Here is a list of most racing fuels
http://www.ridgenet.net/~hideseng/dc_list.htm , note the asterisk. It may be
helpful to some. I remember last year Sunoco caused a big stink when they
changed the formula in their unleaded race fuel that is the spec fuel in Grand
Am, ALMS, ect. Well apparently there was enough ethanol in it to corrode a lot
of fuel system, and a lot of racers didn't know about it. Well everyone soon
knew about it when they all put it in their cars, only to have their fuel cells
deteriorate. It also does seem everytime they ban a certain dangerous chemical
in a fuel, the new chemical that replaces it is even more dangerous and
corrosive. It totally defeats the purpose of the original ban.
Also for those with enough patience, time, and interest these two threads are a
decent read, http://www.coloradoscca.org/prodcar/viewtopic.php?t=4080&start=0
it's main topic is the spec fuels at the Runoffs, but they do talk about
additives somewhat and the use of "super
fuels".http://www.coloradoscca.org/prodcar/viewtopic.php?t=3946&start=0 just
more discussion of what fuels are used and some more on "super fuels".
Bill Babcock <BillB@bnj.com> wrote:
Actually, the stringent fuel regs mean more weird additives, not less. Most
low-octane pump gas products won't pass SCCA dialectric tests. The simple
additives can't be used. The aim is to eliminate the highly toxic ones. The
end result is all kinds of weird rocket fuel being used to get past the test
and still deliver 105-plus octane or octane equivalent. Two years ago when I
running a Radical in DSR, I got some stuff at Laguna (or maybe Sears) that
smelled like shoe polish, and passed the test for SCCA a few weeks later but
took on some of the color from my poly fuel can. Yikes.
Conversely, the stuff I got from Pacific Raceways when they first put the
new big aboveground fuel tanks in looked and smelled like normal gasoline,
and worked fine, but I had to wash my fuel cans out with Avgas and fill and
pump Avgas through my fuel cell to get fuel to pass the dielectric test
after using it. About had me pulling my hair out. I got DQ'ed on an easy win
from fuel testing after the race.
Bill Babcock
Babcock & Jenkins
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-fot@autox.team.net [mailto:owner-fot@autox.team.net] On Behalf
Of Rocky Entriken
Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2005 10:10 AM
To: BillDentin@aol.com; fot@autox.team.net
Subject: Re: Unfriendly Racing Gas Additives
With SCCA's stringent fuel regs -- and SCCA is not the only sanctioning body
taking a hard line on fuel, and those making racing gas know it -- I'm
skeptical of additives even being there to do such things. I'd be more
suspicious of quality control of the floats themselves (also explaining why
older ones are better).
We get so much aftermarket crap nowadays that cannot hold a candle to the
original....
--Rocky Entriken
----- Original Message -----
From:
To:
Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2005 8:20 AM
Subject: Unfriendly Racing Gas Additives
> Amici:
>
> Three or four years ago, we were having a tremendous problem with leaky SU
> carb floats. Six or eight failures in ten events. We assumed it was some
> new
> additive in the racing gas, which the solder in the floats did not like.
> We
> also determined that an old float lasted longer than the new ones
> available.
>
> The following year the problem seemed to go away, and we again assumed it
> was
> a change in the racing gas. Well, it may be back. Bob Wismer is racing
> down
> south, and in two events (Sebring and Moroso) he has had two leaky floats.
> Maybe the gremlin is back. Worth watching for, anyway.
>
> Bill Dentinger
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
|