What to do with old gas and oil?

[Gh0stRider]

If you aren't willing to burn it your MB then don't even think about your car......

Never had a problem burning old pre-mix in my cars. Usually, the amount is less than a quart, and that is added to a nearly full tank of gas in a car. (14-22 gallons depending on which car) The old fuel can cause hard starting and rough running, but is rendered harmless when mixed with several gallons of fresh fuel. A modern car engine will burn it cleaner than burning it in a bonfire (dangerous and stupid), and letting it evaporate contributes to hydrocarbon emissions. Besides, gas doesn't evaporate completely. You'll end up with a lot of the heavier (read sludgier) components after the light aromatics evaporate away.

 

[Hajuu]

Burning it doesn't pollute much more than using it in your car.. And im sure 'your mates old truck' goes really far on 5L of petrol, at the possible expense of damaging their car...

There's being green, and there's being impractical. (in my opinion anyway

 

[Gh0stRider]

Burning it doesn't pollute much more than using it in your car..

You've got to be kidding me!

I guess there is no need for the electronic fuel management on modern cars. No need for catalytic converters. No need for the charcoal canisters on the gas tank vents to absorb the fumes. Because just dumping it on the ground and burning it doesn't pollute much more. Sure, I'm being "green" but I'm not a "greenie" if you know what I mean.

I once disposed of several gallons of bad gas drained from a car that had been sitting for 4 years. It didn't even really smell like gas anymore. I added it about half a gallon at a time to an 11 gallon tank in a Ford Escort that had over 170,000 miles. (not km) The car ran fine, I disposed of the fuel in a respnsible manner. The car also got oil changes every 10,000 miles (not km) whether it needed it or not. lol The "change it every 3,000 mile guys" (I bet you are one of them) are probably going bonkers. The engine was clean as a whistle inside too!

 

[Hajuu]

haha, that's mainly for maintinence, performance, and efficiency concerns. Your muffler and catalytic converter reduce your emissions.. negligibly afaik. The muffler is especially, as the name suggests, primarily for reducing the noise of your exhaust.

As for the other concerns, if it's spoiled fuel, then it's effective efficiency is effectively null, or even negative efficiency, if it does by chance break something.

 

[Gh0stRider]

.....The muffler is especially, as the name suggests, primarily for reducing the noise of your exhaust......

Really? wow!

 

[motorpsycho]

hmmm...wonder what an air filter is for?

 

[Stan4d]

haha, that's mainly for maintinence, performance, and efficiency concerns. Your muffler and catalytic converter reduce your emissions.. negligibly afaik.

Just curious....how familiar are you with cars sold in the states. Here in Texas where I live we have come under stricter regulations. Every year during our saftey inspection we are now subjected to a dyno type set up that measures our emissions. I can guarantee that even something as small as an intake manifold temp sensor can drastically change the emissions. Yes when it went out the test failed and I had to replace it. Seems the engine computer uses those inpouts for max efficiency as well as cleanest burn of fuel. On our tests we are given a sheet that shows the standards as well as what your car did.
I hope now you know more and will not make assumptions about the emission standards of other countries.
Burning fuel in the open is by far worse than burning it in a motor.
Not saying it out of greeness, it is just a fact. Also that is why I would not dispose of the spent fuel in my car (unless it was an older model pre emmisssions enforcement). I might be wrong but it does kill the fire ants and edge the fence nicely.

 

[motorpsycho]

in a nutshell, todays car engines are made to run as lean and as hot as possible, and that is what all the emissions junk is for. a leaner engine puts out less hydrocarbons.
There is nothing wrong with an emission controlled engine these days, but back in the early 70's when it all started (here in the USA), the automotive world took a major down turn in performance. a 1970 chevy chevell s.s. 454 ls 7 was putting out 450 horsepower right off the showroom floor. a 1971 chevelle s.s. 454 was putting out maybe 300 horsepower. they totaly detuned the engines, added emission devices, and it was down hill from there. (computers had not come into play yet) i think the lowest h.p. ratings were around 1974-75 when the fuel crunch hit us hard. a 1974-75 chevy 454 engine (available only in trucks at the time) was making a miserable 250 h.p. things did get much better as time went on with computer controlled engines and transmissions, and today, they can get amazing amounts of horsepower out of the smallest of engines. so emissions equipment and computer contolled engines are not a bad thing, it just took a long time for them to make everything work right together.

 

[andyszyd]

Burning it doesn't pollute much more than using it in your car.. And im sure 'your mates old truck' goes really far on 5L of petrol, at the possible expense of damaging their car...

There's being green, and there's being impractical. (in my opinion anyway

I exterminate fire ants with stale gas leftovers.

Works much better then lame and ever weaker commercial insect control products.

 

[Old Bob]

I exterminate fire ants with stale gas leftovers.

Works much better then lame and ever weaker commercial insect control products.

Dump some gas on em and toss a match, they will really be fire ants.

I don't get the mentality that its ok to burn in a car with a $5000-8000 dollar engine because they are concerned about a $129 engine?????