gas or fool

[Stainless1]

Dan, does this mean the book can go to the printers? 

BTW, I heard a rumor that BNI membership was going up almost 17%, heard anything on that?

[fastesthonda_jim]

DW, thanks for the yes's cept it's two yes's for three, count 'em, three questions.  Please help those of us who are easily confused as to which yes belongs to which question.

And yes about the "trophy" e-mail.  I'm trying to co-ordinate the delivery today.

Jim

[Sumner]

Thanks Jon for posting that and also Dan for Rick's comments.  In my mind I feel better about it for what that is worth  .

I do have a couple questions just for my own curiosity and not meant to slow up the rule book anymore.

Jon's post says

The addition of even 2 % Methanol to Gasoline will raise the DC meter to 20 or more.

yet the rule proposal says

no more than 10% methanol

 and

any gasoline that measures 15.0 or less on the D.C. scale and meets all other S.C.T.A. requirements will be allowed

.  This seems to be at odds with each other.  If 2% will take it over the 15.0 then how will the 10% work??

And the last thing I wonder about is Rick's comments

DIELECTRIC VALUE OR CONSTANT IS NOT CONSIDERED A PROPERTY WHICH DEFINES GASOLINE OR CAN BE USED TO GAUGE GASOLINE QUALITY.  AS I TOLD JIM LATTIN EARLIER THIS YEAR WHEN ASKED: "I THINK IT WOULD BE A MISTAKE FOR SCTA TO GO DOWN THIS ROAD.  THE REASON ??  THEIR IS NO BACKUP IN THE STANDARDS OR LITERATURE FROM EITHER THE ASTM (AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR TESTING AND MATERIALS) OR THE API (AMERICAN PETROLEUM INSTITUTE) WHICH SUPPORTS THIS KIND OF TESTING FOR THE PURPOSES OF DEFINING OR QUALIFYING A MOTOR FUEL AS GASOLINE."

.

If he doesn't think D.C. is a good way to test/define gasoline did he have any suggestions/solutions to that problem.  I realize that the rule modification doesn't rule out other tests, but does seem to say that over a D.C. of 15 will disqualify it as gas and be the overriding consideration??

I feel at least that I know a little more about this than I did a week or so ago and can see that it is not an easy situation to get a handle on with all the different types of "gases" out there.

c ya,

Sum

[Dean Los Angeles]

We could have had this conversation 10, 20, even 30 years ago. Nothing has changed. What we want is to run gasoline, a slippery substance that is constantly changing. 30 years ago gasoline, which is nothing more than a definition of an empty container that is filled with as many as 40 different hydrocarbon compounds in a million variations. Today you can add in all the other non-hydrocarbon blends that define gasoline today.

If you intend for the racer to show up with a container full of some unknown liquid and attempt to verify the contents, you have a long road ahead of you.

This is why event gas is the only real solution.

ERC provides racing gasoline that has no roots in pump gas. Why worry about pump gas? SCTA came up with the event gas rule to make less work, but doesn't provide event gas at El Mirage. Seems like an easy fix to me. Make event gas the only solution. Since there are no stock engine classes in LSR, leave it up to the racer to conform to the gasoline provided.

The American Power Boat Association has a good series of articles on testing fuels. Scroll to the bottom of the page.
http://www.apba-racing.com/downloads.html

[Dean Los Angeles]

The addition of even 2 % Methanol to Gasoline will raise the DC meter to 20 or more.  I don’t know why one would do that because Methanol does not yield much more BTU that Gas (about 1.5%).

Somebody didn't do their homework. Methanol provides LESS BTU's than gasoline.

Comparing makes no sense unless you consider the air/fuel ratio.
Gasoline      20,943 BTUs/lb       14.7:1 air/fuel ratio by mass   1415 BTU’s/lb of air.
Methanol      9,770 BTUs/lb       6.4:1 air/fuel ratio by mass    1527 BTU’s/lb of air
Methanol gets you about 22% more power. Adding 10% to the gasoline would be worth it. Even if you only get a miniscule improvement at 2% it's free horsepower. Why wouldn't you?

The addition of 1 % Nitro Methane will raise the DC constant to about 35 +.

I'm not an expert on DC, but pure nitromethane has a DC of 39.4. Seems unlikely that 1% would raise the DC from 2 to 35+

[dwarner]

"SCTA came up with the event gas rule to make less work, but doesn't provide event gas at El Mirage."

I don't think it is a matter of less work, more of a control issue. There is no vendor willing to provide gasoline at El Mirage, not enough sales.


You have pointed out the problems in many pages of posts. I have yet to see your suggested solution other than poviding "event gas" at El Mirage which is a non-solution.

DW

[fastesthonda_jim]

Dan, et al,

I know the "simple" subject of what is gasoline is far more complex than what is not gasoline, and I'm aware of at least a few of the problems that are faced.

Would a solution be to allow racers to run a finite number, say six, of differing but specific gasolines, one with a high octane for blown gas, one with high oxygen for un-blown gas, etc., etc.  In other words to be in gas class you have to run either A, B, or C from ERC, or D, E, or F from VP.  I mean if I'm not mistaken many sanctioning bodies already have a spec "gas" for their classes.

Now I know the rule book continues to get fatter... scuse me, thicker.... er, ummm.... okay, have more pages, and that the original intent was to make things simpler, but times have changed.  Last time I heard, there were something like 94 different formulations of gasoline being sold across the U.S.  The challenge of keeping up for a volunteer organization is not possible.

Yes it's pricier to pay $10/gal for C16 than $3.54... scuse me $3.65.... oops $3.72 for "pump" gas but in the long run it just might be cheaper.  You come to tech.  You get your tank "flashlighted".  You open your sealed can of spec fuel "E" and pour it in.  Your tank gets sealed.  Your 5 gal drum gets sealed.  You go race.  You want to fuel up, you come back through the "gas" line at tech and get un-sealed and re-sealed.

Pretty much just like at the salt, except each racer is his/her own vendor of only SCTA approved gasolines.

My 2 cents... er... ummm $10.00.

Jim Knapp

[Dean Los Angeles]

You have pointed out the problems in many pages of posts. I have yet to see your suggested solution other than poviding "event gas" at El Mirage which is a non-solution.

DW

Well, haven't you hit the nail on the head. There isn't a solution. I, and SCTA wish there was a simple, reliable test for gasoline.

Professional racing series can afford a rolling laboratory to check fuel. A volunteer organization like SCTA probably wouldn't want to foot the bill, much less be able to staff it.

Jim may have the best idea going. Bring sealed cans to inspection. No, the cost would be far more than the cost of the racing fuel because you would have to have an empty tank and a sealed can. Any fuel left from the last race can't be used, and that could be a lot of gas over a racing season. Still the easiest path for both the racer and SCTA. I don't see the need for anything other than a single fuel. Let the racers conform to the fuel, not try and conform the fuel for the racer.

I think a different view on vendor gas might help. You say vendor gas at El Mirage is out. When you look at what SCTA is trying to achieve, which is a level playing field, then maybe SCTA should consider being the vendor. Resell from ERC. Not enough sales is the issue. Right now the 100+ competitors have no reason to buy fuel at El Mirage, other than convenience. If El Mirage was a mandatory event gas venue, then that picture would change overnight. We have the new building. Is there storage space there? I know, insurance, fire safety, etc.

The other option is the one chosen. That gets you the chemists versus the SCTA. Headaches are sure to follow. I am going to run what ever legal gas I can get, but I am certainly capable of changing my mind and giving who ever is on the other side a run for their money, and I'd put money on me! If not me, then someone else. I know that 10% of anyone racing, no matter the organization, stays up nights poring over the rule book looking for an edge.

So, which option presents the better path for SCTA?

[fastesthonda_jim]

Dean,

It's not "that" expensive.  True, eventhough I have a rough idea how much gas I'll use in a pass, I usually overfill so that (horrors!) I don't run out.  The exess gas after a meet is going to go more or less south by the next mee so I just toss it into my non-converter equipped generator.  Pricey electricity, but better than throwing it out. 

And then you bring the rest of the 5 gal drum to the next race, where under watchful eyes it is unsealed and the contents poured into the empty fuel tank in the car.  Then all is re-sealed and we go race.

I suggested the number six for allowed fuels so that folks would have a chance to play around a bit with different combos to see which makes the most power.  My belief is a mandated one of anything will stifle the creativity that makes LSR so fun.  You want booorrriiinnnggg  go watch taxi cab racing (AKA NASCAR).  Different paint jobs racing each other.

Another $.02/$10

Jim Knapp

[Stainless1]

Well, haven't you hit the nail on the head. There isn't a solution. I, and SCTA wish there was a simple, reliable test for gasoline.

Jim may have the best idea going. Bring sealed cans to inspection. No, the cost would be far more than the cost of the racing fuel because you would have to have an empty tank and a sealed can. Any fuel left from the last race can't be used, and that could be a lot of gas over a racing season. Still the easiest path for both the racer and SCTA. I don't see the need for anything other than a single fuel. Let the racers conform to the fuel, not try and conform the fuel for the racer.

Dean, how is having a vendor different than Jim's suggestion.  You would still have to show up with an empty tank.  Of course you still have the folks that might seal there own VP can... as you suggest, maybe everyone out there would cheat...   
But if the inspectors only have to compare to 6 samples, they wouldn't need a thick book of every gas in the neighborhood.  I think Jim hit the nail.... 

[Dean Los Angeles]

But if the inspectors only have to compare to 6 samples, they wouldn't need a thick book of every gas in the neighborhood.  I think Jim hit the nail....  grin

Don't say things if you aren't going to finish. Let me help.

"I think Jim hit the nail with his head!"

And the inspectors wouldn't have to do any samples. The can is sealed, or it isn't. I still think 6 is too many.

Hey! There might be a reason Jim was #1!

I notice Jack D posted today. Nice to see him back. Never met him, still missed him.

[1212FBGS]

humm lets see... i come empty and the SCTA checks me, then the SCTA seals me, and if i need more gas i have to go back to the SCAT and get my SCTA seal checked then opened and refill in the sight of the SCTA and then get resealed by the SCTA , and then i can get back in line..... sounds like a lot of work for the competitor and a SCTA volenteer that a posisition needs to be created and then staffed by someone that is knowledgeable and competant... oh and will show up and help for the next 10 years...... my vote is nope.... how bout we run what we what to run and if ya set a record ya pee in the little cup and hope she'll pass... ya know...kinda like we do it now....it aint broke and we got some more rope...lets race...
kent

[willieworld]

i ll  second that       willie buchta

[ol38y]

Just a thought, what about an approved list to choose from. Kinda like event gas cept you buy it yourself.    You'd still be tested but you'd have some guidelines.

I ain't smart enough to play with fuel mixtures, yet, but at least us dummies have some guidelines...   

Larry

[dwarner]

Larry,

Aren't the guidelines within the rule? You tell the provider what you can use and they sell you the best they have for your combination.

DW