I'm happy you are doing these videos. There are still a lot of people in aviation that don't know about this fuel, and the testing that has been done on it. It's a drop-in replacement for 100LL, and is much better for your engine.
This report on the engine's parameters using G100UL is useful. However, Jon's term "licensing" as well as a POH and limitations are not relevant to experimental amateur built aircraft. These are "certificated" with a special airworthiness certificate which certifies they are safe for flight, and receive operating limitations (not "opspecs" which are for 135/121 operations) from a DAR or the FSDO. An EAB's operating limitations contain no reference to allowed/disallowed fuels and changing fuels is not a major alteration mandating return to phase I. Jon's documents are evidence of good, methodical testing and operation, but they are not required. I am eager to try G100UL in my RV-7 with O-360 with 9:1 compression, so this report is very useful. Just need to have it be available...
I fly a Rotax 912ULS. I’m eager to use the new unleaded aviation gas. I mostly use 91 octane automotive fuel. Unless on a cross country. I hate the lead.
These useless little toy airplanes do nothing to promote the advantage of Gami’s new fuel. It’s not going to get the ball really moving until a P51 or F4U Corsair owner gives his insight on how much better their V12 or R2800 engine runs.
You're thinking of King Airs. At this point, P51s and especially Corsairs more qualify as toys than planes like this that people actually fly around. Outside of airshows, nobody flies a Corsair. And then, it's only so people can hear the big noise it makes. P51s have a way cool retro look, but they're for airshows and air races.
Yes, But don't King Airs have turbo prop engines that burn jet fuel-kerosene?? Heck even Ag Sprayers are going turboprop. There aren't many old Queen Airs flying anymore, they would burn 100 ox. Other wise there is some gasoline hi po single & twin engine Cessna's & Barons, Bonanzas & some high power Pipers etc yet but?
Actually during the war the Allied warbirds had like up to 150 octane leaded Av gas, that was one of the allied advantages over Germany right? We had good & plentifully fuel.
![ARGENTINA vs. BOLIVIA [6-0] | RESUMEN | ELIMINATORIAS SUDAMERICANAS | FECHA 10](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/C3wPtKNbAOA/mqdefault.jpg)
Everyone has known, for a long time, that lead in fuel is a terrible thing. At least the FAA finally got on board. Nice video!
I'm happy you are doing these videos. There are still a lot of people in aviation that don't know about this fuel, and the testing that has been done on it. It's a drop-in replacement for 100LL, and is much better for your engine.
This report on the engine's parameters using G100UL is useful. However, Jon's term "licensing" as well as a POH and limitations are not relevant to experimental amateur built aircraft. These are "certificated" with a special airworthiness certificate which certifies they are safe for flight, and receive operating limitations (not "opspecs" which are for 135/121 operations) from a DAR or the FSDO. An EAB's operating limitations contain no reference to allowed/disallowed fuels and changing fuels is not a major alteration mandating return to phase I.
Jon's documents are evidence of good, methodical testing and operation, but they are not required. I am eager to try G100UL in my RV-7 with O-360 with 9:1 compression, so this report is very useful. Just need to have it be available...
aviation is only 60 years behind the rest of the world
I fly a Rotax 912ULS. I’m eager to use the new unleaded aviation gas. I mostly use 91 octane automotive fuel. Unless on a cross country. I hate the lead.
Imagine when the US discovers liquid cooled engines. IO 390 is a 90 year old engine.
What is the difference in vapor pressure between 100LL and G100UL?
Very interesting video
These useless little toy airplanes do nothing to promote the advantage of Gami’s new fuel. It’s not going to get the ball really moving until a P51 or F4U Corsair owner gives his insight on how much better their V12 or R2800 engine runs.
It seems weird to to dismiss one of the most popular GA planes for 2 aircraft that haven’t been relevant for 80 years.
Not useless or a toy, just an ignorant comment from a non-pilot. Boo you.
You're thinking of King Airs.
At this point, P51s and especially Corsairs more qualify as toys than planes like this that people actually fly around.
Outside of airshows, nobody flies a Corsair. And then, it's only so people can hear the big noise it makes. P51s have a way cool retro look, but they're for airshows and air races.
Yes, But don't King Airs have turbo prop engines that burn jet fuel-kerosene?? Heck even Ag Sprayers are going turboprop. There aren't many old Queen Airs flying anymore, they would burn 100 ox. Other wise there is some gasoline hi po single & twin engine Cessna's & Barons, Bonanzas & some high power Pipers etc yet but?
Actually during the war the Allied warbirds had like up to 150 octane leaded Av gas, that was one of the allied advantages over Germany right? We had good & plentifully fuel.