<div style="text-align: justify">AMB is quite right in suggesting that if there was a non-ether diesel fuel that works as well as an ether-based brew, someone would surely have found it by now. The incentive to find such a fuelhas been there from the outset since ether has always been a bit dodgy to handle and has never been readily available to Joe Average (at least in the places where I've lived). Accordingly, a lot of folks have looked really hard at this issue over a long period of time, beginning in the 1940's when diesels first appeared - this is not a new quest by any means. The fact that over 60 years of looking (by myself, among others) has not identified a non-ether fuel that works as well as an ether-based brew surely tells us something?!?

Having said this, I'm not in any way decrying the value of opngoing research - simply pointing out that people have been pursuing this quest for well over half a century now without notable success. That said, if gkamysz or Keropower come up with an etherless fuel that works as well as ether-based fuel in the average diesel, I'll be the first to switch! Go for it, guys, and good luck - please keep us posted!

Meanwhile, the key issue is - what should we be telling newcomers to diesel operation as mattters stand? I think that Hobbsy has a very good handle on this point - is the diesel cause best served by promoting fuels that don't contain ether but also don't work as well and therefore pose operational problems which are likely in themselves to discourage further diesel activity; or is it better to promote fuels that work predictably and well, even if they do contain ether? I think he's absolutely right - offer useful advice by promoting what works. If anyone comes up with an etherless fuel that works as well, then we'll promote it by all means. Meanwhile, I for one will continue to advise newcomers to diesel operation to stick with ether-based fuels. </div>