Doug_H
The only problem I have with Swift Fuel is the price. I’d rather carry Mogas at 50% less. At every place I’ve been to that has it, it’s even more than 100LL. Get that price down guys…Then way more fields will carry it.
The only problem I have with Swift Fuel is the price. I’d rather carry Mogas at 50% less. At every place I’ve been to that has it, it’s even more than 100LL. Get that price down guys…Then way more fields will carry it.
Unfortunately, there’s no way these alternative fuels can be produced, distributed and sold for less than existing 100LL, or even the same as. They’re still created from petroleum (or something even more expensive), still distributed primarily by truck to scattered vendors serving a limited clientele, and on top of that the considerable development and certification costs have to be amortized in the pricing.
“100R also uses 10 percent renewable materials to enhance its ‘green’ status.”
Whaaat? Are the sticking ethanol in there? I thought that lead-free fuel was its green status.
One big factor driving higher prices for Swift 94UL is transportation & storage. Many airports only have 1 Avgas tank or 2 tanks if two fuel suppliers.
Swift 94UL & 100LL fuel cannot be mixed in transportation or in airport storage tanks. Local refineries have Mogas, 100LL, and potentially Swift 94UL. Refineries, distributors and on-airport stations must also acquire a 3rd handling solution, which means buying more gear and passing on the price.
GAMI solved this problem by incorporating approval in their STC to mix with 100LL to any degree. Makes conversion to a new fuel much more cost compliant with existing infrastructure.
Sorry to be vague there. The full list of airports would be prohibitively long. You can find them on the Swift Fuels website. But I can tell you that Reid-Hillview is one of them, and that has made local headlines after a lot of negative publicity over lead levels.