E10 Ethanol Fuel - The definitive answer (3200/4200/GS)

Zep

Moderator
Messages
9,110
So, based on lots of enquiries I have spoken to the Maserati Factory to get the inside line on the use of E10 with the 3200/4200/Gransport model family. I have reproduced it below:


Thank you for contacting Maserati and for your interest in the Marque of the Trident – a brand that has been at the forefront of the automotive industry for over a century.

Regarding your request we would like to inform you that Maserati 3200 GT/GTA is NOT compatible with the use of E10 fuel, we recommend using only the fuel indicated in the use and maintenance booklet in its possession.

The Maserati Coupe CC/GT and Maserati Gransport with Homologation EU4 instead, are compatible with the use of E10 fuel, however, optimal performance conditions are guaranteed only by the fuels indicated in the Use and Maintenance Manual in their possession.

Thanks for understanding.
 

Zep

Moderator
Messages
9,110
Its going to be a long time I would say. I think that it’s worth figuring out why, perhaps rubber components, and switching them out.
 

mjheathcote

Centenary Club
Messages
9,033
Its going to be a long time I would say. I think that it’s worth figuring out why, perhaps rubber components, and switching them out.

Not that long really, 5 years apparently.
Regarding the 3200 and no E10.
The 4200 was developed from the off for Maserati to re-enter the US market, so E10 no problem.
The 3200 was not.
I too can only think the issue is possibly the rubber fuel hoses that can be changed?
 

mjheathcote

Centenary Club
Messages
9,033
Not good news, the 3200 pumps would need looking at too I would imagine, they sit in a rubber doughnut and we've read of them breaking up/dissolving before now, blocking the system up :confused:

Steel fuel tank as well.
You really need to be looking at a good additive that offers corrosion resistance, even when using the current E5.
I'm spectical the additives actually work doing my own research with independent tests on water separation and corrosion protection in 'jam jars', however doing nothing isn't good either. :(
 
  • Like
Reactions: Geo

Enz0

Member
Messages
108
I don't think replacing only the hardware makes 3200 compatible with E10.

High-performance petrol turbo engines are usually "knock limited". There are two problems with E10.
  1. E10 is 94 RON, lower-octane than 98 RON super-premium.
  2. Stoichiometric for E10 is 14.1, richer than 14.7 petrol. There should be no big problem as long as the fuel map is corrected with the lambda sensors. However, I think the old ECU used in 3200 will correct the fuel map only in low load situations, like idle or cruise. So, when the load is high, like when accelerating, the fuel mixture will be lean, and the lean mixture is a cause of knocking.
 

CatmanV2

Member
Messages
48,541
I don't think replacing only the hardware makes 3200 compatible with E10.

High-performance petrol turbo engines are usually "knock limited". There are two problems with E10.
  1. E10 is 94 RON, lower-octane than 98 RON super-premium.
  2. Stoichiometric for E10 is 14.1, richer than 14.7 petrol. There should be no big problem as long as the fuel map is corrected with the lambda sensors. However, I think the old ECU used in 3200 will correct the fuel map only in low load situations, like idle or cruise. So, when the load is high, like when accelerating, the fuel mixture will be lean, and the lean mixture is a cause of knocking.

I'd expect it to back off the timing then, in response to the knock sensors. Might not be enough to stop a CEL and it might not give best performance but..... (AFAIK the 3200 will run fine on 05 RON but could be totally wrong)



C
 

TimR

Member
Messages
2,654
The ECU, and fuel pumps will need to deliver higher fuel volume efficiency too...(at full load/throttle openings...)
If they cannot, it will compound any concerns about lean charge combustion at full load/throttle openings...
 

Zep

Moderator
Messages
9,110
All engines are knock limited. In fact they use an engine (a small one, in a lab) to determine the octane rating of fuel. It is a measure of the fuels resistance to knock. Therefore, it stands to reason that if E10 has the same octane rating it’s impact on knock (and so the retardation of ignition timing) will be limited to non-existent.

As for air fuel ratio, the impact on engine operation at low load (closed loop) has been studied in many many experiments and found to be negligible. Regarding WOT, as peak power is generally made with AFR of between 12 and 13 to 1, this is likely to make a small difference, which can be resolved with mapping.
 

Zep

Moderator
Messages
9,110
The ECU, and fuel pumps will need to deliver higher fuel volume efficiency too...(at full load/throttle openings...)
If they cannot, it will compound any concerns about lean charge combustion at full load/throttle openings...

Tis true, but we are talking about a 3% difference in energy density, I doubt the tolerances are that tight.
 

TimR

Member
Messages
2,654
Tis true, but we are talking about a 3% difference in energy density, I doubt the tolerances are that tight.
Agreed..
Id follow this particular seam of logic, perhps widening the scope, and state that the entire issue of ethanol use causes more problems than it solves....And it appears to solve VERY little, frankly.
It's 'fiddling'; messing with minutiae at the margins.
 

Contigo

Sponsor
Messages
18,376
Issue is this isn't going to be available at E5 long term, next 5 years then E10.
Who says? Not heard that.

I think the bigger issue will be fuel costs anyway by then. The only way to tell is to run the car on it and see how it deals with the fuel. I've got two cars which are meant to be affected by E10 but will reserve judgment until testing them on it. Japanese cars are designed to run on low octane fuels anyway like 87-91RON hence why we can advance the timing and run them on 98 SUL etc...
 

Zep

Moderator
Messages
9,110
Agreed..
Id follow this particular seam of logic, perhps widening the scope, and state that the entire issue of ethanol use causes more problems than it solves....And it appears to solve VERY little, frankly.
It's 'fiddling'; messing with minutiae at the margins.

If you believe the man, it’s equivalent to taking 600,000 cars off the road in terms of carbon. It is a pain in the ****, and it is probably the thin end of the wedge.

With the right systems, ethanol is more efficient, produces more power (due to its knock resistance allowing more aggressive settings. The issue is having the right kit to make use of it.
 

TimR

Member
Messages
2,654
If you believe the man......

That’s the thing. I’m not sure I do. Maybe right...A claimed reduction of 2% in CO2. Add CO...whatever I guess...
“in use vehicles” don’t appear to be especially ethanol ready for sure.....
 
Last edited:

mjheathcote

Centenary Club
Messages
9,033
Who says? Not heard that.

I think the bigger issue will be fuel costs anyway by then. The only way to tell is to run the car on it and see how it deals with the fuel. I've got two cars which are meant to be affected by E10 but will reserve judgment until testing them on it. Japanese cars are designed to run on low octane fuels anyway like 87-91RON hence why we can advance the timing and run them on 98 SUL etc...


And the DfT has suggested that E5 fuel might only be available for five years - potentially removed from pumps in September 2026.