Plane for the mission - Mo Gas edition

ISaidRightTurns

Pre-Flight
Joined
Apr 15, 2013
Messages
89
Display Name

Display name:
ISaidRightTurns
I've never actually flown on Mo Gas but with the delta between 93 and 100LL growing, it's a hard economic incentive to pass up.

Here's the kicker though - 800 nm range and a 30-45 minute reserve.

Any suggestions? Older 35 with tip tanks?
 
How many people? Lancair 320/360 comes to mind.
 
How many people? Lancair 320/360 comes to mind.

4 people. Currently a 182T fits the bill except I don't know about burning Mo Gas and the range is pushing it.

Edit: I just looked at the Lancair 320. I could fit 98% of my needs with a two seater and rent 2% of the time - but I'm not sure how I feel about purchasing a kitplane.

I know it's weird, all planes are built by someone, I just can't help but think that there could be a giant air bubble in the glass that is undetected to everyone but the guy who built it.
 
Last edited:
Personal choices and all. The Lancair will fit the bill cheaply. MoGas has limited certified approvals, and if you're talking 800 nm non-stop, you'll be better off with a 200 kt plane.
 
In a pipdream world the under developement Pipistrel Panthera will be using a mogas approved Lycoming io-540. They are claiming 1000 nm range with reserves, and 770 lbs useful load with full fuel. For that you need to be willing to wait two years and have about $550k burning a hole in your pocket. :D
 
Deb with IO-470 J or K, perhaps?
 
Deb with IO-470 J or K, perhaps?

Thats what came to mind, Beechcraft Debonair with the for mentioned engine. Also E33 and F33 Bonanza's came from the factory in small numbers with that engine up to and including the 1971 model year.
 
4 people. Currently a 182T fits the bill except I don't know about burning Mo Gas and the range is pushing it.

Edit: I just looked at the Lancair 320. I could fit 98% of my needs with a two seater and rent 2% of the time - but I'm not sure how I feel about purchasing a kitplane.

I know it's weird, all planes are built by someone, I just can't help but think that there could be a giant air bubble in the glass that is undetected to everyone but the guy who built it.

Replace your fears with knowledge. ;)
 
800 miles non-stop in your average piston single is a LONG trip! Even a Malibu would be 4.5 hours! Two 400 mile legs makes more sense and opens up your choices quite a bit. :D I think the newest 182's that can use mogas are the P's, built until 1976. Lots of older Bo's will work, but I can't imagine wanting to spend 6 hours in any cockpit.;)
Everybody talks about long range capabilities, but very few talk about actually flying 5-6 hours per leg, especially with passengers.;)
 
800 miles non-stop in your average piston single is a LONG trip! Even a Malibu would be 4.5 hours! Two 400 mile legs makes more sense and opens up your choices quite a bit. :D I think the newest 182's that can use mogas are the P's, built until 1976. Lots of older Bo's will work, but I can't imagine wanting to spend 6 hours in any cockpit.;)
Everybody talks about long range capabilities, but very few talk about actually flying 5-6 hours per leg, especially with passengers.;)

This is something I hadn't considered. I can get Mo gas at my local airport, but what do you do I the second leg or return portion? I've never seen an airport selling 93. Can you mix 93 and 100ll?
 
Mogas from an airport is a waste of time and money. I work in south Texas and there is an airport semi-close to 2R9 where Im tied down at, planning for a fuel stop before my return trip home and called the airport to check availability on their mogas.... The price was 4.60$ per gallon. If I have the choice between 100ll and mogas and there is zero price break for the mogas, I'm choosing 100ll.

What's the point of mogas if there isn't a decent savings? Sure they priced their 100ll at like 5.20$ but I wouldn't fly there to buy gas when 100ll is 10 miles closer and 4.89$.

The only real possibility of mogas making a meaningful price cut is filling up your own container at a gas station that doesnt contain ethanol.

My .02$


I just love how I can get it at a gas station for 3.50$ (estimated) and they up charge 1$ more pg. Gotta love the bs.
 
Last edited:
What's the point of mogas if there isn't a decent savings?

Part of the point is that most engines that are capable of running on mogas were designed for 80 octane. Those engines don't particularly LIKE 100LL and mogas would be a better option.
 
This is something I hadn't considered. I can get Mo gas at my local airport, but what do you do I the second leg or return portion? I've never seen an airport selling 93. Can you mix 93 and 100ll?

They can be mixed. No problem.
 
What's the point of mogas if there isn't a decent savings?

My plane, and I've heard comments from others that the engine operates better on mogas. My CHTs are tested to be about 15F cooler on mogas, and my internals are cleaner. When I switch from a tank of mogas to a tank of 100LL I often have to crack the cowl flaps to keep the CHT in a good area. I don't have scavenged lead in the insulators on my plugs with mogas, and the belly of my plane is cleaner with mogas.

I just bought a 70 gal saddle tank and I'll try to fill up on mogas at the semi-local no-Eth gas station to refill at home. On the road, it's hit and miss, but I'll go about 40-50 miles out of my way on a long trip for the benefit of buying mogas at an airport.

The only plane with that range and reserve would be an older Bonanza, with the internal 20gal tank, and the 15/20gal tip tanks. basically a flying fuel truck. As another poster mentioned, the more reasonable route is 3-4 hours in the plane with a fuel stop. I carry 54 usable gallons, and my sanity/bladder range is basically 4 hours. That'll get me around 560NM.
 
I just love how I can get it at a gas station for 3.50$ (estimated) and they up charge 1$ more pg. Gotta love the bs.

Couple things. Burning unleaded keeps the engine cleaner. FBO's have to cover "flowage" fees from the airport.
 
Is that an opinion or fact? I'm interested in the answer because my plane can run on either.

Based on my experience it is fact. If you want more than that, you will have to go find someone who has done the actual testing and documentation.
 
MoGas is a no go for me.

#1 = no STC
#2 = no place local to get it without it being poisoned
(well HLM has it, but still doesn't solve #1)
 
Last edited:
There used to be 5 places near Amarillo that sold mogas. Then there were three, then two, one and now no more. I talked at length with Bailey's flying service in Dalhart which used to tank it for their big radial ag-planes. They said they did a brisk business with GA for quite a while, but their supplier kept raising prices on non-Eth to the point where getting a load delivered was close to the price of 100LL. Now that they switched over once and filled the tank with 100LL, they can't go back and fill it with non-Eth and sell to the public.

Many small GA airports where mogas would be popular are single tank facilities. They can either go mogas or 100LL, and of course they choose 100LL. Our local airport put in an above ground tank a few years back and the regulations to follow, and the cost was spectacular. Adding another tank to service mogas is a non-starter.

Face it, mogas at airports has been legislated/regulated out of business. I know where there is a clean above ground mogas tank/filter/pump right now that I could buy for a song, but I got no where to put it on an airport, and no way to meet all the regs for under $75k. I could do it under the table, and risk being caught but the laws on fuel rigs carry criminal sanctions and when you get to that level of risk, I'm out.
 
Is that an opinion or fact? I'm interested in the answer because my plane can run on either.

Your 235 has a low compression engine. It will "like" unleaded better than 100LL. The plugs will not foul and the oil will stay cleaner.
 
Based on my experience it is fact. If you want more than that, you will have to go find someone who has done the actual testing and documentation.
and Those engines don't particularly LIKE 100LL and mogas would be a better option.
and
Is that an opinion or fact? I'm interested in the answer because my plane can run on either.

Here is an excerpt of page 2-5 from the Rotax 912 Ops Manual: (RE: is there proof that engines don't like 100LL)
 

Attachments

  • MoGas.png
    MoGas.png
    121.1 KB · Views: 10
4 people. Currently a 182T fits the bill except I don't know about burning Mo Gas and the range is pushing it.

182P is the most recent model of C-182 that can burn mogas. If you want a cross-country machine that burns mogas and can truly carry four people, this is a good model to look for.

182P range is 450 to 570 NM, after adjusting for 45 minute reserve, depending on throttle and altitude. See page 5-23 of this POH:
http://dpwiese.mit.edu/POH/C182P_POH_1976.pdf
That's for the smaller of two tank capacities that were available.

For the larger tank capacity, you get between 650 and 815 NM of range, which will barely meet your need. See page 5-24. The trouble is, you are then looking at 7+ hours aloft, plus time for taxi etc., and that exceeds the bladder capacity and comfort tolerance for most people. I would just plan on refueling instead, and in that case the smaller tank capacity would be good enough.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top