Jump to content

Unleaded 100 octane AV gas from Shell


luckypierre

Recommended Posts

Yesterday Shell Petroleum announced that they were ready to submit this new product for certification, that they were expecting no problems in this process, and that it shouldn't take that long before the product is ready for market. To those of us looking for an alternative to today's leaded av gas or ethanol infected mogas (especially here in California) this should be good news. But I'm a neophyte and would appreciate any comments from you much more experienced guys. I also don't know whether this product would be good news for the lycomings and other US engine manufacturers or would the FBO's have to install separate and new pumps for this product? It seems reasonable to assume that a company like Shell P wouldn't be going to this effort for Rotax owners. If we do see this product in the next 12 mos as this VP of Shell was implying it will be a wow feedstock for Rotaxers. I buy 99 unleaded in Europe for my car at most gas stations. These engines were designed around that kind of gas. Thanks,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This will eventually replace 100LL since it will not be cost efficient to install new tanks for it. I believe it has been tested in Lycoming and Continental engines.

I don't think it will affect us much but it will be better when we are away from home. I hope Shell licenses it so it will be available everywhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They will unless the FAA selects it as a replacement and mandates it for all aircraft.

 

Wrong 3 letter agency :). That's the EPA that has been pushing it. It took an act of congress to get the EPA to sloooooow down last time they tried to push it. The FAA is just playing ball because they can't control it (fuel tanks and trucks on the ground is the EPA's territory).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filling our tanks with ethanol infected mo-gas versus lead infected 100LL with a lead scavenging additive to me is equally unattractive. If there is a 100 octane unleaded choice available I'll happily pay a premium to use it. For that matter, in California (where you can only get 91 octane premium) I'll happily be filling up my Ferrari at the airport too! (muscle car enthusiasts will be dancing in the streets!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filling our tanks with ethanol infected mo-gas versus lead infected 100LL with a lead scavenging additive to me is equally unattractive. If there is a 100 octane unleaded choice available I'll happily pay a premium to use it. For that matter, in California (where you can only get 91 octane premium) I'll happily be filling up my Ferrari at the airport too! (muscle car enthusiasts will be dancing in the streets!)

 

The EPA might restrict it to aircraft only to avoid moving backwards on the ethanol mandate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The EPA may say "no" to 100 non leaded use in cars, but enforcement would be impossible. Just as we bring 5 gallon gas jugs into the airport with mogas for the plane, we can just as easily carry 5 gallon jugs out filled with 100 no lead. In any event a CT flyer who is only burning 3.5 to 5 GPH is a winner because over time, fuel isn't going down!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks to everyone for your comments. Apologies if my news wasn't "new".

In California there's no street legal, ethanol free, mogas. Even 100 octane "racing fuel", sold at $9-$10 per gallon here, has ethanol in it. Of course Shell will begin by charging some sort of premium for unleaded. I'd be willing to pay it. Rotax engines are designed around the premium unleaded mogas sold in Europe. One can't even find 91 octane there on the highways. Its all 95 to 98, even 99. A product like this in CA would be a good thing in so many ways. Even the "fing" EPA should get behind it enthusiastically.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks to everyone for your comments. Apologies if my news wasn't "new".

In California there's no street legal, ethanol free, mogas. Even 100 octane "racing fuel", sold at $9-$10 per gallon here, has ethanol in it. Of course Shell will begin by charging some sort of premium for unleaded. I for one, will be willing to pay it- happily.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Newer truck and newer larger engines cannot run on jet A-1 without damage to emissions systems. Even the military recently found out that JP-8 wil not work in the newest engines during an experiment in Guam. Jet A has from approx 1500 sulfer to as much as 3000 sulfer. Ultra low, that is the norm now is 15 sulfer. Recently purchased some diesel in South Africa where 50 sulfer and 200 sulfer were all that is avaible at statiions have. Military uses JP-8 in trucks, aircraft (except carrier based planes), gensets, tanks, etc, etc. O yes it is illigal to burn on highway and it is IRS tax folks who are hunting those who try to avoid road tax. They stop truck and dip tanks to look for red dye that indicated, no tax off road fuel.

 

Not flying these past few days as the a TFR cover the entire island and not worth the trouble. Can someone please offer a free vacation for our POTUS anywhere else next year.

 

Hppy 2014 New Year to you and yours

 

Farmer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

..... Better would be to have 91 E10 on the airfield, but that wont happen. ......

 

Note widely, but there are a few, very few, airports that cater to the Rotax and similar crowd as well as some older planes STC'd for mogas.

 

Many Rotax fliers, in and outside of the CT community, have been now flying hundreds and in some cases thousands of hours with E10 mogas, with Rotax's blessings, and with Flight Design's blessings (if you replace the fuel filter in some CTs per a service bulletin in 2009) with no indication of problems.

While not inclined to cut corners, someone would have to make a more compelling case than "someone said not to use E10" to justify to me the difference between $4/gallon 91 E10 mogas and what will likely be at least $6/gallon new no-lead avgas.

 

FWIW: Long detailed discussion on E10 mogas ... for the most part confirming aversion to it is largely, except in highly specific cases, unjustified ... at

http://www.rotax-owner.com/rotax-forum/3-4-stroke-technical-questions/4691-fuel-is-approved-containing-ethanol

 

Alex

P.S., Here's the CT service bulletin re the CTs that should change the filter if using E10 regularly:

http://flightdesignusa.com/wp-content/documents/SB-ASTM-CT2k-04.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...