So is Don saying that an engine run on 100LL never needs to be rebuilt??? Maybe the reason Don is seeing a lot of engines run on auto gas is because a lot of guys are using auto gas. And maybe the guys using auto gas fly more hours than the guys using 100LL thereby needing an overhaul more often. The only way this argument will ever be solved is to build a data base recording time on engine at overhaul vs. type of fuel burned. Other things could be tracked as well, such as annual maintenance, plug life, stuck valves, rings, occurance of vapor lock, etc. Just a thought.
Dennis
Rebuilding a C-85
c-85
Dennis: It's kinda a no brainer. An unleaded gas engine will last much longer. Since some lead is required for the exhaust valve seats to last in our Continentals , the best we can do is run a mix of 20-30 percent of 100ll
Running straight 100 in say a 65 will burn the valves from the lead build-up causing fissures on the face. These are small cracks in the lead coating that act like a cutting torch. The problem is with the 30 degree valve grinds on OEM cylinders. 45 degrees will sheer the lead off. This is what the Superiors have. The best thing to do is run them hard to minimize the build-up. 2150 rpm won't cut it. Too much lead will also build up in the exhaust guides and polute the oil with corrrosive lead acids.
Bottom line is, use only the required amount of lead.
Ron
Running straight 100 in say a 65 will burn the valves from the lead build-up causing fissures on the face. These are small cracks in the lead coating that act like a cutting torch. The problem is with the 30 degree valve grinds on OEM cylinders. 45 degrees will sheer the lead off. This is what the Superiors have. The best thing to do is run them hard to minimize the build-up. 2150 rpm won't cut it. Too much lead will also build up in the exhaust guides and polute the oil with corrrosive lead acids.
Bottom line is, use only the required amount of lead.
Ron
Before you believe anything I say, check with two more people. If they agree, I must be right.
-
Nathan K. Hammond
- Posts: 2371
- Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2004 00:22
- Location: Danville, KY (DVK)
- Contact:
Never take anything you hear in aviation as the complete truth. c-85
Nathan: You got that right. I've eaten crow once or twice. Tastes like chicken. 
Ron
Ron
Before you believe anything I say, check with two more people. If they agree, I must be right.
-
jim pacquin
car gas
according to don and others I have spoken to, the car gas is fine but the additives are not. For instance, 100 octane av gas is fine to leave in a plane for up to 6 mos, maybe longer. Car gas is not, According to the magazine small aircraft maint. Different gas companys add different stuff and according to them some of it is detrimental to the carb. and of course if it has alcohol in it as some does, its big trouble. Then theres the static electricity issue which bothers me alot. I used to stand in the front cockpit of the stearman, on the seat, pouring high test amoco into the tank wondering if I'd blow up. Both airports I fly from will not allow car gas on the field due to the fact that they make no money this way AND due to the possiblity of a fueling disaster. Its not cut and dried by any means ,and an insurance agent told me, in spite of an stc it might be a way for them to duck out on payment if they could. So....I use 100, with a touch of MMO. Im SURE 100 octane is used far more than car gas for the reasons I mentioned.
You know ( I'm going to get on my soap box here) I get more than a little upset at the aircraft insurance companies that are always looking for a way not to pay for a claim. If there's a legal stc, they should be obligated to pay a legitimate claim.
Think about auto insurance, in most states you can be dead drunk, have an accident and they'll pay. You can have a modified car (ever noticed these 'monster trucks' going down the road) and they'll pay....they may not renew, but they'll pay. I'm guessing only one out of 25 (or more) 50 plus year old aircraft will meet their orginal type certificate exactly (think Champs, Chiefs, Taylorcraft, J-3's, etc).
Heck, tie wraps weren't even invented when these planes were new and most tie wraps (for example) are bought at a auto or home improvement store. Not to mention, some of the early materials weren't that long life. Are they going to not pay my claim because I'm using ceconite rather than Grade A or 20/50 oil?
When I owned my Cherokee, I installed a voltmeter rather than the worthless 'load sensing' ammeter the plane came with, but there was no STC for the voltmeter. However, there was a fat AD on the old ammeter as there was a possiblity of fire
behind the dash with a higher amp alternator.
Point is: there has to be some common sense. I'm sure not going to attach my wings with Home Depot bolts, but I can't see where bona fide improvements, especially with a STC can cause your insurance company to deny a claim. Part of the trouble is: we sit and take it, using the rational: it's not legal, etc. (you get the picture). Not to mention it's almost impossible to get a new 337 these days. Or it's getting almost impossible to find a AP/AI (no offense intended) that is familiar with tube and fabric, wood spar experience.
This is what drives a lot of people (like me) to be thinking about the homebuilt market.
I rest my case and now I feel better
.
BTW: there's no STC for MMO that I'm aware of either
Mike
Think about auto insurance, in most states you can be dead drunk, have an accident and they'll pay. You can have a modified car (ever noticed these 'monster trucks' going down the road) and they'll pay....they may not renew, but they'll pay. I'm guessing only one out of 25 (or more) 50 plus year old aircraft will meet their orginal type certificate exactly (think Champs, Chiefs, Taylorcraft, J-3's, etc).
Heck, tie wraps weren't even invented when these planes were new and most tie wraps (for example) are bought at a auto or home improvement store. Not to mention, some of the early materials weren't that long life. Are they going to not pay my claim because I'm using ceconite rather than Grade A or 20/50 oil?
When I owned my Cherokee, I installed a voltmeter rather than the worthless 'load sensing' ammeter the plane came with, but there was no STC for the voltmeter. However, there was a fat AD on the old ammeter as there was a possiblity of fire
behind the dash with a higher amp alternator.Point is: there has to be some common sense. I'm sure not going to attach my wings with Home Depot bolts, but I can't see where bona fide improvements, especially with a STC can cause your insurance company to deny a claim. Part of the trouble is: we sit and take it, using the rational: it's not legal, etc. (you get the picture). Not to mention it's almost impossible to get a new 337 these days. Or it's getting almost impossible to find a AP/AI (no offense intended) that is familiar with tube and fabric, wood spar experience.
This is what drives a lot of people (like me) to be thinking about the homebuilt market.
I rest my case and now I feel better
.BTW: there's no STC for MMO that I'm aware of either
Mike
"If God had intended man to fly He would have given us more money"
rebuilding a C-85
Well, time to tell you folks where I am headed on my C-85. I have decided to have Don at Don's Dream Machine build a new C-85/0-200 engine using my new Superior cylinders(after going through them and installing 0-200 pistons and rings). I am having 2 new mags and a new harness, rebuilt generator, rebuilt carb, and all new baffling installed. When he is done, I will have, in effect, a brand new engine.
My wife of 35 years is an angel, saying that it is ok if I spend the next X years of vacation money on this engine, since she wants to be safe when we fly.
Thanks for all your great comments. Next best thing to "real" hanger flying.
I will let everyone know of the progess we make in putting my "baby" back together.
Thanks !!!!
Charlie
My wife of 35 years is an angel, saying that it is ok if I spend the next X years of vacation money on this engine, since she wants to be safe when we fly.
Thanks for all your great comments. Next best thing to "real" hanger flying.
I will let everyone know of the progess we make in putting my "baby" back together.
Thanks !!!!
Charlie
I agree Ron and Nathan. This is also a soap box issue for me. The questions were kind of tongue in cheek and to reinterate that information we get is limited, mostly subjective, with legal overtones and from people with a different agenda. I have known people using auto fuel before an STC existed...like the old crop dusters. I have heard most of the scare tactics....vapor lock, engine wear and "do you want to kill your family?" When people use that on me, I just smile and walk off knowing they do not have the technical knowledge or "facts" to convince me otherwise. If they want to convince me, give me documented facts not emotions! I am sure there are pilots out there who are convinced that their planes will not run on auto fuel. I always question why their plane will not burn auto fuel when there are so many of us who are successfully using it without incident. Think about it, if one plane went down because of auto gas or, if engine damage or excessive wear could be documented, there would be an AD out quicker than a SR71 going coast to coast.
I have been burning auto gas for longer than I care to remember and will continue to do so. I have a tank with a pump mounted on a trailor. Prior to that I used plastic cans and still do under certain conditions. Concerning static electricity, for how long and how vigorously must one shack a plastic can of gasoline to build a static charge sufficient to discharge upon contact with the tank on any gasoline engine. Do you think twice before filling your lawn mower, motorcycle, etc. with gas out of a plastic container. Is it not the same principle? If it is not safe to fuel a plane from a plastic container, then it is not safe to fuel a lawnmower from the same container for the same reason. If it is a real issue for you, stick a copper wire into the gas and ground it.
I also have a 235 which has almost 900 smoh running primarily auto gas. I had the sump off a couple of years ago for the oil pump AD. Clean as a pin. Plugs stay clean and my valves do not stick. Let's see, 900 hours at 12 gal. per hour = 10,800 gal. My savings alone will pay for my next engine long before I get to 2000 hours. Hell, at 2000 hours, I can justify a factory reman with the savings. For 8 years during the 90's, the plane would set 10 months with 4 tanks (two of which are fiberglass) full of auto gas. Upon my return in [hot] July, after a indepth look at the systems, I would blast off. My major concern was that I remembered how to land the damn thing. My Champ, when finished, will burn auto gas, except for the breakin period (want that lead initially).
A couple of facts that can be verified on the net:
1. All grades of auto gas and 100LL has about the same energy content (BTUs). In fact, 100LL has slightly less due to the additional additives to bump up the octane. If this were NOT true, your automobile, tractor, etc. would have different horse power ratings for different grades of gas. But they don't! An aircraft engine rated at XXX horsepower on 100LL would have a lower rating on lower octane gas. But they do not! Think about it. Do you think the FAA would have issued an STC to EAA and Peterson if an engine produced less power on auto gas?
2. 100LL contains about 2 grams of lead per gal. Old 80 oct avgas contained .5 grams of lead per gal. Auto gas is, of course, lead free. This is the reason for the 3 parts auto gas to one part 100LL.
And Mike I could not agree with you more. My favorite response to people who base their actions only upon the FAA regs without question is that the FAA is not a joint owner with me on my plane. They do not have one penny in it. Granted, the regs have their place but I do not view them as one would God's commandments.
Ok, I will get off my soap box, go back to the hanger to put auto gas in the Champs freshly installed fuel tank system (STC'ed), which was required for the 0-200 (STC'ed), to check for leaks.
Dennis
I have been burning auto gas for longer than I care to remember and will continue to do so. I have a tank with a pump mounted on a trailor. Prior to that I used plastic cans and still do under certain conditions. Concerning static electricity, for how long and how vigorously must one shack a plastic can of gasoline to build a static charge sufficient to discharge upon contact with the tank on any gasoline engine. Do you think twice before filling your lawn mower, motorcycle, etc. with gas out of a plastic container. Is it not the same principle? If it is not safe to fuel a plane from a plastic container, then it is not safe to fuel a lawnmower from the same container for the same reason. If it is a real issue for you, stick a copper wire into the gas and ground it.
I also have a 235 which has almost 900 smoh running primarily auto gas. I had the sump off a couple of years ago for the oil pump AD. Clean as a pin. Plugs stay clean and my valves do not stick. Let's see, 900 hours at 12 gal. per hour = 10,800 gal. My savings alone will pay for my next engine long before I get to 2000 hours. Hell, at 2000 hours, I can justify a factory reman with the savings. For 8 years during the 90's, the plane would set 10 months with 4 tanks (two of which are fiberglass) full of auto gas. Upon my return in [hot] July, after a indepth look at the systems, I would blast off. My major concern was that I remembered how to land the damn thing. My Champ, when finished, will burn auto gas, except for the breakin period (want that lead initially).
A couple of facts that can be verified on the net:
1. All grades of auto gas and 100LL has about the same energy content (BTUs). In fact, 100LL has slightly less due to the additional additives to bump up the octane. If this were NOT true, your automobile, tractor, etc. would have different horse power ratings for different grades of gas. But they don't! An aircraft engine rated at XXX horsepower on 100LL would have a lower rating on lower octane gas. But they do not! Think about it. Do you think the FAA would have issued an STC to EAA and Peterson if an engine produced less power on auto gas?
2. 100LL contains about 2 grams of lead per gal. Old 80 oct avgas contained .5 grams of lead per gal. Auto gas is, of course, lead free. This is the reason for the 3 parts auto gas to one part 100LL.
And Mike I could not agree with you more. My favorite response to people who base their actions only upon the FAA regs without question is that the FAA is not a joint owner with me on my plane. They do not have one penny in it. Granted, the regs have their place but I do not view them as one would God's commandments.
Ok, I will get off my soap box, go back to the hanger to put auto gas in the Champs freshly installed fuel tank system (STC'ed), which was required for the 0-200 (STC'ed), to check for leaks.
Dennis
c-85
Dennis: Don't have a problem with what you are saying. The others that are concerned with alcahol in the fuel, it only takes a minute to test it to see if there is any in it.
Ron
Ron
Before you believe anything I say, check with two more people. If they agree, I must be right.
-
jim pacquin
car gas
I have two hours worth of fuel and like to travel out a ways when I fly. No airports within reach have car gas or 86 octane av ailable. I sure am bright enough NOT to carry gas strapped down in the back seat in a plastic can , which to me is asking to lose. Here again, I'm SURE they would not pay if there was an incident. As for testing to see if theres alcohol in the gas each time I gas up....what if there IS? Then I have to drain it? No way. As for horse power, it seem elementary that 100 octane would give better performance, slight as it would be in this primitive old engine, compared to say the rolls royce in a P-51 which demands 100 or better yet a higher octane rating. Then theres the fellow at Martin airport in baltimore some years back, also a fan of car gas. However, he did have a spark, it did catch fire, burned him badly, destroyed his hangar and the one next to it, along with both airplanes. If your flying from your home then no sweat, your only possibly destroying your own airplane and yourself....I have no problem with that.
We kind of got off the thread here, but my beef is with the insurance companies that are supposedly looking for reasons not to pay a claim even if you have a legal STC (read my post above) or some minor 'unapproved' change even if it had nothing to do with the incident.
That being said, I would probably use more 100LL if the source were closer, but I my plane is hangered 20 some miles from the nearest airport that has 100LL. So if I fly it up to EAU, by the time I land and the fuel guy gets around to putting fuel in (I'm pretty low priority with all the corporate jets around) I've lost the better part of an hour plus just flying it back to the hanger takes a couple or three gallons or puts me at around 3/4 tank again, give or take a little). As far as fueling with plastic cans: yes, I'm uncomfortable, but I try to be as careful as possible and not to fuel in the hanger as a rule. But the same could be said for my old "H" tractor or the airport lawn mower, etc.
Finally, I kind of beg to differ with those who contend that auto fuel will hurt the engine. I don't think experience bears that out when we can run a A65 over 1800 hours on mostly auto fuel with no problems until it finally burned a valve from old age. Plus, new cars and trucks run on unleaded gas and look how their total engine life has increased. There are examples of over 300,000 miles without a overhaul. I used to routinely run at least 150,000 miles before I traded and only traded because the d--- thing rusted out from all our good Wisconsin salt. Not to mention how much longer exhaust systems and spark plugs last when using unleaded fuel.
But as I said before.......my beef is with the insurance companies BTW I've never collected a dime from them either. Nor posted a claim.
That being said, I would probably use more 100LL if the source were closer, but I my plane is hangered 20 some miles from the nearest airport that has 100LL. So if I fly it up to EAU, by the time I land and the fuel guy gets around to putting fuel in (I'm pretty low priority with all the corporate jets around) I've lost the better part of an hour plus just flying it back to the hanger takes a couple or three gallons or puts me at around 3/4 tank again, give or take a little). As far as fueling with plastic cans: yes, I'm uncomfortable, but I try to be as careful as possible and not to fuel in the hanger as a rule. But the same could be said for my old "H" tractor or the airport lawn mower, etc.
Finally, I kind of beg to differ with those who contend that auto fuel will hurt the engine. I don't think experience bears that out when we can run a A65 over 1800 hours on mostly auto fuel with no problems until it finally burned a valve from old age. Plus, new cars and trucks run on unleaded gas and look how their total engine life has increased. There are examples of over 300,000 miles without a overhaul. I used to routinely run at least 150,000 miles before I traded and only traded because the d--- thing rusted out from all our good Wisconsin salt. Not to mention how much longer exhaust systems and spark plugs last when using unleaded fuel.
But as I said before.......my beef is with the insurance companies BTW I've never collected a dime from them either. Nor posted a claim.
"If God had intended man to fly He would have given us more money"
Ron, I certainly agree about testing for alcohol. If I remember correctly, you mix 9 parts gas with 1 part water; shake it and wait for it to settle. Check misture to see if you still have 1 part water. If so, the gas is without alcohol. If you suddenly have more than 1 part water, then the gas has alcohol.
Jim, I checked the NTSB data base for accidents/incidents in Maryland and could not find a reported hanger fire. At the Martin State Airport in the Baltimore area there were no accidents/incidents involving a fire. Maybe it was not reported to the Feds.
Dennis
Jim, I checked the NTSB data base for accidents/incidents in Maryland and could not find a reported hanger fire. At the Martin State Airport in the Baltimore area there were no accidents/incidents involving a fire. Maybe it was not reported to the Feds.
Dennis
C-85
Dennis: I don't get that technical. I usually use an empty water bottle (clear) and add about 1 inch of gas. Fill about 3/4 full of gas and shake the whole mess up. Let settle for a minute and see if the original water line stays the same. If so, no ethenol in gas. The one to nine ratio will give a percentage if you take the time to calibrate the test bottle.
Ron
Ron
Before you believe anything I say, check with two more people. If they agree, I must be right.
-
jim pacquin
fire
I THINK the incident at Martin occured in the early 80's I bought my stearman in 84 and knew about it then and this is why I was nervous pouring the plastic 5 gallon jerry cans into the stearman. Someone had also told me that static elec. could build as you poured it in. (True or untrue I don't know) The mechanic I used, Jack Pogue at Westminster airport in Maryland told me that 100 Av gas would ruin the Cont. engine in the stearman as the compression was so low. The panel had a placard saying "Over 86 octane in emergency only." He told me to use Amoco high test plus 7 0z. of MMO when I refilled. This is what I did. It was the most fun I ever had in the air. Wish I could afford one now! Denny Carouso in St. Marys , Penna rebuilds them and I stop in from time to time to drool and touch them. He is a master!