On Tue, 7 Jan 2014 15:16:42 -0800 (PST),
ron...@gmail.com wrote:
>On Wednesday, June 13, 2012 5:20:41 AM UTC-5,
fred.fl...@thecave.com wrote:
>> I no longer own one of these old stoves, but as a child, I recall my dad
>>
>> said you had to use "White Gas" and could never use "red gas" from the
>>
>> gas station. But back then, red gas meant leaded gas, and the reason
>>
>> for not using it was because the lead would clog something in the stove
>>
>> (not sure what).
>>
>> Anyhow, a friend just got one of these old stoves and wants to know what
>>
>> to burn. I know Coleman fuel is costly, and gas stations no longer sell
>>
>> the stuff called "white gas".
>>
>> Yet, no gasoline contains lead anymore, and it's all white in color.
>>
>> (actually clear). Therefore, I cant see why a person cant just use any
>>
>> standard unleaded gasoline?
>>
>> Anyone know?
>>
>> (Personally, I prefer propane camping stoves. Easier to use and safer).
Certainly easier to use, much much, but not as hot. If you're on K2 and
you need your coffee may have to wait a long time. Well I've never
compared but people could do this at home, outside I guess.
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>I'm 64 years old and never knew that "Coleman fuel" existed before 40 years ago.
I'm 66 and I didn't know either until 44 years ago. But of course I had
used no camp stove or lantern until then.
>My father and family always used white gas in our lanterns and stoves. (The gas was bought at "American" service stations, then they
Headquartered in Baltimore, FWIW.
> changed names to "Amoco". They were the only stations that sold "white gas".) A few times, when we couldn't find white gas, we used ethyl leaded (red, high test) gasoline. It worked, but we had to take the generators apart and clean them because of it. (It has nothing to do with "fumes"... all gasoline gives off carbon monoxide.)
>The problem with unleaded gasoline today is that most of it contains 10% alcohol
I think the alcohol burns less hot, but other than that, I don't see a
problem.
>and many 'other bi-products'.
I don't konw if these are an issue or not.
>? If you're in a tight, then use it. You'll just have to take the generator apart and clean it after you're through using it, but that's no big deal. The "duel fuel" stoves and lanterns are just made with less exacting measure of tolerances (more forgiving).
Googlng on gasoline vs. coleman fuel
Look what Coleman itself has to say. "Our DualFuel� appliances are made
to accommodate automobile fuel. Coleman's modified valving even allows
for differences between summer and winter blends. At 1/10 of the cost of
propane, unleaded gas is the cheapest of all appliance fuels. And it's
available everywhere, of course. In an emergency, you can siphon gas
from the tank of your RV or car to use in a DualFuel lantern or stove.
Although it's the most economical fuel to use, you'll extend the life of
your appliance by using purer Coleman� Fuel most of the time.
Main advantages: availability and low cost. "
You would think if there were safety hazards from auto gasoline, they'd
be the first to trumpet them, unless of course, market testing showed
that it was a losing battle and owners of Coleman and similar items
would continue to use gasoline. So to maximize income they should just
make dual fuel models**. But I sort of doubt that. If they mentioned
car gasoline on their webpage at all and they are aware that it's
dangerous and they don't say so at the same place, they open themselves
up to product liability cases which I think they have no chance of
winning. Maybe I'll ask abou tthis on the legal newsgroup.
**Another reason to doubt this is that aiui, Coleman fule was cleaner
than gasoline, and like you say, a dual fuel stove would need greater
tolerances, so they would have to make a different model. This was true
before fuel injection, but was it true after? For a while the car
companies and gas companies blamed each other when dirt in gasoline gave
problems in fuel injected cars. But the only real solution was cleaner
gasoline, fewer things that can clog a port, and that's what we have
now. So is dual-fuel still needed? I'd check when the dual-fuel
models came out, and when the car makers won the dirty gasoline war, and
see which came first. If Dual=Fuel came out first, maybe they just
continue to make that because it was selling well and more money than
the single fuel models. And the continued sale of single fuel models
enouraged the sale of Coleman fuel.
But wait, there's more:
https://www.ar15.com/archive/topic.html?b=10&f=17&t=589694
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coleman_fuel
http://www.smokstak.com/forum/showthread.php?t=111789
http://www.backpackinglight.com/cgi-bin/backpackinglight/forums/thread_display.html?forum_thread_id=60568
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=78263
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090517202145AAwB3lS
http://www.rvforum.net/SMF_forum/index.php?topic=61462.0
I havent' read these yet, but they sound relevant. And some are from
camping or RV pages, (I hate web forums, but any port in a storm.)
There were other hits too.