Here in Iowa, officially "The Tall Corn State" we love our ethanol. But, as was mentioned in the link bigbill included, ethanol blends contain less potential energy per gallon. Over the last few years I have been mostly filling up with the non ethanol 91 Octane for two reasons.

First, I get a pronounced ping under hard acceleration with 87, 89 takes most of it away but on a hot day and moving like a striped a$$ed ape it may still occur. 91 Octane eliminates the ping altogether.

Second, on those occasions when 91 Octane is not available and I fill with the lower octane ethanol blend I usually get fewer miles per gallon. At first I ascribed it to the usual variations encountered such as speed, traffic and wind. But, it has proven to be a constant over the more than two years since I first noticed it. The non-ethanol fuel seems to get about 5-10% more mileage. When I’ve filled with non-ethanol fuel I normally go 10-15 miles further before switching to reserve than when I fill with the ethanol blend.

I haven’t noticed this difference in my car or truck. I’m guessing the reason is that I normally push the bike much closer to it’s performance limits, while when I’m forced to use the four wheeled vehicles I’m satisfied to simply plod along.

We all like to think of ourselves as rugged individualists. But when push comes to shove most of us are sheep who do what we are told. Worst of all, a lot of us become unpaid agents of whoever is controlling the agenda by enforcing the current dogma on the few rugged individualists who actually exist.