Thanks Freedom!

There is a line of products that works called ACES. It was developed for the military, starting with rocket fuel and a drone fuel treatment (when drones were just being developed.) Then they expanded it to diesel and to gasoline. The gasoline product allows the engine to run well on lower octane fuels (i.e., regular unleaded) as if they were higher octane fuels(i.e., premium unleaded.) Promo video (primarily about the diesel product but has some background info, too):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9M8O...
(I have sold these products and have some in my car now.)

Indeed, let us know what you find out, there must be something that works out there. For now, I am just finding real gas. Thanks!

I'm researching actual on-line racing additive products. Commercial products are very poor in diminishing the effects of corn alky.

Well, check carefully, a lot of them do not address the issue. I tried "Mechanic in a bottle" which is supposed to start any engine that wont run, and it didn't work. Still had to go to shop. It almost seems like the shops are in on it to, when you ask what they did, they say "cleaned it", and will not divulge what that means. I also tried 2 other brands of "Ethanol Booster additive" guaranteed to negate the effects of ethanol. It didn't. But good luck, hope you have better results than I have had. If you find something that works, let us know. I will just pay the extra for straight Mk1 92 Octane. That is a guaranteed fix. Also, it was Bush who sold out to the Corn Lobby, when we had a glut of corn due to farm subsidy's, and this was a quick fix to help maintain demand for something that should have been allowed to fall with free market.

Think again, who would like to leave office and hand the next President a ruined country. I'm sure BHO is well aware of what is going on in the EPA and he is not going to stop it nor the lazy Congress. Myself -, I'm going to purchase on-line gasoline additive concentrates to negate the alcohol.

Money is not bad, but when it is hurting the people who are paying for the product, in favor of some lobbyist, that is bad. This whole ethanol mess hurts the very constituents the liberals claim to want to always protect. As someone who is unfortunately allergic to corn, I have found it is not just what you eat. I worked for a newspaper as a reporter for several years, and there was no way to get to work except to stop at a stop sign beside the building. I found I had to carry an inhaler, as when the corn was in tasslle, I would start to go into an asthma attack by the time I reached our parking lot. Corn products have contributed to obesity via additives. Childhood asthma is greater in cites with a lot of traffic, yet no one is really doing studies to see what additive, including ethanol might be implicated. Kids are put on Ritalin, when many actually have allergies causing their restlessness. Since this might cut lawmakers paychecks or power, they are not likely to see if what they are legislating is dangerous to kids.

You are indeed correct about that, and you also have a really good point someone could use as a alternate reason to ditch the mess, in that it is harmful to the poor and that the Democrats have been complicit in allowing it to go on... The bottom line is always its all about money.

I think our definition of "newer" is different. I consider a 2009 or a 2002 to be a newer car, many of us collectors keep our sports models longer than that.Many of those on the lower middle class and lower often rely on cars older than that to get to work as well. Just because of the farm lobby, we are supposed to have our engines destroyed. I am still concerned over the increase in asthma as the increae in corn products are released as well. Childhood asthma is way up.Stuidies are not being don on the link, but should be. as to the yard equipment, why should government mandates destroy small engines, just to please farmers. There is plenty of market for corn as food products, even though corn syrup is being dumped by many food makers. This is just a special interest issue that should not even have happened. The government who can't even correctly identify weather issues should get out and would were money not changing hands.

Stormi, unfortunately, this issue does not quite fit the statement. The increase in ethanol is more of a "break older cars" than "newer". The newer cars are less effected, but may still have problems.

"A 2012 study by Auto Alliance found internal engine damage to cars built between 2001 and 2009 with the higher blend. And a report last year found that the vast majority of cars on the road were not built to handle higher ethanol levels"

That is 2 different reports, and no source was cited, so the reliability of the data is in question. The bigger impact is that small engines (lawnmowers, chainsaws, wee whackers) have never been able to tolerate any ethanol, and the 10% they have now screws them up. The move to more will make them unusable. The earlier cars will have more of an issue because they were made with non ethanol resistant parts, as well as some carburetors which are more susceptible to being eaten up by the ethanol. The main thrust of the article was that they wrote a crappy law (not a new thing) that mandates amount, not percentage, So as you use less gas, but have to add more ethanol, the ration (and thus percentage of ethanol to gasoline) has to go up. I would say this is more illustrative of the total lack of response, understanding and the impact of lobbyists on government, and the crap that results, than a plot to get rid of cars. There are many more ways they can do that, such as taxes and fees, which is already happening. Even the vaunted "clean cars" are now being taxed to the point you can't own them by states trying to squeeze as much as they can from us.

The administration is anti-car, pro-Agenda 21/2030! It is all about getting rid of cars to please the UN. It has nothing to do with anythig else, this is their goal. First the gave cash fro clunkers, which made is harder for the poor to find used cars to buy. Now they want to destroy the engines of newer cars, until it is too expensive to drive a car. It is all part of the plan, in the book.

Get rid of the EPA altogether!

Yes, a tank for 4 months might thin out the ration since it is very volatile, but the damage would be done. I seriously doubt warranty coverage would be available either.

Ahh, Tricky Dick!

Like all climate issues, will take time to pan out..giving them time to screw us..

5.9 L Cummins..the best engine ever made.

Intentionally done. The Farm Lobby was busy with both parties filling their coffers for this boondoggle...

Diesel is great, but the newer ones with Diesel juice just added another layer of cost and pain to the issue. I have a 2004 Dodge 3500 just because I just do not want to mess with more crap from DC genius...

My point. I have had 3 tools go this year. I am moving to the 92 Oct no ethanol gas a station now sells for this reason. Their current plan will now have cars go tot he shop unless they also go that route.

Higher compression supercharged engins? Better materials for fuel systems? No. They ( EPA) could care less about technology innovations. This is more of a low cost food source market manipulation.

The number it does to "Yard equipment" is obscene...every year I have to replace the gas tubes, air tubes and little filters inside the gas tanks on my chainsaw, trimmer, lawnmower, snow blower and leaf blower...those little plastic and rubber lines just turn to moosh...

The EPA declared war on civilization long ago.

Term2, right on. You touch upon the most scary aspect of all the government alphabet soup bureaucracy pyramids. That is, they are somehow set loose to make up any rules (legislation) they want that can fine, jail, and just slap around the citizenry by their army of little Napoleons and congress snoozes through the whole thing.

I have a Kwik-Fill station near me that offers 91 octane 100% gasoline. It costs a bit more, but I get much better mileage in my Ram-hemi and it works great in all my small engines and emergency generator.