Dogster really blew this one. By the numbers:
[ol]
[li]He depended upon anecdotal evidence to reach his conclusion[/li][li]He disregarded professional trade publications[/li][li]He didn’t follow through with his empirical observations[/li][/ol]
Salvage operators (disclaimer: I write software for the salvage industry) and mechanics are not the most trustworthy of witnesses. I’ve never seen any group of people exagerate more than those in the automotive industry. From street racers to car salesmen, these people have more “Mine is bigger/better/faster/whatever than yours” stories than a boatload of marlin fishermen on Maui. Depending on these people for unbiased and accurate observations made during an informal conversation is unwise.
In addition to Motor Service magazine, cited by Chuck H., I have found Internet cites including a February 2001 Q&A by Tom & Ray of CarTalk.com and an article in Modern Maturity magazine. Both of these cites are from respected sources not given to promulgating myths.
Finally, he failed to dismantle the engine to determine the extent of the damage. Clogging up a fuel filter hardly constitutes “wreck[ing] a car engine”.
Finally, I have my own direct experience with a customer’s vehicle (I also work for a automotive recycling/service facility):
The contractor we had hired to paint my office related to me a story of having his tank sugared when he crossed a picket line to do a drywall job. That night, his vehicle ran sluggishly and he noticed sugar around the tank inlet. He drove the truck, a 1994 Chevrolet C1500 SWB V-6 pickup, to a competitor’s shop, figuring the damage was already done. Said shop accepted the vehicle and charged him to have the fuel tank removed and steam cleaned and the fuel filter replaced. When he picked up the vehicle, it ran fine and he noticed nothing unusual until the fuel in the tank was down to 25% or less of capacity. Then the sluggishness returned. Upon refuelling the truck, he noticed that the sugar at the tank inlet was still present. The shop owner apologized but attributed this to a technician overlooking cleanup of this area when he removed the tank and refused to provide any further remedy. My contractor’s only solution was to try keep the tank filled above halfway or so.
I took his truck into the shop and removed the tank for him. There was still a small amount of sugar present in the tank, just enough to be a problem only when the fuel level was low. I cleaned the tank with water, left it upside down overnight to drip dry, blew it out with compressed air, and sloshed a full quart of fuel dryer around the inside of the tank to disolve any remaining water. The tank was then reinstalled and a small amount of fuel added. The truck ran fine until the fuel level became to low to be picked up by the fuel pump; the problem was solved.
An examination of the fuel system in this vehicle shows it to be typical of cars manufactured in these days of electronic fuel injection systems: The fuel pump is electrical and is mounted inside the tank. A metal screen covers the pump to prevent larger contaminants from entering. Upstream from the tank, a cannister filter is installed under the body. This filter uses a combination of metal mesh and paper elements to purify the fuel delivered to the engine. There is no way sugar granules can penetrate this filter medium assuming the filter to be in good condition and functioning properly but they can prematurely block one.
The case of my painting contractor proves that sugar cannot harm a properly maintained gasoline engine when introduced into the fuel tank. Dumping a bag of C&H in the crankcase is a completely different matter. Sugar crystals are hard enough to score metal parts beyond tolerances found in a modern automobile engine.
