| EcksJay | 10-12-2005 05:42 AM |
Av gas or toluene?
�
�
I've got a rally-x coming up in a week, and I was just wondering what would be a better fuel. The car is a '93 Impreza with a 2.5 swap running the 1.8 ecu and all. It also has some pretty aggressive cams. On 93 octane, I do get a bit of det after 5k rpm, and I'm often racing at that level. Any suggestions? I would use straight out race gas, but the only place around only wants to sell it in 15 gallon increments. And at $7.50 a gallon, it just doesn't make any sense....
| rich728 | 10-12-2005 07:28 AM |
toluene is good. call local paint shops
| flyboymike | 10-12-2005 08:05 AM |
By "av gas", do you mean 100 Low Lead? I know they work in flat-4 engines, but they're usually built by companies such as Lycoming and Continental for spinning propellers. You'll have to find a local FBO who is willing to let you put that stuff in a gas can. Last year, I think I saw it selling for $3.50 a gallon. It's probably higher now, but it would be cheaper than race gas.
| bushflyr | 10-12-2005 08:18 AM |
I haven't been in GA for a few years now, so don't quote me on this, but I believe 100 "low lead" had higher lead levels than old regular leaded. It was called "low lead" to distinguish it from some of the old WW2 era Av fuels. It probably won't hurt your engine short term and I may be totally wrong, but it's something to check.
Getting it into your car isn't really a problem, just take your 5 gallon can down to your local FBO and tell them it's for your ultra light. Nobody's very likely to pump it into your car though as it's a stiff fine.
Getting it into your car isn't really a problem, just take your 5 gallon can down to your local FBO and tell them it's for your ultra light. Nobody's very likely to pump it into your car though as it's a stiff fine.
| solo-x | 10-12-2005 08:36 AM |
i'm no engine guru, but i'm pretty sure a high rpm miss is NOT octane rating related. at high rpm the cylinder is less efficient at filling itself with air, lowering the compression and reducing the chance of detonation. if you're on stock compression ratio just with hot cams i'd look at my engine combination or tuning. $ .02
nate
ps. tried colder plugs yet, or a narrower plug gap? those are typical solutions to a high rpm miss that i've seen.
edit, unless this thing is b00sted, then all bets are off cause i REALLY know nothing about that
nate
ps. tried colder plugs yet, or a narrower plug gap? those are typical solutions to a high rpm miss that i've seen.
edit, unless this thing is b00sted, then all bets are off cause i REALLY know nothing about that
| Patrick L | 10-12-2005 08:44 AM |
I build aircraft engines for a living. There is no problem running 100LL in your car. In the long run it may start too foul your 02 sensors. It has a very small amount of lead in it. Leaded race gases have more. I use to fuel aircraft years ago an had people coming up with 55 gallon drums and race bottles wanting to by 100LL for their dirt track and what not. You might try a mixture. Anyone in your local area sell 110. You could do a mixture of 93 and 110 to get the rating up?
| BraveUlysses | 10-12-2005 12:04 PM |
Lead will kill any cats you have though but you may not have any with a swap like that.
| zzyzx | 10-12-2005 12:16 PM |
Torco
'nuff said.
'nuff said.
| montana_slim | 10-12-2005 02:47 PM |
BraveUlysses is right. I work in the aviation industry as well and the unanimous opinion is that it (100 LL "avgas") will destroy the cats (it won't harm the engine itself though).
| MGXsport | 10-12-2005 02:57 PM |
[QUOTE=Top_Dog]I build aircraft engines for a living. There is no problem running 100LL in your car. In the long run it may start too foul your 02 sensors. It has a very small amount of lead in it. Leaded race gases have more. I use to fuel aircraft years ago an had people coming up with 55 gallon drums and race bottles wanting to by 100LL for their dirt track and what not. You might try a mixture. Anyone in your local area sell 110. You could do a mixture of 93 and 110 to get the rating up?[/QUOTE]
:lol: Low lead actually has twice the content of lead in it then the old leaded 80/87 fuels.
:lol: Low lead actually has twice the content of lead in it then the old leaded 80/87 fuels.
| not ur avg girl | 10-12-2005 07:06 PM |
[QUOTE=EcksJay] Any suggestions? I would use straight out race gas, but the only place around only wants to sell it in 15 gallon increments. And at $7.50 a gallon, it just doesn't make any sense....[/QUOTE]
:p that sounds like maine. haha. when i moved up to school i was amazed to see 100 octane at a local car wash gas station.
:p that sounds like maine. haha. when i moved up to school i was amazed to see 100 octane at a local car wash gas station.
| Patrick L | 10-12-2005 07:17 PM |
there are 2 places in Oklahoma City, one of which has 101 24/7 forsale.
| WickedSTI | 10-12-2005 08:29 PM |
AV gas is not that good due to poor octane quaility.Av gas 100LL will be more prone to knock.For one it is less dense race gas at 6.1 to 6.3 pounds ave gas is 5.8 5.9 pounds per gallon.The outher big reson not to use Av gas is octane quality with a fast advance Av gas is not good at all.Av gas is formulated for use at high altitudes with less O2 levels.Longstory short use race fuel you couls use Av gas but it is a lot of trouble tune for it you would need a way to remap everthing todoit right.Brad
| MGXsport | 10-12-2005 11:14 PM |
AVgas is formulated for 100 octane at sea level and 103 octane at higher altitudes I don't know at what altitude it is good up to but some where in the high teens
| Patrick L | 10-12-2005 11:58 PM |
If the turbo charge plane is pressurized they can go over 18,000 ft. I just did an engine Cessna P-210 which been up over 20,000ft. Aircraft like these are not boosted like cars. They may only, depending on the engine, only run about 32-40"'s of manifold pressure. They run large turbos so that they can keep the same manifold pressure from sea level and on up to altitude.
| Tim-H | 10-13-2005 12:11 AM |
Toluene, It'll clean out your engine and gas tank too.
| MGXsport | 10-13-2005 01:19 AM |
[QUOTE=Top_Dog]If the turbo charge plane is pressurized they can go over 18,000 ft. I just did an engine Cessna P-210 which been up over 20,000ft. Aircraft like these are not boosted like cars. They may only, depending on the engine, only run about 32-40"'s of manifold pressure. They run large turbos so that they can keep the same manifold pressure from sea level and on up to altitude.[/QUOTE]
depending on the airplane it is usually around 30"-35" of pressure since sea level is 29.92" of pressure
depending on the airplane it is usually around 30"-35" of pressure since sea level is 29.92" of pressure
| EcksJay | 10-13-2005 01:54 AM |
Well, I haven't yet had the opportunity to inquire as to the grade and the availability of the Av-gas. My boss has his pilots license, and he recommended the Av-gas. His brother does circle track racing, and that's what he uses.
As far as the det goes, I had my car dyno'd and it included a wideband O2. It has det because the 1.8 ecu retards the timing considerably at high rpms. I shoukd put in an ITC, but the money just isn't there for it.
As far as the det goes, I had my car dyno'd and it included a wideband O2. It has det because the 1.8 ecu retards the timing considerably at high rpms. I shoukd put in an ITC, but the money just isn't there for it.
| MGXsport | 10-13-2005 02:37 AM |
If it is a car that is going to be race only I would put 100LL in it and you'll be fine.
| 00Maddog | 10-13-2005 03:03 AM |
torco!! i have used xylene, and torco delivers the same results with less product. try torco if you haven't yet. in alaska we only have 90 available, and i run the 93 cobb map with 1/2 a can of torco per 10 gallons of 90. works great. o well ot but thought i'd post :p
| Patrick L | 10-13-2005 08:19 AM |
[QUOTE=MGXsport]depending on the airplane it is usually around 30"-35" of pressure since sea level is 29.92" of pressure[/QUOTE]
We just did a TSIO-540-J2BD in a Piper Chieftain and it runs at about 41".
We just did a TSIO-540-J2BD in a Piper Chieftain and it runs at about 41".
| MGXsport | 10-13-2005 12:01 PM |
[QUOTE=Top_Dog]We just did a TSIO-540-J2BD in a Piper Chieftain and it runs at about 41".[/QUOTE]
Yeah those are nice rugged engines. What does S stand for in TSIO? I know the others but I forgot that one.
Yeah those are nice rugged engines. What does S stand for in TSIO? I know the others but I forgot that one.
| makofoto | 10-13-2005 12:35 PM |
I used Toluene for quite a while ... perhaps for 15K ... adding about a 1/2 gallon to a tankful. When I upgraded my fuel pump I was shocked at how soft the rubber tubing had gotten. I had to use a plier to pull off a hose and just clamping down on the hose where it met the metal tube connector caused the connector end to easily slice through the tough reinforced rubber hose! :eek:
On the other hand, according to a test on octane and how to get more in one of the import car magazines ... our local 76 100 octane pump "race" gas is basically 91 octane with added toluene ?!
I've switched to TORCO Unleaded Octane Booster also ... cheaper (note, this is not the same as the octane boosters you can buy at your local automotive outlets).
On the other hand, according to a test on octane and how to get more in one of the import car magazines ... our local 76 100 octane pump "race" gas is basically 91 octane with added toluene ?!
I've switched to TORCO Unleaded Octane Booster also ... cheaper (note, this is not the same as the octane boosters you can buy at your local automotive outlets).
| Patrick L | 10-13-2005 01:46 PM |
[QUOTE=MGXsport]Yeah those are nice rugged engines. What does S stand for in TSIO? I know the others but I forgot that one.[/QUOTE]
Turbo Super Charged
[url]www.powermasterengines.com[/url] is where I work.
Turbo Super Charged
[url]www.powermasterengines.com[/url] is where I work.
| MGXsport | 10-13-2005 02:35 PM |
Very cool I didn't know they used turbo supercharged engines.
| makofoto | 10-13-2005 02:39 PM |
My friend turbo charged his supercharged Mini Cooper ... 275 to the wheels.
| ratt_finkel | 10-13-2005 02:45 PM |
[QUOTE=Top_Dog]Turbo Super Charged
[url]www.powermasterengines.com[/url] is where I work.[/QUOTE]
Pat, you should build an SM car with one of those bad-boys!
[url]www.powermasterengines.com[/url] is where I work.[/QUOTE]
Pat, you should build an SM car with one of those bad-boys!
| Patrick L | 10-13-2005 02:54 PM |
Na, they suck. That tsio-540 is only 350hp
I want to put a turbo forrester motor in a Berkut ot longEZ.
I want to put a turbo forrester motor in a Berkut ot longEZ.
| Fred | 10-13-2005 03:12 PM |
ok, I'm a little confused here. Why would you want to run anything higher than 87 octane in a 2.5RS? (or a 93 Impreza with 2.5 swap)
And why are you still using the 1.8L ECU if you have a 2.5L engine? Is that really supposed to work? :confused:
And why are you still using the 1.8L ECU if you have a 2.5L engine? Is that really supposed to work? :confused:
| montana_slim | 10-13-2005 03:23 PM |
[QUOTE=MGXsport]Very cool I didn't know they used turbo supercharged engines.[/QUOTE]
Nooo, it's not quite what you think. TS does stand for turbo-supercharged, but it is just refering to the fact that a turbo is the means by which the engine is being supercharged. It doesn't mean that the engine has a turbo AND a supercharger (though that would be pretty sweet :D ).
On a sidenote, we are running Continental TSIO-550Cs, which use twin Garrett TA36 turbos, one for each bank of cylinders. On takeoff/climbout, MP is around 35.3-35.5" It only takes us about 18 minutes to get to 25,000 feet from sea level. WAY different from the B19 / C23s that you're use to!! I think my best day in C23s I was pulling 700 or 850 fpm.
How's flight school going?
Nooo, it's not quite what you think. TS does stand for turbo-supercharged, but it is just refering to the fact that a turbo is the means by which the engine is being supercharged. It doesn't mean that the engine has a turbo AND a supercharger (though that would be pretty sweet :D ).
On a sidenote, we are running Continental TSIO-550Cs, which use twin Garrett TA36 turbos, one for each bank of cylinders. On takeoff/climbout, MP is around 35.3-35.5" It only takes us about 18 minutes to get to 25,000 feet from sea level. WAY different from the B19 / C23s that you're use to!! I think my best day in C23s I was pulling 700 or 850 fpm.
How's flight school going?
| montana_slim | 10-13-2005 03:35 PM |
Oh yeah, the TSIO-550-C is rated at only 310 hp (@2600 RPMs) but that is the certified rating all the way up to its max altitude of 25000 feet. So you are assured of at least 310 hp from sea level all the way up to it's service ceiling.
| MGXsport | 10-13-2005 04:19 PM |
[QUOTE=montana_slim]Nooo, it's not quite what you think. TS does stand for turbo-supercharged, but it is just refering to the fact that a turbo is the means by which the engine is being supercharged. It doesn't mean that the engine has a turbo AND a supercharger (though that would be pretty sweet :D ).
On a sidenote, we are running Continental TSIO-550Cs, which use twin Garrett TA36 turbos, one for each bank of cylinders. On takeoff/climbout, MP is around 35.3-35.5" It only takes us about 18 minutes to get to 25,000 feet from sea level. WAY different from the B19 / C23s that you're use to!! I think my best day in C23s I was pulling 700 or 850 fpm.
How's flight school going?[/QUOTE]
I have a flight in 30 minutes and they are finally going to let me off the leash. Right now the winds are holding steady at 10 so hopefully I can go.
Yeah my best in the B19 so far was 800 and that was in a very nice thermal over one of the center point fields.
On a sidenote, we are running Continental TSIO-550Cs, which use twin Garrett TA36 turbos, one for each bank of cylinders. On takeoff/climbout, MP is around 35.3-35.5" It only takes us about 18 minutes to get to 25,000 feet from sea level. WAY different from the B19 / C23s that you're use to!! I think my best day in C23s I was pulling 700 or 850 fpm.
How's flight school going?[/QUOTE]
I have a flight in 30 minutes and they are finally going to let me off the leash. Right now the winds are holding steady at 10 so hopefully I can go.
Yeah my best in the B19 so far was 800 and that was in a very nice thermal over one of the center point fields.
| Patrick L | 10-13-2005 06:54 PM |
Nothing beats a 450hp Lycoming TIO-720. :devil:
| bushflyr | 10-14-2005 12:12 AM |
[QUOTE=Top_Dog]Nothing beats a 450hp Lycoming TIO-720. :devil:[/QUOTE]
Except for a Rolls-Royce Griffon 101 (2420 HP), but who's counting? :banana:
Except for a Rolls-Royce Griffon 101 (2420 HP), but who's counting? :banana:
| MGXsport | 10-14-2005 01:08 AM |
or a nice big GE engine :)
| flyboymike | 10-14-2005 08:18 AM |
[QUOTE=MGXsport]or a nice big GE engine :)[/QUOTE]
I'd prefer one of these, I think. Of course, that might be because of the airplane they wrapped around it.
[url]http://www.pratt-whitney.com/prod_mil_f135.asp[/url]
I'd prefer one of these, I think. Of course, that might be because of the airplane they wrapped around it.
[url]http://www.pratt-whitney.com/prod_mil_f135.asp[/url]
| Fred | 10-14-2005 12:18 PM |
So can nobody think of a good reason, or are you all just too busy sploodging yourselves over airplane engines? :lol:
| flyboymike | 10-14-2005 12:51 PM |
[QUOTE=Fred]So can nobody think of a good reason, or are you all just too busy sploodging yourselves over airplane engines? :lol:[/QUOTE]
On the sploodging, guilty as charged. However, the first post mentioned problems with detonation. He asked specifically what fuel he could use to fix it. I do not have nearly the knowledge required to say if he should be fixing this with better fuel or if he should be looking at how his car is tuned. But, that's the reason people are giving him fuel suggestions.
On the sploodging, guilty as charged. However, the first post mentioned problems with detonation. He asked specifically what fuel he could use to fix it. I do not have nearly the knowledge required to say if he should be fixing this with better fuel or if he should be looking at how his car is tuned. But, that's the reason people are giving him fuel suggestions.
| zzyzx | 10-14-2005 02:31 PM |
Could somebody rename this thread the "Airplane engine thread" ?
In the meantime, if you're trying to drive a car and not fly a plane the obvious consensus is that Torco is the most convenient and best bang for the buck.
In the meantime, if you're trying to drive a car and not fly a plane the obvious consensus is that Torco is the most convenient and best bang for the buck.
| makofoto | 10-14-2005 02:34 PM |
[url]http://www.torcoracefuels.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=28&osCsid=85c1c8b575589b8c028ee9267e66dfbe[/url]
one can is good for 4 to 6 1/4 tanks of 91
one can is good for 4 to 6 1/4 tanks of 91
| EcksJay | 10-14-2005 11:53 PM |
[QUOTE=Fred]ok, I'm a little confused here. Why would you want to run anything higher than 87 octane in a 2.5RS? (or a 93 Impreza with 2.5 swap)
And why are you still using the 1.8L ECU if you have a 2.5L engine? Is that really supposed to work? :confused:[/QUOTE]
The 2.5 swap into a '93 retaining the 1.8 ecu, wiring harness and vacuum hose routing is one of the easiest and cheapest swaps you can do. All the wiring plugs are the same, except the injectors and water temp. All total, I have less than $1000 into the swap. Including the motor and cams. And it only took me 2 days. Half of one day was spent trying to seperate the tranny....
So yes, it is possible. The reason that I need to run higher octane is because of the timing map of the 1.8 ecu. While it works well, it is far from being perfect. Eventually, I will put in some EM, but the money just isn't there for it at the moment. :(
Oh, and I'm getting 150 AWHP and TQ. :banana:
And why are you still using the 1.8L ECU if you have a 2.5L engine? Is that really supposed to work? :confused:[/QUOTE]
The 2.5 swap into a '93 retaining the 1.8 ecu, wiring harness and vacuum hose routing is one of the easiest and cheapest swaps you can do. All the wiring plugs are the same, except the injectors and water temp. All total, I have less than $1000 into the swap. Including the motor and cams. And it only took me 2 days. Half of one day was spent trying to seperate the tranny....
So yes, it is possible. The reason that I need to run higher octane is because of the timing map of the 1.8 ecu. While it works well, it is far from being perfect. Eventually, I will put in some EM, but the money just isn't there for it at the moment. :(
Oh, and I'm getting 150 AWHP and TQ. :banana:
| Fred | 10-15-2005 01:43 PM |
Thanks for the info. Didn't know you could do that. So if all the plugs are the same, couldn't you just swap the 1.8 computer for a 2.5 computer & avoid aftermarket engine management?
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét