Originally Posted by Dean88
I would love to have some E10 around here. You may be complaining about the drop in mpg, but that is 10% less oil that we would have to use if all gas is E10. I know once you figure in the drop in mpg, it won't be 10% less oil, but it is still less foriegn oil that we will have to use, and that means less money into terrorists hands.
Now you WOULD think that. Wouldn't ya? Well, it's just simple math, so let's check it out. A gallon of E10 is 90% gasoline. If we can agree on that, let's go to the numbers.
From Christcorp's numbers:
(Highway mileage)
2003 Toyolta Camry: 30mpg (E10) 33mpg (Non-ethanol)
2000 Focus: 31mpg (E10) 33mpt (Non-ethanol)
1983 Honda Motorcycle: 32mpg (E10) 36mpg (Non-ethanol)
1994 F250 : 9.5mpg (E10) 10.6 (Non-ethanol)
Now if we take a 1000 mile trip the fuel usage and amount of gasoline used will be:
(Highway mileage)
2003 Toyolta Camry: 33.3 (gal E10) 30.3 (gal of gas) 30 (Gal of gas in the E10)
2000 Focus: 32.3 (gal E10) 30.3 (gal of gas) 29.0 (Gal of gas in the E10)
1983 Honda Motorcycle: 31.3 (gal E10) 27.8 (gal of gas) 28.1 (Gal of gas in the E10)
1994 F250 : 105.3 (gal E10) 94.3 (gal of gas) 94.7 (Gal of gas in the E10)
So, the only car of the 3 that used less gasoline when burning E10 was the focus and that was less by 1.3 gallons in 1000 miles. The rest used basically the same amount of gasoline between using E10 and plain gas.
Difference being the oil companies can charge more for E10 and make a higher margin on it.
Does E10 still sound like a good deal? Any wonder that the evil oil companies aren't squaking about having to provide E10? It's part of the reason for those huge profits many people like to bawl about.