VAF Forums - refueling my RV12

VAF Forums (https://vansairforce.net/community/index.php)

- RV-12/RV-12iS (https://vansairforce.net/community/forumdisplay.php?f=73)

- - refueling my RV12 (https://vansairforce.net/community/showthread.php?t=155489)

Quote:

Originally Posted by waterboy2110 (Post 1221137)

I've kept it on the down low hoping Rotax would come through with the warranty but that's not looking too promising.

It was a warm day, EFIS data says the engine was within it's operating parameters - Phillips 66 was nice enough to pull a fuel sample and confirm I had good fuel.

New engine - 4 hour conversation with head of Quality Control for AvGas from Phillips... Bottom line - it just not worth the risk for me.
You guys do what feels right for you.

Since 91UL is actually the preferred fuel (as recommended by Rotax), I have a feeling there is more to this story that just hasn't been discovered yet.....

Quote:

Originally Posted by rvbuilder2002 (Post 1221150)

Since 91UL is actually the preferred fuel (as recommended by Rotax), I have a feeling there is more to this story that just hasn't been discovered yet.....

Well Scott - I'd be happy to discuss it. I've spoke to several folks at Vans and the black hole that is Rotax support is what it is.

The questions I would have expected to be asked never came up. At some point I'll put it all on a blog but I wanted to hear Rotax say - no, we won't cover the failure.

Quote:

Originally Posted by rongawer (Post 1221138)

Let?s see, at 36 gallons a week for 100LL @$4.05/gallon, that?s $145 a week. The same amount in 91UL @$2.80/gallon is $100.80. So, assuming 46 weeks a year, that?s roughly $2,000 a year. Plus, I have to deal with leaded fuel, a dirtier engine, more frequent oil changes and so on... it?s a lot more than a few cents.

The difference between AvGas and MoGas is about $0.50 / gallon here is CA. Takes a lot of fifty cents to cover a twenty thousand dollar engine. Just sayin.

product recommendation

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2johns (Post 1221076)

I'm tired of hauling 5 gallon cans of gas. My airport car is a 2001 Chrysler van has a 20 gallon gas tank and internal pump that can put out 5 GPM. Is it a pipe dream to try to tap into it?

I use a fuel transport system designed for sports enthusiasts (boaters, race cars, etc.) I have no financial interest or affiliation with the company, but think that their system works well.

I have 2 red transport jugs of 8 gal each and 1 hand cranked fuel pump that screws into each jug. I drive to the gas station, and purchase 16 gal of premium pump gas and drive back to the airport. I attach the pump and manually fill my tank in about 5 min of easy cranking. Put everything away, go fly!

http://flofast.com

Quote:

Originally Posted by vernon smith (Post 1221118)

It says diesel only but they have to say that.

The reason some transfer pumps say "diesel only" is that many of them are lubricated by the "oil" in diesel. Gasoline lacks this lubricating quality causing the pump to fail prematurely.

There are other, more likely, causes of a melted piston than using unleaded fuel recommended by Rotax: incorrect ignition timing, mechanical problems, oil lubrication problems, incorrect prop pitch.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mel (Post 1221182)

The reason some transfer pumps say "diesel only" is that many of them are lubricated by the "oil" in diesel. Gasoline lacks this lubricating quality causing the pump to fail prematurely.

Usually its the type of seals used and gas will cause them to swell and fail.
Used to work on diesel and gas engines have found out along with hydraulic seals the same.

Quote:

Originally Posted by rvbuilder2002 (Post 1221150)

Since 91UL is actually the preferred fuel (as recommended by Rotax), I have a feeling there is more to this story that just hasn't been discovered yet.....

Wonder why it was only one piston as there usually is damage to the others also but to a lesser degree as the hottest cylinder would have the most damage.

Quote:

Originally Posted by EXflyer (Post 1221192)

Wonder why it was only one piston as there usually is damage to the others also but to a lesser degree as the hottest cylinder would have the most damage.

I don't know either.... There has been very little info provided so any explanation would just be a total guess on anyone's part.

There are details specific to the design of the 912 that could account for just one cyl having a problem....
With the two carb's each connected to just the left or right side cyl, a 912 is essentially two engines connected via a common crankshaft.
It is easy to accept that there could be a problem on one side that didn't exist on the other.
There is also differences between the front and rear cyl. on both sides. With the designed shape of the intake manifold, the induction flow for the rear cyl has to make a sharp turn immediately after exiting the carburetor. This results in a well known condition of the rear cyl. always running slightly leaner than the front cyl. (this can often be seen when inspecting the condition of spark plugs).
So it would be understandable that if a specific condition became marginal, that one of the cyl may have been negatively affected when the other wasn't (though Jim never mentioned which cyl had a problem).

Quote:

Originally Posted by RFSchaller (Post 1221146)

I use the 5 gallon plastic containers and I agree with the gripes about hoisting 30 lbs of fuel up to pour it in. The new self venting nozzles are horrible with the pitiful trickle they provide. Many thanks to the Vans AF member who posted the vent and nozzle kit that converts the cans to the old style of pouring from a vented container.

Maybe this post is what you're referring to...http://www.vansairforce.com/communit...35&postcount=1