Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#5
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 2 Oct 2008 17:53:54 -0400, "jamesgangnc"
wrote: Gas still has way more btu per gallon which is a lot more energy density. Propane is one of the lowest with only 92,000 btu per gallon. Gas is 123,000 btu per gallon. Octane only helps you run a higher compression which you could argue lets you make better use of the fuel. But in that, diesel can run pretty high compression and it is the one fuel with even more btu per gallon than gas, 138,000 btu per gallon. "Richard Casady" wrote in message . .. On Thu, 2 Oct 2008 09:49:23 -0700 (PDT), wrote: It's tough to beat the btu in a gallon of gas. With propane the simplist, cheapest mixing valve will work as well as the best fuel injection. Stuff is 100 octane, as well. The stuff _is_ available many places. Slightly more BTU per pound due to the slightly higher proportion of hydrogen. I had propane heat at my previous address, and adding a fitting or two and a hose to the 1 000 gallon tank would have been easy. If I had had a 100 octane hot rod I would have done it. Gas does have higher energy density but that may not necessarily matter. It does with planes, more so than cars and boats. Casady BTU per pound is considered more useful. Never seen a published figure for energy content that wasn't by weight. Per pound, propane is slightly better, although in practice the heavier tank would cancel that. The pilots have always figured gas at six pounds per gallon, while propane is about four. Casady |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Ships of the old Portuguese cod fishing fleet 3 - codfishing fleet unknown.jpg | Tall Ship Photos | |||
Ships of the old Portuguese cod fishing fleet 2 - codfishing fleet creoula.jpg | Tall Ship Photos | |||
Ships of the old Portuguese cod fishing fleet 1 - codfishing fleet argus.jpg | Tall Ship Photos | |||
My boat is expanding | Cruising | |||
Expanding foam | General |