News:

The ORG - 100% FREE advice!

Main Menu

E10 petrol: Plus ULP and Boost 98 - who uses it?

Started by 13B, 15 June 2007, 01:08 AM

13B

Simple really, my nearest petrol station is a United brand, they sell three unleaded varieties... plain unleaded 91RON, Plus ULP 94RON with E10, and Boost 98 which is 98RON with E10.  They don't sell plain premium unleaded.

My engine is the Australian Delivery 8.0:1 CR which according to all my learnings about internal combustion engines, should live in 91RON petrol.. or even 87RON if it were available...

[Start of rant..]

Since my email to MB of Melbourne asking the same thing has gone unanswered, I'm asking you guys.

I've had a read of the into on MB Aus site which says my aus delivered 6.9 is compatible with unleaded however its a bit vague and doesn't state what the minimum RON requirement is.

To put it bluntly, PULP looks like a waste.  I can understand why you need it in high revving, high compression or turbo or super charged late model engines... I can also see why you'd need it in a GTHO Phase 3 running 11.5:1 CR... but I can't see any benefit of it in a slow revving, low compression, engine like early MB V8s...

[End of rant]
450SEL 6.9 #5440 = V MB 690 , 450SE # 43094 = 02010 H , 190E/turbo # 31548 = AOH 68K

Brian Crump

My advice from MB was to use 98 RON as it is a cleaner burning fuel than 95 and obtains more complete combustion. Yes, I can pick a difference between 95 and 98. On 95 the car will diesel briefly at turn off after a hard run.
Ethanol is not compatible with our 116 set up and I avoid it.
I have no doubt someone will tell me I am dead wrong and that I should run the 450SE on 91 RON but in my experience, there is a significant difference in the way the motor runs on each of the octane levels. Frankly, the price difference is not enough to be of concern.
Regards,
BC

oscar

Are you concerned about the ethanol or asking whether you should just use 91 RON?

My half sized 3.5 has a 9.0:1 CR.  The owners manual says "use premium".  It was established earlier that this means 98RON.  Of course, 30 yrs later it contains no lead and an upper lube additive is another debate.  Most W116 engines can use unleaded fuels without an additive. AFAIK, the 350 engine is in Limbo with no real answer given by MB as I'm not 100% sure that the 3.5L has hardened valves and seats, where as later 4.5L and 6.9's are covered. 

Then when it comes to real world experiences, some mechanics say all MB engines have hardened valves and seats since some post WW2 date I can't remember.  My real world experience is that in the tradition of a "which oil to use" debate, I use PULP 98 (no ethanol) and an additive most of the time.  Believing, a quality car deserves a good wine.  But previously, the car had done maybe 150,000-200,000km on ULP 91 RON without additives.  I'm at 390,000km with good compression and no ill effects I know of.  My mech did a wet test/leak down test a couple of years ago and said there were no problems.

IIRC, the last time we spoke on ethanol, the biggest problem was corrosion of the exposed metal in our fuel system.  Particulary steel and aluminium.  The ethanol acts as an electrolyte between say the fuel tank, parts in the pump and the aluminium rails causing corrosion.  Though this would only occur in high concentrations of ethanol.  Don't know whether E10 would cause concern but I'm sure E85 would if we had it.
1973 350SE, my first & fave

koan


The 6.9 owners manual say 98 RON but it also says 8.8:1 compression, the Australian supplement that describes our emission engine doesn't mention the required fuel.

I run 91 RON in my 8.0:1 engine, I tried it sometime ago on 98 but with no discernable difference but it might be worth trying again as I now have the engine running considerably better.

On our vintage engines without knock sensors and clever electronic control of ignition timing there will be no power increase with higher RON fuel unless the ignition timing is advanced.

koan
Boogity, Boogity, Boogity, Amen!

13B

Thanks for the responses.

Looks like I'll try a tank of 91RON next and see if it likes that.  If it doesn't I'll check my timing (haven't checked it yet, this is on the 1st week I've had the car).

We use E10 Plus ULP in my wife's '97 Mits Verada, but we checked with Mitsubishi first.  It seems to run better on the stuff, but thats not surprising as the engine management system is fairly sophisticated.

I think if I think of the D-Jet system as just a super sophisticated carburetor with similarly little (or no, to be precise) computerised monitoring of the engine - i.e just like a carb - that if it were a Ford or Holden big-block V8 with an 8.0:1 CR then I'd probably also be running it on 91RON.
450SEL 6.9 #5440 = V MB 690 , 450SE # 43094 = 02010 H , 190E/turbo # 31548 = AOH 68K

robgee

HERE'S THE LINK TO  Australian Institute of Petroleum.
CARS THAT CAN RUN UNLEADED WITH NO PROBLEMS AND CARS THAT REQUIRE ADDITIVES OR PULP.
Regards,
Rob.

http://www.aip.com.au/health/lead_guide.htm


nathan

the 6.9 aus owners manual notes that it should be run on 98RON
i may be falling for the advertising, but who cant afford another 5 bucks a tank per week to keep the engine running cleaner...im sold as after my sister sent a piston through my M110 in the G, themechanic noted it was the cleanest engine he'd ever seen after about 4 years of ultimate 98 only...
1979 116 6.9 #6436
2018 213 e63
2011 212 e63
2011 463 g55
2007 211 e500 wagen
1995 124 e320 cabriolet
1983 460 300gd
1981 123 280te

koan

Quote from: nathan on 15 June 2007, 08:35 PM

the 6.9 aus owners manual notes that it should be run on 98RON


I'm talking about the white supplement, if that's what you refer, to what page is it on?

koan

Boogity, Boogity, Boogity, Amen!

Mercules

Just a note on E10 ethanol blended fuel - I have seen first hand how this fuel can absolutely wreck certain types of rubber seals, usually found in fuel pumps, EFI & carburettor systems. Commodores are especially bad - it will kill the fuel pump very quickly!

Quote from: 13B on 15 June 2007, 07:18 AM
We use E10 Plus ULP in my wife's '97 Mits Verada, but we checked with Mitsubishi first.  It seems to run better on the stuff, but thats not surprising as the engine management system is fairly sophisticated.

What did Mitsubishi tell you? I would be interested to know. I have worked in tech assistance for several major manufacturers and the pre-recorded response from all of them is "we  have not performed any testing on the long term effects on the car, therefore we cannot reccomend you use this fuel" same goes for bio-diesel too!

Quote from: 13B on 15 June 2007, 01:08 AM
To put it bluntly, PULP looks like a waste.  I can understand why you need it in high revving, high compression or turbo or super charged late model engines... I can also see why you'd need it in a GTHO Phase 3 running 11.5:1 CR... but I can't see any benefit of it in a slow revving, low compression, engine like early MB V8s...

Yes I agree - If you have a car with high compression, turbocharged or the manufacturer specifies you use premium, then use it - I used to tune WRXs a few years ago and we would not touch the boost until it had 98 octane in the tank. Everything else is fine on regular unleaded in my opinoin - the power gain from usiung premium is virtually unoticeable and not worth the extra cost.

Quote from: koan on 15 June 2007, 03:15 AM
The 6.9 owners manual say 98 RON but it also says 8.8:1 compression, the Australian supplement that describes our emission engine doesn't mention the required fuel.

I run 91 RON in my 8.0:1 engine, I tried it sometime ago on 98 but with no discernable difference but it might be worth trying again as I now have the engine running considerably better.

On our vintage engines without knock sensors and clever electronic control of ignition timing there will be no power increase with higher RON fuel unless the ignition timing is advanced.

koan
How right you are Koan - I had a 3.0 litre VL Commodore with aftermarket EFI that could only take 23 degrees of ignition advance until it started pinging on regular... but on premium I could wind in 31 degrees of advance before the rattling began - this made another 10 rear wheel kilowatts! (dyno proven)


Quote from: Brian Crump on 15 June 2007, 01:26 AM
My advice from MB was to use 98 RON as it is a cleaner burning fuel than 95 and obtains more complete combustion. Yes, I can pick a difference between 95 and 98. On 95 the car will diesel briefly at turn off after a hard run.

Sounds like there is a problem with the car BC, not the fuel! Possibly a loose nut behind the wheel?  ;D

Quote from: nathan on 15 June 2007, 08:35 PM
the 6.9 aus owners manual notes that it should be run on 98RON
i may be falling for the advertising, but who cant afford another 5 bucks a tank per week to keep the engine running cleaner...im sold as after my sister sent a piston through my M110 in the G, the mechanic noted it was the cleanest engine he'd ever seen after about 4 years of ultimate 98 only...

This would be more likely related to regualr oil changes rather than fuel quality - you still get carbon deposits from 98. Have a look at the oil from a car running LPG - the 105 octane of LPG has nothing to do with the honey-like oil... its comes down to the lack of carboning from running LPG.

OzBenzHead

13B:  There have been numerous threads and post on this topic in the past; here are some bits and pieces from them, and some links.

Basically:

* do NOT use ethanol in a pre-'86 Benz

* it is NOT necessary to use additives

* ALWAYS use 98 RON petrol in any high-compression Benz engine - i.e. anything over 8:1 or perhaps 8:5 to 1 - and never anything less than 95 RON in any other Benz.

The above information is direct from the M-B Classic Center in Stuttgart.

It's true that you are unlikely to feel the difference between 98 and 95 through the seat of your pants; however, I find that running 98 - with the appropriate spark-timing adjustment - gives me better fuel consumption to the point where I get more miles per dollar from a tank of 98 than I do from a tank of 95.

*  From my former extremely infelicitous experience with ethanol-blended petrol (in my 1970 W108 280SE), it will only get into my Benzes' tanks over my dead body!

*  Be careful adding any kind of alcohol to the fuel system of a pre-'86 Benz; you risk rotting the rubber and plastic components.  If they're already ancient, it might take only a little nudge from, say, ethanol, methanol, or similar cleaner or additive to push them over the brink. You also risk introducing rust to the steel components of the fuel system, as alcohols are hygroscopic - they absorb/hold water.

I have a six-page PDF document on ethanol-laced fuel (includes a comprehensive table of which cars can safely drink it), additives, and octane - especially relevant to Benzes. As I can see no means of attaching the document to a post on this forum, I'll happily e-mail it to you - or anyone else who'd like a copy. All I need is (a) a request, and (b) an e-mail address to send it to. You may ask via a forum post, a forum PM, or a private e-mail (my address is displayed in my profile).

The information in the document is compiled from the Australian Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries (the Ethanol part) and Stuttgart Mercedes Classic Center (additives and octane).

There are also older threads on this forum on the subject:
Thread http://forum.w116.org/index.php/topic,282.msg1731.html#msg1731
Thread http://forum.w116.org/index.php/topic,281.msg1863.html#msg1863.

*  According to the CSIRO (which officially endorses ethanoled petrol), the supposed environmental benefits of ethanol-blended petrol are at least balanced - if not outweighed - by the environmental and financial costs of producing the stuff.

Lacing petrol with ethanol appears to be nothing more than a thinly disguised farming subsidy propping up unsustainable agricultural practices; according to the literature US farmers must still be hugely subsidised to produce ethanol-sourcing crops - else the stuff would be unaffordable at the pump. I'm sceptic enough to believe it's nothing more than politricks.

I'm all for "green" - but it has to be true green - not merely right-sounding vote-catching huff.

* See also the 12th post (mine) in this thread: http://forum.w116.org/mechanicals/mandated-methanol-in-the-u-s/msg3926/#msg3926.

Any government that wants me to run ethanol in my unsuited old Benzes can bloody well pay for all the necessary conversion and adaptation costs! Or, preferably, the politicians concerned can drink the damn stuff in lethal quantities.
[img width=340 height=138][url="http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a215/OzBenzHead/10%20M-B%20Miscellany/OBH_LOGO-2a-1.png"]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a215/OzBenzHead/10%20M-B%20Miscellany/OBH_LOGO-2a-1.png[/url][/img]

koan


A couple of comments on your post OzBenzHead, basically I don't see anything wrong with adding ethanol to  petrol with a few provisos.

If you have an established ethanol industry, like for instance Brazil does and it's cheap, I've seen prices around $40 a tonne but setting up from scratch to produce ethanol for transport use at many times the cost of petrol is absolutely stupid, except of course if you happen to be PM Howard's brother.

The environmental cost of producing ethanol, land use, water use is 3 to 4 litres per litre of ethanol, the energy required for production are conveniently not mentioned.

Another thing is labeling, up to 10% ethanol is allowed without any requirement for it to be stated. I'd like to decide what I buy and not have this sleight of hand approach.

You say alcohol being hygroscopic is a bad thing, isn't it a good thing in that it takes up moisture and prevents the water causing corrosion? Isn't this why old type brake fluids are hygroscopic by design?

I think you can upload PDFs to the gallery, I've done it with text files. Would be good to create a jpg saying "Ethanol  PDF"  for a thumbnail. I think Office can save files as jpgs.

I'd like to read the pdfs you offered, my address is in my profile.

koan.
Boogity, Boogity, Boogity, Amen!

Brian Crump

#11
QuoteSounds like there is a problem with the car BC, not the fuel! Possibly a loose nut behind the wheel?
Hardly. A rather strange comment to make about the driver? I hope it is made in jest?
I take my advice from MBS and from the mechanic who sets up my car with me.
The car has been timed to take advantage of 98.
The general concensus amongst many who use/tune/race older engines is to time to 98 and I am happy with the results.
Regards,
BC

Mercules

Quote from: Brian Crump on 16 June 2007, 06:39 AM
QuoteSounds like there is a problem with the car BC, not the fuel! Possibly a loose nut behind the wheel?
Hardly. A rather strange comment to make about the driver? I hope it is made in jest?

Yes it was in jest Brian. You are the tightest nut behind the wheel anyway. ;D
You know, I said that to a 18 year old P plater once and he looked at me and said "oooh, how much will that cost to fix?"

If your mechanic has tuned & timed the car to suit 98 then you should give everyone his number! There are only a few mechanics that switched on enough to do/reccomend that these days!

Cheers,
Cameron

Brian Crump

QuoteIf your mechanic has tuned & timed the car to suit 98 then you should give everyone his number! There are only a few mechanics that switched on enough to do/reccomend that these days!
He is.
Regards,
BC

bahnstormer109

when i first started driving i had a 72 280CE with d(irty)-jet injection. the first winter i had it the car lost all power and when the motor and the weather was cold the car would not move over about 20mph. wasnt really rough running or missing, just had NO power. i had my foot to the floor and it simply wouldnt go over 20mph.

i was using the old lead replacement petrol that was discontinued soon after this. i didnt know much about cars or fuels at the time. i took it to mercedes and they looked at it and told me it had a serious carbon build up in the motor. i asked my mechanic what i should do about it, he said 1- take off the head and blast it to clean it, or 2- run it on 98 octane shell optimax or BP ultimate.

i got a bottle of "moreys" fuel additive which is a lead substitute, but also a carby/ injector cleaner, upper cylinder lubricant etc etc. i filled her up with 98 shell optimax with a double dose of this additive and took it for a burn and the thing just bloody flew! never had a problem since.

hence no other fuel has ever been in any of my cars ever since. i keep a bottle of moreys in the boot of each car, i also use the diesel version in the 300TD its an injector cleaner/ smoke kill/ biocide.

i think the low octane fuels are for new holdens, fords, toyotas, etc etc that are tuned for it and have lean, clean injection systems. old benzes need a good high octane fuel that also keeps their insides clean as their motors need a bit of a hand in that dept. especially the d-jets. i always find my d-jet cars blow a lot of black sooty crap on the ground when theyre cold, whereas the k-jets dont.

and nathan, how does one grenade an M110 anyway??? there cant be too many cases of this!!
Paolo,
Brisbane, Australia.

72 300SEL 3.5
84 280CE
86 560SEL
86 230TE