Based on the G100UL fuel leak thread what's your position?

[gabez]

9 hours ago, EricJ said:

That seems to be a positive development.  I hope it winds up being broadly applicable.

it's progress from a company that actual makes fuel for living.

I think we have supplies of paint stripper for the next decade. Hopefully GAMI cuts a deal with Home Depot so it's more readily accessible. 

[MisfitSELF]

On 8/24/2025 at 9:47 AM, Aaviationist said:

No, you paid 400$ for an STC allowing you to use the fuel covered under the STC. 
 

are you saying Gami or someone prevented you from using the fuel?

 

how much of the STC’d fuel have you run through your engine?

For one thing the fuel isn't available on any wide scale and likely won't be because of these issues.  And is was advertised to cause no issues and be a "drop in replacement".  It's not that, it's not as advertised, and I'm out $400.  It's not really much in the aviation scheme of things but those are real damages.  I paid for a product, it turns out is vaporware and even if I could get it, would likely result in damage to my aircraft.  You damn right I want my money back. 

You order some $400 product on Amazon based on reviews, turns out all the "5 star reviews" are false advertising and the product doesn't work or causes harm, would you just suck it up or return it?

[MikeOH]

29 minutes ago, MisfitSELF said:

You order some $400 product on Amazon based on reviews, turns out all the "5 star reviews" are false advertising and the product doesn't work or causes harm

BINGO!

Product misrepresentation, plain and simple.  The idea that you shouldn't expect to recover those damages is almost as ridiculous as claiming that the $400 isn't even damages in the first place!  You paid for a "license" to use a misrepresented product...damn right I'd want my money back.

[Aaviationist]

15 hours ago, MikeOH said:

BINGO!

Product misrepresentation, plain and simple.  The idea that you shouldn't expect to recover those damages is almost as ridiculous as claiming that the $400 isn't even damages in the first place!  You paid for a "license" to use a misrepresented product...damn right I'd want my money back.

Circle talk Mike strikes again.