For Dellorto wizards.

sfcpiet said:
Really don't understand what all the fuss hysteria is about with ethanol fuels.

It is possibly the best, most efficient fuel that has been available at regular pumps (they are all that matter for me) for years. 

So it's not compatible with many fibreglasses, but those weren't compatible with all fuels anyway.  It was advisable to drain any fuel from fibreglass tanks if the machine was to stand for any length of time, even 40 years ago!  Modern resin compounds cope quite well with ethanol these days (I still drain my fibreglass tanks, though).  In use, I haven't had a single issue.

Rubber hoses may pose a problem, but that can easily be remedied.

When a bike is laid up for the winter, or any length of time, draining the float bowls has always been a good idea, even without ethanol.

As more and more barn finds turn up, many still carry fuel from pre-ethanol days.  The havoc I find in these carbs is no better than what I find in later ones, only a bit different, mostly the smell.

A now deceased friend, that was heavily involved in the Toyota F1 and WRC efforts regarding engine and fuel management, once explained he had never before worked with better pump fuels, these still were the basis of their special concoctions (where allowed :D).

piet

Another conspiracy theory bites the dust.

Paul
 
People have been using methanol in fuel for years. It has a long history in racing. It has very similar properties to ethanol. Methanol perhaps being a little more aggressive to some synthetic materials.
Methanol is a good fuel. It has a high octane rating, burns relatively cleanly, has a cooling effect on the engine, etc. The same can be said of ethanol. So it seems strange to me that methanol is known as a great racing fuel but ethanol is seen as an evil fuel additive.
 
The lion's share of ethanol fuel around here is 85 or 87 octane, the octane-free is 90. That's one reason I avoid ethanol. Further, if you do happen to park you bike for a few months with fuel in the tank, you don't have to worry about the risk of the ethanol and any moisture in the tank separating and sinking to the bottom where it produces something of a corrosive mix. Out on the road I don't worry about it, but around town and when I know my bike will be sitting for any period of time, I do.
 
murphus said:
The lion's share of ethanol fuel around here is 85 or 87 octane, the octane-free is 90. That's one reason I avoid ethanol. Further, if you do happen to park you bike for a few months with fuel in the tank, you don't have to worry about the risk of the ethanol and any moisture in the tank separating and sinking to the bottom where it produces something of a corrosive mix. Out on the road I don't worry about it, but around town and when I know my bike will be sitting for any period of time, I do.

Zero octane petrol, interesting...  :D

No fuel at german pumps under 95 octane rating any more.  98, 100 and 102 available, at a premium.  All have at least 5% ethanol content, in line with EU regulations.  E10 super has 95 octane as well, but at least 10% ethanol content.  E85 is also available, 85% ethanol.  Special set ups required, but I hear only praise from users!

If laying up a bike for more than 6 months, I'd drain and use the fuel for my lawnmower.  That doesn't seem to mind at all how old the fuel is, starts 1st or 2nd pull, every time!  Maybe because it's a Honda? :D

piet
 
At one time I could buy Sunoco 260 - Per 5 Gallons, I added 1 cup of methanol and a couple table spoons of Red-X = KaBOOM !

The compression of my Kawasaki 440cc John Deer Sport Fire snow machine was so Hi fitted with dual 38 Mukini's, I often had to start it an Eyther Spray Bomb when it went below 10C.

The smell of the fuel stand off on start up was gloriously toxic and the engine vibes defoliated snow off 60 pine trees ;o)
 
Chrisk - Sonoco 260 was 110 Leaded (RON) Octane.

I'm a great Mukini Carb and Dellorto 30A VHB guy. Holley and Weber's for car engines and specialize in Lambda EFI I-Jetronic fuel injection systems.

Granted Corn Ethanol fuels tend to eat Aluminum, Rubber and Copper but does deliver Hi-Octane.
 
Chrisk: LOL

Can't believe our older member's don't recall the old Red-X "trioxyethylphenalthiomane" formula - Other wards known as SPEED ;o)

Can't say what the original Red-X Gasoline formula additive was but would guess it was based on a Keytone Molly-Toluine source and probably full of Lead.
 
There was an article posted on the internet about 15 years ago regarding a guy who lived out in the USA mid-west who ran a Suzuki GS 500 twin.
He decided to run it on E85 that was available out there.
At first it wouldn`t start,so he tried covering the carb inlets,in the end blocking them off completely with a couple of plastic cups.
The bike would then start,and idle,but very roughly.
He then replaced the idle jets with ones 150% larger than stock,and the mains with ones 130% larger than stock.The Suzuki then ran fine with no problems,although mpg was reduced to 75% compared to regular gasoline.
It seems in Nebraska,amongst the corn fields,yellow pump 99 octane E85 was about two -thirds cheaper than regular petrol.
 
Seem to remember there was an assortment of Amal main jets for alcohol use. Drag racers and some illegal stock machine used them.  Super huge orifices..as I recall.

That would explain the Suzuki GS 500
 
from Piets earlier posting
"Really don't understand what all the fuss hysteria is about with ethanol fuels."

I honestly don't know how you can say that Piet, I have been present when ethanol damaged float valves have been diagnosed and on one of those occasions it caused about 4 litres of raw fuel to drain into the sump oil, it ran out like piss, and the engine was running (just) on it, you just cant help thinking, hydraulic'd pistons and bent rods as well,and its not just the one bike either, my experience is more like five bikes, twins and triples but none of them my own, only last Decemebr I recovered from France a very expensive classic Masseratti Khamsin (150,000GBP) and it ran like shit, barley able to drive it onto my trailer, two months later it transpires that the float valve tips in the Webbers are shot,

and if there is no issue, why do Dellorto now provide float valves with revised soft tips of a different colour (red) (as do Webber)
CLEM
 
E5 and E10 fuels shouldn`t really present any great problems for most vehicles providing they are used regularly.............
Ethanol,like most alcohols attract water,and if any fuel containing ethanol if left to stand for any length of time can result in a alcohol/water mix separating from the main body of the fuel and gravitating to the bottom of the fuel tank,causing starting and corrosion problems.
If a vehicle is going to be left unused for any length of time then the best course of action is to drain fuel from the tank and fuel supply (which is a good idea in any case).
By doing this you are removing the ethanol whilst it is still in suspension with the main body of fuel,before the ethanol and any water it contains gets the chance to become separated.
Ethanol has it`s advantages:it burns more cleanly in air than petrol,therefore reducing Co2 emissions,and is renewable.
Disadvantages include a lower heat of combustion,and Co2 produced during the production/fermentation process.
E5 and E10 are here to stay,along with E15 on the horizon,so we may as well get used to it.
Anyway,if it were a choice between ethanol problems,and going electric,I know which way I`d choose.
 
Actually there`s one more thing I have thought of related to this.Looking for fuel pipe that would be resistant from any possible attack from increasing ethanol content in fuel,Viton seems one to go for,but was wondering about Neoprene.
According to a compatibility chart I was studying,Neoprene was ethanol compatible (good),but when scrolling down to gasoline,Neoprene was given an unsatisfactory rating,which is a little confusing.
Any thoughts on this?
 
rocketonarail said:
Actually there`s one more thing I have thought of related to this.Looking for fuel pipe that would be resistant from any possible attack from increasing ethanol content in fuel,Viton seems one to go for,but was wondering about Neoprene.
According to a compatibility chart I was studying,Neoprene was ethanol compatible (good),but when scrolling down to gasoline,Neoprene was given an unsatisfactory rating,which is a little confusing.
Any thoughts on this?

The original hardened ex Breganze Cavis is fine.

Paul
 
CLEMTOG said:
from Piets earlier posting
"Really don't understand what all the fuss hysteria is about with ethanol fuels."

I honestly don't know how you can say that Piet, I have been present when ethanol damaged float valves have been diagnosed and on one of those occasions it caused about 4 litres of raw fuel to drain into the sump oil, it ran out like piss, and the engine was running (just) on it, you just cant help thinking, hydraulic'd pistons and bent rods as well,and its not just the one bike either, my experience is more like five bikes, twins and triples but none of them my own, only last Decemebr I recovered from France a very expensive classic Masseratti Khamsin (150,000GBP) and it ran like shit, barley able to drive it onto my trailer, two months later it transpires that the float valve tips in the Webbers are shot,

and if there is no issue, why do Dellorto now provide float valves with revised soft tips of a different colour (red) (as do Webber)
CLEM

No pissing contest Clem, but Laverdas come and go here, a dozen bikes each month, in varying configurations, all quite happy to run on E5 fuels. 

The red tipped float valves have been supplied by Dellorto since the early 1990's, no talk of ethanol in regular fuels yet.  AfaIk, ethanol-containing fuels were re-introduced in Europe around 1998-2000.  Whatever the reason for the Dellorto change, it wasn't the european swing to these fuels.  Brasil, amoung other countries, were using alchohol-based fuels in huge quantities by then, maybe that was what decided it.

I've drained full-to-the-brim Laverda engines long before ethanol fuels were even thought of (IIrc, 23 litres was the record!).  It's not a material issue, it's a design issue that lets fuel drain past the float valves.  Due to the oblique angle of the carbs, especially on the triples, there is simply too much friction between float valve and valve body to allow smooth movement of the valve, or to allow the valve tip to seal adequately over a long period.  The VHB carbs on the 750s e.g., do not have these issues, the float valves are close to vertical with a lot less friction involved.  And these do not even have a rubber tip!

I overhaul loads of Dellorto PHB/PHF carbs each year and rarely do I find corrosion, certainly none caused by the fuel itself.  I sometimes do find  corrosion at the bottom of the float bowl, caused by accumulated water.  But this can accumulate if the bike is left standing in rain or lives in an especially humid climate, not necessarily by water seperating from fuel.  The fact that water is in there long enough and in a quantity to cause corrosion alone is an indication of how well a bike is maintained.  Rubber components show mostly deterioration through simple drying out, pump diaphragms and o-rings are often bone-hard and brittle.  I do find a lot of residue and gumming, but that had been a huge problem in pre-ethanol times as well.

Your Khamsin example isn't exactly very good Clem, dodgy specialist engineering in abundance.  How well was the vehicle maintained?  The float tips were possibly shot well before the incident.  Perhaps still working, by the skin of the teeth?  There are bound to be as many expensive, polished turds in the classic car scene as in the bike scene, probably many, many  more. 

To illustrate my point, just today a rather tidy 3CL in close to original appearance happened to be brought in for a carb service.  These had been repeatedly ultra-sonically cleaned and rebuilt, but the bike would stubbornly refuse to idle.  Odo showed an original 23000km (in line with overall condition), the valves had been "done" 2000km prior to being laid up parked at the back of the shed 20 years ago.  An initial compression check showed below-par values, especially on #1.  Checked valves, clearances all over the place.  Corrected and another comp check, all a bit better and a lot closer to another.  I found bowed inlet stub flanges, the o-rings had been replaced.  The bowing was as much as 0.3mm, given the o-ring is squashed by less than 0.5mm, this was quite borderline.  No problem, remedied on the lathe in a matter of minutes.  Float heights all over the place, jets loose, needle and needle jets with a lot of fuel residue, no blocked passages.  With a bit of fettling and a handful of odds and sods later, all seemed well.  Three new (Champion :D) plugs, hooked up the freshly-charged battery and it sprang to life.  Up to now, I hadn't touched the balancing screws... balancing was way, way out.  Another 5 minutes of fiddling and I had a steady 800rpm idle, on 95 octane E5 Eurosuper :D.  Strobed the original BTZ ignition, all OK, pleasant surprise.  The dangerously low float heights were possibly the main culprits causing the erratic idling, but it was probably the culmination of all manner of little things.  Just 'cos a Maserati may command 150000 quid, doesn't mean it's in reasonable condition.  Many probably just look 150 grand good.  You probably know full well how bloody expensive it is to keep a car of such calibre in top condition.  What's a couple of float valves compared to the total complexity of that particular car?

What exactly was the diagnosed "ethanol damage" on the Laverda float valves?

piet
 
Back
Top