Will Leaded Race Gas Hurt My Car?
 

I just got off the phone with my local speed shop to see if I could get some race gas. They have 114 octane, but it's leaded!
They told me that it doesn't have much lead in it and it won't hurt anything except it will clog up your cats. I don't have cats, so that's no problem.
Any of you run leaded race gas in your 7's?

Leaded gas will positive effects due to having a higher octane and also since it contains lead, it has lubricating properties, henceforth the apex seals will get better lubrication. As far as any negative effects, the only 2 that I know of will be that the catalytic converters will get clogged(doesn't matter if you have a midpipe), and also it will decrease the lifespan of the oxygen(O2) sensor considerably, that's about it.

Do you have a lot of mods that require the higher octane? Isn't it true that cars don't benefit from higher octane unless they need it? How would you know if you need or can benefit from higher octane?

The only reason I want to run it, is to avoid detonation at higher boost levels. I'm planning on upping my boost to 15 PSI for my next race.

I found some unleaded 107 octane race gas. Went out and tested with it last night. A very noticable improvement!
I will find out this Sunday. Going to the track.
*********** 87 Mazda RX-7 Turbo II ************
*88 J-Spec Engine *Bonez Intake *TO4 Proturbo
*Greddy Turbo Timer *Greddy A/F Meter w/4 wire O2 sensor
*Greddy FMIC *Walbro Fuel Pump *720cc Secondaries
*Apex SAFC *Greedy Type R BOV *Bonez Street/Strip Clutch
*Apex S-AVCR Boost Controller *Bonez Downpipe
*ACV/Air Pump Removal *Fuel Pump Re-wire *Ported Wastegate
*Jacobs Rotary Pro Ignition *3" Turbo Inlet Duct
*Red Silicone Vacuum Lines *Magnecor 10mm Wires
*Optima Red Top Battery *Throttle Body Mod.
*Suspension Specialties Sway Bars *Apex GT Exhaust
*Falken Tires-205/55/R16 Front Nitto NT-555R 225/50VR16 Back
*RB FCD *2700 LBS.
*********** MOVIES ************
http://gallery.rx7club.com/images/videos/100plus.avi
http://gallery.rx7club.com/images/videos/burnout.avi
http://gallery.rx7club.com/images/vi...urbo-incar.avi
http://gallery.rx7club.com/images/videos/TurbovsNA.avi
http://home.rmci.net/panther/13_7.avi
*************************************************
*See at: http://home.rmci.net/panther/turbo.htm

http://home.rmci.net/panther/little_turbo.gif

Any engine with forced induction, weather it be turbo or supercharger will gain HP from higher octane, it allows more advance to be run at the same boost levels or the same timing with higher boost. it is more resistant to detonation so higher boost can be run with the same safety margin retained

Unless you plan on running crazy boost (24+ psi) there's really no reason to run leaded 117 octane. You would have to have your ignition turned up quite a bit to benefit from it. If you don't turn up the ignition (which you have to be real careful with) you're just gonna foul your plugs.

Best bet is to try and find something with a rating around 107 octane. I'm running 18 psi on 93 pump gas ( good pump gas). Even at 18 psi, if I run 110 leaded fuel it'll foul the plugs.

I ran VP C16 which is 116 octane and leaded when I ran my 11.1.

The plugs fouled a bit easier but the car ran heaps better and with a greater safety margin than running 23psi and pup fuel.

To be safe, you should run it.

Leaded fuel will give you more power, but if you do not advance your ignition you will not see the gains. A company called Millenium makes a 110 unleaded that is availible, you can try that (I have never used it). Race gas is easy to get ahold of, pick your manufacturer and then contact them for the nearest dealer. My dealer delivers to my doorstep, so I don't even need a truck to pick it up.

Don't forget that O2 sensors will last around 20-50 hours on leaded fuel.

I heard that you could buy a gallon of jet fuel (high oct.)from an airport and put it in your tank, finish filling it with pump gas and the oct. will be raised higher for hella cheaper....never tried it though.

Mixing fuel is a cheap way of increasing octane, just don't be dumb and buy some unknown avation fuel. A lot of people run 3 gallons of 100 with there pump fuel when they go to the track for some extra protection.

Rev. Jay
http://ricemobile.net/

Be careful. There's a big diffrence between avgas and jet fuel. Avgas is high octane gasoline, I dunno if it's leaded anymore but it's usually pretty cheap because it's not taxed for road use. (Therefore it's illegal to use it in a street car)

Jet fuel is kerosene, or diesel fuel, I forget which but they're very similar to each other anyway. Gasoline cars will not run on kerosene. (People regularly dum excess kerosene from a camping trip in their tanks when it's almost empty - doesn't work!)

at Rockingham dragway here in NC they have a sunoco 112 unleaded. I usually dump a few gallons of that in when I go there. I think its about $4.50/gal there though.

don't use jet fuel......trust me u don't want to go that route. my best friend works as liquid fuels specialist for the air force and he states that jet fuel in actuality is a lot like diesel w/ similar burning characteristics. so now you have been warned.. :bash: aviation gas differs and unless you know what you're buying....i'd stick w/ 107race gas..

it depends, one airplane fuel is like high-octane gas, and one is like diesel. I forget which is which, I *THINK* propellor engine fuel is like high-octane gas, and that Jet fuel is like diesel. Matter of fact I'm pretty sure of it now, because jet fuel is hard to get burning, I think jet fuel is like the diesel, and prop fuel is more like high-octane gas, but DON'T quote me on that.

WTF are you talking about?! I'm currently stationed on a military base where I work directly with jet-fuel 5 days a week. Jet fuel is a combination of gasoline and kerosene and it is about as flammable as any other type of fuel. So much so in fact that using it in your typical internal combustion engine will more than likely burn up your bearings and seals. All the engines that I no of (in the military) that is high and low bypass turbofan, turboprop, turbine, whatever, run on the same grade of jet fuel; JP8. In the future please don't mislead people. Anyone who has been through intial aircraft maintenance training would be able to tell that you are talking out of your ass... (Yes I realize how old this is but it had to be done.)

Let ye with 5 posts come in and start throwing crap around...

Dude, read my post "I *think* this is the case"... get your panties out of your arse and take a deep breath.

JP8 is a high grade like-desiel. It has a higher flash point than JP4 which is why we use it in the military now. DO NOT USE JET FUELS IN YOUR CAR. Avgas is high octane(usally leaded) gas. It can be safe but not recommended as much as simple race gas. And thats because with that you know what you are getting exactlly. And yes I work with JP8 every day with my job as a BlackHawk Crewchief here in Bosnia.

Aviation gas I believe is rated on a different scale from automotive gas anyhow, so a higher number might not mean anything.

Let those who speak with knowledge speak and those who have none listen. I don't come in here and try to explain rotarys to anybody (hence the 5 post) but after viewing a few of you're other post, I couldn't let this one slide. All I ask is that you don't mislead people and give them a false sense that they have learned something when you really don't know what you are talking about. I'm not angry just very concerned that some one might get the misconception that jet fuel is simply "high octane" race fuel: a potentially hazardous misunderstanding.

Just because you work on a military base doesn't mean you know anything about fuels, and this is obvious.
You can compare activation energy of combustion (the energy required to start a chemical reaction) to the energy produced during an exothermic chemcial reaction; there is no correlation.
So comparing flammability to (burning up bearins and seals) is completely irrelevant, and thus your posts are completely moot.
In fact, not only is your point incorrect, but the person whom you blasted WAS correct in his very basic post: it is easier to set fire to iso-octane (gasoline) than it is to set fire to jet fuel, mostly due to iso-octanes ability to readily evaporate.
Your "I learned about fire hazards in basic training" education should keep to itself when discussing kinetics, a subject of which you completely lack any knowledge in.

He stated in his post that av-gas is high octane gasoline, and jet fuel is chemically similar to diesel fuel, which is completely correct. The only one here spreading misinformation is you, so knock off on subjects you know dick-all about.
Welcome to the forum. Sorry you had to get such a quick lesson on why you shouldn't spew off on subjects in which your are inscient.

Where did I say jet fuel is simply high octane race fuel? Go back and read it before you go off on me...

There are a few types of Avgas.

87, 100, and 100LL (low lead). I believe the colors are red, green, and blue. I do believe the number stands for octane rating, but I'm not sure either. Just don't use red :)

Aviation gas as far as i know is rated in motor octane. The 100LL is blue in color.

Not trying to be high and mighty or anything...
Originally posted by Barwick
JP-8 jet fuel was developed as a jet fuel in response to problems encountered in use of JP-4 jet fuel. By the fall of 1996, JP-8 completely replaced JP-4 in the United States Air Force. Compared to JP-4, JP-8 has a higher flash point and lower vapor pressure, making it less volatile; contains less benzene, a known carcinogen; and contains less n-hexane, a known neurotoxicant. However, as a kerosene-based fuel, JP-8 has a strong odor and is oily to the touch, while JP-4, a kerosene-gasoline mix, is less pungent and has a non-oily, solvent-like feel.

It has been estimated that approximately 60 billion gallons are used worldwide each year, with 4.5 billion used by the US Air Force, the US Army, and NATO. The US Navy uses JP-5, which is very similar to JP-8. JP-8 is also used to fuel heaters, stoves, tanks, and other vehicles in military service; and used as coolant for engines and other aircraft components. JP-8 is planned on being used at least until the year 2025 as the battlefield fuel for all U.S. military operations. The Department of Defense has recognized JP-8 as the single largest chemical exposure for its personnel. JP-8 without several additives is Jet A or commercial fuel.

If you want to know more click >>HERE<<
>>HERE<< and >>HERE<<

True, but how often are you exposed to jet fuel daily?

You mean P.E. or "Potential energy"?Potential energy (again)

You're actually correct there. Because of the additives in the fuel its flash point is in fact reduced. My mistake.

I would post information from my text but I'm afraid that I could be punished for doing so. Instead I have given you the above references. If this is still not enough information I will find more upon request.
I've said my piece. If you still want to argue, then do it amongst yourselves. I know when I'm right and when I am wrong, something that many people on this forum would do well to learn.

No, I meant what I said. Activation energy is the amount of input energy required to start a chemical reaction. In internal combustion engines, this activation energy is provided by the spark; that is the purpose of the entire ignition system.

Potential energy is the total amount of energy in which a chemical reaction is capable of producing.
Again, this is not what I meant. I was talking about the energy produced during combustion, not the potential energy. Potential energy would only be fully released in usable form during complete combustion, which does not occur in internal combustion engines. So, when I said "energy produced by a exothermic chemcial reaction" with reference to the combustion of iso-octane, I meant the total energy produced by incomplete combustion.

It is true that there is no correlation related to the activation energy of a chemical reaction to the output of energy, whether the reaction is complete (potential energy) or not. What I said was completely correct.

activation energy
n : the energy that an atomic system must acquire before a
process (such as an emission or reaction) can occur

potential energy
n : the mechanical energy that a body has by virtue of its
position; stored energy [syn: P.E.]

Online Dictionary

How is this an arguement? You just proved I was right. On all accounts.

Pretty lame that some newb thinks he can argue by looking up simplistic definitions in the dictionary (that also prove I am correct) and put up an arguement against a university education. Honestly, this is grade 12 reaction kinetics.

You really suck at arguing. Normally, you try to prove yourself right, and not the person you are arguing against.


Input energy= energy that must be acquired. They are synonymous. Your dictionary just reworded what I said.

Potential energy: Energy stored. Stored energy can be released, or produced. Again, your definition just reworded EXACTLY what I said.

Seriously, guy, give it up. You were wrong, and you got called on it by someone with way more knowledge than you. Take a lesson and know when to sit down, and don;t post information in which you are nescient.

Congratulations on your ability to quiz me on elementary physics. Too bad we're talking about chemistry.

:rlaugh: This is just getting sad.

The two definitions are similar but at the same time different. The term you used pertains to atomic reactions, not mechanical as you stated earlier. As for you're remarks about me being a n00b, you were once a newbie also. Although I am new to RX7's I'm not at all new to forums. As long as people like you are around giving misinformation and attacking people, people like me will always be around to put in their 2 cents at the least. It's a shame that mods don't intervene on this forum more often. Maybe they are to busy dealing with more important issues, or perhaps they would rather not waste time with juvenile comments and antics.

You stated mechanical, not me. Find me where I stated Mechanical. I stated Chemical potential energy.

As for you're remarks about me being a n00b, you were once a newbie also.
Yep, I was. And guess what? I didn;t spout off to senior members about stuff I didn;t know shit all about.

As long as people like you are around giving misinformation and attacking people, people like me will always be around to put in their 2 cents at the least.
This is far too ironic. You started by attacking someone else, and giving completely false information. Hypocrisy at its peak...
And to top it off, I prove you wrong, and yet you still spout off...

s a shame that mods don't intervene on this forum more often. Maybe they are to busy dealing with more important issues, or perhaps they would rather not waste time with juvenile comments and antics.
What would the mods intervene? the intervene with flames and insults. Noob is not an insult, and I have only commented on your actions with the descriptives such as lame. Read the forum rules, this is completely within their boundaries.


I never stated anything about mechanical reactions (In fact, you brought up that completely irrelevant topic), I stated CHEMICAL reactions, in other words, reactions at the atomic level. I'd like you to quote me when I brought up mechaanical potential energy. Chemical reactions are atomic: IE The bonding of two oxygen atoms to form the O2 molecule is a chemical reaction.

Now since you say they are very different, perhaps you are comparing mechanical potential energy to chemical potential energy? Did you know they are different?

Let's have an example of both:

An object on the face of the earth with a mass of 10 kg (22.5lb) is lifted 10m (about 33 feet) above the surface of the earth. Thus, with a gravitational Potential energy is the 980 Joules.

Now, let's look at Chemical Potential energy, what I discussed in my post, and have been referring to all along.
Let's, say, take a battery. Did you know batteries are just a chemical reaction between lead and sulfuric acid? Its just a very simple electrolytic cell. Now we know that a battery has potential energy, as when you hook it up in circuit, you get a flow of electrons (energy).
Hey, look at that. A chemical reaction with potential energy.
In fact, we know, via the Nernst equation, that we can attriute chemical potential to electrical potential being equal:
Z e V = - k T ln ([in] / [out])
We can also determine the change in chemical potential energy in a chemical reaction via the Gibb's Equation:
G = Go + R T ln ([prod]/[react]) (Go is the known standard chemical potential energy at standard conditions), R is gas constant, and T is the temperature).


Owned again. geez, you don't give up.... I'm an engineer; I've spent years learning this shit. You don't even know the difference between mechanical potential energy and chemical potential energy...

Ok you win :D http://www.spunangel.com/opossum/argue.jpg

Ok just a quick observation while reading this thread..

Toad[^_^], you seem to think that every single airplane out there uses Jet fuel...
Someone was talking about there being different grade, 'octane', plane fuels.
Obviously they,and you by the sounds of it, were just a little bit confused with the distinction between AVgas and Jet fuel...

Now that this has all been covered I have nothing else to add at this time, other than to say keep up the good work guys, I need a good chuckle every now and then. :)

It takes some time to sift through the posts on this forum, and even then it is not possible for the mods to read every single post.

Shoot, communicate, move on out. If you screw up the first two, you need to make darn sure you execute the last one in a timely manner. ;)

Thread closed.