Prist is not a fuel additive

Hmm, we use Prist at work and I never noticed that warning. I prefer Plexus myself.
 
Prist makes 3 products: fuel additive (which is what most of think of), deice fluid, and the aforementioned windshield cleaner
 
Prist also makes a fuel additive. Just not that stuff.
 
Hopefully they both have a warning not to drink them... :-/
 
What does their fuel additive do? Is it for avgas, or jet fuel?
 
Palmpilot said:
What does their fuel additive do? Is it for avgas, or jet fuel?
Click to expand...
Mostly turbine fuel. In general terms, Prist bonds with suspended water in the fuel and lowers its freezing point.
 
Last edited:
I guess I can understand why things like Prist, that have a whole bunch of different products, might have that warning, but why does peanut butter have to say "contains peanuts" on the label?
 
Palmpilot said:
What does their fuel additive do? Is it for avgas, or jet fuel?
Click to expand...

Jet Fuel.

It is like dry gas for cars. Plus an anti microbial. Jet fuel, if there is water present, can support the growth of bacteria or fungi that will clog up the fuel filters.
 
Everyone is not asking for diethylene glycol monomethyl ether, or more simply, MIL-DTL-85470B when they fuel up?
It sort of rolls off the tongue; "Quick turn, top off, positive MIL-DTL-85470B"

lol
 
Let'sgoflying! said:
It sort of rolls off the tongue;
Click to expand...
FYI: But they do ask for an FSII (Fuel system icing inhibitor) at times which is the "proper" name as there are a number of other brands of FSII other than Prist.
 
SkyChaser said:
I guess I can understand why things like Prist, that have a whole bunch of different products, might have that warning, but why does peanut butter have to say "contains peanuts" on the label?
Click to expand...

Because someone wanted a law. So the law was written that all products with peanuts in them must be labeled to tell people that there are peanuts in it.

No one thought to exempt peanuts.
 
Pinecone said:
Because someone wanted a law. So the law was written that all products with peanuts in them must be labeled to tell people that there are peanuts in it.

No one thought to exempt peanuts.
Click to expand...

could have left it at "No one thought"
 
Pinecone said:
Because someone wanted a law. So the law was written that all products with peanuts in them must be labeled to tell people that there are peanuts in it.

No one thought to exempt peanuts.
Click to expand...

Having a kid with a pretty severe peanut/tree nut allergy, we have become avid label readers. You would be surprised how many products 'contain', 'may contain' or 'are manufactured on equipment that also processes' peanuts. It is equally surprising to see how many products you would expect to be peanut-unfriendly actually contain zero peanuts.

With that said, yes, I would expect a big shelf full of actual peanuts to not need a sign, however, there is a large portion of the population that think chocolate milk comes from brown cows, sooo.....
 
Prist and its competitors are used by boaters with diesel engines, if they do not keep refueling frequently.

That keeps the black goo from propagating, and covering filters with non porous blockages.

Freeing a contaminated fuel tank is a complex and expensive process, if any live microbes survive, your are on the way back to engine failure to run. The owner never considers Prist expensive again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top