Water in fuel is good

I presume you have read Joe Wagner's column in the Jan 2004 Model Aviation. Adding 20% water to your fuel gives you an additonal 100 RPM's

He, He, He, He, Chuckle!

Hi Jim. When I ws about 16 (48 yrs ago!) something I became aware of was WATER INJECTION in sophisticated full size car and plane engines. Not exactly having the gear, I nevertheless thought we ought to try a poor man's version of it. So I put a good amount of water into some diesel fuel, gave it a good shake, waited for the undisolved water to settle out, and decanted off the fuel. I tried it in my trusty old E.D. Competition Spcl 2cc. No rev counter then, but I really think it ran with more power, but it would not run for more than a about a minute, at which point it would stop. Next run, same thing. The things we do when we're young! Best wishes,

I like to add 20% sugar to my fuel.
Chris

I'll bet that engine was a SWEET running little thing!

Therein lies a tale. A couple of years ago I attended a meeting at work where somebody was discussing the notion of spraying water into a jet engine inlet to increase power. I said that that principle had been described by Charles Berry of St. Louis nearly 50 years ago. There was silence, then the meeting continued.

>Therein lies a tale. A couple of years ago I attended a
>meeting at work where somebody was discussing the notion of
>spraying water into a jet engine inlet to increase power. I
>said that that principle had been described by Charles Berry
>of St. Louis nearly 50 years ago. There was silence, then
>the meeting continued.

Howard, would that have been Charles "Chuck" Berry, regarding water injecting the fab "Hotrod Lincoln"? We had a '49 Lincoln Cosmopolitin, and that puppy never ran well, even on AvGas. Maybe it needed water in the gas... At least it was a stick shift...with power windows. Guess why I remember the power windows?
(for D.Dirt) Lefty

It was a hotrod Ford, rather than a Lincoln. It wasn't water injection per se. Rain water was blowing up under his hood. He firmly believed that this had a beneficial effect on his engine.

Howard! The song is "Hotrod Lincoln". It was a Model A Ford with a Lincoln flathead, a bigger, uglier and foul running version of the Ford flatheads. I really prefered Jeff Rein's version "Ballad of the Folken A", that Dirt managed to get published in Model Builder. But anyway, I think Chuck only covered the song...don't believe he was the first to record it. I'll check.... Steve

Hot Rod Lincoln
( Commander Cody and the Lost Planet Airmen )

My pappy said, "Son, you're gonna' drive me to drinkin'
If you don't stop drivin' that Hot Rod Lincoln"

Have you heard this story of the Hot Rod Race
When Fords and Lincolns was settin' the pace?
That story is true, I'm here to say
I was drivin' that Model A

It's got a Lincoln motor and it's really souped up
That Model A Vitimix makes it look like a pup
It's got eight cylinders, uses them all
It's got overdrive, just won't stall

With a four-barrel carb and a dual exhaust
And four-eleven gears you can really get lost
It's got safety tubes, but I ain't scared
The brakes are good, tires fair

Pulled out of San Pedro late one night
The moon and the stars was shinin' bright
We was drivin' up Grapevine Hill
Passing cars like they was standing still

All of a sudden in a wink of an eye
A Cadillac sedan passed us by
I said, "Boys, that's a mark for me!"
By then the tail light was all you could see

Now the fellas was ribbin' me for bein' behind
So I thought I'd make the Lincoln unwind
Took my foot off the gas and man alive
I shoved it on down into overdrive

Wound it up to a hundred and ten
My speedometer said that I hit top end
My foot was glued like lead to the floor
That's all there is and there ain't no more

Now, the boys all thought I'd lost my sense
And telephone poles looked like a picket fence
They said, "Slow down! I see spots!"
The lines on the road just look like dots

Took a corner; sideswiped a truck
Crossed my fingers just for luck
My fenders was clickin' the guardrail posts
The guy beside me was white as a ghost

Smoke was comin' from out of the back
When I started to gain on that Cadillac.
Knew I could catch him, I thought I could pass
Don't you know by then we'd be low on gas?

We had flames comin' from out of the side
Feel the tension, Man! What a ride!
I said, "Look out, boys, I've got a license to fly!"
And that Caddy pulled over and let us by

Now all of a sudden she started to knockin'
And down in the dips she started to rockin'
I looked in my mirror; a red light was blinkin'
The cops was after my Hot Rod Lincoln!

They arrested me and they put me in jail
And called my pappy to throw my bail
And he said, "Son, you're gonna' drive me to drinkin'
If you don't stop drivin' that Hot ... Rod ... Lincoln!"

Oh! Maybe you were thinkin' of "Maybellene"? I'll be right back!

» Maybellene

Maybellene, why can't you be true
Oh Maybellene , why can't you be true
You've started back doin' the things you used to do

As I was motivatin over the hill
I saw Maybellene in a Coup de Ville
A Cadillac arollin' on the open road
Nothin' will outrun my V8 Ford
The Cadillac doin' about ninetyfive
She's bumper to bumper, rollin' side by side
Maybellene

The Cadillac pulled up ahead of the Ford
The Ford got hot and wouldn't do no more
It then got cloudy and started to rain
I tooted my horn for a passin' lane
The rainwater blowin' all under my hood
I know that I was doin' my motor good
Maybellene

Solo guitar

Maybellene

The motor cooled down the heat went down
And that's when I heard that highway sound
The Cadillac asittin' like a ton of lead
A hundred and ten half a mile aheadv The Cadillac lookin' like it's sittin' still
And I caught Mabellene at the top of the hill
Maybellene

Solo guitar

Maybellene

Maybellene, why can't you be true
Oh Maybellene , why can't you be true
You've started back doin' the things you used to do

As I was motivatin over the hill
I saw Maybellene in a Coup de Ville
A Cadillac arollin' on the open road
Nothin' will outrun my V8 Ford
The Cadillac doin' about ninetyfive
She's bumper to bumper, rollin' side by side
Maybellene

The Cadillac pulled up ahead of the Ford
The Ford got hot and wouldn't do no more
It then got cloudy and started to rain
I tooted my horn for a passin' lane
The rainwater blowin' all under my hood
I know that I was doin' my motor good
Maybellene

Solo guitar

Maybellene

The motor cooled down the heat went down
And that's when I heard that highway sound
The Cadillac asittin' like a ton of lead
A hundred and ten half a mile ahead
The Cadillac lookin' like it's sittin' still
And I caught Maybellene at the top of the hill
Maybellene

Howard...sorry for ever doubting you! Steve

PS: I can't find San Pedro on the map. But I been up the Grapevine, passin' cars like they was standin' still....

Jeff is not the first person to rewrite Hot Rod Lincoln. I was surprised by the history:

http://www.rockabillyhall.com/HotRodLncln.html

Post #19:
Howard, Charlie Rush was alive and well at the "Goodguise" Street rod reunion, (1986) and had the car there with him. A rudimentary Model A Coupe, with '40 front axle ass'y that looked like it shortened the wheelbase, but the frame was added to for that Lincold V12. Hood and radiator were extended, that is what gave it the odd look. I think he was residing in Washington at the time, when asked which came first, the car or the song, he just laughed. Wouldn't say.

I copied the lyrics Steve, thanks. I took guitar lessons from the guy that played the lead in Hotrod Lincoln for Commander Cody on that record. He taught it to me. He was working in a little band playing at The Beachcombers Bar just out of Kodiak in 1963. In '64 The Beachcombers washed away in the tsunami after the earthquake.

If your in France at the 2000 W.C's driving a Skoda, it goes like this.....

Son, your going to drive me to soda,
if you don't stop driving that "Hot Rod" Skoda!

Said PW to HR

Some time ago I wanted to find out for myself what affect water in the fuel had so I added water in .5% increments to my usual 80/20 all castor mix. OK, so I used an RC engine and flew it as well. There was absolutely no difference in starting (first flick), idling or peak revs until I got to 4% water at which point I couldn't even get the engine to fire except on a prime. What I found was that at a certain % of water (and it depended on the temp of the fuel too) all the oil was forced out of suspension and settled at the bottom of the tank. And that's why I couldn't get the engine to fire at 4%....it was drawing pure oil through the fuel line. I tried a similar test with an all synthetic oil later and it did the same thing. So to say you can mix 20% water is pure rubbish unless the fuel was at about it's boiling point

During WWII the RAF noticed when the airplanes took of on a day with heavy fog the engines developed more power and the airplanes lifted off sooner. They started loading on a few extra bombs on foggy days. Then someone did some research and found water injection in the engine would do the same thing as fog so all the airplanes could carry a few extra bombs on every bombing run. Later race car drives found water injection would give them more power. In the mid 60's someone came out with a water injection system for your car it gave you more power and better gas mileage. I bought a water injection system at K-Mart and put it on my 65 chevy when I was in high school. The fuel companies discovered they could use a process called cracking to double the amount of gasoline they produce and formulated the fuel to contain 4% to 8% water. If you check the local library for a volume of books called, "The Chemical Formulary" you will fine the fuel formula for every gasoline manufacture and it tells the percentage of water that is in each manufactures fuel. Alcohol burns at a lower temperature than gasoline but the BTU rating will determine how much water can be added to the alcohol. I think probably 2% or 3% would work fine, give you more power and make the engine run cooler. When the fuel ignites and burns it turns the water to steam. When water turns to steam its volume increases 1600 times thats where the extra power comes from. It would be interesting to have a tiny dyno tester to experement with this to see how much water can be added and how much power is gained.

Water has a similar gross effect as Nitromethane, and Nitrous Oxide, inthat it augments the oxygen. Without a proportional fuel enrichment, the quotient is: POWER! RATTLE! BOOM! in that order.

No, it doesn't. Nitromethane RELEASES oxygen when it decomposes, and then parts of the molecule can recombine with the oxygen, so it's both a fuel and an oxygen source. Water does nothing of this sort. Add it to fuel, and it does nothing but turn to vapor, eating up energy in the process.

Isky, forgive me. I was reading it at the exhaust manifold, where it sensed a 'leanness' when augmented with water injection. Depends on set mixture, prior to water intro. Water, or 'steam', isn't carrying any fuel, so steam will tend to 'lean' the mixture, but that is dependent on the mean air/fuel ratio in the first place, right? 14:1, gasoline, say. Vaporization will help, but only if the mixture is rich in the first place, or squish & quench are not adequate. There are too many variables here, and I don't have a dyno.

Water injection in Jet engines is a very effective way to increase thrust. A jet engine functions on 2 principals. Delta T, or change in temperature front of engine to rear, and air mass flow rate of change.

1.The water when vaporized in the inlet reduces the inlet tmeperature. Thus enabling agreater delta T, or the ability to get the turbine inlet temperature lower and the change in temperature greater--translates directly to increaced thrust because hotter air expands more, therby increacing flow rate.
2. Increaces mass of volume accelerated through the engine. Again, more thrust.

Water being vaporized in the inlet in a recip burning gasoline lowers the temperature again, typically for turbo or supercharged instalations to reduce the inlet temperatures and reduce the chance of detonation in the comustion chamber. An effective intercooler does the same job without the weight penalty of carrying the water. However cumulatively, both can increace BMEP with lower temperatures--more HP.

I'll let Al experiment with water in alcohol based fuel and see what happens...I'll watch.

Dave

If I recall as the water alcohol mixture cooled the air entering the manifold and increases the density, it also allowed the air fuel mixture to burn more slowly and given a longer effective power pulse during the power stroke. In a sense it increased the octane "rating" cheaply. Many additives came about to do the same thing during the war and were "secret" for the duration. I remember some of the research I did on my paper on petroleum from the ground to the manifold. Got a B+ (it was two days late, darn dog)
TCP, boron, tetra ethyl lead, and only God knows what else has been tried to increase the burning time, increase economy, eliminate ping, etc. Kinda makes the Stanley Steamer more feasable, except for shoveling coal. (just kidding)

cooling to increase the density is the little bit I remember from my days as an engineering physics major. I agree. Although, I left the major due to skills that don't equal the major.

I am glad you understand the laws of Physics. I had not thought about water increasing thrust in a jet engine but its logical. You gave me an idea, I can't wait to try water injection in my pulse jet engine. I will attach an injecter like a venturi near the end of the exhaust tube. My Dyna Jet engine produces only 5 lbs. of thrust so I might not be able to detect the increase in thrust because it might be only a few ounces. If it works then I know I will notice a power increase on this pulse jet engine.

If that thing runs at all, it needs a chain to the table. Those "engine mounts" look a trifle wimpy,not including the vise grips that will come loose and launch it thru the wall,on fire.
The water will be a measurable amount of thrust increase,even on 5#. The water gives a greater change of temp,resulting in greater exit velocity. MM

Trim the amount of water with a infrared heat gun. You just want to lower the intake area's temp with as little as possible temp reduction in the hot area. When the exhaust temp drops as much as the intake side than back off the water.
It'll make a heck of a steam cleaner !!!!
MM

I had it mounted to a 500 lbs welding table. I tried to take pics there but the light conditions were bad. I moved it to the work shop for a better pic. Pic turn out much better. The engine screams. It takes about 20 seconds to turn red hot. It starts very easy with a leaf blower.

Speaking of Jet intake cooling sprays, has anyone seen the commercial where they guy is changing his newborn son's diaper and the kid lets go and hits the fan runnnig next to the man, covering him with a 'fine mist'? Then it shows him talking about this very subject in a meeting. I forget what the commercial is for but it's one of those companies that is trying to convince everyone that they view everything different. Cute commercial though. Can't wait till MY son gets to deal with his first gueyser.

I wonder if it'd be better to inject the water directly into the combustion chamber, rather than into the intake.

I suspect you'd need a LOT of water - which brings up the weight-of-water issue again. To carry enough on a plane for the whole flight, you'd negate the gains you made in thrust, at best.

Several months ago I mentioned that I was going to try to run an engine on after shave lotion, namely my bottles of "Old Spice". It contains alcohol, water, smells great (women hate it) and should mix well with a typical 10% nitro fuel. Now I am going to do it. Any one got an engine they don't need and can donate for this experiment? Say an Ro-Jett of some type? Or a good PA .61 RE?
No kidding this time. Yeah, right.

Old Spice is only good in marine engines.

Joe always throws off the competition that way. I recall something about moving the landing gear on your Team Race planes...

Mr. Wagner has been losing it for several years.

I hate to see this, but there have been enough incorrect--some pretty outlandish--statements in his column that I gave up reading them a couple years ago.

It will happen to me some day--many think it already has--and in light of his many contributions over the years, let's just shrug it off.

Dan, I for one do not believe that you are losing it.----------------------- you got to have it first to lose it.

Bigiron

there have been enough
>incorrect--some pretty outlandish--statements in his column
>that I gave up reading them a couple years ago.
>
>It will happen to me some day--many think it already
>has--and in light of his many contributions over the years,
>let's just shrug it off.
>
>Dan

Ron B.
F4Fguy

C'mon Dan don't give up.Watching us old farts self destruct is part of the fun.Besides,given the amount of total B.S. from this particular source I have to suspect he is,as the Brits would say,"having us on".
Now,about adding glass beads to increase fuel flow by making it roll better.......................

I didn’t’ see Joe Wagner's article. Was it a serious article or was Joe just joking around? Just like Jim above in the original post, I’d say that this is a joke. I’m not going to test it.
Chris

A small amount of water vapor allows more compression, earlier timing, in auto race engines. Quite a bit of advantage(50hp on 250) can be made on a street/race type of turbo car. It cools the mixture as it vaporises. leading to more power. We also inject water/ alcohol mixture in the drag race turbo cars at 20psi of boost.
The % in auto is about 1galper hr per about10gal per hr of gas. (250hp+-) The alky ratio is twice the fuel per water @20gal to 1gal
The modern equivalent is EGR. (a combustion retarder/stabiliser)
It is not beyond possible to see a slight increase in power if you can get it started and keep it running , with a steady needle.
The water vapor makes more energy( as it expands) than fuel/air.
IMHO, I doubt that it works reliably, but ...I have not tried it.
MM

Guys,

As I read the Wagner article, the 'jist' of it was saying is that an obsession with H2O taken up in the fuel is not justified interms of pure power output...maybe not steadiness off run, but he didn't address a "stunt run"...but he DID address internal corrosion.

AND...if you read the entire article...he is tying in the concept of bearing corrosion due to water in fuel...which he goes on to state is REALLY due to a chemical reaction of the fuel and brass tank components...?...that produces a residual water/acid contaminated sludge...AND THAT is what eats up bearings.

I may have missed something here, (as I am on the SPECIAL list that gets the AMA magazine in time for a fun Saturday evening news)!

BUT...is Wagner losing it?

I think NOT.

And you could always provide an article to the AMA magazine yourself every month or two, although it easier to write disparinging e-mails about something taken out of context.

Judging from the way some guys jumped on Elmore for trying to find the origin of a unidentified prop/thrust washer, I think there is a need to THINK and try to interpolate what something that a well meaning contributor is providing us...

that washer means nothing to anyone except about 20% of the E-bay buyers getting engines that have lost the thrust washer...maybe 20% of E-bay engines ARE missing needle valves and thrust washers.

That is all...chill out guys.

Read between the lines...add to our info strings, don't subtract.

>I didn’t’ see Joe Wagner's article. Was it a serious
>article or was Joe just joking around?

>Chris

Joe did not seem to be joking around. In fact he states "....l'm still surprised by what happened." Toward the end of the article he gives several facts concerning the engine used in the test which may have contributed to the results being what they were. Joe wagner was at one time and/or still is enough of a recogmized authority on engines and modeling that magazines have been publishing him for years.

It would seem that someone trying to replicate the results or disprove them would be beneficial.

I am one who ADAMANTLY advocate to newer modelers to keep the lid on their fuel jugs. Not so mush to keep the water out but keep ALL contaminants out. ANYTHING in our fuel that is NOT one of the intended ingredients is not good. I have gone to the field to find modelers who cannot get their engines to start, or if they do start they can't get a consistent needle setting etc...etc. When I look at their fuel jug, what do I see? open lid, grass and other crud floating around in it. Help them to clean the NVA, flush the tank, strain their fuel and they get good flights for the rest of the day. Three months (or less) later I find the same guys out at the field --- Same problem---- Look at their fuel jug--- same cause. Ad-nausium.
Keep your fuel as clean and contaminant free as you possibly can.

Water INJECTION was good for added power in short bursts on "emergency power" situations As the title infers, it was INJECTED, not mixed with the fuel. The added water vapor would expand as steam and provide added expansion in the combustion chamber per stroke and thus more power. We went to GREAT PAINS to be certain that the fuel did not contain water. To the point on filling small vials containing a silica-jel component that would turn blue if there was suspended water in the fuel. If it turned blue. you changed fuel.

Howard and Steve,

I have it on very good authority (Buzz Wilson) that Jeff has laid "Ballad of the Folken A" down in CD format. Next time Howard buys a fuel shut-off, maybe Jeff will throw in a CD.

Alas, all is not good news: I have been forced to place Pete Munroe's name on the "Doesn't get it" listing. A probationary period is a possibility, pending good and humorous conduct for the next three months.

>Yes the water injection was used on the Air Force's B-52's
>back in the 70's and early 80's. The same engines were
>installed on the KC-135A model tankers - which I flew in the
>70's. We used water injection to augment the thrust
>available to the engines to assist with a heavyweight
>takeoff; as I recall the thrust increases weren't huge -
>11,820 lbs without water, and 12,400 with water inj (per
>engine). The theory was to increase the air density just
>prior to the combustion chambers thus allowing the thing to
>burn a bit more JP-4 and thus produce increased thrust. I
>remember we used to shut the water off before it was all
>used up and then save it for a touch-and-go later in the
>flight. At the lighter gross weights, the take-off and
>climbouts were quite a bit more interesting wtih the 707's
>nose pointed up at a deck angle of around 25 degrees vs. 15
>degrees!
>
>My Nobler would flame out if I tried to do that today - I
>think the flame is cooled with water in the fuel - not that
>it wouldn't help out with air density - but how the heck
>would that be accomplished? Interesting task for Windy? He
>could make a "Robo-cop" infrared inlet sensor "Z-tron" fuel
>density augmentation gizmo that would give the engine an
>instant boost to launch it into the next hourglass! Boy,
>what a name!! Geeze I crack myself up!

JOE,

VERY COOL NOBLER!!!

TED

P.S., SURE WISH I HAD ONE!

Hmmm...Ted, I thought you were about to expound on ADI applications in DC-6s as that seems applicable to this thread. 3 Wet 1 Dry bring back any memories? I also had the privelage of flying the "Redcoat's Revenge" which had water/methanol injection for those hot days of summer. Never flew the "water wagons". In Joe Wagner's test I wonder if the water/fuel was shaken to emulsify (probably the wrong term) the solution or just added some water to the tank of fuel? Joe will have a follow up article, I'm sure. Best regards,

I have some fuel lying around so I thought I would do a test like Downunder suggested, except I decided to go for broke. I added 4 oz of Sig Champion fuel to a jar, then 1 oz of chlorinated Lake Michigan water to the mix (nominally 20% water). I let the mixture sit for approximately an hour. A dark red layer settled out at the bottom, and a milky layer formed elsewhere. As Dale mentions, if I shake the jar up, the whole mixture emulsifies---like salad dressing.

I have no clue to whether this stuff might actually run in an engine, but I would assume that if it does, you would have to shake it up first. Too bad it is so cold outside, otherwise I would grab some one of my FP's and try it. But I hope if your fuel would ever absorb this much water, that you would notice it!

I tried water injection years ago on an old 68 Ford Falcon with a 302 V8. Was my highschool hot rod. Read it in a Pop Mechanix. I used a 1 gal tank and tied it to a vac line under the carb through a little reg valve I cobbled up from the plumbing isle at Ace. My engine always ran a little stronger on cool foggy days, and with this setup, it was always like a cool foggy day. Improved mileage too, not that I cared at the time.

This setup worked well because the water didn't get mixed with the fuel until delivery at the manifold, so no need to worry about it staying mixed in the tank. Only problem was if you were not careful you could hydro lock your engine with too much water, and also, relying on vaccuum feed wasn't ideal since it drew less water when you wailed on it and manifold pressure dropped. So it didn't have a big effect on hot rodding, but it was great for highway cruising and peppy moderate driving.

Just like some polyprope, or even a little gasoline, I'm sure water could have a plus effect on HP or economy with our engines under the right conditions. BUT...I sure wouldn't want to do this on one of my ST46 or ST60's though. Can you say rusty ball bearings?!

When I was working as an auto mech in St Louis, my boss showed me a neat trick to clean out carbon from old engines. Cleaned a lot of the carbon off the exhaust valves and the entire exhaust system. We would place a spray bottle of plain water near the intake and at 1,200 rpm, start spraying a mist of water in the carb. You would not believe the amount of carbon that came flying out that exhaust. Then we took the car on the highway for a second driving test. Big difference. It was a Buick owned by a "little old lady" that lived around the corner from the shop. She drove the car about three times a year, one of which was for the annual vehicle and emissions inspection.

Ty,
Dead right, I've used that trick - works best on low use vehicles with soft sooty carbon in the chambers - from running rich when cold.

And, of course thats how "compressor washes" are done on turbine engines.

So far as I know, when water or water/meth is used to augment power in piston or turbine engines, it is injected into the AIR not the fuel. The latent heat of vaporisation cools the air, increasing charge density - hence the permanent foggy morning effect.

On full size aircraft, it is a poor substitute for installing the right size engines, and has been fitted to some notorious ground huggers - some models of Jetstreams, metro and HS748's fer instance.

I can say from first hand experience what "wet" fuel or high humidity does in speed & pylon engines running on 80:20 fuel - instant detonation, requiring the head to be shimmed up, costing power.
Cheers, Dave

Here is a photo of the jar of fuel. It has been sitting on the bench for a couple of days. Recall that this started out as 4 oz of Sig Champion!

I wonder what the red layer is. I would think that oil would be on the top. But you can see there is very little left of the red coloring in the upper layer. I thought that the red coloring is coming from the Klotz component of the lube. I don't know whether this is a dye or intrinsic to the oil (I guess the former since it is on the bottom now)

Added:

I decanted the top layer into another jar, and at least by touch, it feels like the alcohol-water mixture. By contrast, the red stuff feels oily. There is ~1/2 oz of the red stuff.Originally there was 0.4 oz of Klotz in the Sig fuel, so maybe that is what the red layer is. I didn't realize that it is heavier than water. I wonder if that means that there is still some Castor up in the top layer. I note that Joe Wagner fuel was all castor.

For the heck of it, I poured some of the top layer into a jar cap, and lit it. Certainly seemed to burn ok! At the end I was left with oiley layer with some brown crud (Fox crust!). Good old smell of burning castor. So I conclude that the bottom red layer was Klotz, and the top layer a combo of castor, methanol, nitro, and good ol' H2O.

I guess I need to do another experiment with some all castor fuel, just to see what happens.

Just mixed 2 oz of Sig 25% all castor, 10%nitro, and added 1/2 oz of water (I'm getting too cheap to throw away 4 oz of fuel!). I do see a separation, a clear liquid on the bottom, the milky mixture on the top. I'll let it sit a while.

Just mixed some SIG 10%25%oil fuel with 5% Cranapple juice. I'll let you know how it tastes!

UPDATE!!!

Dang if the Cranapple juice didn't make the fuel taste bad too. Is there ANY reason for this junk other than to make something else bitter and un-etible?

Save the world, band the Cranberry.

Ted,

Every time I read "Ted Fancher" and "Nobler" in the same posting my heart aches...

You know why...

Run good on the bench?
How bout in the air?
Will the needle hold setting?
how bout at a four cycle?
Is it repeatable flight after flight?
Hope someone will try this and let me know.
I,ll be busy practicing(I hope),as I have some "muleskinning" to do next year.

Read Joe's article closely. The devil is in the details-"..had to keep the glow plug clip on for 30 seconds, and it took 8-10 flips to start instead of 1 or 2."

Old fuel(presumably some that has picked up moisture) has trouble keeping the fire lit. It is hard to start, needs to run leaner, and is prone to quitting. All things that Joe W. discovered by adding water directly. The motor was hard to start and needed extra warm up to run, ON A TEST STAND. I am sure he would have experienced all the classic bad fuel problems if he had tried to fly with the mix.

The old fuel problems are almost identical to the old glow plug problems. When a plug gets worn out the motor is harder to start, won't run smooth, and has to be run leaner, risking quitting from fuel starvation.

Both scenarios seem to be due to combustion problems. Either the water is killing the combustion, or the worn out plug doesn't start it reliably. So an engine with a really broad needle valve setting range is likely going to be more tolerant than a competition engine that has to be set precisely.

Had a Camino with a 305 in it once, I was driving in town one day and it was acting stuffed up, so I pumped the pedal to the ground a couple of times and it stopped couging. Then I looked in the rearview mirror! People behind me turned on their headlights there was such a big black cloud. Nearly ran off the road laughing so hard.

I have one of the Dubro line connectors on the top of my jug, you unplug the line, hook your fueler up and suck out the juice, then put the line back over. Once, about 6 years ago, I had a buddy that 'borrowed' some fuel, after the end of the day he wanted to 'return' what he didn't use. I don't normally put back in once I take out, but this is an RC guy who for some reason still had fuel in his tank, didn't fly it out. Now I'm not knocking RC guys, but the fact is that THEY don't have to wait till the tank is empty to land, therefore, at the end of the day he still had fuel in his tank. So he put it back in my jug by taking my cap off and squirting it back in. He also left the cap off. After a short rain storm, I found my fuel with the cap off. I also found it impossible to have a reliable engine run on the next tank of fuel. Replaced the fuel and all was well.

More power? Who cares. NO CONTINUITY!

This is like discussing whether it actually causes damage to slam your hand in a door, or does it just look bad? Answer is IT HURTS MORON, STOP DOIN IT!