Winter storage question | Page 3 | GTAMotorcycle.com

Winter storage question

You're preaching to the choir here, I've been in the trucking industry for 23 years and counting, and at one point, even retrofitted my old diesel pickup with water injection.

That all having been said, water injection is not a thing in mainstream use in run of the mill diesels. It's actually virtually unheard of outside competition. It's actually been in more production cars with gasoline engines then ever used in diesels, for that matter.

What you forgot to say about diesel engines is that despite all their benefits, their initial purchase prices are many times higher. In the commercial industry where trucks are routinely run into the 1 to 1.5+ million kilometer range the benefits obviously outweigh the negatives, but for the typical grocery getting pickup truck market, if you do the math, the diesel will typically cost you *more* over the lifespan of ownership, taking initial purchase price and increased maintenance costs into consideration. Even for the "occasional hauler" market (IE, the <10,000KM/year RV tower) the advantages of a diesel are still not really there vs the cheaper purchase and operating cost of a gasser.
 
Last edited:
Um, we live in a really really huge country, travel relatively tremendous distances on some of the largest roads and road networks in existence, we also happen to be an oil producing nation not a stellar corn producing nation, that would be the USA.


I buy diesel trucks because the motors out last 2 truck bodies, diesel engines run exactly the same all the time, fuel conditioner is simple and inexpensive, diesel engines perform better because the fuel has a greater energy potential then gasoline and most other available fuels (did you know some diesel engines actually have water injectors, they can add water to the combustion process and turn it into energy, plus water dissolves carbon deposits)
You are overgeneralizing diesel. Gas industrial engines often run as long, sometimes longer - this discussion isn't about fuel, it's about engine and application matching.
 
I've been storing my bike with esso 91 (has around 10% ethanol) + fuel stabilizer for a few years. Haven't had any problems.

Can someone tell me if this is not a good way and why?
You never know how much ethanol is in Canadian gas. In the USA there are ethanol mandates to prop up the ethanol industry, so when a pump says 10% ethanol you know there is ethanol in the mix -- not so in Canada. In Canada, ethanol is added at the time fuel is dumped at the station (pumps say "up to up to 10%") it's only added when there is economic advantage to fuel suppliers -- meaning the cost of ethanol is lower than gasoline. When the retail price of regular is below $1.30/l, it's unlikely ethanol is added as it would decrease producer margins.

Unless you can test your gas, the only way to know is if the dealer states the grade is ethanol free.
 
Hmm but doesn't the fuel stabilizer prevent fuel from breaking down ? ....
That would imply petroleum distillate to be a fuel preservative,
no idea if it is or not here, we need a scientist to chime in on that one.

:I thought the topic was winter storage including fuel and the properties of fuel types or additives
and discussion of really cool trucks and size of your vehicles was the stray from topic part.
 
Last edited:
You are overgeneralizing diesel. Gas industrial engines often run as long, sometimes longer...
you mean like a gas turbine engine? yes, I should think a good turbine would surpass a reciprocating engines longevity.
 
This is a fools argument. Simple math proves it.


.


Math aside... Can you get two dishwashers into your Volt..?
'Not that anyone really needs to justify their choices, but...
We still have a little bit of freedom when it comes to our personal choices.
I "choose" the type of vehicle I drive because it suites my lifestyle. I simply could not take a Volt or any other small car to many of the places I go. That, and the amount of gear I haul into these places simply would not fit into a car.
The whole "need" angle is a red herring... If we followed that principle we'd all be living in huts eating one meal a day.
 
Math aside... Can you get two dishwashers into your Volt..?

Can you fit 10 refrigerators in the back of your pickup?

Silly argument.

I "choose" the type of vehicle I drive because it suites my lifestyle. I simply could not take a Volt or any other small car to many of the places I go. That, and the amount of gear I haul into these places simply would not fit into a car.

Then you have a justifiable reason for a pickup. I'm not suggesting that a small car is a valid option for people who have a real genuine use for a pickup truck - I realize contractors, repairmen that need to haul a lot of gear (etc etc etc) need the space and hauling ability of a truck. My point was that a lot of people do none of those things and still somehow think they need a truck when in reality the closest their truck has ever been to offroading is jumping a curb in a parking lot, and the closest thing to hauling it's ever done was a few coolers and a two-four headed to the cottage.

There's wants, and needs. If a pickup truck is a want for someone, that's fine...but don't try to try to convince others it's a need when it's just not reality.
 
You never know how much ethanol is in Canadian gas. In the USA there are ethanol mandates to prop up the ethanol industry, so when a pump says 10% ethanol you know there is ethanol in the mix -- not so in Canada. In Canada, ethanol is added at the time fuel is dumped at the station (pumps say "up to up to 10%") it's only added when there is economic advantage to fuel suppliers -- meaning the cost of ethanol is lower than gasoline

There's so much wrong with your facts I'm not sure where to start.

- The ethanol is not added at the station. Ethanol is not separate in any fashion in the tankers, it is mixed at the racks where the tankers load.

- You know that any fuel advertised as having ethanol is going to have at least 5%, with most being in the 7% to 8% range. Zero question.

- Ontario mandates by law an overall average of 5% ethanol per litre on an overall yearly average. This is the reason non-ethanol is getting harder to find, because every litre sold without that 5% means that percentage needs to be made up on another litre sold somewhere else..and since the percentage isn't allowed to exceed 10% (hence the decals on the pumps we all see), there's only so much non-ethanol they can legally actually sell in a year without potentially leaving themselves up the creek realizing they can't actually legally produce any more fuel for the remainder of the year. Needless to say no refiner in the province is going to make that mistake.

The economic advantage argument has little to nothing to do with anything at all. Refiners don't particularly like ethanol either, it's a PITA to run the supply chain to obtain it (more $$), a PITA to store it (more $$), it adds extra steps to the mixing and loading processes (more $$) and they are not magically immune to all the scourges that WE all deal with when it comes to ethanol either such as it's hydroscopic nature.

The only people that benefit from the whole ethanol thing is farmers and small engine repair shops.
 
Math aside... Can you get two dishwashers into your Volt..?
'Not that anyone really needs to justify their choices, but...
We still have a little bit of freedom when it comes to our personal choices.
I "choose" the type of vehicle I drive because it suites my lifestyle. I simply could not take a Volt or any other small car to many of the places I go. That, and the amount of gear I haul into these places simply would not fit into a car.
The whole "need" angle is a red herring... If we followed that principle we'd all be living in huts eating one meal a day.

If they genuinely need a truck then by all means get a truck.

If they simply want a truck and try to justify that want by saying how practical it is that’s a weak argument.

Wearing ski boots every day if you ski every day makes sense. Wearing ski boots every day if you ski twice a year does not make much sense. If you simply love wearing ski boots then knock yourself out.... it’s a want, not a need. Do what you want, just don’t say it’s a need.
 
Back to topic though, it's supposed to be nice on Tuesday Alex, get out for a rip and run down that gas if the ethanol content is a worry. I'm going to try and get both bikes out for a short rip after work and then prep them for storage, forecast says wet snow sunday, that's my cue and the R6 is still in the driveway. BTW guys, for anybody needing an extra one, Costco had energizer branded smart battery chargers(4a) for like $30 last time I was there, I picked up 3 of them for the boat, trailer and R6 batteries.


Tuesday does look an alternative to burn that left over fuel to "near zero" if possible :p That would take the guessing out of the question plus hopefully a bit of late season fun as well...
 
I'm surprised more people haven't chimed in with how it's not really a concern. I never used to pay attention to ethanol vs. non and always put whatever 91 octane was convenient for my GSXR for years and with fuel stabilizer I never had an issue. That said, when I learned about it I started using Shell 91 to be on the safe side. This year on my BMW I had about a quarter tank of Petro Canada 91 (10% Ethanol) left in the tank. I topped up the rest with Shell 91 and added fuel stabilizer. All should be fine.

For the OP, I would imagine topping up the rest with Shell 91 and adding fuel stabilizer will be just fine.
 
I would personally like to witness someone with a travelling condominium of a pick up truck tell a child in a fourth world country with a bloated belly from starvation that:

"I need that 26 pounds of corn for one liter of fuel for my truck."

It's a crime that we are allowed to do this **** in our bent and distorted world of excess. Whoever came up with the idea to burn food for fuel should be jailed and then starved!

Sorry for the thread hijack OP...but you got a lot of great answers and advice. Plus, it's been kinda slow around here lately :)


Sent from my HTC One M9 using Tapatalk
 
I'm surprised more people haven't chimed in with how it's not really a concern. I never used to pay attention to ethanol vs. non and always put whatever 91 octane was convenient for my GSXR for years and with fuel stabilizer I never had an issue. That said, when I learned about it I started using Shell 91 to be on the safe side. This year on my BMW I had about a quarter tank of Petro Canada 91 (10% Ethanol) left in the tank. I topped up the rest with Shell 91 and added fuel stabilizer. All should be fine.

For the OP, I would imagine topping up the rest with Shell 91 and adding fuel stabilizer will be just fine.

I'm with you on this... For winter storage we're talking a few months. I know gas goes to crap relatively quickly, but I've stored many bikes of mine topped up with gas that contains ethanol, added stabilizer and never had issues starting in the spring. Usually put the bikes away for good sometime in November, then break them out if I'm lucky end of March or April.

I'd be more concerned if its a carb'd bike. But my drz's or motocross bikes never have had any issue firing up come spring when adding stabilizer and running the bike to get it into the carb. Only had to clean the pilot jet on a tiny crf70 dirtbike after sitting for 6 months and using no stabilizer... it got pretty gummed up.
 
I would personally like to witness someone with a travelling condominium of a pick up truck tell a child in a fourth world country with a bloated belly from starvation that:

"I need that 26 pounds of corn for one liter of fuel for my truck." ...

Um, no part of diesel fuel comes from corn :| ask that of somebody driving a flex fuel vehicle.
 
For anyone with a tank full of old fuel that they unexpectedly didn't get to burn, look where your fuel lines go. If you have a fuel cock on your tank (like both of our bikes do) you can reasonably easily disconnect the outbound line (turn the valve to the off position first), stick on a temporary piece of hose, and then dump the fuel into a container and put it in your car or whatever.

My wife's 1100 has about 3/4 of a tank of 89 ethanol in it so I'll be doing exactly that, leaving just enough to get it up to the local Shell to fill it up with the non-ethanol, hitting it with stabilizer there as well.

Myself, I hope to be able to burn the rest of what's left in mine out the normal way. Fingers crossed next weekends forecast holds. ;)
 
.... If you have a fuel cock on your tank (like both of our bikes do) you can reasonably easily disconnect the outbound line (turn the valve to the off position first), stick on a temporary piece of hose, and then dump the fuel into a container and put it in your car or whatever....
If you have fuel injection you can disconnect the fuel return hose from the injector rail and use the bikes fuel pump to empty the tank ;)
 
There's so much wrong with your facts I'm not sure where to start.

- The ethanol is not added at the station. Ethanol is not separate in any fashion in the tankers, it is mixed at the racks where the tankers load.

- You know that any fuel advertised as having ethanol is going to have at least 5%, with most being in the 7% to 8% range. Zero question.

- Ontario mandates by law an overall average of 5% ethanol per litre on an overall yearly average. This is the reason non-ethanol is getting harder to find, because every litre sold without that 5% means that percentage needs to be made up on another litre sold somewhere else..and since the percentage isn't allowed to exceed 10% (hence the decals on the pumps we all see), there's only so much non-ethanol they can legally actually sell in a year without potentially leaving themselves up the creek realizing they can't actually legally produce any more fuel for the remainder of the year. Needless to say no refiner in the province is going to make that mistake.

The economic advantage argument has little to nothing to do with anything at all. Refiners don't particularly like ethanol either, it's a PITA to run the supply chain to obtain it (more $$), a PITA to store it (more $$), it adds extra steps to the mixing and loading processes (more $$) and they are not magically immune to all the scourges that WE all deal with when it comes to ethanol either such as it's hydroscopic nature.

The only people that benefit from the whole ethanol thing is farmers and small engine repair shops.
Thanks Captian Internet. Anyone can snip internet articles and paste them together. You could have just posted links to the Gov and Globe and Mail sites you clipped for your editorial.

Do some actual research, better still contact people in the industry. Ethanol is added at point of sale, sometimes blended at the dump sometimes at the retailer depending on the delivery capabilities.

Now do the math on gas sales by grade. Ethanol costs more than gas for refiners, so they come as close as possible to the 5% target. To reach this target by adding 5.4% ethanol to regular then be done. The reason pumps say up to 10% is so they have flexibility to adjust anything anytime, helping them react and adjust to spot buys, surpluses of ethanol stock, imported fuels, and because price fluctuations at the pumps slightly alter the ratio of regular to premium fuels. It doesn't mean they add ethanol to all grades. When the price of ethanol is more than their cost of gasoline (which it is most of the time), they have zero incentive to blend it in.

If you're still a skeptic, it's not rocket science to test your fuel.

1) Get a simple graduated 50ml cylinder ($5 on Amazon.ca)
2) Fill the cylinder with 20ml of fuel from your tank then add 2ml of water then agitate until the color is continuous
3) Let the mix sit for 15 minutes and you will see a separation of water (bottom) and fuel (top).
4) Find the separation point and call that "x". If x is at 2ml, there is no ethanol. If it's higher, use this formula to compute the ethanol content: ethanol=5(x-2)

As for benefit, ethanol does benefit farmers, small engine mechanics and ethanol distillers -- it also benefits the environment.
 
*gasp*. I checked my facts before posting, heresy, I know.

You apparently found some of the same sources I did trying to dispute them. And you’re still missing the point about the mandated overall averages on ethanol content.

I used to haul gas. I’m not just talking out my ***. I’ve been a commercial driver for, oh, almost 3 decades now.

As for your last comment about the environmental aspects, there is much debate about the legitimacy of that - there an argument to be made that it’s complete bunk, actually. All that ethanol doesn’t pop out of thin air, there is a massive supply chain that starts in the farmers fields, including fuel used to plant & harvest the corn, fuel used to haul it to the ethanol facility, energy used to ferment and produce the ethanol, fuel used once again to haul that ethanol to the refinery, and after all that, once it’s in our tanks, the reality that ethanol has a much lower BTU rating which means cars burning ethanol gasoline end up burning *more* gas in the end than if they were burning pure gas. All that in the end makes the argument weak.

Much of the ethanol in gas thing was brought on by the farm lobby who saw an opportunity to bolster their market. If it ends up being something that Doug Ford gets his eyes on and sees an opportunity to kill the whole thing and lower the cost of gas as a result, it would not surprise me to see him do it, and as much as I disagree with many of his other decisions I would support that one - it is a stupid system.
 
*gasp*. I checked my facts before posting, heresy, I know.

You apparently found some of the same sources I did trying to dispute them. And you’re still missing the point about the mandated overall averages on ethanol content.
No, I have a little experience with detecting Internet plagiarism -- I can spot cut and paste from a distance.
I used to haul gas. I’m not just talking out my ***. I’ve been a commercial driver for, oh, almost 3 decades now.

As for your last comment about the environmental aspects, there is much debate about the legitimacy of that - there an argument to be made that it’s complete bunk, actually. All that ethanol doesn’t pop out of thin air, there is a massive supply chain that starts in the farmers fields, including fuel used to plant & harvest the corn, fuel used to haul it to the ethanol facility, energy used to ferment and produce the ethanol, fuel used once again to haul that ethanol to the refinery, and after all that, once it’s in our tanks, the reality that ethanol has a much lower BTU rating which means cars burning ethanol gasoline end up burning *more* gas in the end than if they were burning pure gas. All that in the end makes the argument weak.

Much of the ethanol in gas thing was brought on by the farm lobby who saw an opportunity to bolster their market. If it ends up being something that Doug Ford gets his eyes on and sees an opportunity to kill the whole thing and lower the cost of gas as a result, it would not surprise me to see him do it, and as much as I disagree with many of his other decisions I would support that one - it is a stupid system.
It's true ethanol does not pop out of thin air however it is not a net zero proposition - a ethanol increases combustion efficiency which directly reduces greenhouse gasses however this is only part of what ethanol means. True that an Ethanol mix yields about 3% MPG less than pure gasoline however that's a cost of green issue only, your car pollutes 30% less per mile when using 10% ethanol blend.

Ethanol production is a complex strategic issue for many countries including Canada. First, it stabilizes a large part of agricultural market (corn) without it we would have mountains of surplus and acres of dead farms (or massive farm subsidies). Next, we would have no capacity or infrastructure to offset a fossil fuel calamity (we would be at greater mercy of foreign oil interests), and lastly it supports an entire industry of producers and researchers, many of which are looking at waste materials and other bio sources as inputs to Ethanol production(which benefits both the environment and economy).

As for ford attacking Ethanol, I think not. First unlike Carbon Tax which is a federal threat, Ethanol use is a federal law -- much tougher to attack. Ford is also not likely to kill the 6 Ontario refineries and jobs that currently supply 65% of Canada's ethanol needs.
 

Back
Top Bottom