German officials have de-boondoggled on the E85 front, withdrawing plans mandating a 10 percent bio-fuel content for the lowest grade unleaded fuel. For some reason, the government didn't check the stats (or did?) before establishing a threshold for making the switch. If one million cars couldn't run on the plant juice blend, they'd hold off on E10. Deutsche Welle reports the numbers: "The [auto industry] sources said that some 330,000 cars made by German manufacturers, as well as more than 2 million imported cars, could not run on the new fuel and that the cars' owners would be forced to fill up with higher octane, more expensive types of gas." The German association for technical inspection (GTÜ) reports [via The Local] that the country's cars may have enough problems without worrying about running on bio-fuels. "A 2007 GTÜ study found that 8 million vehicles were found to have significant problems during general inspections. 'The finding is even more alarming when you consider that many of the vehicles had been repaired just before they were inspected,' said GTÜ chief Rainer de Biasi. His said the findings indicated that every sixth car in Germany poses an accident risk." Sobering stuff. Of course, one wonders about Germany's standards relative to, I dunno, New Jersey.
Find Reviews by Make:
Read all comments
And these units are out top-ending on the Autobahn?
I have never heard of any place in USA where governmentally required and regulated car inspection was meaningful, i.e. where much is covered. Many places have no annual inspections.
Shop in NH- “if you can get it here we can inspect it”
I think of US as somewhere in between “first world” and “third world” in terms of government competence and societal expectations.
My brother lived in Germany for a couple years, and purchased a car. From his experience, the inspections are very thorough. He failed because his parking brake force wasn’t sufficient, although it was enough to keep the car from rolling when parked.
Actually, New Jersey’s vehicle standards are among the highest in the U.S.–exactly the opposite of Maryland, which has no safety inspections once a car passes a single inspection when it is put into service by a new owner.
There are emissions inspections in areas near Baltimore and Washington.
Come on down to the South. We don’t need no steenking inspections!
You’re nuts to run this stuff in your car. Does anyone remember the BMW M60 engine that utilized a Nikasil bore lining? It took a few years, but these engines eventually failed due to the gasoline chemistry in North America. It was a major problem, that BMW quietly resolved by replacing all the engines, no questions asked. Now BMW is having fuel pump failures on the new E92 335 twin turbo coupe. Again, this is being blamed on the gasoline in North America. Can you imagine the mechanical surprises that are to come with E10 and other blends?
There are no inspections other than a smog test in California, although the cops can certainly write you a fix-it ticket (or even impound the vehicle) if it’s blatantly obvious you are driving a death trap.
Isn’t the “fuel may contain up to 10% ethanol” that it seems most stations have in the US the exact same thing as E10?
My understanding was that engines were fine running E10. Anything more than 10% and not so much.
Do I have this wrong?
My Volvo 850-T5 developed multiple fuel leaks and smelled like a distillery after our Colorado gas stations began using mandated E10 formulations. Plus the attendant drop in fuel mileage.
So they ram E-10 down our throats at a higher price. Did anyone ask if our cars, especially the older ones, would tolerate it? Hell no.
Every gas station near me sells E10. I have no choice. So far so good, and my old Audi made it to 210K running mostly on E10.
I didn’t think German cars were that bad!
I know my new ’62 Volkswagen was junk at about 60K miles 4 years later, but I thought things had improved. Here in Iowa we have been running on E10 for more than 20 years with few problems.
My ’85 Dodge Aries went to 220K on it. My Datsun 720 pickup did over 200k on E10. I disassembled both engines when I junked them out and they were like new inside as far as I could tell. I change oil every 3 thousand miles.
There is nothing wrong with E10, but there might be something wrong with those who are bad mouthing it. Like they’re not telling the truth.
@johnny canada
I don’t get it. No other company has issues with premature fuel pump failure with NA gasoline. Yet, BMW does and it’s the fault of the fuel? How in the world does that make sense? It’s not like the OEMS and suppliers don’t know what the gasoline is like over here, so if their parts fail prematurely it’s their own fault for not building robust components. Besides, if I’m not mistaken, the ability to run on E10 is federally mandated whether or not the gasoline is blended that way or not.
If I’ve missed something, please correct me.
@rm
so if their parts fail prematurely it’s their own fault for not building robust components. Exactly. But nevertheless, BMW is blaming component failure on gasoline quality. All the more disappointing considering that a Soviet era Lada could run forever on boiled yak fat.
Further reinforcing my perception that ‘German Engineering’ isn’t all it’s cracked up to be. Great for marketing, but just as crummy as ‘American Engineering.’
@rm
What you’re missing is that this is only an issue for direct injected engines running high pressure pumps. Obviously BMW should have taken the different fuel into account, but there are only a handful of direct injected engines on the US market, so it’s not as simple as saying “the other guys don’t have that problem”.