![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jay Honeck wrote:
87 octane auto gas is perfect for our low compression engines, and certainly won't hurt them. Using "premium" (or, for that matter, 100 LL) is neither necessary nor recommended. (Note: SOME mogas STCs do require using a higher octane car gas, but those are the exception, not the rule.) Don't forget, MANY planes are not considered low compression, even though they're not exactly "high performance". For example, all the 160 hp versions of the O-320 found in many Cherokees, Warriors, C-172s, etc, as well as the normally aspirated 180 hp O-360 found in Cherokee 180s, REQUIRE higher octane than 87 octane car gas. I believe, for most of them, they could get by with less than 100, but would certainly need super unleaded as a minimum. --- Jay -- Jay Masino "Home is where the critters are" http://www.JayMasino.com http://www.OceanCityAirport.com http://www.oc-Adolfos.com |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
: than 87 octane car gas. I believe, for most of them, they could get by with
: less than 100, but would certainly need super unleaded as a minimum. True. The high-compression (8.5:1) O-360/O-540's were certificated on 91/96 avgas. The Petersen STC (the only one applicable to high-compression engines) requires mogas with the appropriate ASTM ratings and to have an anti-knock-index (Average of Research and Motor octane... "R+M/2") of 91 or higher. When I bought my STC, Petersen said that even in the high-temp, altitude, CHT setup, they were unable to induce knocking or detonation even with 89. The certificiation folks wanted a bit of safety margin. It should also be pointed out that the R+M/2 rating does not directly compare to the avgas lean rating (i.e. the "91" of the 91/96 or the "100" of 100/130 100LL). The avgas lean rating testing setup more closely resembles the Motor method of the R+M/2. Typical point spread ("sensitivity" IIRC) is +-4 to 5 points on either side. In other words, 91 AKI is more like 96 Research, 86 Motor... i.e. a bit dicey given the 91/96 rating of the aviation engine. That said, I haven't experienced any troubles running hundreds of gallons of 93 AKI through my O-360 180hp... summer, winter, etc. -Cory ************************************************** *********************** * Cory Papenfuss, Ph.D., PPSEL-IA * * Electrical Engineering * * Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University * ************************************************** *********************** |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
MoGas Long Term Test: 5000 gallons and counting... | Jay Honeck | Home Built | 82 | May 19th 05 02:49 PM |
MoGas Long Term Test: 5000 gallons and counting... | Jay Honeck | Owning | 87 | May 19th 05 02:49 PM |
Pocket PC Tips & Glide Navigator II Tips | Paul Remde | Soaring | 0 | December 14th 04 08:21 PM |
Mogas and microbial growth | Economic Girly Man | Owning | 6 | November 13th 04 09:14 AM |
"Dirty Tricks" and "Both Sides Do It" | Leslie Swartz | Military Aviation | 19 | March 29th 04 06:11 PM |