Sport Pilot Talk

From another forum. Any thoughts?

"I use Stabil. I put it in my fuel drum when I fill it. This year at Sun & Fun Phil Lockwood brought it up and he said it works almost like magic to keep fuel fresh for almost a year. It forms a barrier on top of the fuel and keeps the lighter parts from evaporating off."

.....

CTLSi wrote:Rotax will not honor a warranty where Stabil is used in Mogas and in the engine.

Once again, more nonsense from the king of nonsense.

The Magnuson-Moss Act does not generally allow manufacturers to toss out blanket warranty disclaimers. In laymen's terms, there has to be a causal relationship between the use or non-use of a specific product and the claimed defect.

The most common and simple example with respect to engines, is a manufacturer cannot require you to use a specific oil, nor prohibit you from using a specific oil ... they can require a "standard", but would still have to prove a causal relationship to deny a warranty claim.

Just as an aside, SeaDo recommends using fuel stabilizer with their Rotax engines. Hmmm ... Bombardier, SeaDo, Rotax? Same company.

http://seadoosportboats.com/topic/5274- ... ize-rotax/

Soon after buying my PiperSport I attended a workshop given by Ronnie Smith. He recommended using Seafoam as a fuel additive for Rotax engines, especially if using Mogas with ethanol.

Rotax publishes a service bulletin listing recommended and approved fluids. Not legally binding, but if you use something they didn't list, and have an accident, expect your insurance company to look for an excuse not to pay. And if there's a lawsuit, you can be sure the plaintiff's counsel will be sure to paint you in the most unfavorable light to the jury.

Rather than stabilize fuel, if it sat more than a few months in the airplane I'd drain it and burn it in my car.

I'm not a chemical engineer, I have no idea what the overall effects of stabilizing fuels is to fuel composition. Even if the fuel burns fine, is it leaving excess deposits behind inside the engine and/or fuel system? Is it more or less prone to separate out water? Is the octane rating affected, potentially leading to detonation?

I have stabilized fuel for use in ground vehicles, that doesn't bother me...the the safety risks of a fuel failure are a lot more dire at 3000ft, IMO.

BrianL99 wrote:http://seadoosportboats.com/topic/5274- ... ize-rotax/

Brian, that is a user's forum. The posts appear to come from individual owners, and have not necessarily been vetted by Rotax, Seadoo, or Bombardier. I would take care not to interpret them as being Rotax-approved procedures. (Same goes for posts here!)

MrMorden wrote:Rather than stabilize fuel, if it sat more than a few months in the airplane I'd drain it and burn it in my car.

I'm not a chemical engineer, I have no idea what the overall effects of stabilizing fuels is to fuel composition. Even if the fuel burns fine, is it leaving excess deposits behind inside the engine and/or fuel system? Is it more or less prone to separate out water? Is the octane rating affected, potentially leading to detonation?

I have stabilized fuel for use in ground vehicles, that doesn't bother me...the the safety risks of a fuel failure are a lot more dire at 3000ft, IMO.

I burn old fuel in my car too.

Which do you think is a bigger concern?:

a) burning stale summer blend gas in winter conditions
b) burning stale winter blend gas in summer conditions

drseti wrote:

BrianL99 wrote:http://seadoosportboats.com/topic/5274- ... ize-rotax/

Brian, that is a user's forum. The posts appear to come from individual owners, and have not necessarily been vetted by Rotax, Seadoo, or Bombardier. I would take care not to interpret them as being Rotax-approved procedures. (Same goes for posts here!)

You're right Paul.

Is this one better? This is from BRP's own site: http://store.sea-doo.com/product/759313 ... Stabilizer

Yes, it is, Brian, and it confirms to my satisfaction that fuel stabilizer is acceptable - in jet ski engines. Still, says nothing about whether it is approved in aircraft engines.

drseti wrote:Yes, it is, Brian, and it confirms to my satisfaction that fuel stabilizer is acceptable - in jet ski engines. Still, says nothing about whether it is approved in aircraft engines.

If I can recall my 8th grade Reasoning 101 correctly ...

If some Rotax engines burn gas.

If the the product is "suitable for all gasoline engines".

Therefore the product is suitable for all Rotax engines that burn gas.

The fallacy there is that the suitability claim comes not from Rotax, but from BRP. What applies to one of a conglomerte's many divisions doesn't necessarily apply to the others. Would you invoke CanAm Spyder operating procedures to a Learjet?

drseti wrote:The fallacy there is that the suitability claim comes not from Rotax, but from BRP. What applies to one of a conglomerte's many divisions doesn't necessarily apply to the others. Would you invoke CanAm Spyder operating procedures to a Learjet?

It's really irrelevant to the original post/question/statement.

The fact is, Rotax can't disallow a warranty claim unless they can prove a causal relationship between the failed part in question and a "prohibited" additive.

I just searched my Rotax Operational Manual and cannot find a prohibition against fuel additives.

Personally, if my airplane was going to sit for more than a month or two with MoGas, I'd be putting Stabil in it.

Just my opinion, your mileage may vary.

BrianL99 wrote:I just searched my Rotax Operational Manual and cannot find a prohibition against fuel additives.

True. Rotax tends not to prohibit specific products. Instead, they list approved or recommended ones. The operative document is SI-912-016 R4, Selection of Suitable Operating Fluids. It's worth a read if you want to maximize your engine's life. (BTW, Lycoming and Continental publish similar service instructions. They're not binding, but just make good sense...)

drseti wrote:

BrianL99 wrote:I just searched my Rotax Operational Manual and cannot find a prohibition against fuel additives.

True. Rotax tends not to prohibit specific products. Instead, they list approved or recommended ones. The operative document is SI-912-016 R4, Selection of Suitable Operating Fluids. It's worth a read if you want to maximize your engine's life. (BTW, Lycoming and Continental publish similar service instructions. They're not binding, but just make good sense...)

Semantics and/or legalities aside Paul, do you not use or recommend fuel stabilizers?