[PA28235] Re: mogas
- From: Reinhold Strnat <strnat@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: pa28235@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2006 14:51:43 -0700 (PDT)
Jay, thanks for a detailed and reasoned response to Kris' concerns. You have
put in one place all kinds of information about mogas that I've been trying to
accumulate from many sources. My 235 runs very well on mogas, thank you very
much.
One thought I'd like to add to the mogas debate, which is not a technical
issue, pertains to user fees. A lot of general aviation's costs are paid by
fuel taxes. When we buy mogas, we are not funding the ATC system in the manner
the tax system was designed for. For most general aviation pilots, avgas taxes
are the only financial contribution made directly to help pay for the U.S. air
traffic control system. Even VFR pilots benefit from the high level of safety
our system offers, the weather products and services, and the (relatively)
orderly traffic flows that result from IFR operations. AOPA is struggling hard
to convince Congress that the present funding system is not broken and that
user fees are not needed or wanted. Those of us using or switching to mogas
(and I count myself among them) are inadvertently circumventing the process and
perhaps undermining those efforts by siphoning money out of the system.
I'm sure there are many independent-minded pilots who would say "so what, screw
the Feds, who needs 'em anyway," but they do have power over us and we may lose
even more clout by denying the government the tax revenues earmarked to help
pay the very real costs of our aviation system. That said, do I want to pay
$5.00/gal? Of course not. If the revenue stream becomes noticeably smaller,
however, we may find the government taking actions that will ultimately cost us
both more money and possibly more flying freedom.
Any other thoughts out there about it?
-Reinhold
N8560W
----- Original Message ----
From: jjhoneck@xxxxxxxxx
To: pa28235@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 9:35:39 AM
Subject: [PA28235] Re: mogas
Well, Kris, I'm sorry if you took my response as a personal attack. You
clearly don't spend much in the on-line community of pilots if you perceived my
response as in any way insulting. Perhaps I've become too thick-skinned, but
my response would be called "timid" in some of the aviation forums I frequent.
Suffice it to say I apologize -- I didn't mean any affront.
That said, I think your preception of mogas, and mogas users is wrong. Here's
why:
1. If there were two pumps at my airport, and they were the SAME PRICE, one
avgas, one mogas -- I would put the unleaded mogas in my plane. It is simply
a superior fuel for our low-compression engines.
2. You are the one who is running a fuel -- 100LL -- that was not recommended
for our engines. Mogas has been SPECIFICALLY approved for operation in our
engine.
3. The ethanol issue is a problem, but one that can be managed. From all the
research I've done, the worst thing that can happen is that it can harm the
fiberglass in our tip tanks -- IF you let it sit in there for long periods of
time. Since we fly around 75 times per year, even if I accidentally got some
ethanol, it wouldn't be in contact with anything for very long.
(On a slightly different point, if we, as voters, allow our government to
mandate the use of ethanol in all gasolines, we will have driven the final nail
in the coffin of general aviation. Flying has dropped to all-time low levels,
as fuel costs have tripled, and many owners are only able to fly as often as
they do because of the mogas STC.)
4. You seem to be dismissing over 15 years of experience burning car gas in our
plane as irrelevant. You are also dismissing hundreds of thousands of
trouble-free hours of operations, by pilots all over the world, as meaningless.
Does this make sense?
5. If your A&P won't work on a plane because the pilot uses car gas, he's
ignorant of the facts. My A&P/IA (an EAA and AAA grand champion builder with
over 40 years behind a wrench) has personally rebuilt over 100 Lycoming O-540s
-- including mine. He will tell you that the very cleanest engines are the
ones that burn UNleaded fuel, since it is the overload of lead that causes so
much gunk to build up inside our engines. I can put you in touch with him, if
you'd like?
6. Fouling spark plugs IS caused by improper engine management -- if you
believe that it is somehow "normal" to severely lean your engine in order to
make it run "properly".
How in the world did we ever come to the point where we consider it "normal" to
burn a fuel in our engines that requires such bizarre and archaic operation?
Here's the bottom line: By using 100LL, YOU ARE BURNING A FUEL THAT CONTAINS
400% MORE LEAD THAN YOUR ENGINE WAS DESIGNED TO USE. The ONLY reason you have
to lean so severely is to prevent the bottom plugs from loading up with little
BBs of lead that can't be scavenged by our low-compression engines.
Imagine if automobile owners were sold a fuel such as this! Let's say, for a
moment, that your local gas station started selling a fuel like 100LL.
Everyone was told that it was a fine fuel -- maybe even BETTER -- for
full-power operations, but every time you coasted, or idled at a stoplight, you
would have to pull this little lever back on the dashboard, or your engine
would eventually stall.
How much of THAT fuel would they sell?
If, despite these facts, you still consider 100LL to be a "proper" and "normal"
fuel to use in your plane, well, I don't know what else can be said.
7. The Lycoming disclaimer of mogas is an insurance ploy, plain and simple.
It gives them an out on paying bogus claims, and is no different than all the
other fine print insurance companies have packed into their policies.
Remember, we're not talking about stuff you're distilling in your bath tub --
we're talking about a fuel that has been *specifically* approved by the Federal
Aviation Administration -- a group that is not generally considered to be run
by a bunch of crazy, slip-shod, laid back guys.
Let me give you an example of how the FAA works. In 1999, the FAA ORDERED me
to remove a perfectly fine set of Aeroflash strobes from my old 1975 Warrior,
because we discovered that they were STC'd for a PA28-140, not for a PA28-151.
It didn't matter to them one whit that those strobes had been on the plane for
over 26 years -- they HAD to go. It didn't even matter that they worked --
they were clearly a "hazard to flight" -- and I had to spend $1000 removing
them, and reinstalling a set of virtually identical Whelen strobes that had the
right paperwork. No amount of pleading, cajoling, or begging saved me from
that fate.
Now, does this REALLY sound like the kind of organization that would casually
approve a fuel for use in your airplane? Given their intense level of
scrutiny, do you REALLY think they would allow car gas in aircraft if there was
ANY chance of failure?
8. Transporting fuel IS a pain in the butt, but only because so few airports
actually sell mogas on the field. (There are two within 20 miles of Iowa City
-- but the FBO at Iowa City refuses to follow suit.)
I (and thousands of people just like me) have solved that problem by installing
a professionally-made fuel transfer tank, complete with metered pump and
filter, in the back of a pick up truck. It's safe, works great, and also
allows me to have fuel for my lawn mowers, weed wackers, blowers, etc.,
whenever and wherever I need it. It's a wonderful thing to have around.
My sources for this include:
- The FAA
- EAA (Experimental Aircraft Association)
- AAA (Antique Aircraft Association)
- Iowa City Aircraft Repair (Keith Roof, A&P/IA)
Again, I say this: If you want to use avgas in your plane, have at it -- but
please don't spread rumors and old wive's tales about using mogas.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"
-------------- Original message from PilotKris@xxxxxxx: --------------
Well Jay...
Since you seam to feel the need to attack me personally (one of the reasons I
almost never post what might be useful information to others), let me respond
your attacks.
It is clear you didn't even bother to read thoroughly my post.
I never said that AvGas was "better quality" than MoGas. What I said was there
is an FAA mandated, dedicated supply chain that provides the AvGas that is
pumped at the airports. Quality control exists all points. That doesn't mean
it's "higher quality" but it does provide assurance that you are getting what
you think you're getting. No such QC exists at your local "HyVee".
What happens if the guy filling the tanks (at the refinery, at the distribution
depot, the driver of the delivery truck, at the station, etc.) accidentally
dumps a few hundred gallons of diesel, or ethanol, or whatever into the fuel
that ended up in your tank? It's VERY easy to do. Even if the station knew of
the mix-up, do you think they will dispose of the gas (huge HAZMAT issues and
expense) or would they just keep pumping knowing that it "probably won't hurt
anything" (and it probably won't hurt...A CAR).
The information I brought to the attention of the group for their consideration
so that they can be informed of all the issues concerning the use of MoGas. Not
just the one-sided opinions of some.
I only provided FACTS not opinions in my post.(except for the part about MoGas
smelling bad, that was my opinion). You sir, only provided your (obviously
biased) opinions.
Let me reiterate a few of the FACTS and add more FACTS.
1. If you are going to use MoGas per a STC, YOU MUST FOLLOW ALL OF THE
PROCEDURES IN THE STC (every MoGas STC I have seen requires that every drop of
fuel you put in your plane be tested for alcohol). The purchase of a piece of
paper and a couple of stickers is just the beginning.
2. The differences between MoGas and AvGas go far beyond the octane rating and
lead content.
3. The company that designed and built the O-540-B4B5, Lycomming, DOES NOT
APPROVE OF THE USE OF ANY FUEL OTHER THAN 80/87, 100LL, 100/130 AVGAS...
PERIOD. They go so far as to say the use of any "unspecified fuel" (and MoGas
from the HyVee certainly counts as unspecified) requires inspection of the
engine by "competent maintenance personnel" (read teardown).
4. If you are going to transport fuel, you must follow all of the requirements
of your local fire department including using proper containers and procedures.
Those are the FACTS not opinions or personal experiences. I actually did the
research prior to forming my opinion. My sources included:
FAA
My local BP distributor
My local fire department
Textron Lycomming (read Service Letter L185B and Service Bulletin 398)
Piper
Now my opinions and observations:
I feel that the plug fouling issues to be combinations of poor operation of the
engine(s) and poor maintenance. In almost 3,000 of flying, I've only had one
lead-fouled plug and that was my own fault (too long between cleanings).
No A&P or I.A. I consider competent enough to work on my plane would even think
of suggesting an owner/operator use MoGas. My I.A. had gone so far as to say he
won't work on a plane that uses MoGas (he thinks it stinks too).
I feel that most people using MoGas are thinking with there wallets, not their
heads. They also tend to rationalize the use of MoGas by claiming it's somehow
"better" than AvGas.
While there might be some people out there who are doing it correctly, I've
never seen a pilot who follows all the MoGas STC procedures and I've seen many
pilots do things that are down right dangerous like transport fuel in the trunk
of their car in used paint thinner cans.
I WILL NOT USE MOGAS IN MY PLANE NOR WILL I FLY/INSTRUCT IN A PLANE THAT HAS
USED MOGAS. I won't expose my family to the potential risks it brings to save a
few bucks.
Besides, how egotistical would I be to think I know better than the people who
designed and built the motor?...
But I'm just a 3,000 hour CSEL. CMEL, CFI, MEI. What do I know...
In a message dated 7/11/2006 9:20:40 AM Pacific Standard Time,
jbenson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
jjhoneck@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> This post is TOTALLY untrue, and ranks as one of the most uninformed posts
> I've
> ever seen on this group.
>
> 1. There is no requirement to use anything higher than 87 octane regular
> unleaded gas with our Cherokee 235 STC.
>
> 2. The low compression O-540 was designed to run on 80 octane avgas -- a fuel
> that is no longer available. By using 100LL in your plane, you are using a
> gas
> that it was never designed to use.
>
> 3. 100LL has 4 times more lead in it than 80 octane gas. This is why you
> must
> lean your engine severely in order to NOT foul spark plugs when you run with
> 100LL avgas.
>
> I'm just astounded when I read misinformation like this. Given all the
> p roblems caused by 100LL, how did it EVER develop that some pilots today
> still
> believe that 100LL is somehow "better" for your plane than car gas? Nothing
> (and I mean NOTHING) could be further from the truth.
>
> What's even funnier is the statement that it's somehow "better quality" gas.
> The local HyVee gas station where I fill my transfer tank pumps more gas PER
> DAY than my airport pumps all YEAR. Let's talk about what happens to
> aviation
> gasoline that sits in a big metal tank for 11 months, shall we?
>
> Then let's go down the road to discuss FAA approval of mogas in airplanes.
> This is the same organization that we all bitch about for being so anal that
> they won't let us use a non-approved light bulb in our plane -- yet, for some
> reason, people think that they were wild-eyed lunatics when they approved the
> use of car gas in aircraft? Does anyone REALLY believe that the FAA didn't
> check mogas thoroughly (beyond thoroughly!) prior to approval?
>
> If you want to spend an extra $15 per hour on a fuel that can actually harm
> your engine (100LL), have at it. But don't spread misinformation like this
> to
> other 235 drivers, please.
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Subject:
> [PA28235] Re: mogas
> From:
> PilotKris@xxxxxxx
> Date:
> Tue, 11 Jul 2006 14:16:19 +0000
> To:
> pa28235@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> To:
> pa28235@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
> OK OK,
>
> Enough is enough on the MoGas deal.
>
> Everyone se ams to be forgetting that you MUST follow all of the STC
> requirements which include using SUPER unleaded gas. That is not that
> much cheeper than AvGas, around here it's only about $.50 per gallon.
> You also MUST test the MoGas for alcohol. Who is actually doing that?
> For EVERY purchase?
>
> I know a guy who's so proud of the $ he saves buying MoGas, I then found
> out he buys it at the cheapest "brand-X" station around. I'd doubt that
> he's even getting 91 octane.
>
> What about the stability of MoGas (especially for those storring large
> quanities). I've had many tanks of MoGas "go-bad" in cars, boats,
> motorcycles but never a load of AvGas.
>
> There are MANY differences between 100LL and MoGas that go beyond just
> the octane. Oh, and let's not forget that the differences vary BY DESIGN
> for the seasons.
>
> The biggest reas on AvG as costs more than MoGas is quality control. There
> MUST be a totally dedicated supply chain that extends from the refinery
> all the way to your airplane. The fuel CANNOT be pumped via a pipeline
> or even carried in a truck that has ever had MoGas before. Can your
> local Brand-X station say the same about their "super" unleaded?
>
> Oh, and do I even start about varpor-lock problems?
>
> I'll gladly pay the extra $7.00 an hour for the extra security provided
> by AvGas...
>
> (Besides, MoGas STINKS!)
Other related posts:
