mx5cartalk.com

I know the NC needs 95 RON or better, but the problem is: I live in the country and my local servo, only sells regular unleaded or E10 (91 RON) and E85 (100 RON).

So, the question is: can the NC take E85?

I'm very wary of ethanol, ever since I went through 2 sets of valves in my NA 'cos I was using E10. Nobody told me that E10 is death to NAs. You would've thought the bloke who replaced the first set would've mentioned it.

I can only get Shell's V-Max, Caltex's Vortex 98 and BP's Ultimate when I drive to the city, but I guess these should be my preferred fuels?

Thanks folks.

The FCAI website suggests the answer is no.
http://www.fcai.com.au/environment/can- ... trol-#FCAI
Best to give Mazda a call and ask.

Well, that's a drag. Might have to keep a jerry can of Premium at home in case I haven't got enough to get into town.

Does anyone have a preference for V-Max, Vortex 98 or Ultimate? Or are they all the same.

One of the reasons I like diesel is that you don't have to think about difference types - any diesel's fine as long as it isn't petrol!

I've used all the 98RON petrols including United, BP and Caltex. I use shell vmax the most simply because it's closest to me.
I think any difference between them is your imagination.

All very similar. I have found bp the most consistent/economical, shell seems to fluctuate. Some days it feels awesome, other days it feels not as good. I realise the strict qa procedures they'd have but that's my observations over 5 years.

I assume it's United, They only sell 95 Octane E10 don't they? http://www.unitedpetroleum.com.au/unite ... leaded-e10

That's fine for your NC.

Not out of the box they arent, but like any efi car they only need a tune.

Fluges wrote:So, the question is: can the NC take E85?

The NC would need a re-tune to run safely on E85.

Fluges wrote:Does anyone have a preference for V-Max, Vortex 98 or Ultimate? Or are they all the same

I've never noticed any difference whatsoever between those in performance or economy nor when compared with 95 RON.
However, I only ever use those when I can't get 95 RON. I normally use Vortex 95 as it is the closest to me or I can use our Woolies rewards card.
I have used United 95 RON E10 when that was all that was available. No detectable difference in power but a slight reduction in economy.

Abit of topic but not all diesels are the same either it's just we haven't yet got to the point in aus of having a premium and basic diesel.

Modern diesels engine are requiring lower and lower impurities particularly sulphur.

You will find some if the big brands market their diesel as "premium diesel" but I'm not sure if it's actually different to mainstream yet or if all diesel is getting better and becoming "premium" by some standard.

Fluges wrote:I know the NC needs 95 RON or better, but the problem is: I live in the country and my local servo, only sells regular unleaded or E10 (91 RON) and E85 (100 RON).

So, the question is: can the NC take E85?

I'm very wary of ethanol, ever since I went through 2 sets of valves in my NA 'cos I was using E10. Nobody told me that E10 is death to NAs. You would've thought the bloke who replaced the first set would've mentioned it.

I can only get Shell's V-Max, Caltex's Vortex 98 and BP's Ultimate when I drive to the city, but I guess these should be my preferred fuels?

Thanks folks.

alot of your info in incorrect. E10 is 95 ron, and E85 is 105 ron.

Never heard of ethanol hurting valves. Fuel systems yes, due to the cleaning effect that ethanol has, but not moving parts. Sure the valves weren't burnt due to incorrect fuelling issues? Not the actual E10 itself?

A NC shouldn't have any issues with E10. It's isn't an old car, so the fuel system should be full of crap like a 20yo car. And it you actually drive enough to need a tank fill once every 3-4 weeks. I fail to see any problems with an NC+E10.

project.r.racing wrote:I fail to see any problems with an NC+E10.

Because Mazda insist that it must be minimum 95 RON (it's also clearly marked on the fuel lid) and most E10 suppliers only guarantee their stuff to be at least 91 RON.

I've never tried E10 in my NC. Most of the E10 around here says 94 RON on the bowser and I'm not game enough to test the 95 RON minimum requirement.

JBT wrote:

project.r.racing wrote:I fail to see any problems with an NC+E10.

Because Mazda insist that it must be minimum 95 RON (it's also clearly marked on the fuel lid) and most E10 suppliers only guarantee their stuff to be at least 91 RON.

That is a good point and didn't think of that.

E10 is a maximum blend of 10% ethanol. At 10%, it will be 95 ron. At 0% it is just regular 91 ron. So E10 could potentially be anywhere in between. Which is why they will only guarantee the minimum ron.

Don't even think about using ethanol blends if the car maker does not recommend for your car- its easy to look up on their web sites.. Also don't use it anyway . Ethanol even the E10 blends do not offer better economy- cheaper at the pump but less l/100KM . If you want proof there are a number of articles on this. A few years ago Drive did an extensive comparo and I think even RACV did some evaluations. I don't see any case for ethanol including diverting a food into fuel- there are many links to this as well.

Run your NC only on 95 or if you want to spend more money 98 is safe.

I have told this story before . Ethanol can and does damage engines fuel lines etc . One of the problems is that the blenders cannot guarantee that its only 10% i.e. poor control- i.e. it may be minimum not maximum. This was conveyed to me by a guy who had been in the petrol business , had an engine damaged after using ethanol ( almost immediate). After some fast legal action ( free from his contacts) and an initial rejection by the Petrol co, they paid up. I might add that this guy with his contacts able to get an analysis of the fuel- he simple had the proof and the contacts to assist him and he was pissed off but had the backup . Feel free to take it as hearsay but I am always a sceptic and the story he gave me was believable.

I was already avoiding E blends and that merely sealed it for me- never use it. A damaged engine which could cost thousands of dollars and chances of getting compensation from the petrol co you can accept as just about zero. Your engine develops a problem- what chance of proving it was ethanol fuel?

If the poster has to drive further to get the right fuel thats a bugger but not worth the risk in my view.

It damaged the engine? Can you be more specific with what the damage was? Just for my own curiousity.