two decades. My Honda pressure washer is 17 years old and has seen nothing but E10. It's often goes two years between uses and yet it's never been tuned up, it's only had two oil changes and it always starts on the third or fourth pull after sitting all year. I had two 1981 Honda CT110's that only saw E10 for the years I owned them - again, easy starters, super reliable. And I hardly ever started them. They would sit sometimes over a year.

But, when I was younger, in the 1970's, before we had alcohol in the gas, varnish in the carb was a common problem if an engine wasn't used regularly. Sometimes all it took was six months of sitting and it was time to rebuild the carb.

Your anti-ethanol theories do not match up with my extensive experience with small engines.



Nope! Another old wives tale. Back before we had E10, water in the fuel and corrosion was a big problem. You know what the solution was? Go down to your local auto supply store and buy a bottle of pure ethanol to dump in your tank. Some people put a little in each tank to keep water and corrosion issues at bay. Yeah, it cost a little extra but people wanted to treat their babies right. Now it's supposed to be bad? This is funny!




What? The problems were rampant before we had E10, now this kind of nightmare is as rare as hens teeth.



Sigh... Modern fuel systems have sealed vapor systems. That means there is generally 100% saturation and nothing is evaporating or getting left behind. Besides, gasoline has components that are a lot more volatile than alcohol. There is nothing special about alcohol that causes problems in this regard.




Duh! Gasoline needed detergent additives even more before we had E10.

Never have I seen a post so full of completely wrong information. It's like it was all made up by a tooth fairy.



Actually, you are.



Yes, cheaper than gasoline and the petroleum industry is the one with heavy government subsidies.



It looks like you want everyone to be exactly as informed as you are. Which is to say mis-informed.



More fuzzy thinking here. Currently, Federal Law limits gasoline to 10% ethanol. So when you pay $.30 more gallon for premium, it's not because you're paying more for ethanol (ethanol is cheaper than gasoline), it's because oil companies are not allowed to put more than 10% ethanol, they must use more expensive distillates to get to 91 octane. 91 octane would cost less if the feds didn't limit ethanol to only 10%. That's why E85 is about 20-25% less expensive than E10 and has an octane higher than premium.

Click to expand...

This post is hilarious, thanks for making me laugh today.

MikeM. said:

Nope! Another old wives tale. Back before we had E10, water in the fuel and corrosion was a big problem. You know what the solution was? Go down to your local auto supply store and buy a bottle of pure ethanol to dump in your tank. Some people put a little in each tank to keep water and corrosion issues at bay. Yeah, it cost a little extra but people wanted to treat their babies right. Now it's supposed to be bad? This is funny!

Click to expand...

I remember when we had to do this. I remember my 1984 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme wouldn't start one cold winter day right after Christmas because the water in the tank and carburetor froze and it left me stranded. I believe the anti gel/freeze gas tank additives had methanol in them.

MikeM. said:

...
More fuzzy thinking here....

Click to expand...

The problem with small engines is very well known... as recently as 2013 Consumer Reports (http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/...ethanol-can-make-small-engines-fail/index.htm) advises against using ethanol blended fuels with small gasoline engine appliances. My personal experience with years of small engine problems (mine and my neighbors') say it's very real. It may be unfortunate, but not everyone buys ONLY small engine appliances from 'reputable' sources such as yourself.

Fuel phase separation is a well established phenomenon with ethanol blended fuels. There are plenty of articles available... just google it. And oh yes, and I have a friend currently dealing with that very problem on his boat right now.

Yours is the fuzzy, funny logic: the beauty of that can of ethanol you put in your tank to remove the water was that once it passed through your system it was gone. The ethanol in your regular fill-up, in contrast, is always there, holding water in solution. Add in acurious habit of many owners: to fill up whenever the tank is 1/2 full. It never fully removes the water charge. In fact, it just picks up more when the tank is opened. Until it can't anymore...then it falls out. Doesn't happen to everybody, just those with habits... like my friend with his boat (which IS fully E15 certified).

There are pluses and minuses to almost all things more complicated than a pacifier; just because I point out a few of the minuses doesn't mean I'm knocking it. It just means I'm trying to be realistic about some of the warts and how to deal with them. You can continue with a naive and rosy perception if you wish, but you're just doing the very cause you seem to be passionate about a great disservice by sweeping them aside with simplistic banalities.

That's why it's not worth trying to discuss this further with you.

Enjoy your reality.

Skipped the ethanol debate to say that, yes I agree with others, there is no performance benefit to running higher octane versus the recommended 87 octane for the CX-5. The only time you will probably see a benefit, is if your engine is knocking to begin with. Like another have said, there is really no way to prove this unless someone does a controlled test while logging the knock retard data from the ECU.

Someone mentioned using the new Shell Nitrogen premium fuel with enriched cleaning agents etc... I don't think you will benefit greatly from that since the CX-5 uses a direct injection engine. If it was port injected, then yes it could be beneficial. As of right now, save the money and get cheaper gas from another top tier gas station.

There is e85 tuning for sky activ now btw.. good gains if you want to be bothered with mixing

Where does it say in writing that E85 is acceptable for use in a CX5 and what years? Ed

I said there is tuning for it; i.e you can have your ecu and engine calibrated to run e85. it's not new and done on many cars as a performance mod because of the knock resistance and cooling of e85 over say 93

My question was, is there validation, to confirm that the CX5 fuel system components are E85 proof? Ed

erhayes said:

My question was, is there validation, to confirm that the CX5 fuel system components are E85 proof? Ed

Click to expand...

No, in bold text with "caution" in the header, Mazda says:

Your vehicle can only use oxygenated fuels containing no more than 10 % ethanol by volume. Damage to your vehicle may occur when ethanol exceeds this recommendation, or if the gasoline contains any methanol. Stop using gasohol of any kind if your vehicle engine is performing poorly.