That 1 lb per gallon looks like it approximately trades off for the increased energy per unit, doesn't it? Or is my math off? If I am correct, it would provide more time in the air per gallon in an approximately even trade-off for the extra weight per gallon. In other words, you could carry less fuel to get the same flying range. Any engineers out there to back me up on this? Dave Winters
-----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jerry Eichenberger Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 12:42 PM To: [email protected]; ercoupe tech Subject: RE: [ercoupe-tech] Fw: Swiftfuel Scott - When I read the article, I didn't see anything about Swiftfuel's being approved by FAA. It appears to be only in initial testing now. And, it weighs 1 pound more per gallon than 100LL. -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]on Behalf Of Scott Morgan Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 1:31 PM To: ercoupe tech Subject: [ercoupe-tech] Fw: Swiftfuel --- Look at AVweb.com to learn about Swiftfuel. FAA has tested it and approved it for use. It is a biofuel replacement for 100LL and the company claims to be able to produce it for less than $2 per gallon. Scott
