California Gas Rant!

[jumpjet]

I just completed my first long 1500 mile trip through several states on my FJ-09 and all went well other than a stiff neck but I pushed 800 miles in one 16 hr day.   After going over the numbers with my fill-ups, I can't help but determine that the expensive California gas that we have here must really suck!  The highest mpg that I've gotten since owning my FJ has been around 47 mpg and that was cruising around 60 mph on the back roads.  I get out of state and filled up a couple times in Utah and got 55 mpg.  The lowest being 52 mpg doing 70-75 mph on the interstate.  Same with Arizona.  Keep in mind that I'm loaded up my my side and top cases.  I'm enjoying the 50s for the first time until I get back into California and I drop back down to 42 mpg on the same interstate doing the same speed using the same brand of gas.  I've come to the conclusion that the gas in other states is different than what's here in California.

[bigdaddybane]

Gas cost ? Here in Ontario, Canada we are paying right now $1.07US for a liter of premium (91 octane) ... that will be $4 per gallon.

[patrickjs5]

@jumpjet seems to be referring to the quality of the actual fuel. While California is more expensive than surrounding states, it was the MPG achieved that was the main point of contention.
 
I average ~45 MPG here in Cali when I stick to the freeway, averaging 75 MPH. Haven't ventured out of state yet.
 
Your experience is definitely interesting. We would need a larger sample size to come to any verifiable conclusions. Does anyone know of differences in state laws regarding fuel content? Usually California is the strictest/most tightly regulated, but maybe not this time.

[koth442]

CA adds ethanol to their fuel which doesn't burn as well. But it reduces that amount of fossil fuel used and provides subsidy for corn farmers.
 
https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-05/documents/050515mstrs_guthrie.pdf
 
According to that, 9.8-10.2% ethanol by volume.

[ULEWZ]

CA adds ethanol to their fuel which doesn't burn as well. But it reduces that amount of fossil fuel used and provides subsidy for corn farmers. 
https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-05/documents/050515mstrs_guthrie.pdf
 
According to that, 9.8-10.2% ethanol by volume.

That is what is ironic, lower emissions from the ethanol gas, but you need more gas for the same BTUs, so more gas!! I hate when this blend comes back every season.
 

[xlxr]

From what I have heard, CA gas has it's own formula to reduce smog, ethanol is part of the formula. I live in South CA and have had recent problems with FI cars and bike. Apparently, the ethanol tends to settle out of the blend if it sits too long, and then soaks up condensation moisture from the under ground tanks.

[koth442]

From what I have heard, CA gas has it's own formula to reduce smog, ethanol is part of the formula. I live in South CA and have had recent problems with FI cars and bike. Apparently, the ethanol tends to settle out of the blend if it sits too long, and then soaks up condensation moisture from the under ground tanks.

 
100% true.  CA gas is yet another reason I left CA.

[adjuster]

Few things to consider:
 
1) Water is not fuel.
2) Alcohol and water mixes really well, while oil and water typically do not.
3) The CA EcoFreaks have demanded a fuel blend that barely meets the 91 octane rating. To get there they have to blend in more methanol/alcohol, and that further dilutes the fuel's energy content.
 
And that's really all there is to look at.
How much energy the fuel has in it by design. Pure gasoline has about 15 to 20% more energy than a blend of 90/10 gasoline to methanol. E95 has even less energy, and your fuel economy drops even more, but you do have higher octane, so you can run higher compression or boost it with a turbo and get more power, at the cost of fuel economy of course.
 
An excellent example of this fuel/energy debate is diesel fuel. It compared to gasoline has about another 25% MORE energy per gallon. So, this is one of the reasons that diesels get better fuel economy, they have more energy per unit of fuel.
 
There are all sorts of other factors, how the fuel is burned, how rich or lean you can run with various fuels and all kinds of debate can be had over what's best ultimately for the planet etc.
 
But CA has decided that it's consumers get weak, pathetic fuel, and because it's actually more expensive to create, they get to pay more for that sub-standard fuel.
 
If you don't like it in CA, don't vote EcoFreak.
 
BTW, if you really wanted to clean up the smog, there is a simple and cost effective coating that could be applied to every radiator in CA or Country wide for that matter, that turns every hot radiator into a smog scrubbing cat. As you drive around, the air passes around the radiator fins and tubes, and the coating changes the chemicals in smog into benign ones that are no longer harmful.
 
But that would be too easy, and nobody could bribe political hacks with simple fixes...

[BakerBoy]

From what I can tell, over a dozen states have the same fuel requirements as California: 10% ethanol by volume. But many places/states use the same blend that is available--when I travel around the US, most pumps are labeled 'up to 10% ethanol' (but of course, that doesn't prove that's what's in the tank).
https://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/gasoline/faq.htm
https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=27&t=10
 
But back to the OP's point ... I don't believe there's any more issue with CA fuel than other states such as CO, which requires 10% ethanol over winter months (FYI, out of convenience, most fuel stations just use the same 10% ethanol blend year round here). What I've found is that if you can/do fill up on a state that doesn't have ethanol blend, and then fill up with 10% ethanol blend, yes the fuel mileage drops ... by about 10%. Stupid politics!
 
I also find the lower the elevation one rides, the lower the fuel economy. I get low 50's in Colorado, and low 40's near sea level (with 10% ethanol blend) on my bikes.
 
To adjuster: what is the 'simple and cost effective coating that could be applied to every radiator..."?
 

[keithu]

+1 on elevation. That's probably the biggest factor.
 

[adjuster]

This is a good article on it.
 
There have been a few designs on this.
 
The metal coatings, similar to what they use in your exhaust cat, is expensive, as they coat with Palladium and Platinum.
 
The spray on coatings have been designed to go after multiple conversions for the stated price of 50.00, but Volvo only went with going after Ozone for much less.
 
Mass production would drive the price of the 50.00 coating down to a simple fraction of that amount if it was "required" by the EPA or DOT in the USA. And it would clean up our air in cities as that's where most of the traffic is.
 
There is a problem however.
The EcoFreaks can't get behind the technology as they can't call for reduced driving. The more you drive, the more air you clean. The hotter your radiator, the better the performance, and that requires you to burn "fossil fuels" that are so evil right?
 
Pure EV's don't have pollution.. Until you consider they are charged off power produced by oil/gas/coal... whoops. And it takes WAY more energy to make an EV v/s a standard vehicle. (One of the reasons they cost more, or are subsidized by our taxes to sell/make them.)
 
So, this coating on our bikes, cars and everything hot out there in the breeze including your exhaust pipe outsides... Would reduce air pollution. And it's cheap.
 
http://europe.autonews.com/article/19980622/ANE/806220837/volvo-installs-smog-eating-radiator

[cranky]

More good news
 
 
http://www.kpbs.org/news/2017/apr/28/california-gas-prices-rise-under-bill-signed-gover/?utm_medium=social-media&utm_campaign=kpbsnews-twitter&utm_source=t.co

[Cruizin]

The only problem with "some" Californians is they vote liberal. 
They ran away from the liberals there that destroyed their former homes, but then come here to Idaho and vote the same way... Stupid is as stupid does I suppose.
 
I am NATIVE CA born, and moved to Idaho in the mid 80's. Loved it here, and never moved back to CA when I was done with College. Too many foolish people and foolish laws trying to create the ultimate nanny state.
 
Need to get more of the relocated CA folks to vote conservative, it's why Idaho is so much nicer than CA. And all the good intentions in the world just destroyed CA.
 
Socialism is great till you run out of other folks money to spend.

...that's a whole lot of 'passion' there... I think you might be ready for a premium membership... and maybe a t-shirt?

 
My fault, I left the door open

[alejandro]

Yawn.