Don Terrill’s Speed-Talk

David Redszus wrote:

VP sells 100 octane unleaded with no metallic compounds. Sunoco 260 GT is probably similar... What do they use to raise octane?

Sunoco uses iso octane, aromatics, and oxygenates to raise fuel octane.

Doesn't VP start with price controlled aviation fuel? (they may not find their base stock priced as low once this comes to fruition)

No, VP does not use "price controlled aviation fuel. Neither does any other AvGas refinery.

From my years of dealing with VP fuels I would be willing to bet they could bring the best unleaded to the market at less than 3.00 a gallon or less if done on a global scale.

Very doubtful. Since VP must purchase fuel blend components from producer refineries, they do not have control over cost or quality or availability of certain components. In addition to very low volume production, a plethora of similar blends, and the high cost of distribution without a pipeline, their product costs are high and difficult to reduce. The oil industry must rely on massive scale at the supply end, refining and processing, as well as distribution and storage.

Good high octane fuels deteriorate very quickly and are difficult to keep fresh and un-contaminated.

correction from post above yours to my poorly worded statement.

I am not sure on that and I probable should have clarified "them bringing it to market" would be the fuel industry as a whole not VP it's self, although they have been bought out be a bigger company as I understand and has started regular gas stations with the VP logo.

any word on whether or not this 100octane pump gas will become a reality for us in the coming months?

Here there is no push for better transportation efficientcy.
Here there is only interest in gov taxing you more with a carbon tax. Basicly a guilt tax based on a lie.
Makes living more expensive. The gov is not interested in you living better, thru increased transportation efficientcy. 100 octane pump gas will never be seen here.
Just more carbon tax.

We have a number gasstations scattered around our country which supply 102 octane fuel (RON). But it's not common.
Euro95 is our 'Regular' gasoline.
Euro98 is 'Premium'.

F-BIRD'88 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 20, 2019 11:59 am Here there is only interest in gov taxing you more with a carbon tax. Basicly a guilt tax based on a lie.
Makes living more expensive. The gov is not interested in you living better, thru increased transportation efficientcy. 100 octane pump gas will never be seen here.
Just more carbon tax.

That's the truth. The carbon offsets and carbon credits and yadda yadda is some hokey B.S. if I ever saw it. It's like a they let someone from wall street try to solve the problem. I know, lets trade CARBON FUTURES. Yeah.

And this is all regardless of what you believe on climate change. It's a dunce hat worthy idea either way. Either address the issue or don't.

BigBlockMopar wrote: ↑Tue Aug 20, 2019 5:20 pm We have a number gasstations scattered around our country which supply 102 octane fuel (RON). But it's not common.
Euro95 is our 'Regular' gasoline.
Euro98 is 'Premium'.

I think Euro 95 is equal to 91 octane "(Ron+mon)/2" gas in the US and Euro 98 is equal to US 94 octane gas. That's what I'm seeing online anyway. This past weekend, I saw multiple states selling 85 octane gas with 91 as their premium. Ours is 87 octane regular unleaded and 93 octane premium.

I couldn't imagine having 85 octane all the time. It made a noticeable difference in my truck. It took more throttle to take off, keep speed up, etc... I did not like it. With states selling that low of octane still, I don't see them jumping to 100 octane fuel any time soon. But I know next to nothing about any of this except what I see aold at the pump and how it affects drivabilitg in my own vehicle.

OEs are looking at other ways to control detonation. Variable compression, water injection. . .

Zmechanic wrote: ↑Tue Aug 20, 2019 6:56 pm

F-BIRD'88 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 20, 2019 11:59 am Here there is only interest in gov taxing you more with a carbon tax. Basicly a guilt tax based on a lie.
Makes living more expensive. The gov is not interested in you living better, thru increased transportation efficientcy. 100 octane pump gas will never be seen here.
Just more carbon tax.

That's the truth. The carbon offsets and carbon credits and yadda yadda is some hokey B.S. if I ever saw it. It's like a they let someone from wall street try to solve the problem. I know, lets trade CARBON FUTURES. Yeah.

And this is all regardless of what you believe on climate change. It's a dunce hat worthy idea either way. Either address the issue or don't.

-all 1000% Correct.....additionally...it costs $$$ to make octane..period...so it will Never Happen

gruntguru wrote: ↑Wed Aug 21, 2019 1:56 am OEs are looking at other ways to control detonation. Variable compression, water injection. . .

It isn't just about detonation, but NOx pollution. And with direct injection NOx is largely reduced "naturally", allowing for smaller engines that make acceptable power via higher compression and turbocharging. Less pollution, better fuel economy, all while being able to run on kerosene-like swill needed for low evaporative emissions, doctored back up to 87 octane with ethanol.

If ya want 8 billion people in the world, ya gotta make concessions...

peejay wrote: ↑Sun Jan 12, 2020 7:31 am

gruntguru wrote: ↑Wed Aug 21, 2019 1:56 am OEs are looking at other ways to control detonation. Variable compression, water injection. . .

It isn't just about detonation, but NOx pollution. And with direct injection NOx is largely reduced "naturally", allowing for smaller engines that make acceptable power via higher compression and turbocharging. Less pollution, better fuel economy, all while being able to run on kerosene-like swill needed for low evaporative emissions, doctored back up to 87 octane with ethanol.

If ya want 8 billion people in the world, ya gotta make concessions...

Cylinder pressure fuses Nitrogen and Oxygen into NOx.

NOx is broken down in the first stage of the catalytic converter into Nitrogen and Oxygen. The Oxygen from that first stage is then used to finish burning unburnt hydrocarbons, and to convert CO into CO2. NOx is a 'good' thing now.

Before 3 stage catalytic converters, compression ratios went into the toilet and cams got retarded in order to decrease cylinder pressure, and avoid the production of NOx. They also added air pumps to engines that blew into the exhaust as an oxygen source, so the converter could burn the unburnt HC's and convert the CO.

NOx is NOT a bad thing now, and is actually a necessary component for the emission system.

Wish they would come on with the 100 octane. It's the 12th day of 2020 already

F-BIRD'88 wrote: ↑Fri Jun 30, 2017 6:18 pm BMW already has a turboed car that uses a OEM Water/methanol injection system to allow both higher compression and boost on existing fuel.

Back in the early '60's, the little 215" aluminum engine Olds was blown and had water/alcohol injection on it!

I forget if the flat-6 Corvair engine in about that time had it or not??

pdq67

pdq67 wrote: ↑Mon Jan 13, 2020 11:51 am

F-BIRD'88 wrote: ↑Fri Jun 30, 2017 6:18 pm BMW already has a turboed car that uses a OEM Water/methanol injection system to allow both higher compression and boost on existing fuel.

Back in the early '60's, the little 215" aluminum engine Olds was blown and had water/alcohol injection on it!

I forget if the flat-6 Corvair engine in about that time had it or not??

pdq67

I believe the Olds had an advertised 10-1 compression with the turbo...I also believe lack of anti detonation fluid limited the boost...I'm pretty sure the Corvair had lower compression and no fluid...Stubebaker also had mechanical superchargers at that time...
In it's day, the turbo Corvair won the Nationals twice in B/stock running 13 flat at 110 mph...

n2omike wrote: ↑Sun Jan 12, 2020 10:09 am

peejay wrote: ↑Sun Jan 12, 2020 7:31 am

gruntguru wrote: ↑Wed Aug 21, 2019 1:56 am OEs are looking at other ways to control detonation. Variable compression, water injection. . .

It isn't just about detonation, but NOx pollution. And with direct injection NOx is largely reduced "naturally", allowing for smaller engines that make acceptable power via higher compression and turbocharging. Less pollution, better fuel economy, all while being able to run on kerosene-like swill needed for low evaporative emissions, doctored back up to 87 octane with ethanol.

If ya want 8 billion people in the world, ya gotta make concessions...

Cylinder pressure fuses Nitrogen and Oxygen into NOx.

NOx is broken down in the first stage of the catalytic converter into Nitrogen and Oxygen. The Oxygen from that first stage is then used to finish burning unburnt hydrocarbons, and to convert CO into CO2. NOx is a 'good' thing now.

Before 3 stage catalytic converters, compression ratios went into the toilet and cams got retarded in order to decrease cylinder pressure, and avoid the production of NOx. They also added air pumps to engines that blew into the exhaust as an oxygen source, so the converter could burn the unburnt HC's and convert the CO.

NOx is NOT a bad thing now, and is actually a necessary component for the emission system.

NOx is still a bad thing.

An engine burning at stoichiometry will produce nothing but water and carbon dioxide with perfect combustion. With imperfect combustion you get enough free oxygen and NOx to break down into free oxygen to mix with CO and HC in the catalyst. Either way the combustion has to start with stoichiometry.

peejay wrote: ↑Mon Jan 13, 2020 3:44 pm NOx is still a bad thing.

An engine burning at stoichiometry will produce nothing but water and carbon dioxide with perfect combustion. With imperfect combustion you get enough free oxygen and NOx to break down into free oxygen to mix with CO and HC in the catalyst. Either way the combustion has to start with stoichiometry.

Chemistry guy here...

The IDEAL combustion of any hydrocarbon is:

HC + O2 --> CO2 + H2O

However, this is a fantasy. The atmosphere is 80% nitrogen and only 20% oxygen.
Therefore... Since Nitrogen is present, it WILL get fused with oxygen into NOx. Heat and cylinder pressure are what cause this. In the old days before converters could split NOx into N2 and O2, they used low compression ratios and retarded cam timing to kill cylinder pressure to minimize NOx production.

Since oxygen is only 20% of the atmosphere, we encounter incomplete combustion... so instead of producing all CO2, we get CO formed. We also get the incomplete combustion of hydrocarbons (HC), so those exist in the exhaust as well.

The first stage of modern cats breaks down NOx... NOx ---> N2 + O2
The oxygen produced is then used to convert CO into CO2... CO + O2 ---> CO2
That oxygen is also used to finish burning any HC that makes it through.... HC + O2 ---> CO2 + H2O

NOx is a GOOD thing in modern cats. It breaks down to form the oxygen required for the other processes. It was bad before they came up with that first stage that breaks them down. Back then, they had to add air pumps to blow air into the exhaust so the old catalytic converters could react the CO and unburned hydrocarbons. You won't see limited compression ratios and cylinder pressure anymore. Higher compression, turbos, superchargers, etc are all very common nowadays.