e10 fuel in a 1999 406 3 ltre coupe - Page 2
  • Register
  • Help
Page 2 of 3 First 123 Last
Results 26 to 50 of 62
Like Tree18Likes

Thread: e10 fuel in a 1999 406 3 ltre coupe

  1. #26
    Fellow Frogger!
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Nagambie
    Posts
    793

    Default

    Alloy cylinder heads have hard seats which cope with ‘dry’ LPG perfectly well.
    Race engine development guys make money confirming your worst fears of doom and destruction.
    RTFM !


    Sent from my iPad using aussiefrogs

    Advertisement
    87205gti likes this.

  2. #27
    Fellow Frogger! luthier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Northern NSW
    Posts
    958

    Default

    Whatever Dude, I don't really care now as I never use anything but 98 in my Ducati and Moto Guzzi and I use Diesel in my two HDI 406's and I use 91 in my Holden Frontera cause I don't care about it.
    The engine it happened in was a 504TI which was definitely more of a 98 engine.
    The link I gave was to a very respectable engine reco place that also does race stuff because they are good enough to do it.
    They told me how all the little mum and dad bubble cars were coming in with stuffed valves and seats from E10. These are the very cars that are sposed to be able to deal with that stuff.
    If you feel you know better than them, that's cool.
    It comes down to whether you believe in vaccinations , homeopathic medicine, the power of Cannabis for healing and curing cancer and many things. Sometimes it's a matter of faith and sometimes it happens to you so you believe or not. You might believe in Western medicine and it might let you down.
    You might drive round on Ethanol and have no problems or you might end up with an expensive head job or you might be an expensive head job. Dilligaf?

  3. #28
    Demannu-facturing! Demannu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    2,414

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 87205gti View Post
    your not supposed to run 91 in a 3 ltre v6, 406 coupe
    it says min 95 ???

    Bazz
    It's got a knock sensor, it will be fine. Even on mine with the compression bumped up, it never pings.

    Generally speaking, the calorific value of 91 octane fuel is higher than 95/98/E10, so you get more bang for your buck. Plus it's cheaper than premium.

    I have nothing against E10, at all, I have done thousands and thousands of KM with it in my coupe, but like I said, if needs to be >10% cheaper than 91 for me to use it.
    87205gti likes this.
    Scotty

    Melbourne - Dandenong Ranges

    1956 Peugeot 403 - 'Francois' - resto project

    1969 Peugeot 504 - 'Pascal' - daily driver project

    1970 Peugeot 404 Utility - 'Brutus' - resto project

    1978 Peugeot 604 - as yet unnamed - V6 on straight LPG

    1999 Peugeot 406 Coupé - 'Chloe' - 5 speed manual

    2011 Peugeot 3008 XTE HDi - 'Zoe' - hatchback on steroids

    2014 Peugeot RCZ - 'Remy'

    1999 Range Rover 4.6 HSE - 'Grover' - tow car

  4. #29
    Fellow Frogger!
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Nagambie
    Posts
    793

    Default

    Whatever dude ?.


    Sent from my iPad using aussiefrogs

  5. #30
    Fellow Frogger!
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Nagambie
    Posts
    793

  6. #31
    Tadpole
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    Orelia, WA
    Posts
    19

    Default

    Apparently the federal rules state that e10 can have a maximum of 10% ethanol, so it could be less.
    Personally, I follow the manufacturer's advice.
    My brother bought a hyundai terracan td and was told that if he runs biodiesel in it he would void his warranty. A long time ago I did some research into bioD and I can't see any reason for it, but when he asked me I said he should do as he was told by the dealer. Safest option.
    As I said previously, I can't see why ethanol would be a problem, but there is most likely a reason for a list of accpetable cars.
    By the way, out of interest (because as far as I can see e10 is not available where I am) I had a look around and they put all sorts of additives into ethanol to stop it chemically eating things........
    That would lend weight to the reports from shops about lots of problems. But it may also point to there being a problem in the past that they have or are trying to address.
    None of that really helps much because it might HAVE BEEN a problem in the past or it MIGHT STILL be a problem.
    And I am still a backyard playaround bloke with 20 -30 cars experience, and I know my input is not worth much.
    If in doubt, don't run it......
    hypermiler likes this.

  7. #32
    Fellow Frogger!
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Nagambie
    Posts
    793

    Default

    For the last 20 years all local sold cars have been ‘engineered’ for E10 and therefore covered under warranty.
    ALL the relevant questions have been answered in the Metro link above.
    I’m lucky to be able to source E10/95 fm United when we go to Bendigo for a massive discount to PULP fm woollies and economy is unchanged too.


    Sent from my iPad using aussiefrogs

  8. #33
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Box Hill nth
    Posts
    97

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by luthier View Post
    I have no doubt after talking to these guys.
    I had complete collapse of my valve seats using E10 and if you ring and ask these guys about it they will happily tell you about all the low mileage head jobs that happen from people using these fuels.

    Pryce Race Engines


    As I said earlier just ask any shop that deals with this every day, don't take the word of a shade tree mechanic who might only do a hundred or two in his life, listen to the blokes with the experience, or not. WTF would I care.
    chill out man,lol
    did someone step on your toes ?

  9. #34
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Box Hill nth
    Posts
    97

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Demannu View Post
    It's got a knock sensor, it will be fine. Even on mine with the compression bumped up, it never pings.

    Generally speaking, the calorific value of 91 octane fuel is higher than 95/98/E10, so you get more bang for your buck. Plus it's cheaper than premium.

    I have nothing against E10, at all, I have done thousands and thousands of KM with it in my coupe, but like I said, if needs to be >10% cheaper than 91 for me to use it.

    thanks mate,just what i needed,someone with the same model and year as my car with real evidence cheers
    what is calorific value in layman's terms please ,I'm ignorant of its meaning
    ta
    Bazz

  10. #35
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Box Hill nth
    Posts
    97

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nagaman View Post
    For the last 20 years all local sold cars have been ‘engineered’ for E10 and therefore covered under warranty.
    ALL the relevant questions have been answered in the Metro link above.
    I’m lucky to be able to source E10/95 fm United when we go to Bendigo for a massive discount to PULP fm woollies and economy is unchanged too.


    Sent from my iPad using aussiefrogs
    yes but the question is about my 1999 model 406 ,so it is just under 20 years old.

  11. #36
    Fellow Frogger!
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    261

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 87205gti View Post
    what is calorific value in layman's terms please
    Its a comparison of how much energy is in the fuel. You buy fuel per litre, but different fuels have different amounts of energy per litre. There is a 10% difference in energy per litre between diesel and petrol but very little information about the energy difference in the petrol "types":
    https://www.techarp.com/automotive/o...myth-debunked/
    Ethanol has a much lower energy content per litre, but some cars are tuned to run more efficiently on E10 so different people see different results.
    406 HDi

  12. #37
    Fellow Frogger!
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Nagambie
    Posts
    793

    Default e10 fuel in a 1999 406 3 ltre coupe

    Quote Originally Posted by hypermiler View Post
    Its a comparison of how much energy is in the fuel. You buy fuel per litre, but different fuels have different amounts of energy per litre. There is a 10% difference in energy per litre between diesel and petrol but very little information about the energy difference in the petrol "types":
    https://www.techarp.com/automotive/o...myth-debunked/
    Ethanol has a much lower energy content per litre, but some cars are tuned to run more efficiently on E10 so different people see different results.
    Supposedly ‘supermarket’ fuel was considered cheap n nasty too, but then it was branded Vortex and that argument disappeared it seems.
    It seems the old Brand Power mentality still stands, code for “let price be your guide”. Value never gets a mention though.


    Sent from my iPad using aussiefrogs
    hypermiler likes this.

  13. #38
    1000+ Posts driven's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    1,154

    Default

    Appear to have mixed calorific value with octane rating 91, E10, 98.

    They are very different and and can have severe consequences on using the cheapest fuel.
    Like the Ducati owner spend thousands on a bike/car and save $2.50 for what end on a tank full of crappy fuel

    https://www.carsguide.com.au/car-adv...son-test-66858


    https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/f...ues-d_169.html

    https://www.allianz.com.au/car-insur...g-and-your-car

  14. #39
    Fellow Frogger!
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Nagambie
    Posts
    793

    Default

    Post 7/97 all Peugeots are approved to use E10 fuel .....EXCEPT 306 (XU engine) according to the Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries.


    Sent from my iPad using aussiefrogs

  15. #40
    1000+ Posts
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Armidale
    Posts
    1,864

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Demannu View Post
    It's got a knock sensor, it will be fine. Even on mine with the compression bumped up, it never pings.

    Generally speaking, the calorific value of 91 octane fuel is higher than 95/98/E10, so you get more bang for your buck. Plus it's cheaper than premium.

    I have nothing against E10, at all, I have done thousands and thousands of KM with it in my coupe, but like I said, if needs to be >10% cheaper than 91 for me to use it.
    Thanks for this - although I've used E10 (because it was supposedly almost 95 octane) I've never used ULP (91 octane) in an engine where 95 was specified. Just put half a tank of ULP in the 406 SV to try it out, and it's fine - no pinging! There was some 95 left in the tank, so mixture must be a bit above 91, but not by much. Look forward to testing consumption.

    May not work with all engines though - my Xantia Turbo (XU10J2TE) used to ping sometimes on 95.

    Cheers

    Alec

  16. #41
    Demannu-facturing! Demannu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    2,414
    Scotty

    Melbourne - Dandenong Ranges

    1956 Peugeot 403 - 'Francois' - resto project

    1969 Peugeot 504 - 'Pascal' - daily driver project

    1970 Peugeot 404 Utility - 'Brutus' - resto project

    1978 Peugeot 604 - as yet unnamed - V6 on straight LPG

    1999 Peugeot 406 Coupé - 'Chloe' - 5 speed manual

    2011 Peugeot 3008 XTE HDi - 'Zoe' - hatchback on steroids

    2014 Peugeot RCZ - 'Remy'

    1999 Range Rover 4.6 HSE - 'Grover' - tow car

  17. #42
    Fellow Frogger!
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Nagambie
    Posts
    793

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Demannu View Post
    A mishmash article leaving much confusion.
    For anti knock protection a savings of 20-30+c/L seems to have eluded her.


    Sent from my iPad using aussiefrogs

  18. #43
    Demannu-facturing! Demannu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    2,414

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nagaman View Post
    A mishmash article leaving much confusion.
    For anti knock protection a savings of 20-30+c/L seems to have eluded her.


    Sent from my iPad using aussiefrogs
    I don't really understand why you seem to have a bee in your bonnet about this, but I think perhaps E10 may cheaper where you are than where I am. Around these parts, E10 is only about 2-4cpl less than 91 unleaded.

    If it were 20-30cpl less, I'd be all over it!
    hypermiler likes this.
    Scotty

    Melbourne - Dandenong Ranges

    1956 Peugeot 403 - 'Francois' - resto project

    1969 Peugeot 504 - 'Pascal' - daily driver project

    1970 Peugeot 404 Utility - 'Brutus' - resto project

    1978 Peugeot 604 - as yet unnamed - V6 on straight LPG

    1999 Peugeot 406 Coupé - 'Chloe' - 5 speed manual

    2011 Peugeot 3008 XTE HDi - 'Zoe' - hatchback on steroids

    2014 Peugeot RCZ - 'Remy'

    1999 Range Rover 4.6 HSE - 'Grover' - tow car

  19. #44
    Fellow Frogger!
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Nagambie
    Posts
    793

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Demannu View Post
    I don't really understand why you seem to have a bee in your bonnet about this, but I think perhaps E10 may cheaper where you are than where I am. Around these parts, E10 is only about 2-4cpl less than 91 unleaded.

    If it were 20-30cpl less, I'd be all over it!
    You answered your own question.
    As a 95 substitute it DOES save me 29c/L.
    There does seem to be an obsession with denigrating book approved E10/94/95.


    Sent from my iPad using aussiefrogs
    dalderton likes this.

  20. #45
    Demannu-facturing! Demannu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    2,414

    Default

    Ah, see, there's the other point. Around here, most of the E10 suppliers are selling 91 octane E10. 94/95 octane E10 suppliers around here are few and far between.

    I think in NSW the higher octane E10 is more common.

    Regardless, my car runs fine on 91, with no noticeable performance or consumption difference to 95, so avoiding E10 on performance grounds is of no concern to me. My decision to avoid it is purely economical!
    Scotty

    Melbourne - Dandenong Ranges

    1956 Peugeot 403 - 'Francois' - resto project

    1969 Peugeot 504 - 'Pascal' - daily driver project

    1970 Peugeot 404 Utility - 'Brutus' - resto project

    1978 Peugeot 604 - as yet unnamed - V6 on straight LPG

    1999 Peugeot 406 Coupé - 'Chloe' - 5 speed manual

    2011 Peugeot 3008 XTE HDi - 'Zoe' - hatchback on steroids

    2014 Peugeot RCZ - 'Remy'

    1999 Range Rover 4.6 HSE - 'Grover' - tow car

  21. #46
    Fellow Frogger!
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Nagambie
    Posts
    793

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Demannu View Post
    Ah, see, there's the other point. Around here, most of the E10 suppliers are selling 91 octane E10. 94/95 octane E10 suppliers around here are few and far between.

    I think in NSW the higher octane E10 is more common.

    Regardless, my car runs fine on 91, with no noticeable performance or consumption difference to 95, so avoiding E10 on performance grounds is of no concern to me. My decision to avoid it is purely economical!
    Hahaha......mine’s to exploit it and a diesel would give me barely any better in net benefit.
    What I’d like to know is - what is the actual sulphur content of E10 compared to 95 PULP or ULP.......same/higher/lower ?


    Sent from my iPad using aussiefrogs

  22. #47
    1000+ Posts alan moore's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Ipswich, Queensland.
    Posts
    1,802

    Default

    I will give my experience with 95 octane E10 which is reasonably common in Brisbane. I have been using it for many years in a number of normal fuel injected cars. My '05 BA 6 cylinder Falcon did 190K before I sold it, 150 K being mine on 95 E10.

    My '08 2L Megane has done 85K, 45K in my ownership, all on 95 E10. My much modified '73 BMW 2002 with electronic injection was running on a 100 octane 5-10% ethanol blend for about 6 years until the fuel was not produced. This car probably only did 3K on this fuel, 2K of which was on the track whilst using approx 40L/100Klm. It is not very efficient.

    None of these vehicles have showed any failure of fuel system/ valves, compression or using oil, although the BMW does now have some blowby when being tracked now, probably just caused by wear, or possibly because the professional engine builder (I bought the engine cheaply from a friend) over bored it 140 thou. The BMW sometimes sat for 3 months without being started, but started easily each time after its hibernation.
    dalderton likes this.
    '56 Renault 750 (16TS Power)
    '62 Renault Dauphine Gordini
    '89 Renault Alpine GTA V6 Turbo
    '08 Renault Megane sedan

  23. #48
    sans witticism SLC206's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    North Parramatta
    Posts
    3,896

    Default

    I wouldn't have said E10 claiming to be 95 is common in NSW.

    It's virtually non-existent in Sydney, with most servos selling it as E10 91 (and not selling real 91 at all). Perhaps they can start marketing it as E10 almost 95?

    As an example, my local sells:
    E10: 137.9
    91: 139.9 - 2c
    95: 155.9 - 18c
    98: 164.9 - 27c

    Rarely would it ever be in the savings range that Nagaman often quotes, but clearly most Sydney servos are taking advantage of the lack of 91 and the reluctance to use E10 to upsell 95 and 98.

    I'm still not going to use E10
    driven likes this.
    Regards,

    Simon

    2018 308 GTi 2011 DS3 DSport
    ----
    2014 208 GTi 2007 207 GTi 2004 206 GTi180 2000 206 GTi 1995 306 XT

    www.peugeotclub.asn.au

  24. #49
    Fellow Frogger!
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    Nagambie
    Posts
    793

    Default

    I would have thought that as Sydney doesn’t have a refinery and , I assume, it’s all from Singapore(?), there wouldn’t be a local blend.
    I would have thought 10% ethanol would force a higher anti knock rating.
    United in Vic brand theirs as 95RON and the only other E10 supply seems to be Metro, or 7/11.
    The C4P has stabilised at 5.2 but I have never accepted these displays as being completely accurate.......having said that, fill to fill seems to be v close to it.



    Sent from my iPad using aussiefrogs

  25. #50
    Fellow Frogger! luthier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Northern NSW
    Posts
    958

    Default

    Hey Nagaman,
    Have you got a barrow to push? Do you own an ethanol plant? I don't really care either way but you appear to be pushing the line a bit too hard dude.
    In simpler terms DILLIGAF.

Page 2 of 3 First 123 Last

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •