.2PDK

Shell 91 is the only ethanol free blend in Ontario that I am aware of.

koala

Yep, it's the only ethanol-free gas in all of Canada.

I use Petro 94 as it does show the car making more power on dyno charts versus 91.

erko1905

Not close to VIR by any chance is it?

ipse dixit

He's in Neckcar country.

Peadsw

Here in Sweden we have 98 at almost every gasstation

evilfij

.2PDK

If my memory serves me I believe that's about 93 US equivalent.

Any ethanol content?

LexVan

I used to go to great lengths to buy non ethanol fuels. I'd be embarrassed, to tell you the complete truth.

I don't lament about it so much, as I've mellowed with age and ownership. I have now simplified my life and just live by the following more simplified rules:

1) Octane rules...I'd rather have 93 over 91....regardless of ethanol content....and +95% of the time I can access 93 where I drive
2) Buy from a busy station
3) Buy from a national brand (Shell, Mobil, BP)
4) If I'm stuck with 91 octane....I'll try to find the non-ethanol version....and I can find it....in a few remotes areas in northern Wisconsin....where I log a lot of miles

Stanley Park

When I took delivery of my car earlier this year in Vancouver, the dealer said to me, "The tank is full of 94 octane, ethanol-free, Chevron fuel."

jnolan

Octane rating is a measure of fuel stability under compression. The debate about ethanol blends is unrelated to octane, although ethanol is used to increase octane ratings. Straight ethanol has an octane rating of 113. The big issue, IMO, with ethanol blended gasoline (aside from using food stock for fuel, the corn lobby, and a few other policy topics) is that ethanol has less energy than gasoline. Cars get lower mileage with ethanol blends. Herein lies the irony, ethanol can produce a lot of power because it needs 14:1 engine compression and 9:1 fuel-air mixture along with ignition timing advanced aggressively but to get there you need to push a lot of ethanol through the injectors (ethanol injectors are huge compared to gas engines). Big power from small displacement is possible, and it’s clean, but fuel economy suffers and that runs afoul of government regulations. Flex fuel vehicles see a 30% drop on mileage when they are running E85.

The hygroscopic property of ethanol used to bother me but on newer cars with upgraded materials for everything from tubing to rotating components, I’m less concerned about this.

koala

Sorry, I should have clarified my statement - Shell 91 is the only "nationally available" fuel without ethanol. Yes, Chevron 94 is ethanol free.

chuck911

R_Rated, I will see your Hulkian Recursion and raise you a Hasselhoffian Recursion!
(Viewer discretion advised!)
https://www.blight.com/~chaf/photo/i...hasselhoff&p=0

R_Rated

I hear germans love him!

saa106

All my cars, and the Denali, 6.2L, require 93 (Texas Baby), O well got to pay to play.

GregD

Re: ethanol, like others I read all the tales of dread (water in the fuel) and car fires on old cars (attacks fuel lines)...
I gotta say on modern cars it has made zero difference. I own 3 old cars (5 at some point), and it has also made precisely zero difference at 10% concentration.
The only place ethanol fuel messes with me is my generator or gas powered tools, things that don't get used often and where the fuel sits... Not the cars... I use Marine Stabil on the oldies that don't get driven once a month... That said I still think subsidizing corn to make gas is stupid.

Re: octane, the higher number is resistance to detonation, i.e premature detonation (anything premature is bad ;-)
The 991.1 if I recall has fairly high compression, 12:1 or something ? on a warm day the knock sensor might reduce power to prevent pinging with low octane. On my old 911 with low compression of 8.6:1, 87 actually feels better, it detonates easier ;-) I've only got access to 91 with ethanol, it's fine... If I had access to 93 I'd use that...