"California FBOs Ordered To Stop Selling 100LL, Switch To G100UL"

[Aden Rich]

For a 5-point octane boost using that product, it add $1.40 per gallon of cost. That definitely eats into the savings a bit...

I buy 91 in Idaho for less than $4.00 per gallon. It's even lower if you go to the fuel depot and get a tank filled, either trailer or truck bed tank. Then you add that and you are still under avgas. You do what you have to do if you want to avoid states like Cali, Oregon and WA that are always trying to out think themselves.

 

[docjjrmd]

I buy 91 in Idaho for less than $4.00 per gallon. It's even lower if you go to the fuel depot and get a tank filled, either trailer or truck bed tank. Then you add that and you are still under avgas. You do what you have to do if you want to avoid states like Cali, Oregon and WA that are always trying to out think themselves.

Though not directly related to UL fuel or 100LL replacements another reason MOGAS can be cost effective is the potential to claim a tax credit for non-highway commercial use by filing IRS form 4136. Type of use is 10 Certain helicopter and fixed wing aircraft. Have to keep your receipts and the purchases segregated and certainly get your tax accountants approval. If you are CFI or operating a flight school that is a commercial venture. Flying for business in a business owned plane may qualify. Might not work for all but its not an inconsequential dollar amount. Interesting 100LL and its replacements are considered specific aviation fuels which are handled differently than MOGAS or road diesel. This credit is claimed by farmers and others as a matter of routine to recapture highway fuel tax dollars. The aviation specific credit is actually easier to qualify for than MOGAAS in an airplane. Maybe everyone flying already is aware of this potential tax credit so FWIW....Just trying to save a buck and keep flying!

 

[[email protected]]

That's an excellent checklist to use.

If you want to really do it right, rip out the entire ignition/fuel system and install SDS or EFII in the airplane. I prefer SDS for a variety of reasons, but truth be told either will get you there from the hardware aspect.

I'm actually in the process of writing a book about this - literally - but here's a short version.

Avoid anything that adds heat to the fuel (mechanical fuel pump, traditional injection servo) by being bolted to the great big heater up front. If you want to maintain the standard injection setup without a full SDS/EFII install, then install dual electric pumps (plumbed in parallel for possible pump failure, SDS has a very nice fuel pump module for this) in the traditional boost-pump area of the airplane with an Andair full-duplex fuel valve and tank returns. Remove the mechanical fuel pump entirely, you can leave the pushrod in place in the engine without the pump, it will simply fall down out of engagement with the cam driving it and stay along for the ride. The output of the fuel pumps should have a backpressure regulator such as the Borla regulator which can be referenced to manifold pressure, holding back pressure of 40psig or so to the standard Bendix injector servo with the rest of the flow going back to tanks - the standard Bendix servo will be just fine with this pressure, I tested mine to 52 psi inlet in flight with normal ops at 42. Important note here - don't just reroute the excess fuel flow back to suction of the pumps - it will get hot, the fuel is used to cool the electric motors in the pumps, it needs to return all the way back to the tanks to dump heat. Double-firesleeve ALL your FWF fuel lines for heat insulation, from the firewall pass-thru to the servo and up to the injection divider, and put heat-shields on your exhaust anywhere it's close to the fuel lines or servo. Mount your FT-60 (if you use one, or similar) on the cool side of the firewall - it works just fine downstream of the electric pumps and you don't want it absorbing heat in the FWF environment and heating the fuel flowing through it. Eliminate the gascolator if you have one, they serve no purpose on an RV since the low point in the fuel system is actually in the tanks, not FWF. Replace the standard .024" injection restrictors with .022" (for an IO360) from Airflow Performance, that will help increase the pressure in the line from the servo to the divider to keep it from boiling and provide better idle in hot conditions, and the supply pressure in the low-40's range to the servo will still be able to move full-power fuel flow through the smaller orifice. Do repeated GAMI-spread tests with custom injector restrictors to get it tight, these are available from Don Rivera at Airflow Performance. Restrict your timing to 25 degrees for a parallel valve, 20 degrees for an angle valve engine at low altitudes, I ramp mine from a low of 22 degrees at sea level to 29 degrees above 7000' via the SDS programming. Don't run WOTLOP below 4000'. The Airflow Performance purge valve works quite well for hotstarts if you have trouble with them, be sure and put a spring on the actuator to pull it open in the event of a broken control cable. You will have reduced (but still non-zero) detonation margin - so takeoff and climb should be done very fat/rich to keep CHT's down, leaning only once you level out and pick up airspeed for cooling.

That's the Cliffs Notes version.

Now you are in my ballpark. I did just that two years ago ran Costco premium in my 0-360 for a year then RIPPED out the instrument panel, carburation, ignition system and installed Dynon HDX and a full SDS EM-5F fuel and ignition system. NO looking back. Still burning Costco premium. Have a 110 gallon tank/pump system in my van. Never a hard start, Never a worry about heat soak. No worries just flying
My luck varies Fixit

 

[- Poindexter -]

CALIFORNIA ASSEMBLY BILL 1193​

Two California senators have introduced a bill which would essentially prohibit the sales of 100LL after 2026. The information they are using to support this legislation is inaccurate and stems from some of the work being done by Pacoima Beautiful, which has been ardently trying to close the Whiteman Airport in Los Angeles. While the bill phases in the 100LL prohibition with respect to population densities and proximity to airports, it will create financial penalties against airports if they continue to sell 100LL past 2026.

 

[blaplante]

The bill is SB 1193 (Senate Bill).
The bill has be referred to Senate committees.
"Referred to Coms. on TRANS. and JUD."

 

[Pilot135pd]

Never a worry about heat soak....

But you live in Washington where your summer temps are our winters

 

[PhatRV]

CIrrus may void warranties if airplane is fueled with G100UL

Cirrus: G100UL use may void warranties

Cirrus Aircraft advised owners on June 19 that the use of unleaded fuel in its top-selling SR-series piston airplanes may void the warranty.

www.aopa.org

There is a lot of headwind for the non-lead aviation fuel.

 

[Taltruda]

I wonder about the turbo charged twin Cessnas and Piper Navajos?

 

[RV8JD]

CIrrus may void warranties if airplane is fueled with G100UL

Cirrus: G100UL use may void warranties

Cirrus Aircraft advised owners on June 19 that the use of unleaded fuel in its top-selling SR-series piston airplanes may void the warranty.

www.aopa.org

There is a lot of headwind for the non-lead aviation fuel.

And here is GAMI's initial response to the Cirrus proclamation:

GAMI Responds To Cirrus G100UL Service Advisory - AVweb

General Aviation Modifications Inc. says it will issue a detailed response to Cirrus Aircraft’s recent service advisory discouraging the use of GAMI’s G100UL unleaded fuel in its SR series aircraft. In a statement to AVweb, GAMI said the service advisory appears to be linked to a single incident...

www.avweb.com

 

[MacCool]

CIrrus may void warranties if airplane is fueled with G100UL

There is a lot of headwind for the non-lead aviation fuel.

Big political tailwind as well. This is shaping up to be a fascinating tussle.

 

[VF84Sluggo]

AOPA has been running that fuel comparison in their twin, 100LL on one side, GHOUL on the other. Curious as to when AOPA will chime in with their results.

(yeah, I typed G100UL that way on purpose )

 

[BH1166]

Don’t know why anyone could argue this info. I run93 UL, o320 for past 800 hours/5 yrs. Cleaner engine, plugs, exhaust valves too.

 

[PhatRV]

Don’t know why anyone could argue this info. I run93 UL, o320 for past 800 hours/5 yrs. Cleaner engine, plugs, exhaust valves too.

A large university airplane fleet was testing GAMI fuel but it has stopped due to engine valve problems on their Lycoming engines. These fleet airplanes accumulate very high operational hours very fast and they will often see problems way before us pilots who fly on average 100hour/year. I am waiting for the finding from Lycoming on the issue.

 

[mstrauss]

A large university airplane fleet was testing GAMI fuel but it has stopped due to engine valve problems on their Lycoming engines. These fleet airplanes accumulate very high operational hours very fast and they will often see problems way before us pilots who fly on average 100hour/year. I am waiting for the finding from Lycoming on the issue.

I think you are confusing G100UL and UL94. The University of North Dakota (UND) was testing UL94, which is a Swift developed formulation (basically 100LL, without the lead). GAMI, the developer of G100UL, has been looking at the UL94 valve seat resection issue UND found, and so far has provided limited comment on the high aromatics content being a potential cause. Of course, as UL94 is not their product, its not for them to defend or show deficient.

 

[PhatRV]

I think you are confusing G100UL and UL94. The University of North Dakota (UND) was testing UL94, which is a Swift developed formulation (basically 100LL, without the lead). GAMI, the developer of G100UL, has been looking at the UL94 valve seat resection issue UND found, and so far has provided limited comment on the high aromatics content being a potential cause. Of course, as UL94 is not their product, its not for them to defend or show deficient.

Thanks for the clarification. We want some large fleet testing on GAMI fuel too.

 

[71459]

Warm engine vapor lock at low power setting during ground operation. Have had the engine quit on the ground more than once. Ran fine during tests in the air at cruise power. I was too scared to try long low power setting in flight where I could not make the runway if the engine quit.

25 years of flying on mogas - never a single problem. Engine runs perfect and stays cleaner. Figure I've been able to do 30% more flying thanks to the keeping the powerplant installation simple and inexpensive.

 

[- Poindexter -]

Alas, a bunch of us would love to play in the UL sandbox, but our higher compression (9:1 and up) means we‘ll need that higher octane. Even at my dinky airport in California, the FBO says it’ll be many years before that happens.

 

[Treekiwi]

25 years of flying on mogas - never a single problem. Engine runs perfect and stays cleaner. Figure I've been able to do 30% more flying thanks to the keeping the powerplant installation simple and inexpensive.

Just out of interest, what engine, fuel, and ignition systems are you operating with? Anything different from standard configurations?
Thanks
Stephen

 

[RV7A Flyer]

​ CALIFORNIA ASSEMBLY BILL 1193​

​ Two California senators have introduced a bill which would essentially prohibit the sales of 100LL after 2026. The information they are using to support this legislation is inaccurate and stems from some of the work being done by Pacoima Beautiful, which has been ardently trying to close the Whiteman Airport in Los Angeles. While the bill phases in the 100LL prohibition with respect to population densities and proximity to airports, it will create financial penalties against airports if they continue to sell 100LL past 2026.

The latest draft (emphasis added, unimportant section on cost deleted):

SECTION 1.​

Chapter 8 (commencing with Section 21710) is added to Part 1 of Division 9 of the Public Utilities Code, to read:

CHAPTER 8. Leaded Aviation Gasoline​

21710.​

For purposes of this chapter, “aviation retail establishment” means any public or private entity that sells aviation gasoline, or offers or otherwise makes available aviation gasoline, to a customer, including other businesses or government entities, for use in this state.

21711.​

An airport operator or aviation retail establishment shall not sell, distribute, or otherwise make available leaded aviation gasoline to consumers on or after January 1, 2031, in compliance with Section 47107 of Title 49 of the United States Code.

21712.​

If a provision of this chapter conflicts with a federal grant assurance in effect on or before December 31, 2030, that provision shall not apply to an airport operator subject to that grant assurance until the federal grant assurance expires.

 

[TimSPEED]

Didn't Lycoming speak against UL fuel recently?

Lycoming Clarifies G100UL Warranty Impact - AVweb

The world’s largest piston aircraft engine manufacturer has confirmed it may not honor warranty claims on engines that have been run on GAMI G100UL unleaded fuel. In a statement to AVweb, Lycoming said that G100UL is not on its list of approved fuels and while warranty claims are assessed...

www.avweb.com

 

[rv8ch]

Didn't Lycoming speak against UL fuel recently?

Lycoming Clarifies G100UL Warranty Impact - AVweb

The world’s largest piston aircraft engine manufacturer has confirmed it may not honor warranty claims on engines that have been run on GAMI G100UL unleaded fuel. In a statement to AVweb, Lycoming said that G100UL is not on its list of approved fuels and while warranty claims are assessed...

www.avweb.com

This statement is about G100UL, not all unleaded fuels. My guess is that there is some concern about the "aromatics" used in G100UL that increase the octane rating. Based on what the GAMI guys have tested and provided to the FAA to get the approvals they have, there does not seem to be much to be concerned about, but clearly Lycoming knows a lot more about this fuel and their engine than I do.

Small aside: As a thought experiment, imagine we were all running an unleaded fuel with 100 octane. Imagine a company came out with a new 100 octane fuel, but they used lead to boost the octane, not the aromatics. Everyone would be saying "Are you crazy!?!? Burn fuel with lead in it? It will completely gum up your engine!"

 

[PhatRV]

Didn't Lycoming speak against UL fuel recently?

Lycoming Clarifies G100UL Warranty Impact - AVweb

The world’s largest piston aircraft engine manufacturer has confirmed it may not honor warranty claims on engines that have been run on GAMI G100UL unleaded fuel. In a statement to AVweb, Lycoming said that G100UL is not on its list of approved fuels and while warranty claims are assessed...

www.avweb.com

If there are engine troubles after the introduction of UL fuel, I would think the plane owner and insurance company will probably blame Lycoming, and the rationale for Lycoming to keep the status quo.