Page 1 of 1
avgas
Posted: Tue Jun 20, 2006 12:16 pm
by Subcanis
Some of you may remmber me asking about running 100LL in my KLR. No?
Recap:
I work at my local airport, and we have to sump all our fuel trucks
daily. I have anywhere from 55 to 165 gallons of 100LL at my disposal
every week. We cant sell it, and all of our fuel trucks are.
So, I decided to try it (against some of the advice I got on here).
Runs fine. No, runs GREAT. It runs cooler and I get better MPG. The
plug shows no sign of lead fouling whatsoever. Valves look just as
they should. I havent been running it straight, I tend to run half a
tank down, then top off with 100LL, then run it down half again, fill
with pump 88, so its about 50/50 (just to reduce the lead content).
So yeah, Im going for a ride.
Chris in WY
avgas
Posted: Tue Jun 20, 2006 3:20 pm
by Adam
Chris,
I am no expert but from what I understand it only hurts in high
performance applications when people try to substitute it for a
racing fuel because it burns slower. I would run it, especially if
it was FREE. The KLR motor wont know the difference, heck you could
probably pee in the tank and it would be ok. I have run some weird
fuel (Mexico mobile roadside fuel stations) or better known as a
drum in the back of a pick up with no problems. In short, I would
run it and the small amount lead in the fuel will make your valves
very happy.
Adam
04 KLR650
04 KTM450MXC
--- In
DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com, "Subcanis" wrote:
>
> Some of you may remmber me asking about running 100LL in my KLR.
No?
>
> Recap:
> I work at my local airport, and we have to sump all our fuel trucks
> daily. I have anywhere from 55 to 165 gallons of 100LL at my
disposal
> every week. We cant sell it, and all of our fuel trucks are.
>
> So, I decided to try it (against some of the advice I got on
here).
> Runs fine. No, runs GREAT. It runs cooler and I get better MPG.
The
> plug shows no sign of lead fouling whatsoever. Valves look just as
> they should. I havent been running it straight, I tend to run
half a
> tank down, then top off with 100LL, then run it down half again,
fill
> with pump 88, so its about 50/50 (just to reduce the lead
content).
>
> So yeah, Im going for a ride.
> Chris in WY
>
avgas
Posted: Tue Jun 20, 2006 3:57 pm
by afmcg1
I already did this reply, but I'm new to the group, so I guess I just
sent it to the original poster, here it is for everyone else...
My buddy runs 100LL in his CRF450. When he did the top end after
~40hrs, the combustion chamber was full of yellowish deposits,
including on the exh valve stems. It looked terrible to me, I have
some pics on my comp at home. Granted, I don't think he diluted it,
and the 450s burn a bit of oil, so those may have been contributing
factors.
This was enough to keep me from using it, and I run pump 91 in my KLR
and KLX, and pump 100 in my CRF450.
If the 100LL is free...I guess it depends on how comfortable you are
with deposits. Maybe you won't have any issues.
--- In
DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com, "Adam" wrote:
>
> Chris,
>
> I am no expert but from what I understand it only hurts in high
> performance applications when people try to substitute it for a
> racing fuel because it burns slower. I would run it, especially if
> it was FREE. The KLR motor wont know the difference, heck you
could
> probably pee in the tank and it would be ok. I have run some weird
> fuel (Mexico mobile roadside fuel stations) or better known as a
> drum in the back of a pick up with no problems. In short, I would
> run it and the small amount lead in the fuel will make your valves
> very happy.
>
> Adam
>
> 04 KLR650
> 04 KTM450MXC
>
>
> --- In
DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com, "Subcanis" wrote:
> >
> > Some of you may remmber me asking about running 100LL in my KLR.
> No?
> >
> > Recap:
> > I work at my local airport, and we have to sump all our fuel
trucks
> > daily. I have anywhere from 55 to 165 gallons of 100LL at my
> disposal
> > every week. We cant sell it, and all of our fuel trucks are.
> >
> > So, I decided to try it (against some of the advice I got on
> here).
> > Runs fine. No, runs GREAT. It runs cooler and I get better MPG.
> The
> > plug shows no sign of lead fouling whatsoever. Valves look just
as
> > they should. I havent been running it straight, I tend to run
> half a
> > tank down, then top off with 100LL, then run it down half again,
> fill
> > with pump 88, so its about 50/50 (just to reduce the lead
> content).
> >
> > So yeah, Im going for a ride.
> > Chris in WY
> >
>
new member - howdy!
Posted: Fri Aug 04, 2006 2:06 pm
by revmaaatin
> On Aug 3, 2006, at 8:27 PM, revmaaatin wrote:
>
> > I see in your link, it appears the med-helo is a single-engine,
two-
> > blade Bell-212 (UH-1), BELL-412 is a dual-engine, etc....
Hello list,
I got a note-4-correction from our friend Clint:
SNIP-SNIP
On Fri, 04 Aug 2006 16:09 , Clinton Kendall
sent:
>A Bell 212 (UH-1N) is also twin-engine.
UNSNIP-SNIP
I responded:
Hi Clinton,
You sir, are correct, mostly sort of. I went back to the 'book' and
took another look. I am looking at page 147 of the Jane's
Encyclopedia of Aviation dtd 1980, and it indeed shows a picture,
description: " Bell Model 212 Twin Two-Twelve" (word for
word), "developed initially for a Canadian requirement." The
picture is a working model over an oil platform.
So to be painfully correct, a UH-1N (which I have actually flown, 3.3
hours I think; 66 hours of Bell 212) is most correctly described as a
Bell 212 Twin Two Twelve, accoridng to Jane's.
Thus ends another round of stump-the-chump! or the USMC cruise game
of choice: min-usha trivia for $20!
Thanks. I learned something today.
END OF REPLY
Where else can you get useful KLR information, and, a lesson in
aircraft identification, for the same price?
revmaaatin. sometimes correctly ID'ing an aircraft is like trying to
determine the sex of a cat. Only useful if you want more/less cats