What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

IO360 and mogas

I have read several posts where people are debating the merits of mogas vs 100LL. I can't seem to find any good thread on the modifications required to tolerate the ethanol in mogas. I am considering building an rv7 someday with the IO360, possibly electronic ignition. Just want more info on the possibility of using Mogas. Thanks
 
Dangerous Advice

My wife has other thoughts on the value of any information from this guy named Pete Howell.:rolleyes:

Mogas use is a complex topic with many opinions on both sides. It has worked well for me in an O-320 with Electronic Ignition. YMMV.

Fuel Quality, compression ratio, ignition timing, and other factors are important considerations.

A good place to start are the archives here(search button) and at Avweb.

Given the price and future of 100LL - it is good to have options.
 
Thanks, that newsletter is great. I still wonder if there are any mods possible to make the fuel system ethanol friendly. I really like the idea of running one tank 100LL for take off and landing and keeping another full of mogas.
 
Talking about 100LL in the $6 range and premium gasoline without ethanol at $4XX then the $2 gal savings at 7 gph is worth considering to me.

No ethanol for me though, not in an airplane - vapor pressure reasons.
 
No ethanol for me though, not in an airplane - vapor pressure reasons.

My take as well. Having designed and built a completely ethanol-tolerant fuel system, I found very early in Phase 1 testing that the higher Reid Vapor Pressure of mogas will likely prevent me from using any mogas in my airplane.
 
Two cents worth

The second paragraph of Howells article defines Mogas as fuel with no ethanol. I have an STC for the Swift and have been running Mogas for several years with no problems. Test each batch for ethanol an haven't found any yet. I would never use automobile fuel (ethanol) for vapor pressure reasons. It is recommended to run a tankful of 100LL occasional to keep a little lead on the valve seats.

Using Mogas in the -7 with an IO360 is in our plans.

fly safely.:)
 
My vapor pressure problems were with ethanol-free mogas. Look at the ASTM specs for mogas. The Reid Vapor Pressures specified are, most times of the year in most locations, significantly lower than that specified for 100LL. Many people run mogas with no problems. I couldn't.
 
Gooday folks, I am not sure how many of you have actually done any real live testing of various fuels on an aero piston engine dyno, and certification testing for the FAA at that, but here are my thoughts on mogas in an IO320/360/540.

1. RVP is a problem and while one VAF member has built a system to mitigate against it I believe he still runs Avgas in one tank.

2. Latency, so with mogas and EI you get a peak pressure much higher and much closer to TDC than you do with the engines designed fuel and magneto's. Part of the reason those who do have extreme lengths to keep CHT's under control. They then get slightly better control of CHT but the ICP remains.

3. Gum buildup from much higher olefin content. Not worthy of the risk in my opinion. I have enough troll with my large HP outboards running good mogas.

4. No controls in place.

5. Finding, carting and storing (laws and by-laws, insurance) and the overall pain in the butt doing so.

6. Avgas is not going to vanish, it will become lead free, but it will remain.

You can run it in your carb engine as the RVP problem is less of a problem?..but the other factors remain.

These are not my opinions. These statements are from real data.

Pick your poison carefully, but do not buy one thing on the basis avgas will vanish, as 75-80% of the consumption is by folk who will not let that happen, and private O320 flyers are not in that bunch. The 80/20 rule applies here.

Hope that helps.
 
stc

The mogas stc covers engines that were designed to run on 82 octane avgas.
 
Regarding vapor pressure, a little 100LL in the mix goes a long way. Ratios of as little as 1 part 100LL to 8 parts mogas have a significant effect.

More details on this thread.
 
Last edited:
It's one of those things... I really want to run mogas and there are those who seem to have good luck doing it, but I read and see too much information that scares me. For now it looks like 100LL. Thanks for all of the good info and the links.
 
It's one of those things... I really want to run mogas and there are those who seem to have good luck doing it, but I read and see too much information that scares me. For now it looks like 100LL. Thanks for all of the good info and the links.

That's exactly how I feel. I know you can save an average of $50 per fill up but I'm flying in a $100K machine, do I really care about $50 per fill up and if I do, should I be flying?:rolleyes::confused: I'm loving the Experimental world so far but still having a hard time with some of the justification that I see others make, but no disrespect to anyone and not judgement on anyone, it's just not for me. To each it's own, fly safe and enjoy:D
 
On my 3rd tankful

For my 0-320 with a pmag and have noticed absolutely no difference in performance or temps. ETOH free at Starke County IN, KOXI, 91 octane.

Used same fuel in a 0-300 powered C-172 for years never any issues.

I like saving $50. per tank it adds up and gives me somewhere to go (20 min.) when I just feel like going for a ride. Last time it was $1.57 per gal. Savings.


I hope to fly west soon and you can believe I plan my route to a degree via Mogas availability. First stop David City NE, not even that far out of the way.


After that......?
 
Hope that helps.

I am not very smart Dave, are you saying dont use mogas at all? and is mogas in Oz the same as mogas in the US?
Should we not use mogas at all?:confused:

Can I say that I consider fuel to be one of the cheaper things in aviation and would not consider using mogas in lieu of avgas if it were available, however this may not always be the case.
 
Last edited:
There is much conflicting verbiage on the subject of mogas and ethanol.

I don't like ethanol because it can be corrosive if it comes in contact with material not designed to withstand it. But to say it causes vapor lock may not be true.

I bought and tested E85 for vapor pressure a few years back and it came in almost as good as 100LL. Also, there are Lycomong powered aircraft flying with 100% ethanol.

There's an element of politics when ethanol is discussed and that really muddies the water.
 
20 year old wifes's tale

Concerns about corrosion issues over ethanol is simply no longer an issue.
This obsession with ethanol free gas is all based on the catastrophic effect of early ethanol blended gasoline and I do agree it was a very valid concern.
Phase separation:
Highly unlikely if you keep your fuel tanks closed and fly a lot with fresh fuel.
Even less likely to happen in mid flight.
Vapor lock:
Design a fuel system to prevent it:
Either fuel pumps pushing fuel to your fuel controller or constant flow return,
both work, different concept. Fuel injection preferred, High fuel line pressure
is your friend when it comes to vapor lock.

All fuel system components must be ethanol tolerant.
AFP fuel injection system takes care of that.
Rubber o ring on tank drain replaced with Viton o ring ( 10 cents)

Mechanical fuel pump is the only wild card in my system and the only reason I carry Avgas. No one will tell me if the rubber components in that pump are ethanol compatible and I choose to park the aircraft with avgas in the system so as to minimize exposure of those rubber parts to ethanol. I do know from unnamed sources that rubber used in those fuel pumps is not a concern for ethanol. In todays litigious world one is better off listing a thousand things that can go wrong and not mention what actually works.

As to flying on mogas with ethanol:
I have tested as many scenarios as I could think of using mogas only and in
2 years and 260 hours of flying have not seen or noticed a stumble, burp, or anything else running the engine throughout it's power envelop in any and all conditions.

Many of us are using mogas with ethanol some without any modification but most are smart enough not to spread it all over the internet:rolleyes:

From an engineer at the forefront of development:

BillL

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Chillicothe, IL
Posts: 881

Quote:
Originally Posted by ronschreck
<snip> BTW, are there not some corrosion issues with running ethanol-blend fuel?
Since this thread has been revived . . .there are real facts and data behind elimination of modern ethanol corrosion issues. They were very real and very bad. It is true that they have been eliminated at the manufacturing plant.

The early ethanol plants (circa 1994) were not required to have a continuous monitoring system for acidic content. Cargill and ADM made 90% of all ethanol as an additive at that time. The manufacturing process adds acid to accelerate the mash fermentation process (like the old batteries in hillbilly stills) then a water wash process removes the acid. Some plants did not have good controls and allowed the acid laden ethanol out on the market. My engineering group worked with Cargill and ADM to propose, and get, the ASTM testing standard modified to make it a continuous process measurement rather than the batch process being used. This change pretty much eliminate all corrosion due to the ethanol content over the following 12 months that the standard allowed for compliance.

More background: At the time (mid 1990's) my engineering group was developing catalysts for large diesels that sprayed pure(denatured) ethanol in front of a catalyst bank to reduce NOx by 90%. We had field testing sites that purchased 10,000gal tanks of ethanol. The first one was ok, but then we started to eat up everything. Pumps especially. We had a 5 gal can of the stuff shipped back to us and it dissolved the chrome off the pull out spout of the 5 gallon can, and in the process of eating the container neutralized itself. Struggling for a while, I sent a guy with a glass container and brought a sample back. It was 500 times over the acid limit of the standard. yes, five hundred. So- the old tales of corrosion were true and were nearly impossible to trace. The large batch sizes and the fact that we stored it in stainless steel tanks kept the acid from neutralizing itself in normal steel tanks, allowing the team to get to the root cause.

PS: one must still ensure that elastomers are compatible and pressure/temp of fuel is adequate to prevent vapor formation, but corrosion should not be a concern.
__________________
Bill Lane
Building 7 tipper. QB,Canopy : on hold
G3X/GNS 650 Panel, Built by SteinAir
IO-360 M1B, Hartzell CS Composite
Wiring 98% sans FWF. FWF: Fitting SJ Cowl
 
My IO-360 Bought new about 10 years ago was from Superior and they recommended 92 oct eth-free mogas. Nuff said and I never looked back. It now has 650 hours on it in Dale Walter's capable hands with no issues.

At the time I tested it with 100LL in one tank and mogas in the other. With a GRT EFIS at 8000' and 75% power showed zero diff in MAP CHT/EGT. Running a bit LOP. Excellent performance all the way around.
 
There is much conflicting verbiage on the subject of mogas and ethanol.

I don't like ethanol because it can be corrosive if it comes in contact with material not designed to withstand it. But to say it causes vapor lock may not be true.

I bought and tested E85 for vapor pressure a few years back and it came in almost as good as 100LL. Also, there are Lycomong powered aircraft flying with 100% ethanol.

There's an element of politics when ethanol is discussed and that really muddies the water.

An ELMENT :D it is entirely politics and special interest with zero actual substantiated benefit :eek:
 
Some interesting reading for the OP, see quote.



Old 05-24-2010, 04:52 PM

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Caldwell ID
Posts: 214
Default The Vanguard Squadron, 16 plus years of ethanol use
Gary Kuhns, lead pilot of the air show squadron, ?The Vanguards? has info on ethanol use. This is no surprise, they have been practicing and performing in RV-3s all the while running the IO-320 engines on ethanol and all mixtures of ethanol and avgas when flying x-country to and from the show sites. I figure with their 16+ years of ethanol experience, they can provide some insight for my own flex fuel project. In addition, by putting the team?s experiences out here on the board, hopefully it will answer a question that has come up occasionally on the vansairforce boards. What about the Vanguard Squadron? What have they done to the airplanes so they are ethanol compatible?

This posting is based on 3 or 4 conversations I had with Gary during 2010. The last conversation we had, Gary added some clarifications and corrections to the draft I had sent him.

Basics on the Vanguard airplanes
Four similar Rv-3 airplanes, N6GT, N16MR, N19EH, N25RV
IO-320 and wood Sensenich propellors

Fuel system
Like many other early Rv-3s, all four Vanguard airplanes have 24 gallon fuselage tanks. However, two of the four also sport wing tanks giving them impressive fuel capacity. None of the fuel tanks were built using special procedures or unusual materials as the planes were built with avgas in mind. Aerobatics are flown with wing tanks (if present) empty and fuel feeding from a flop tube inside the fuselage tanks. All have a factory type mechanical fuel pump and backup electric pump on the firewall. In order to accommodate the higher fuel flow needed with ethanol, Airflow Performance, Inc has re-calibrated the Bendix fuel injection systems. None of the airplanes have fuel drain sumps or gascolaters, Gary reports they were removed when they realized they weren?t performing any function. There is no separation of water and any particulates are trapped at the screened inlet to the Bendix fuel servo. All four have avgas priming systems for cold starts. They use a small fuel tank, (weed-wacker size) mounted behind the seat to feed the priming system.

I specifically asked Gary if they have had any fuel pump failures or tank sealing problems. He couldn?t recall any, and he asked the rest of the team if they experienced any issues. None. Gary did report Van?s Aircraft advised flop tubes needed inspected for softening/swelling. All four airplanes got the inspection and flop tubes were in good condition.

Engine setup.
All four airplanes now run high compression ratios. Three of the engines had engine work and the 10 to 1 setup by FWF/Demars approximately 20 years ago. Two of those engines are still in use. The third, N16MR got a new engine set up as 10.8 to 1 compression by Central Cylinder, Omaha NE. Gary?s N6GT was for many years just a stock 160 hp 320. The recent rebuild at Central Cylinder utilized the old crankshaft and case, though he reports the case got beefed up. Central Cylinder set his engine up with the custom pistons as well and he is running 10.8 to 1.

All four engines are have inverted oil systems.

Performance.
The team is very happy with the airplanes performance. Gary as formation lead, runs partial throttle throughout the routine, allowing the others to apply power as necessary for positioning. The team appreciates the consistency, smoothness, and reserve power that is available with these airplanes. Gary did not report any detailed performance testing, as they are very happy with how the planes performed, so they haven?t been in a troubleshooting or documentation mode. On Gary?s lead airplane, N6GT, he reported the rebuild shop saw 175 HP on their dyno running avgas. Gary?s estimate of HP while running on ethanol based on climb rates and speed is an additional 10 HP. (probably due to charge cooling, compare the latent heat of ethanol to gasoline, the ethanol is cooling the inlet stream- Stan).
Cold starting on ethanol is a problem. The engines like pre-heaters. The avgas priming system is used when below 50 degrees F. Once the engine is running, the avgas isn?t needed. Gary reported they had trouble finding fuel ethanol near one air show, so they used a local E-85 pump and had no trouble on starting. The 85% ethanol with the 15% gasoline likely provides enough easily vaporizing components for cold starting.
Gary reports no vapor lock issues, though he does caution they don?t have any significant experience at higher altitudes (over 10,000 feet). They don?t spend time up high.
Gary did report that back in 1993, he remembers a short clean out period when the engines were switched from avgas to ethanol. They observed some smoke in the exhaust as the ethanol loosened carbon up and the engine cleaned out.

Fuel composition
Ethanol, but when traveling back and forth to air shows, they will use 100LL as necessary, since that is what is available at fuel stops. Gary suspects they have run on about every possible combination of ethanol and avgas.

**The non-technical, keep it simple folks say, 100% ethanol, but pure ethanol doesn?t exist legally in the US motor fuel market, since gasoline presence is required by law so the liquor taxes continue to flow. The highest ethanol concentration you?ll legally see outside the production plant fence will still have 2 to 5 percent gasoline, and this is what the Vanguard squadron normally consumes, as do folks seeking ethanol out for racing. They find a plant or distributer who will sell the denatured ethanol (Stan?s comment).

Fuel flows
Gary reports approximately 15-20% more fuel flow on ethanol than avgas. The fuel injection system was set up for the higher fuel flow, so when running avgas, operations can easily be over-rich. The pilot compensates with the mixture control but it?s fairly close to the lean edge of the adjustment window. Tractability on avgas is OK if the pilot stays on top of it.
Some comparative fuel burns. Numbers come from the digital flow meter on Gary?s N6GT. Slightly rich of peak at 7500 to 8000 feet 140 to 145 knots, Gary sees about 9.3 gph on ethanol and 8.4-5 on av-gas. Gary?s leaning protocol (fixed pitch), lean until RPM loss, then go rich to gain back RPM, then a touch more rich. Gary observes 350 to 375 F CHT?s in cruise. He is in the cruise ROP camp, so if he observes CHTs approaching 400 F, he adds fuel.

Warning on carbs. Gary reported a carburated engine operator running on ethanol had a fuel stoppage. The operator told him of occasional fuel interruptions as the airplane warmed up (about 20 minutes into operations). The problem was traced to inlet valve seat. Apparently, the fiber seat would swell and cut off fuel flow. The operator reported the seat was replaced with brass and the problem was fixed.

Lastly, I will mention that Poet (previously known as Broin) sponsors the squadron, and if you?ve seen the airplanes or been to their website ethanolairshows.com you?ll already know this. So, the airplanes fly largely because a well known and successful ethanol company has chosen to support their efforts. What that means I don?t know for sure, but given the anti-ethanol aviation landscape, the corporate support is likely the one thing that allowed the ?test? to occur. Who else would have done such a thing? In talking with Gary, it seems pretty simple. I get the sense that they'd been doing this for so long and it has worked so well, that running on ethanol is a non-issue. Interesting, considering all the predictions that have been made on what will happen to gaskets, fuel lines, fuel pumps, and etc.
__________________
Stan
1990 RV-3 (now apart, upgrades in the works)
1959 C172 O-360
Reply With Quote
 
previous post too long

The political component associated with ethanol is a true distraction to those wishing to simply find out weather or not ethanol gasoline is suitable for
use in an airplane such as our RVs.
Ethanol free mogas is widely available in parts of the country but not here in the land of fruits and nuts.
You simply adapt your fuel system to deal with what is available to you.
The information is easily available from those who have successfully used ethanol fuel it for years.
 
Back
Top