What's the best auto gas for a/c use in California?

[[email protected]]

O.K. guys ..

Anybody have any knowledge of which widely available mogas in
California has the least amount of alcohol, MBTE (or whatever?) in it?

Going to be using it in a 2 cycle engine in my motor glider, and
really don't want anything except just plain old gasoline!

Thanks for any input,

D.R. Smith

[Ken Sandyeggo]

wrote in message >...
> O.K. guys ..
>
> Anybody have any knowledge of which widely available mogas in
> California has the least amount of alcohol, MBTE (or whatever?) in it?
>
> Going to be using it in a 2 cycle engine in my motor glider, and
> really don't want anything except just plain old gasoline!
>
> Thanks for any input,
>
> D.R. Smith

All I know is that ARCO started adding corn-squeezins a little while
ago, so I've been driving a block further to get Amoco or whatever. I
can't notice any difference when I get lazy and get ARCO. I run a
Soob 2.2 which is an auto engine (doh) so if the ARCO doesn't hurt the
engines in cars, I don't see where it would have much effect on my
engine...but then, what the heck do I know? I guess the less alcohol
the better, but don't know where you could find out who puts what in
their gas. I think that in most major cities, it all comes through
one pipeline anyway. At least that's what I read, and various brands
get mixed with other brands and then some dilute it with alcohol and
other stuff and on and on.

KJSDCAUSA

[Bruce A. Frank]

Nothing wrong with MTBE. Gasoline has, at times, always had some of it
in the formula. From the stand point of burning it in the engine, unlike
alcohol, I know of no detrimental effects. In CA the only choice for the
oxygenation ingredient right now is MTBE or Alcohol. Alcohol in aviation
fuel has been shown to cause problems. Unlike gasoline, and its usual
components, MTBE tends to never stabilize when leaked into the soil.
MTBE continues to travel, is not "detoxified" by bacteria in the soil,
and goes into the water table. Also appears to be a link to contaminated
lakes due to boat motor fuel and also unburned MTBE making it into the
atmosphere to become a component of rain. There is also a strong
investigative link between increased use of MTBE and increased asthma in
children. But as a fuel, gasoline with MTBE is just fine. B^)

Oh, BTW, MTBE was voted out of our gasoline 3 years ago, and Gray Davis,
by executive order has allowed it to remain. There are over 100 towns in
CA that now have ground water supplies that can no longer be used due to
MTBE contamination (a suspected carcinogen) and the state pays for
trucked in water in those areas. For a very minor benefit in possible
air pollution levels the untested, from an environmental standpoint,
MTBE was mandated. The damage to the people and the environment has
proven to be much worse than anything expected if auto fuel had remained
unchanged.

wrote:
>
> O.K. guys ..
>
> Anybody have any knowledge of which widely available mogas in
> California has the least amount of alcohol, MBTE (or whatever?) in it?
>
> Going to be using it in a 2 cycle engine in my motor glider, and
> really don't want anything except just plain old gasoline!
>
> Thanks for any input,
>
> D.R. Smith

--
Bruce A. Frank, Editor "Ford 3.8/4.2L Engine and V-6 STOL
Homebuilt Aircraft Newsletter"
| Publishing interesting material|
| on all aspects of alternative |
| engines and homebuilt aircraft.|
*------------------------------**----*
\(-o-)/ AIRCRAFT PROJECTS CO.
\___/ Manufacturing parts & pieces
/ \ for homebuilt aircraft,
0 0 TIG welding

While trying to find the time to finish mine.

[COUGARNFW]

A couple months ago, after a friend noticed that the sign: "..we no longer use
MTBE..." by Union Oil at Union stations was accompanied by a tiny, tiny sign on
the pumps that "...we might be using alky..", I wrote to Union asking if they
were using alky and how much if so.

I was shocked to get back the message that said this: "we no longer make
gasoline because we sold all our refineries years ago, so we buy fuel from
other makers, and we have no idea what is in the fuel".

Doesn't that give you a warm feeling? Union used to be the best in calif, now
they are just another greedy reseller with no responsibility for their
"product".

In tests we have made using the water shake, we have found that the gases
tested all have about 5 percent alky.

Good luck on finding out anything different. And let us know if you do find
someone but time is running out.

Neal

[Ben Haas]

Hey,, That Gray Davis guy sounds like real smart guy.<g>. If you ever
did a chemical analysis of gasoline you would freak at all the
substances in it. Refiners still make the simple stock but all the
different resellers add their own additives. It is like food, the
basic stuff is safe in moderation. it is all the preservatives that
will kill ua all.

Ben Haas N801BH

"Bruce A. Frank" > wrote in message >...
> Nothing wrong with MTBE. Gasoline has, at times, always had some of it
> in the formula. From the stand point of burning it in the engine, unlike
> alcohol, I know of no detrimental effects. In CA the only choice for the
> oxygenation ingredient right now is MTBE or Alcohol. Alcohol in aviation
> fuel has been shown to cause problems. Unlike gasoline, and its usual
> components, MTBE tends to never stabilize when leaked into the soil.
> MTBE continues to travel, is not "detoxified" by bacteria in the soil,
> and goes into the water table. Also appears to be a link to contaminated
> lakes due to boat motor fuel and also unburned MTBE making it into the
> atmosphere to become a component of rain. There is also a strong
> investigative link between increased use of MTBE and increased asthma in
> children. But as a fuel, gasoline with MTBE is just fine. B^)
>
> Oh, BTW, MTBE was voted out of our gasoline 3 years ago, and Gray Davis,
> by executive order has allowed it to remain. There are over 100 towns in
> CA that now have ground water supplies that can no longer be used due to
> MTBE contamination (a suspected carcinogen) and the state pays for
> trucked in water in those areas. For a very minor benefit in possible
> air pollution levels the untested, from an environmental standpoint,
> MTBE was mandated. The damage to the people and the environment has
> proven to be much worse than anything expected if auto fuel had remained
> unchanged.
>
> wrote:
> >
> > O.K. guys ..
> >
> > Anybody have any knowledge of which widely available mogas in
> > California has the least amount of alcohol, MBTE (or whatever?) in it?
> >
> > Going to be using it in a 2 cycle engine in my motor glider, and
> > really don't want anything except just plain old gasoline!
> >
> > Thanks for any input,
> >
> > D.R. Smith
>
> --
> Bruce A. Frank, Editor "Ford 3.8/4.2L Engine and V-6 STOL
> Homebuilt Aircraft Newsletter"
> | Publishing interesting material|
> | on all aspects of alternative |
> | engines and homebuilt aircraft.|
> *------------------------------**----*
> \(-o-)/ AIRCRAFT PROJECTS CO.
> \___/ Manufacturing parts & pieces
> / \ for homebuilt aircraft,
> 0 0 TIG welding
>
> While trying to find the time to finish mine.

[Ron Natalie]

"Treetopper" > wrote in message ...
> I understand no auto gas is safe for use in california (AGL) between Sept
> and Feb. due to pumping it full of air or some other oxygenating process.
> This tends to cause the engine to run extremely lean beyond managmento
> levels in flying 2 stroke engines and some 4 stroke engines. Pistons are not
> in themselves all that expensive to replace, its the repair to the landing
> gear and airframe and hospital bills that kill you.

How about some facts? The oxygenates aren't "pumping things full of air."
It's a specific additive (reformuation) to the fuel. Currently threre are two
popular ones. MBTE and Ethanol. Ethanol is NOT approved for autogas
STC'd aircraft. There are problems with both corrosiveness and interaction
with rubber to solve. MBTE is fine, but it's disappearing because it's a lot
more toxic and due to he absolutely abysmal status of most underground
gas storage tanks, it's a significant pollution risk.

[Bruce A. Frank]

The really stupid part about all of this is that the oil companies say
that they now have the ability to formulate gasoline that matches the
clean burn levels required without the necessity of adding either MTBE
or alcohol...but the Feds MANDATE alcohol...a deal for the corn lobby
and a backwards step in efficiency.

Orval Fairbairn wrote:
>
> In article >,
> "Ron Natalie" > wrote:
>
> > "Treetopper" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > I understand no auto gas is safe for use in california (AGL) between Sept
> > > and Feb. due to pumping it full of air or some other oxygenating process.
> > > This tends to cause the engine to run extremely lean beyond managmento
> > > levels in flying 2 stroke engines and some 4 stroke engines. Pistons are
> > > not
> > > in themselves all that expensive to replace, its the repair to the landing
> > > gear and airframe and hospital bills that kill you.
> >
> > How about some facts? The oxygenates aren't "pumping things full of air."
> > It's a specific additive (reformuation) to the fuel. Currently threre are
> > two
> > popular ones. MBTE and Ethanol. Ethanol is NOT approved for autogas
> > STC'd aircraft. There are problems with both corrosiveness and interaction
> > with rubber to solve. MBTE is fine, but it's disappearing because it's a
> > lot
> > more toxic and due to he absolutely abysmal status of most underground
> > gas storage tanks, it's a significant pollution risk.
> >
> >
>
> The corrosiveness is not due to the alcohol, per se, but due to
> alcohol's affinity for water that causes the corrosion. It will soak the
> water right out of the air and deposit it in your tank, wher the water
> will star the corrosive process.

--
Bruce A. Frank, Editor "Ford 3.8/4.2L Engine and V-6 STOL
Homebuilt Aircraft Newsletter"
| Publishing interesting material|
| on all aspects of alternative |
| engines and homebuilt aircraft.|

[Ron Natalie]

"Bruce A. Frank" > wrote in message ...
> The really stupid part about all of this is that the oil companies say
> that they now have the ability to formulate gasoline that matches the
> clean burn levels required without the necessity of adding either MTBE
> or alcohol...but the Feds MANDATE alcohol...a deal for the corn lobby
> and a backwards step in efficiency.

The other issue is that one company (Unocal I think) owns the patent
to the most popular reformulated fuel strategy. This may be stiffling
the rest of the industry pushing for requiring (or even allowing) the reformulation.

[[email protected]]

On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 05:32:41 GMT, "Bruce A. Frank"
> wrote:

>The really stupid part about all of this is that the oil companies say
>that they now have the ability to formulate gasoline that matches the
>clean burn levels required without the necessity of adding either MTBE
>or alcohol...but the Feds MANDATE alcohol...a deal for the corn lobby
>and a backwards step in efficiency.
>

You can thank Archer Daniel Midland's contributions to the Bush
campaign for the fact that you will soon NOT be able to buy fuel
without their alcohol in it.

I wonder how many repairs, how many people will die in aircraft engine
failure related crashes due to their politics?

STILL have not heard ... Chevron76arcoshell .. or whatever as an
answer to my question ....

[Bruce A. Frank]

Yep, I am sure GW called up the proper agencies and said, "Now, you guys
better mandate alcohol in fuel so my good buddies at ADM can get
fat(er)." Puhleeeeese!

wrote:
>
> On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 05:32:41 GMT, "Bruce A. Frank"
> > wrote:
>
> >The really stupid part about all of this is that the oil companies say
> >that they now have the ability to formulate gasoline that matches the
> >clean burn levels required without the necessity of adding either MTBE
> >or alcohol...but the Feds MANDATE alcohol...a deal for the corn lobby
> >and a backwards step in efficiency.
> >
>
> You can thank Archer Daniel Midland's contributions to the Bush
> campaign for the fact that you will soon NOT be able to buy fuel
> without their alcohol in it.
>
> I wonder how many repairs, how many people will die in aircraft engine
> failure related crashes due to their politics?
>
> STILL have not heard ... Chevron76arcoshell .. or whatever as an
> answer to my question ....

--
Bruce A. Frank, Editor "Ford 3.8/4.2L Engine and V-6 STOL
Homebuilt Aircraft Newsletter"
| Publishing interesting material|
| on all aspects of alternative |
| engines and homebuilt aircraft.|
*------------------------------**----*
\(-o-)/ AIRCRAFT PROJECTS CO.
\___/ Manufacturing parts & pieces
/ \ for homebuilt aircraft,
0 0 TIG welding

While trying to find the time to finish mine.

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article >,
(Corky Scott) wrote:

> On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 02:14:15 GMT, Orval Fairbairn
> > wrote:
>
> >The corrosiveness is not due to the alcohol, per se, but due to
> >alcohol's affinity for water that causes the corrosion. It will soak the
> >water right out of the air and deposit it in your tank, wher the water
> >will star the corrosive process.
>
> Perhaps there's more to it Orval. When I was an auto mechanic, I
> recall seeing a Chrysler come in to the shop that was running poorly.
> The car was pretty new, this was probably around 1979 or '80. We
> opened the hood up to look and were all horrified to see that every
> single rubber hose was swelled up like it was bursting. We started
> asking questions and it was finally decided that the owner had been
> using gas that had a higher ratio of Ethanol to gas than it was
> supposed to have.
>
> Think about it, every single piece of rubber that the fuel touched,
> from the tank to the lines in the belly, to the engine compartment and
> inside the carburator, ALL had to be replaced. It took us days. The
> hoses were soft and slimy.
>
> Corky Scott
>
>

There is even more to the story. Remember when cars were suddenly
catching on fire from fuel lines leaking after MTBE was introduced?

I have a book, put out by Ethyl Corp., about 1953, and sponsored by the
AF and Navy, titled "Aviation Fuels and Their Effects on Engine
Preformance," NAVAER-06-5-501; USAF T.O. No. 06-5-4.

In it it says that you can expose fuel hoses, rubber, etc. to
hydrocarbon-based fuels and be OK, but, if you switch to naptha-based
fuels, you can run into problems. The converse is also true -- you can
run the same type materials with naptha-based fuels and be OK, but will
run into problems if you then switch to hydrocarbon-based fuels.

Apparently, the material takes a "set" with one type of fuel. The cars'
fuel lines leaked when a new formulation was introduced.

[Barnyard BOb --]

On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 17:48:24 GMT, "Bruce A. Frank"
> wrote:

>Yep, I am sure GW called up the proper agencies and said, "Now, you guys
>better mandate alcohol in fuel so my good buddies at ADM can get
>fat(er)." Puhleeeeese!
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Yeah.

GWB USE to be an alcohol man.
Now he is an oil man....
just like his VeePee.


Barnyard BOb --

[Peter Dohm]

Ron Natalie wrote:
>
> "Treetopper" > wrote in message ...
> > I understand no auto gas is safe for use in california (AGL) between Sept
> > and Feb. due to pumping it full of air or some other oxygenating process.
> > This tends to cause the engine to run extremely lean beyond managmento
> > levels in flying 2 stroke engines and some 4 stroke engines. Pistons are not
> > in themselves all that expensive to replace, its the repair to the landing
> > gear and airframe and hospital bills that kill you.
>
> How about some facts? The oxygenates aren't "pumping things full of air."
> It's a specific additive (reformuation) to the fuel. Currently threre are two
> popular ones. MBTE and Ethanol. Ethanol is NOT approved for autogas
> STC'd aircraft. There are problems with both corrosiveness and interaction
> with rubber to solve. MBTE is fine, but it's disappearing because it's a lot
> more toxic and due to he absolutely abysmal status of most underground
> gas storage tanks, it's a significant pollution risk.

Goodness! This must be Alice's world "behind the looking glass." Who would
have though that crummy and unsafe old leaky tanks would give me a warm, fuzzy
feeling?