Sunoco vs. VP Fuel

Discussion in 'The Comp Buzz' started by Frank Aragona Jr., Apr 29, 2015.

  1. 377 D/A

    377 D/A Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2008
    Messages:
    282
    Likes Received:
    11
    who has actually wrecked parts and been able to attribute it to the fuel alone. i keep hearing people say other people are wrecking motors but i have not heard someone say i wrecked a motor and it was the fuel that did it. i am not a fan of the fuel but wrecking parts? someone may have a few pages back and i did not read it because i just dont have time so i thought i would just ask the question

    ian
     
  2. Charlie Yannetti

    Charlie Yannetti Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2006
    Messages:
    1,638
    Likes Received:
    98
    I believe that Allen Johnson may have publicly stated it in an interview that was printed here earlier.. I have heard several Pro Stock tuners, owners, and engine builders claiming to have lost rounds because of fuel related misses during a run.. I've heard and witnessed the bogging on the hit.. I even had a hard time starting a freakin' 4cyl motor at G-Ville.. REALLY???

    Don't get me wrong, if it's down on power, it's down on power, but make it consistent so that you can deal with it's inability to provide the same results as VP..

    I've claimed all along that it's the inconsistency from drum to drum that WILL cause problems... first can says lean it out, add some timing, the next can says BOOM!!... you wanna risk it??

    NOW!!!.. has anyone even questioned the lead content of SR-18, as opposed to C-25, as far as what is acceptable by Federal and EPA standards.. C-25 was given a ceiling of 6, while SR-18 is in excess of 10.. does anyone answer for that??.. not even going into the affects on burn rates..

    I took a Comp motor out of a car this weekend, and the water I spilled on the garage floor evaporated almost as fast as SR-18... BUT HEY!!.. it leaves a nice orangy-yellow coating on your parts, so they stay lubricated against rust.. really nice tint on the intake runners and intake ports too.. LOL!!
     
  3. clevo351

    clevo351 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2009
    Messages:
    67
    Likes Received:
    0
    Are you telling me that Sunoco chemists cannot make the fuel to match the C-25? :eek:
     
  4. Mark Lelchook

    Mark Lelchook Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2006
    Messages:
    231
    Likes Received:
    24
    VP is a synthetic fuel, Sunoco isnt, I can only assume its hard to duplicate.

    Mark Lelchook
    D/ED
     
  5. RamAirV

    RamAirV Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2011
    Messages:
    75
    Likes Received:
    25
    Mark is correct.
    Also, the formulation are proprietary and the reason for the difference in performance. VP fuels tend to be more stable.
     
  6. Rob Harrison

    Rob Harrison Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2006
    Messages:
    2,535
    Likes Received:
    42
    Reading through this thread , I just don't get how a fuel could be the cause of a bog at the hit or the cause of a misfire . Leaving against the chip , to bogging , would have to be a 100 HP drop , misfiring would suggest that the fuel is not burning ? Further to the burn-rate , higher lead content would make it safer ( detonation ) for a 16 to 1 CR . The only issue is the failing fuel check , but they will fix that , with the total focus on SR18 , Sunoco will come up with a formula that will be at least as good as C25 , probably better.......
     
  7. jmarkaudio

    jmarkaudio New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2009
    Messages:
    29
    Likes Received:
    1
    When a fuel does not vaporize as well as another the burn characteristics in the combustion chamber will not have the same quality, sometimes to the point it will bog or misfire. And it may not even be a complete misfire, just an incomplete burn. In these cases you put more fuel in to have sufficient vaporized fuel, and if the combustion or vaporization is slowed more timing is needed to get peak pressure at the optimum point. Take an older car and try to run it icold n colder weather without a choke, it will likely do much the same. Comp and Pro Stock racers tend to run the engines cold to make more power, how well the fuel vaporizes is vital to getting the most out of it. C25 vaporizes extremely well at lower temps, why it makes power. SR18 does not vaporize near as well, couple that with the inconsistency of a the batches and you have trouble. And a slower burn is not going to help with detonation or preignition, incomplete combustion from cycle to cycle leaving hot unburned fuel is what can hurt. Fuel that atomizes better vaporizes more completely and is less likely to have issues.
     
  8. Rob Harrison

    Rob Harrison Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2006
    Messages:
    2,535
    Likes Received:
    42
    Thanks for the explanation , Mark , but I am not afraid to admit that I have no idea what you are explaining . Burn-rate I have always thought was a function of combustion chamber shape and piston dome interference , spark plug location , wet flow introduction of fuel from the intake manifold , less timing always makes more power if the burn efficiency is in place with all of the above . Whatever characteristics the fuel has , as long as the motor does not detonate.......well I guess the fuel has done it's job , at least as far as we have dyno tested and we have done far too much of that......the bottom line is as the other Mark said , " we are a sportsman class , we should be allowed to run any accepted fuel for Sportsman racing "
     
  9. Charlie Yannetti

    Charlie Yannetti Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2006
    Messages:
    1,638
    Likes Received:
    98
    OK.. OK..... SOOOOOOOOOOO, I'm getting a weeeeee bit tired of the banter here.. don't listen to the reports.. don't listen to the statistics.. just strap your piece into the dyno cradle, and give it a whirl... tune it the way your dyno tells you to.. put timing in, take jet out.. make it sing the best you can..

    THEN!!.. take it to the track, and get another 5 gallons of SR-18.. GEEEEEE!!.. a little hard starting??.. HMMMMMMM, stuff won't even ignite??... HMMMMMMM, doesn't really wanna come up clean on the chip??.... HMMMMMMM, lumbers off then line and your down 4 or 5 in 60ft??... HMMMMMM, what could that be... BUT HEY!!!.. we'll just tune 'er up.. took the tops right out of those pistons on the top end, didn't it Son??..

    BASICALLY.. if you don't believe what you're hearing, just put it in your best piece, and learn for yourself...

    Some guys have a handle on running the stuff, but are they as fast as they should be??.. I don't think so.. and if they tell you they are.. I will tell you they are lying to you.. PLAIN AND SIMPLE..

    I was just at a well known Pro Stock engine builder's shop, who recently tested with SR-18 to find the track differences between it and C-25... played with timing and jet to dial the car in.. two pistons later, they are on to a back-up piece...

    Try it bench racers, you'll love it... STOP THE NONSENSE!!!!!
     
  10. RamAirV

    RamAirV Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2011
    Messages:
    75
    Likes Received:
    25
    Rob, the problem is VP C25, being synthetic, is more stable to changes when compared to the Sunoco formulation.

    Think about it, if it fails fuel check right out of the can, it means the fuel formulation has changed or deteriorated and the reason why your engine will have problems.
     
  11. Rob Harrison

    Rob Harrison Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2006
    Messages:
    2,535
    Likes Received:
    42
    From Charlie's explanation , this fuel is not useable . We have never experienced the effects a fuel that is approved and doesn't burn ? Incredible blunder of technology , to ask everyone to use it anyhow and screw their stuff up , as Mark said , will be last time they race . P/S team burns 2 pistons , puts back up motor in , out of control......
     
  12. RamAirV

    RamAirV Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2011
    Messages:
    75
    Likes Received:
    25

    Mark is correct.

    Although not racing related, in turbine powered aircraft, a change of jet fuel will affect powerplant and the thrust parameters of the aircraft due to the difference flashpoint and burn.

    That is the reason why the flight manuals have a chart on how each different types of jet fuel will affect the aircraft performance.

    In the early days of aviation, there were issues with military aircraft depending the branch they operated from.

    The Navy JP-5 (Jet A) due to its composition, was a heavier fuel when compared to the USAF JP-4 (Jet B). In the early days, the fuel tank gauges were electro/mechanical and not electronic like they are now and read in pounds of fuel, not gallons. In new aircraft, the systems will correct for the different fuel in use. Therefore, an USAF aircraft with Navy heavier fuel, could show enough fuel, however, the tank contained less fuel in gallons capacity due to the heavier fuel.

    As a matter of fact, I lost a great friend an mentor due to this issue when he was flying a WWII British fighter from the East Coast to a museum in California. The gauge indicated he had fuel, however, the engine flamed out and he crashed. There was no fire in the crash because the fuel tanks were empty.
     
  13. jmarkaudio

    jmarkaudio New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2009
    Messages:
    29
    Likes Received:
    1
    You questioned why it would bog or misfire if the fuel burned slower. Fuel vaporization has a huge impact on detonation resistance, the easier and lower temps it will vaporize the faster and more complete it will burn, require less timing, in some cases less fuel. The better it vaporizes the more energy/temperature it pulls from the inlet air charge. The better it vaporizes the more equal distribution is, and more complete combustion will be. This lead to a lower chance of detonation and preignition. Introducing SR-18 that does NOT vaporize as well will require tuning changes, but in this case it's worse as batch to batch the fuel properties are inconsistent. When timing and fuel are optimized for one batch (meaning everything on the ragged edge for best power) and the next batch does not vaporize as well you can hurt parts, have issue with a lean bog or misfire. Either that or you tune safe and don't make as much power.
     
  14. Steve Polhill

    Steve Polhill Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2006
    Messages:
    1,200
    Likes Received:
    27
    I haven't commented on this thread yet because I have voiced my opinion several times on what I consider to be a garbage fuel we are being forced to run.

    But it has been mentioned about car counts going down. I run our car on an extremely limited budget, more so this year than any other. Because of that budget I have put all my eggs in one basket so to speak. If we hurt an engine as it looks like many have. I'm Likely done for the year, and considering the length of this new fuel contract. I would have to take a serious look at whether or not we come back. Going bracket racing at my local track would start to look very attractive. I have put every spare cent I have into this car and Engine, and I can't afford to hurt parts because of the negligence of the fuel company and the greed of the Sanctioning body.

    Car count matters to us, but I'm not sure the NHRA cares. If the dollar amount I have heard that Sunoco paid to be the official fuel is correct, the NHRA is more likely to defend the fuel company that gave them Millions, than the racer that gives them hundreds. I hate to be so doom and gloom about it, but it's how I see it. I sincerely hope I'm wrong.
     
  15. Mike Croley

    Mike Croley New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2010
    Messages:
    31
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sunoco is a big company with a lot of experience. It's not hard to duplicate race fuel specs. If that was Sunoco's aim, they could have done it easily. They seem to have decided to construct a different fuel, with different specs, that will accomplish the same power and torque. From the feedback, they have a ways to go. But i have no doubt they'll get the job done. It seems as though they might have either gotten a late start on producing the fuel, or didn't have enough data.
    The idea of vaporization being an important criteria is correct only in the broader context of race fuels for specific purposes. If vaporization were the only key to making great race fuels, every brand of race fuel would have the identical lowest possible RVP numbers. And each race fuel manufacturer would have ultra fast vaporization on every one of it's fuels. But they don't. In the case of the SR 18, it looks as though they think the goal can be accomplished with a different spec fuel. And to make the new fuel work, it might take a very different tuneup.
     
    #56 Mike Croley, May 10, 2015
    Last edited: May 10, 2015
  16. Mike Croley

    Mike Croley New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2010
    Messages:
    31
    Likes Received:
    0
    The sanctioning bodies will try to work with all parties to make sure everyone is happy. But you're right, if push comes to shove, the sanctioning body will go with the sponsor. Car count and fan count revenues are down, so the sponsor and tv money becomes much more important.
     
  17. Steve Polhill

    Steve Polhill Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2006
    Messages:
    1,200
    Likes Received:
    27

    Will they(Sunoco) get the fuel figured out? Possibly, But in the mean time we are the guinea pigs, and it is our lost rounds and broken parts. It's us that are paying the price while they figure it out. In my opinion if they don't have it figured out don't force us to run it.

    Sunoco may be a big company with a lot of experience, but apparently they haven't figured out how to make two batches of fuel that test or work the same. If they got a late start or didn't have enough data don't make us pay the price while they get their S**T in order.
     
  18. dino618

    dino618 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2011
    Messages:
    63
    Likes Received:
    0
    At vegas nats had 3 pails of fuel 2 bought from dist in seattle and one in vegas all according to sunoco out of same batch of fuel and put in five gal pails at same location in california whom is the western 11 states distributor. of the 3 pails 2 passed one didn't. Spent over an hour at tech trailer with sunoco reps and NHRA techs discussing what is happening the base samples pass it's what is brought in that is out of parameter sometimes. Solution sunoco is attempting to put batch numbers so they can track and hopefully salve issues.
    The problem is in the handling of the fuel not passing at fuel check, it was less than a 1/4 percent out of parameter and the NHRA tech says bad fuel " does this make it no good ,no just not in spec" now hypothetically
    the fuel makes less power , same for all, Question is if NHRA said out of spec instead of BAD fuel at pomona,phoenix ,gators and so on would this discussion of Bad fuel be trashing the net not sure and I don't know . And yes I hurt parts at Vegas was it fuel or me I cant say.
    This beckons again if we want our category to survive why keep down grading ourselves with rash comments instead of getting or members together and put something on paper to our reps and officials that is logical to help the situation instead of hindering it .


    Dino Kost
    B/DA 618
     
  19. Mike Croley

    Mike Croley New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2010
    Messages:
    31
    Likes Received:
    0
    The fuel check uses manufacturer supplied fuel specs to compare samples taken at the track. A number of things can affect fuel checks, temperature of the sample, even contamination from the container used to hold the sample. And certainly poor handling of the product on the way to, or at the track could also affect it. By implementing batch numbers, they should be able to quickly track down problems.
    It puts the racer in a bad position, and this isn't the first time it's happened. The idea of race fuel companies buying exclusive rights in NHRA is fairly recent. I think before VP bought the rights, it was open to all fuel companies. I know Union 76 was a major supplier in Pro Stock in the nineties.
    The racers might be able to work with NHRA to make all classes other than Pro Stock open for all accepted fuels. But as i mentioned before, the current situation is that Sunoco put out a lot of money to buy the rights to be official fuel supplier, and they feel they should get as much for their money as possible.
     
    #60 Mike Croley, May 11, 2015
    Last edited: May 11, 2015

Share This Page