[Mr Teddy Bear]

This info is now on the FBHVC website

https://www.fbhvc.co.uk/news/article/fb ... c-vehicles

It doesn't give us specific info on 'our' cars which I'm still trying to confirm.

The Land Rover's guidance is that all K-series, 4- & 6-cylinders, produced after 1996 are E10 compatible. This date looks to be the intro of Freelander, and hence K-series into Land Rover but in my mind it's unlikely that specs fuel system specifications changed in '96 for the fitment into LR products, so pre-'96 could be OK too, as #Dorchester's experience suggests

Somethings in the fuel system for K Series engines did change around 96, the fuel filter and pipes /unions. I have discussed this in great detail in a separate thread. I had thought this was more to do with retooling, but perhaps there is more to it than that?

[ReubenVP]

Funnily enough Boris Johnson was speaking to the press about the launch of a new more environmentally friendly petrol.
When asked about E10 he said
"It's a great school, I enjoyed my time there."

[GTiJohn]

Funnily enough Boris Johnson was speaking to the press about the launch of a new more environmentally friendly petrol.
When asked about E10 he said
"It's a great school, I enjoyed my time there."

Practicing those Dad Jokes ?

[Mr Teddy Bear]

Very good!

I'm not going to risk it in my 93/93 K Series, unfortunately the price seems to be around 140/150 pence per litre. This may be offset by a loss of performance/increased fuel consumption using E10?

[GTiJohn]

Latest advise from people who are likely to know is:

Late K Series was engineered to cope with (e10) ethanol but T Series and A Series were not

Trying to confirm what 'Late' means but working assumption is 1996 as that's the advice from land Rover for Freelander 1.

[961tat]

Latest advise from people who are likely to know is:

Late K Series was engineered to cope with (e10) ethanol but T Series and A Series were not

Trying to confirm what 'Late' means but working assumption is 1996 as that's the advice from land Rover for Freelander 1

From what I know the 1.4 k mpi and 1.6 honda cars had the same fuel pump and tank , later 1.6 k were a different pump and tank so can't see that rubbers would be any different from what I've seen working on and stripping these R8 models also ive been running my 214sei 19945 on E10 no change in power and it still does 38 mpg mixed driving , I never run the tank empty ( the more fuel in the better ) and ive inspected rubber fuel line for cracks and hardness and will check again soon after all the pipes are nearly 30 years old so replacement would be a good idea anyway with e10 rubber hose .

[Dorchester]

I haven't yet replaced my hoses & rubbers despite running E85 since 4 years in the 25 (and the KV6 as well) and 2 years in the 214 cabby.
They look fine and supple without any distressing sign... at the moment.
But I'm watchful so much so that when they are not out, they are garaged with their open bonnet (battery connected to the charger)
How right you are Chris when you say: I never run the tank empty ( the more fuel in the better )! That's my policy too: never less than half empty and often more when garaged.

[GTiJohn]

Latest info on K-series compatibility from someone who was there:

...my view is that damp liner engines were part of K-series expansion, which also included E10 compatibility.

If my theory is right, then all 1.6 and 1.8 would be compatible, plus 1.1/1.4 from late 96CY.

NB: CY=Calendar Year

This can't be definitive advice so should be taken into consideration with other info in the public domain.

[RoverRevival]

boss ladies 03 25 hd ran fine on e5 recently after 1/2 tank e10 we have been having running issues and occasional none starts..

[rjessett]

been running my vvc coupe on e10 since it came out - no issues so far, feels just the the same.

I did reset the fuel adaptations on T4, and all the other "settings", no idea if that made a difference.