Put 100 octane (low lead) Aviation fuel in my 80 (1 Viewer)

[ironbinder]

Is that bad. I just got done installing my COMEUP Winch 9.5 rsi Seal . I was so happy I drove to the little local airstrip to Photograph it. And after I was done I put 15 Gallons of 100 octane low lead AV Gas in my Landcruiser.
Is that an issue? I have never done this before. I was stoked and it was a spur of the moment idea.
Cruiser runs great, seems to have a little more quicker response on the pedal.
A little more power as well.
I live in California, vehicles call for Unleaded Fuel.
Will this hurt the CAT? or anything else?
btw, Shell Premium is going for 3.50 a gallon, the AV Gas was 4.50 a gallon. Here in the Napa Valley.
Not planning on doing this again.

 

[Rifleman]

100 LL Ave gas is chalked full of lead, and if you keep running it, it will do damage to your cats, plus it can foul your O2 sensors with prolonged use. We use to run 100 LL in the shops race car,(it was over a buck less per gallon then race gas) even though they call it LL it has almost as much lead in it as leaded 100 octane race gas does. I remember reading a report written about 10 years ago were they compared the amount of lead in Sunoco race gas used in Nascar, to 100 LL Ave gas. The report stated that the difference in the amount of lead between the two fuels was about 2% less lead in 100LL compared to Sunoco race gas.

 

[mjosoba]

I don’t think it will hurt anything just this once. Personally I’d fill up to dilute it a bit. I doubt that would actually make a difference, but it would help my peace of mind.

 

[SmokingRocks]

higher the octane rating = the more resistive the fuel is to combustion / pre-detonation. High octane is used mainly in high compression and forced induction engines because of it's aforementioned properties. People falsly believe that because high powered and luxury cars require High Octane that by putting it in their honda accord it will give it more power. I mean premium is better than regular right?! Don't fall for it.

Putting high octane in our low compression tractor engines will actually cost you several horsepower and 5 or 10 extra bucks. Any 'gains' are perceived, not actual.

 

[lastresort576]

higher the octane rating = the more resistive the fuel is to combustion / pre-detonation. High octane is used mainly in high compression and forced induction engines because of it's aforementioned properties. People falsly believe that because high powered and luxury cars require High Octane that by putting it in their honda accord it will give it more power. I mean premium is better than regular right?! Don't fall for it.

Putting high octane in our low compression tractor engines will actually cost you several horsepower and 5 or 10 extra bucks. Any 'gains' are perceived, not actual.

^^^This. And the unburnt fuel will cause the cats to prematurely crap out.

 

[mct75]

Leaded gas is great for engines, it's just bad for drivers.

 

[Red Merle]

higher the octane rating = the more resistive the fuel is to combustion / pre-detonation. High octane is used mainly in high compression and forced induction engines because of it's aforementioned properties. People falsly believe that because high powered and luxury cars require High Octane that by putting it in their honda accord it will give it more power. I mean premium is better than regular right?! Don't fall for it.

Putting high octane in our low compression tractor engines will actually cost you several horsepower and 5 or 10 extra bucks. Any 'gains' are perceived, not actual.

What about using 91 octane that doesn't have any ethanol in it vs. running 87 octane with 10% ethanol? I have been running the 91 lately and I swear the truck runs better and I calculated an increase of 1.3 MPG while using it on a recent road trip. I don't mind the extra cost if it's actually a benefit but if it's burning up my brand new cats and O2 sensors, I will switch back to the corn gas.

 

[SmokingRocks]

Your increases are likely more a result of the 100% gas. Ethanol is pure bull**** that shouldn’t be in our gas, it’s the result of government meddling with s*** they shouldn’t be meddling with. Just like how we have these f’n amazing ‘spill proof’ gas cans that don't work with a sh!t...

Thank you government for trying to unf#ck a problem that never existed... How about you reallocate the time spent fxxxing up something as simple as gas and gas cans to.. I don't know maybe getting us out of wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Libya, Nigeria and Yemen... How about we do that... F^ck am I the only american left with common sense?!

-rant over-

Annnnyway... Here is why I despise Corn Gas

E85 has roughly 30% less energy content as a gallon of pure gas.

Also ethanol blends deteriorate rubber, plastics and fiberglass. While there’s not much fiberglass in the fuel system there are tons of rubber hoses, o-rings and plastic pump parts and injectors..

Apparently auto parts stores are now selling rubber that is specifically designed to resist this deterioration but from what I’ve read it just prolongs the inevitable.

I would be fine running the 91 no Ethanol gas, I’d probably even bump the timing to 8-10 degrees advanced. The higher octane and increased timing will pair well and certainly give the old girl some more pep.

Personally I go out of my way to fill up with ethanol free gas, luckily there is a Murphy Express down the street from my office that sells corn free 87 octane. And yes I’ve averaged about 1mpg better when using the corn free go juice.


For everyone interested in finding ethanol free gas, there is an app called Pure Gas which list the stations around you which carry straight gas. It's not perfect as many of them are av gas / airport stations or race gas. But its crowd sourced so you can add notes to the stations which helps ID the ones that sell 85-91 pure gas.

Ethanol-free gas stations in the U.S. and Canada

 

[Red Merle]

Your increases are likely more a result of the 100% gas. Ethanol is pure bull**** that shouldn’t be in our gas, it’s the result of government meddling with s*** they shouldn’t be meddling with. Just like how we have these f’n amazing ‘spill proof’ gas cans now. We need less corn juice in our gas and less government doing stupid sh!t like this.

-rant over-

E85 (15% corn juice) has roughly 30% less energy content as a gallon of pure gas.

Also ethanol blends deteriorate rubber, plastics and fiberglass. While there’s not much fiberglass in the fuel system there are tons of rubber hoses, o-rings and plastic pump parts and injectors..

Apparently auto parts stores are now selling rubber that is specifically designed to resist this deterioration but from what I’ve read it just prolongs the inevitable.

I would be fine running the 91 no Ethanol gas, I’d probably even bump the timing to 8-10 degrees advanced. You might notice even more pep.

Personally I go out of my way to fill up with ethanol free gas, luckily there is a Murphy Express down the street from my office that sells corn free 87 octane. And yes I’ve averaged about 1mpg better when using the corn free go juice.

Thanks for the detailed response. I completely agree with your rant. Don't get me started on those damn "improved" gas cans.

I just spent a lot of time and money rebuilding the top end of my motor last fall and after a year of the corn gas, I thought I could perceive just a slight stumble or rough idle. After doing a little research, I decided that the corn gas was the problem and I started using the gas from the one station in my area that sells 89 octane with no ethanol. That did seem to make an immediate improvement but always getting gas at that station is a bit of a hassle and it's only 10 cents cheaper than the 91 octane that is also ethanol free that they sell at most of the other stations up here.

I don't put a ton of miles on my rig so I am just going to keep using the 91 unless gas jumps way up in price and then I might consider mixing it. I just wish they would get rid of the whole ethanol thing altogether. It's a stupid idea in the first place because it doesn't do anything to lower emissions(in fact it actually increases them because so many farmers have expanded their operations into areas that used to be wooded to take advantage of the subsidies) and it's just not good for most of the vehicles on the road.

 

[SmokingRocks]

Sounds like a good plan!

There was a time when the governments influence in the economy was around 3-5%... today that number is north of 45%... Which is terrifying and gives us crap like corn gas and gas cans that cost billions to engineer yet don't accomplish their intended purpose.

-End-

 

[Desert Dino]

Thanks for the detailed response. I completely agree with your rant. Don't get me started on those damn "improved" gas cans.

I just spent a lot of time and money rebuilding the top end of my motor last fall and after a year of the corn gas, I thought I could perceive just a slight stumble or rough idle. After doing a little research, I decided that the corn gas was the problem and I started using the gas from the one station in my area that sells 89 octane with no ethanol. That did seem to make an immediate improvement but always getting gas at that station is a bit of a hassle and it's only 10 cents cheaper than the 91 octane that is also ethanol free that they sell at most of the other stations up here.

I don't put a ton of miles on my rig so I am just going to keep using the 91 unless gas jumps way up in price and then I might consider mixing it. I just wish they would get rid of the whole ethanol thing altogether. It's a stupid idea in the first place because it doesn't do anything to lower emissions(in fact it actually increases them because so many farmers have expanded their operations into areas that used to be wooded to take advantage of the subsidies) and it's just not good for most of the vehicles on the road.

In Israel we do not, but Ethanol in gasoline, but using it reduce the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere because the corn absorbs CO2 from the atmosphere to gain weight and produce sugars and starch thes sugars are converted Ethanol

Using fossil fuel is adding more CO2 that was not there in the first place

 

[SmokingRocks]

I'm afraid I'm going to have to disagree with you @Desert Dino

Your statements about the benifits of corn used as fuel are widely disproved by many many scientific studies. Yes growing corn or anything for that matter is done so through the process of photosynthesis; absorption of CO2 by the plant converted to simple sugar glucose atp and what not by utilizing light energy. That's great and if the story ended there then sweet we can all sing kumbaya and ride our unicorns home.

BUT studies have shown that converting corn to ethanol in a government subsidized market has lead to increased clearing of rain-forest. Just fyi the CO2 absorption of 1 acre of living rain-forest greatly exceeds that of 1 acre of corn. One such study was preformed by the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences again confirmed the above statement and concluded that the combined climate change and health cost are:

• $469m for Gas
• $472-$952m for Corn Ethanol
• $123-$208m for Cellulosic Ethanol

Cellulosic Ethanol could help reduce green house emissions by as much as 90% when compared to pure gas. It is much cleaner fuel and research has shown it has far less of an impact on deforestation rates. But cellulose ethanol is not feasible to produce on a massive scale.

I understand that the initial theory was that CO2 emissions due to the production of ethanol would be canceled out by the next crop but that has proved to be short sighted. Study's have shown that it is not as neutral as many had thought, CO2 released from the processing of the corn into ethanol for example is not counterbalanced. Another study shows that burning 1 liter of ethanol vs 1 liter of pure gas netted only a 20% reduction in greenhouse gasses.

When you factor in the cost:

• Deforestation
• CO2 resulting from production not being canceled out
• 34% less energy per unit than gasoline

for the benifit:

• 20% reduction in greenhouse gasses (if running e-100)
• renewability

it doesn't equate. All things equal you are reducing the energy potential of a unit of fuel by blending which reduces the range that the vehicle can travel on that one unit. Potentially by 30%. So instead of going 100 miles you only go 70 miles on that fuel unit, and realistically you aren't seeing the full 20% reduction in greenhouse gasses with a blend. So is it worth it to burn more fuel to go less distance?

So yes the theory is amazing, but it doesn't capture the whole picture. I'm happy to share the studies if you are interested.

 

[Malleus]

x2. It'd be a great idea, if it were true.

 

[abuck99]

The AV gas will have a negative effect on certain plastic parts, fittings, sensors if left in there for too long. Dilute, run that stuff out of the tank asap, and refill with premium pump gas.

 

[SmokingRocks]

No need for the premium unless its E-0

 

[abuck99]

No need for the premium unless its E-0

Here at lower elevation I find that my truck runs Mo-better on 93 Octane. Elixir for a high mileage motor.

 

[SmokingRocks]

@abuck99 How advanced is your timing set?

 

[Proven]

E85 (15% corn juice) has roughly 30% less energy content as a gallon of pure gas.

Also ethanol blends deteriorate rubber, plastics and fiberglass. While there’s not much fiberglass in the fuel system there are tons of rubber hoses, o-rings and plastic pump parts and injectors..

Apparently auto parts stores are now selling rubber that is specifically designed to resist this deterioration but from what I’ve read it just prolongs the inevitable.
View attachment 1590198

Gas stations around me have started offering "REC" Gas which is short for "Recreation" Gas (REC-90 - Wikipedia). This is gas without Ethanol and was intended for use in small non-automotive engines. Usually sells for more than the current blended gas. Unlike Diesel, they don't use a different nozzle so you could pump it easily into your Cruiser. I use REC-90 in all my mowers, weed eaters, blowers and small engines. I also advised my brother in law to ONLY use it in his boat. No issues over 6 years besides routine maintenance.

I worked for a power sports OEM and we had some pretty awful experiences because of the change to ethanol from MTBE fuels. Ethanol produced less power in outboard engines, ATV's and motorcycles which gave users a bad feeling so they started showing up at dealerships for "Warranty" work. We had older model units that had been run hard for years showing up because the ethanol was cleaning out their gummed up fuel tanks and pushing that trash into the fuel systems. When the hoses started failing on older products they blamed the OEM for defective materials/craftsmanship. Customers blamed the OEM and not the gas. The change cost a immeasurable amount of money to the OEM engine industry.

Ethanol fuels shelf life is also much much shorter than the old MTBE fuels. The standardized test was done under "Normal" conditions in a sealed system. Basically 70% humidity on an average warm day without accounting for precipitation or temperature fluctuations. Under that testing they deemed 90-100 days stable. The MTBE fuels were stable for multiple years using the same parameters.

So - because of ground water pollution concerns caused by damaged/leaking underground fuel storage tanks we went to an option that yields less power, uses a food/feed source as a base material and is less stable in storage without aftermarket additives.

Expanding on that - it doesn't get a lot of play on the news - The price of beef and dairy has increased year over year as a result (Ethanol Helps Boost Meat Prices) because we are using corn that would have been surplus to be used for feed. Instead that excess is going to make fuel additives. So now corn farmers are selling less for feed stock and more for fuel stocks. When the price of feed goes up, so does the price of food.

Sorry about the long winded message...this just hit a painful nerve.

To the OP - Don't use fuels that aren't found in the listings of your owners manual. Which means no E10 either...good luck! lol.

 

[onemanarmy]

Is that bad. I just got done installing my COMEUP Winch 9.5 rsi Seal . I was so happy I drove to the little local airstrip to Photograph it. And after I was done I put 15 Gallons of 100 octane low lead AV Gas in my Landcruiser.
Is that an issue? I have never done this before. I was stoked and it was a spur of the moment idea.
Cruiser runs great, seems to have a little more quicker response on the pedal.
A little more power as well.
I live in California, vehicles call for Unleaded Fuel.
Will this hurt the CAT? or anything else?
btw, Shell Premium is going for 3.50 a gallon, the AV Gas was 4.50 a gallon. Here in the Napa Valley.
Not planning on doing this again.

super confused
did you do this on purpose?

if not:
were there other nozzles there as well (reg, mid, premium) car gas next to the aviation fuel?
The nozzles are the same size?
How did you pay? Didn't notice the price difference? attendant didn't stop you or at least question you? no signage?
Why would one assume that car gas would be readily available at an airstrip near the plane refueling area?
Were there other cars there fueling up?
on your phone the entire time and not paying attention to the world around you? I'm seeing this more and more.

 

[lastresort576]

I like you smoking rocks. Haha. You gotta be from the boulder area with all that knowledge.