Kerosene As Emergency Engine Fuel: The Test Results
A head-to-head test of 1 kerosene as emergency engine fuel options with the measured results for each. See how they ranked and watch the full test video.
Some figures on this page were transcribed from the test video and have not been independently re-verified. Treat the numbers as a close guide and watch the full video for the exact readings.
Kerosene K1 (lower sulfur than K2, cleaner burning)
Affiliate link. We may earn a commission at no extra cost to you.
The measured results
Every number below is read straight from the test. Scroll sideways to see all measurements. Products are listed in the order they finished.
| Product | Fuel properties | Cold start test, straight/100% kerosene, small engine | Carbon buildup test, engine previously run clean on a full tank of gasoline, then run on kerosene | See-through cylinder head combustion test | Cold weather (about -15 to -16 F) liquidity test vs diesel | Load/performance test (engine brake load) | Fuel efficiency test (fuel-injected generator powering a ~1,500 W space heater via a kilowatt meter, compared against a previously-established gasoline baseline) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1Kerosene K1 (lower sulfur than K2, cleaner burning) | auto-ignition temperature 254 C / 490 F, flashpoint 66 C / 152 F, per the K1 safety data sheet | ran successfully starting with 8 oz of pure kerosene; narrator was impressed with how well it ran but had to make a carburetor adjustment to get it running smoothly | left a bit more carbon deposits than gasoline, notably more buildup on the outer edge of the piston area, indicating a less complete/less clean burn | showed a lot of bright streaks, indicating it takes longer for kerosene to fully combust, unlike gasoline's quick, even flame pattern | kerosene remained liquid while diesel gelled at the same temperature | caused significant spark knock/pinging under load; adding an unmeasured splash of octane boost helped only a little, engine still knocked a lot under load; without a full load (just driving) it ran fine with no pinging or knocking | test setup and method described in full but no resulting efficiency/runtime figures are ever spoken; flagged as on-screen-only, logged to data/onscreen-only.txt |
How it was tested
- cold start on 100% kerosene
- carbon/combustion-chamber deposit comparison vs a gasoline baseline
- see-through cylinder head combustion visual comparison
- cold-weather liquidity comparison vs diesel
- engine-brake load test for knock/pinging, with and without octane boost
- fuel efficiency test via generator under a fixed electrical load (result not spoken, see notes)
Data notes and caveats
Single-product myth-test (kerosene as emergency gasoline substitute), not a brand competition, so isHeadToHead is false and winner/runnerUp/budgetPick are null. Confidence set to low specifically because the fuel-efficiency generator test is fully narrated as a setup (space heater load, kilowatt meter, comparison to a previously measured gasoline baseline) but the actual resulting numbers are never spoken in the transcript; logged to data/onscreen-only.txt as MTlNjRDOJ5E rather than guessed at. All other tests (cold start, carbon buildup, see-through combustion, cold-weather gelling vs diesel, load/knock test) have clear narrated qualitative results, captured above. Meta chapters field is null for this video.
More Myths & Experiments
Which Fuel Saving Devices Brand Wins?
Reduced speed plus increased tire pressure
See the resultsWhich Diesel Fuel Alternative Brand Wins?
5 products tested
See the resultsWhich Turpentine As Engine Fuel Additive Brand Wins?
2 products tested
See the results