Is it possible to use a 10 to 15% mix of methanol in 1997 Volvos without any problems?

  • Thread starter Thread starter justobservant
  • Start date Start date
In alt.autos.volvo John Robertson said:
I rang Volvo Australia and was told 5% max and then I am not sure as even
between brands there seems to be a difference in my Turbo if I push it .So
far I have avoided the use of Methanol but as our Prime minister has a mate
who is in to producing methanol it no doubt will be forced on us .My hose
between my tanks rotted so did my wifes both cars were brought second hand
from Sydney Australia where Methanol is common and it does rot hoses rubber
and such .

Australia is moving towards the use of up to 10% _Ethanol_, *not* _Methanol_.

Completely different stuff. Ethanol is the alcohol in drinks - it's not as
poisonous or carcinogenic as methanol, or as corrosive. :-)
 
Michael said:
It is we who validate the gurus, not they who validate themselves (as
dealers do, after all... money to invest is the main qualification for that
rating.) Because of the cross-posting I'm not sure which forum brings you
here, but alt.autos.volvo has a couple of professionals and at least one
very talented amateur who rarely set a foot wrong. I've been following the
group since we got our Volvo about 16 years ago and I trust them more than I
did my dealer... when we still had one in the state.

I am a dedicated DIYer who has resorted to dealers only three times in as
many decades and regretted it once, but at least three of the Volvo gurus
are several notches above me by any sane reckoning. One of them - a pro -
has posted in this thread.

My partner, who used to work at a Porsche dealership in Phoenix, warned me
that service writers are usually the least experienced mechanics at a shop.
The experienced ones are busy with cars, not with customers.

But to each their own - believe whom you will.

Mike

"The main, if not the sole, purpose of education is to be able to detect
when a man is talking rot." John Alexander Smith (1914), as reported by
Harold Macmillan

And while I also would trust something I read on the internet,
especially from someone who has a history of knowing what they're
talking about, over some dealer service advisor whose function is to
sell, sell, sell, a source better than either is the owners manual. The
one for my '98 V70 (which is almost identical to the OP's '97 850 from a
fuel system standpoint) states:

"Do not use gasolines containing methanol (methyl alcohol, wood
alcohol). The practice can result in vehicle performance deterioration
and can damage critical parts in the fuel system. Such damage may not
be covered under the New Vehicle Limited Warranty."

That seems pretty conclusive.

--
Mike F.
Thornhill (near Toronto), Ont.

Replace tt with t (twice!) and remove parentheses to email me directly.
(But I check the newsgroup more often than this email address.)
 
In <[email protected]>,
Mike F said:
And while I also would trust something I read on the internet,
especially from someone who has a history of knowing what they're
talking about, over some dealer service advisor whose function is to
sell, sell, sell, a source better than either is the owners manual. The
one for my '98 V70 (which is almost identical to the OP's '97 850 from a
fuel system standpoint) states:

"Do not use gasolines containing methanol (methyl alcohol, wood
alcohol). The practice can result in vehicle performance deterioration
and can damage critical parts in the fuel system. Such damage may not
be covered under the New Vehicle Limited Warranty."

That seems pretty conclusive.

In general, Mike F, I agree with you. However, the owner's manual (esp.
well-pass warranty) may not be the best source of information either.
For example, I use regular (87 octane) in my Volvo 850 - which is normally
aspirated.

Neither the manual, nor the dealer recommend using 87 octane fuel. However,
others on this group - such as Dr. Stephen Henning have used it with no
ill effects on several Volvos including one similar to that which I drive.

So, I guess, whatever the source of information, one has to be able to
whet it.

AC
 
Mike F said:
And while I also would trust something I read on the internet,
especially from someone who has a history of knowing what they're
talking about, over some dealer service advisor whose function is to
sell, sell, sell, a source better than either is the owners manual.

I generally agree with you. However, you have to understand that the car
company also has a vested interest in saying what they do--it's a form of
CYA. Tell the owner that they can't do anything but a very narrowly defined
set of "correct use", and you've got a basis to void the warranty if
something goes wrong with the car. I'm not saying that's true in this case,
just pointing out that the owner's manual is not exactly an objective source
of information. For example, I frequent the Miata newsgroup, and that
owner's manual says to never, ever, ever, ever tow anything with the Miata.
There are a several people on that newsgroup that have thousands of miles of
towing trailers, without a mishap or damage to their car, and nobody there
is saying "hey, guys, I have had problems towing a trailer with the Miata."
Seems pretty clear that that part of the owner's manual is nothing but CYA.
The
one for my '98 V70 (which is almost identical to the OP's '97 850 from a
fuel system standpoint) states:

"Do not use gasolines containing methanol (methyl alcohol, wood
alcohol). The practice can result in vehicle performance deterioration
and can damage critical parts in the fuel system. Such damage may not
be covered under the New Vehicle Limited Warranty."

That seems pretty conclusive.

Conclusive specifically about methanol. Methanol and ethanol are very
different--methanol is much more hydroscopic and corrosive, and much more
polar (i.e., likely to extract rubber additives), and thus much more likely
to cause damage to an engine. Since they specifically mentioned methanol, I
would read that to mean ethanol-containing fuels are fine.

Eric Lucas
 
I generally agree with you. However, you have to understand that the car
company also has a vested interest in saying what they do--it's a form of
CYA. Tell the owner that they can't do anything but a very narrowly defined
set of "correct use", and you've got a basis to void the warranty if
something goes wrong with the car. I'm not saying that's true in this case,
just pointing out that the owner's manual is not exactly an objective source
of information. For example, I frequent the Miata newsgroup, and that
owner's manual says to never, ever, ever, ever tow anything with the Miata.
There are a several people on that newsgroup that have thousands of miles of
towing trailers, without a mishap or damage to their car, and nobody there
is saying "hey, guys, I have had problems towing a trailer with the Miata."
Seems pretty clear that that part of the owner's manual is nothing but CYA.


Conclusive specifically about methanol. Methanol and ethanol are very
different--methanol is much more hydroscopic and corrosive, and much more
polar (i.e., likely to extract rubber additives), and thus much more likely
to cause damage to an engine. Since they specifically mentioned methanol, I
would read that to mean ethanol-containing fuels are fine.

Eric Lucas

Well what you are saying is true to an extent - and I know lots of
people who tow with cars where the owners manual warns against it. But
owners manuals are written also with a worst case scenario too, like if
you're towing a trailer with your Miata up a mountain road at high speed
on the hottest day of the year in the deserts of Arizona with the A/C on
full blast while tailgating another car so closely that airflow to the
rad is blocked. Or perhaps it's brake related, same scenario, this time
going down the mountain, automatic transmission in Drive, riding the
brakes all the way.

However in cases like using fuel, there's really only one scenario -
using it is using it. And in this particular owners manual, I didn't
post everything written about the fuel requirements, that was more than
a whole page. It did allow a composition of up to 10% ethanol, as well
as allowing other additives.

--
Mike F.
Thornhill (near Toronto), Ont.

Replace tt with t (twice!) and remove parentheses to email me directly.
(But I check the newsgroup more often than this email address.)
 
Michael Pardee said:
The contaminants in the coal are the problem. The electric utility I work
for used to make "coal gas" and the production sites have cost us a fortune
to clean up. The heavy metals left behind made for mighty toxic waste.

Mike

That is one thing that always comes to the top...that the cost of energy
is increasing. Petroleum has been the king for a long time. There is no
obvious and immediate successor to the throne.

However, in electric plants where coal is burned, the same heavy metals
are left behind in the ash. The sulfur is still freed by the process.

Maybe your gas process is expensive, and the waste is nasty, but it is
unlikely to be any worse than the waste generated by burning the coal.

There just is no free lunch, is there?
 
Back
Top