---------------------------------------------------------- JabiruEngine-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Fri 07/04/14: 6 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 03:18 AM - Re: Auto Fuel (Clive james) 2. 04:15 AM - Re: Auto Fuel (FLYaDIVE) 3. 04:39 AM - Re: Auto Fuel (Rob Turk) 4. 04:51 AM - Re: Auto Fuel (FLYaDIVE) 5. 06:21 PM - Re: Auto Fuel (Wayne Lenox) 6. 11:26 PM - Re: Auto Fuel (Rob Turk) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 03:18:06 AM PST US From: Clive james Subject: Re: JabiruEngine-List: Auto Fuel I tried 91 octane mogas 50-50 with 94 octane mogas in my 2200, ran like a ba g of spanners, drained it out and put it in the car and put fresh 94 and she was sweet again. 91 octane is too low for Jabs, certainly in Uk, 91 is for T iger Moths etc, really low compression, though it can be variable, I know on e field that ave switched back to Avgas because of that. Regards Clive > On 3 Jul 2014, at 23:22, FLYaDIVE wrote: > > Bobby: > > There is a huge amount of information on running MoGas Vs AvGas. MoGas wi ns hands down. > The limiting factor for the octane rating is the compression ratio of the e ngine. Cars have compression ratios in the range of 8.5:1 to 12:1. And the y all use 92 octane AND that rating is obtained by the (R1+R2)/2 method - WH ICH is not as good as using a Knock Engine. AND - Just think of it all thos e cars can run on 92 octane!!! There is NO reason for you to spend the extr a money trying to obtain an increase of ONE (1) octane number ESPECIALLY sin ce you have NO way of proving that you are even getting that much! > > I have been using 91 octane on a 180+ HP Lycoming O-360 engine for years w ithout a single problem. Mater of fact... The spark plugs LQQK GREAT, no l ead fouling. Compression ratio: 9.5:1... Before Mods, I would guess 10.5:1 but I never did the math. I also have been running MoGas on an O-320 150+ H P HC for years and can say the same thing... UNTIL New Jersey went the way o f ethanol gas... Now I switched to AvGas - NOT a DROP of ethanol free gas i s available in this lousy Damn-O-Cratic state of NJ! > > Barry > > > > > > >> On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 5:20 PM, wrote: >> Guys >> I have been using Marine fuel ( automotive boosted to 92 octane ) for yea rs and boosting it to 93 octane. >> I just read an item from Jabiru USA that says 91 octane is O.K. >> Check it out. >> >> http://www.usjabiru.com/JabiruEngines_D0PT.html >> >> I was very careful adapting from 100 LL to the 93 octane marine fuel by p utting the 93 in one tank and taking off on the other with 100LL. Loading th e engine gradually to make sure it was not detonating. I was wondering if an y one has been using 91 Octane NON ethanol auto fuel with good results. I us ed 93 Octane ethanol for a while but got concerned about how long it would s tay in the tank before breaking down or collecting water. I have had bad exp eriences with ethanol in lawn equipment that is not used regularly and do no t use it any more. >> >> Bobby ( age 76 ) >> Zodiac 601 XL "B" >> Jabiru 3300 S/N 1141 >> Sensenich 64" x 51" Prop >> Bing Carb 260 Main & 290 Needle Jet >> Status - Flying 217 hrs. >> >> >> >> >> >> ist" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?JabiruEngine-Li st >> tp://forums.matronics.com >> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution >> > > > 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3 D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3 D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3 D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D 3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3 D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 04:15:51 AM PST US Subject: Re: JabiruEngine-List: Auto Fuel From: FLYaDIVE Clive: Tiger Moth (very old plane/engine) and many of the 1970 planes were designed to run on 80 Octane. That is 6.5:1 compression up to 8.5:1 compression. BUT! That is 80 octane as proven/tested by an anti-knock engine. Not a home-brew mixing of gas, or even the MoGas divide by two (2) method. The question is: What is the compression ratio of the Jab and is yours equal to that or any higher? On the O-320 the case halves have been machined down 0.010" each (total of 0.020") so the compression ratio has been increased to above the published 9.5:1 ratio. Barry On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 6:17 AM, Clive james wrote: > I tried 91 octane mogas 50-50 with 94 octane mogas in my 2200, ran like a > bag of spanners, drained it out and put it in the car and put fresh 94 and > she was sweet again. 91 octane is too low for Jabs, certainly in Uk, 91 is > for Tiger Moths etc, really low compression, though it can be variable, I > know one field that ave switched back to Avgas because of that. > Regards Clive > > ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 04:39:46 AM PST US From: Rob Turk Subject: Re: JabiruEngine-List: Auto Fuel Why do you think Jabiru has increased the barrel size over time from 106mm to 106.5, then 107 and now 107.5mm? On 7/4/2014 1:15 PM, FLYaDIVE wrote: > Clive: > > Tiger Moth (very old plane/engine) and many of the 1970 planes were > designed to run on 80 Octane. That is 6.5:1 compression up to 8.5:1 > compression. BUT! That is 80 octane as proven/tested by an > anti-knock engine. Not a home-brew mixing of gas, or even the MoGas > divide by two (2) method. The question is: What is the compression > ratio of the Jab and is yours equal to that or any higher? On the > O-320 the case halves have been machined down 0.010" each (total of > 0.020") so the compression ratio has been increased to above the > published 9.5:1 ratio. > > Barry > > > On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 6:17 AM, Clive james > wrote: > > I tried 91 octane mogas 50-50 with 94 octane mogas in my 2200, ran > like a bag of spanners, drained it out and put it in the car and > put fresh 94 and she was sweet again. 91 octane is too low for > Jabs, certainly in Uk, 91 is for Tiger Moths etc, really low > compression, though it can be variable, I know one field that ave > switched back to Avgas because of that. > Regards Clive > > > * > > > * ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 04:51:56 AM PST US Subject: Re: JabiruEngine-List: Auto Fuel From: FLYaDIVE I don't know! Did they ever publish the reason why? Bigger bore equals: Lower compression More volume More HP Maybe better burning/ignition properties? Maybe a less expensive set of rings or piston? Maybe easier starts Maybe lower CHT's So, what are the answers? Barry On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 7:39 AM, Rob Turk wrote: > Why do you think Jabiru has increased the barrel size over time from > 106mm to 106.5, then 107 and now 107.5mm? > > > On 7/4/2014 1:15 PM, FLYaDIVE wrote: > > Clive: > > Tiger Moth (very old plane/engine) and many of the 1970 planes were > designed to run on 80 Octane. That is 6.5:1 compression up to 8.5:1 > compression. BUT! That is 80 octane as proven/tested by an anti-knock > engine. Not a home-brew mixing of gas, or even the MoGas divide by two (2) > method. The question is: What is the compression ratio of the Jab and is > yours equal to that or any higher? On the O-320 the case halves have been > machined down 0.010" each (total of 0.020") so the compression ratio has > been increased to above the published 9.5:1 ratio. > > Barry > > > On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 6:17 AM, Clive james wrote: > >> I tried 91 octane mogas 50-50 with 94 octane mogas in my 2200, ran like >> a bag of spanners, drained it out and put it in the car and put fresh 94 >> and she was sweet again. 91 octane is too low for Jabs, certainly in Uk, 91 >> is for Tiger Moths etc, really low compression, though it can be variable, >> I know one field that ave switched back to Avgas because of that. >> Regards Clive >> >> >> > > > * > > > * > > ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 06:21:30 PM PST US From: Wayne Lenox Subject: Re: JabiruEngine-List: Auto Fuel > On Jul 3, 2014, at 6:17 PM, wb2ssj wrote: > > I have used 91 octane non ethanol for 12 years now and have it both in my 6 cylinder lightning and my 4 cylinder jabiru 0 problems.Tex > > > Sent on a Virgin Mobile Samsung Galaxy S=C3=82=C2=AE III > > > -------- Original message -------- > From: BobbyPaulk@comcast.net > Date:07/03/2014 5:20 PM (GMT-05:00) > To: "Server, JabiruEngine-List Digest" > Subject: JabiruEngine-List: Auto Fuel > > Guys > I have been using Marine fuel ( automotive boosted to 92 octane ) for year s and boosting it to 93 octane. > I just read an item from Jabiru USA that says 91 octane is O.K. > Check it out. > > http://www.usjabiru.com/JabiruEngines_D0PT.html > > I was very careful adapting from 100 LL to the 93 octane marine fuel by pu tting the 93 in one tank and taking off on the other with 100LL. Loading the engine gradually to make sure it was not detonating. I was wondering if any one has been using 91 Octane NON ethanol auto fuel with good results. I use d 93 Octane ethanol for a while but got concerned about how long it would st ay in the tank before breaking down or collecting water. I have had bad expe riences with ethanol in lawn equipment that is not used regularly and do not use it any more. > > Bobby ( age 76 ) > Zodiac 601 XL "B" > Jabiru 3300 S/N 1141 > Sensenich 64" x 51" Prop > Bing Carb 260 Main & 290 Needle Jet > Status - Flying 217 hrs. > > > > > ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= ========================== ========= > > =C2=C2=B7=BA~=B0=C3=AD=C2=B2,=C3=9E=C3=99=C3=8A%=C2=A2=C2=BD 4=C3=93M4}=C2=A7=1Er=B9=C2=AB=B0=C3=C3=A7{=07(=C2=BA=C2=B8=C5 =BE=C2=AD8^%=C2=C3=A2=C2=AE=C3=A1'=9A)=C3=9E.+-=12f=C2=A2=9DZ +=C2=BAe,z=C3=98^1=C2=ABk=C2=A2x=C5=93=C2=B0=C2=B8=C2=AC=C2=B4W=C5=A1=C2=B6=C3 =C3=9E=C2=B0=C3'=C2=AF=C5-=06=C2=AD=C2=A2=C2=BBhn=C2=BA0=C2=B1=C3=ABa zf=C2=A7=C3=88=C2=B8=C2=AC=C2=B6=C3=ABb=93+bz=C3=8B.r=16=C2=AC.+-R=7F=C3 =92=C2=B9=C2=BB=1C=C2=AE*m=C5-=B0=C3=C2=AD=C3=88b=C2=BD=C3=A4=C5=BE j=C2=B7!=0E=C5=92'=93-=C2=9D=C3=AC6=C2=B2=06=C2=BA0=C2=B1=C3- =C2=A1j=C3=91@@=C3=B8h=C2=B6=B9!j=C2=B7=C5=A1=C2=9D=C3=99=C2=AEr=19=C2 =AEr=19=C2=A8=C2=AD=C3=C2=A1=C2=AD=C3=A7=C3=A1=C2=B6=C3=9A=7F=C3=0C0 =84=A2=C2=ABk=C2=A2x=C5=93=C2=B1=C3=8A&=C3=BC=C3'=C2=AF=C5-=06=C2=AD=C2=A2 =C2=B2Zn*=C3=AE=12x"=C2=9D=C3=A2=C3=A2=C2=B2=C3=98m=C2=B6=C5=B8=C3=C3=83=0C &j=C3=9A=C3=A8=C5=BE',r=B0=C25=C2=AB=C3=A2=C2=81=C2=ABh=C2=AC =93=BA=C5-=C2=BB=9E=C5=BE=08=C2=A7x=C2=B8=C2=AC=C2=B7=C3=B6=C5 =92=014N4=82=AC=99X@E9=15=0CI&=C2z =C3=9Ej=C3=97(=C5=BE=C3=97=C2 =A7=C2=B5=C2=A9l=C2=A1=C2=AB=C3=9A=C5-V=BA=A2=C3=AB=C3=A2j=C3=98 ^Y=C3=C3=85=C2=A2=C2=BB=C2=C2=B1=C2=A8ky=C3=B8m=C2=B6=C5=B8=C3~=C5- =C3=AE=C5=A1=C3=89=C5=A1=C2=B6=C2=BA'=B0=C3=8B=1C=C2=A2hm=C2=B6=C5=B8=C3 ~=C5-=C3=AE=C5=A1=C3=89=C5=A1=C2=B6=C2=BA'=B0=C3=8B=1C=C2=A2o=C3=9A .+- =B0=C3=AD=C2=AE&=C3=AE=C2=B6*'Y=C3=C3=92=C5-=C3=97=9C =C2=A9=C3=A4=C3=8A=B9=C5=B8=C2=A2=C2=BC=C2=A8=C2=BA=C2=B8=1E=C2=9D =C3=C3=A8=C2=BA=C3=8B.=C2=C5=A1+=C2=B4=C3=86=C2=AD=C2=B4:=C3=9A=93 W=B9=C5-=C3=8B@vh=C2=A7j=1A=C3=9E~=1Bm=C2=A7=C3=C3=B0=C3=83 =C5 =A1=C2=B6=C2=BA'=B0=C3=8B=1C=C2=A2o=C3=9C=C2=A2{k=B0=C2=BB=C2=AD =C5-=B0=C3=A1=C2=B6=C3=9A=7F=C3=0C0=84=A2=C2=ABk=C2=A2x=C5=93=C2 =B1=C3=8A&=C3=BD=C3=8A'=C2=B6=C2=B8=BA=C2=BA=C3=98=C2=A8=C5=B8=C3=B6=C2 o=C3=B7=C3=A8=C5=BE=C3=9F=C3=A9=C2=AD=C3=AF=C3=9B=C2=A1=C3=9C=C2 -=C3=99=C2=A5 ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 11:26:27 PM PST US From: Rob Turk Subject: Re: JabiruEngine-List: Auto Fuel Jabiru has not to my knowledge published reasons why, but lower compression to make it run on poor quality, low octane fuel is an obvious one. This will be at the expense of HP. They have made many other changes, and many of them without providing a reason (or when they did, it didn't always make sense). On 7/4/2014 1:51 PM, FLYaDIVE wrote: > I don't know! Did they ever publish the reason why? > > Bigger bore equals: > Lower compression > More volume > More HP > Maybe better burning/ignition properties? > Maybe a less expensive set of rings or piston? > Maybe easier starts > Maybe lower CHT's > > So, what are the answers? > > Barry > > > On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 7:39 AM, Rob Turk > wrote: > > Why do you think Jabiru has increased the barrel size over time > from 106mm to 106.5, then 107 and now 107.5mm? > > > On 7/4/2014 1:15 PM, FLYaDIVE wrote: >> Clive: >> >> Tiger Moth (very old plane/engine) and many of the 1970 planes >> were designed to run on 80 Octane. That is 6.5:1 compression up >> to 8.5:1 compression. BUT! That is 80 octane as proven/tested >> by an anti-knock engine. Not a home-brew mixing of gas, or even >> the MoGas divide by two (2) method. The question is: What is the >> compression ratio of the Jab and is yours equal to that or any >> higher? On the O-320 the case halves have been machined down >> 0.010" each (total of 0.020") so the compression ratio has been >> increased to above the published 9.5:1 ratio. >> >> Barry >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Other Matronics Email List Services ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post A New Message jabiruengine-list@matronics.com UN/SUBSCRIBE http://www.matronics.com/subscription List FAQ http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/JabiruEngine-List.htm Web Forum Interface To Lists http://forums.matronics.com Matronics List Wiki http://wiki.matronics.com Full Archive Search Engine http://www.matronics.com/search 7-Day List Browse http://www.matronics.com/browse/jabiruengine-list Browse Digests http://www.matronics.com/digest/jabiruengine-list Browse Other Lists http://www.matronics.com/browse Live Online Chat! http://www.matronics.com/chat Archive Downloading http://www.matronics.com/archives Photo Share http://www.matronics.com/photoshare Other Email Lists http://www.matronics.com/emaillists Contributions http://www.matronics.com/contribution ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.