Do you suppose the fact that it's gas tank sits only a few inches above a warm paved surface and that it does not experience large altitude changes associated with high rates of depletion (intro of larger amounts of moist air over the period) might have something to do with it?
I know you already know...but the comparison is not apples/apples. Autos typical fuel system introduces fuel through a plumbing system which brings already-warmed fuel (usually already pressurized by in-tank pumps) into and over high engine compartment temps, at (usually) lower consumption rates and under greater pressures, most frequently to manifold co-located fuel injection systems. Even older carbureted systems experience greater exposure to vapor-lock issues from elevated fuel temps than to cooled fuel under gravity head pressures. Our airplane's have gravity fed systems, coming from tanks located well away from heat sources which lead to the gascolator, and plumbing which provides limited exposure to engine heat in updraft carburetor systems. Even so, the heat which is available is applied at points downstream of the water-collection point (gascolator.)
I agree, the corrosive and other damaging effects of alcohol in fuels is of primary importance, but I've personally experienced a gascolator which was overwhelmed by water/alcohol ...in an A&P's C-182! He used "gasahol" religiously until it quit on us during initial climb at night!
The airplane was properly pre-flighted, sumps drained (while still in the hangar), then it was pulled out into the cool night air where it stood for the next half-hour while he finished work and closed up the doors on multiple corporate hangars. The early evening hours had just experienced a cool-down and we were going flying ... or thought we were...when the engine sputtered while about 100' above Rwy 13L at DAL.
He used to be an autofuel junkie, but no more. (Fair enough, that airplane also had rubber bladders which may have had wrinkles which may have trapped some water/alcohol in puddles that escaped the sump-draining activities. But regardless, it was the ethanol-laced fuel which attracted the moisture which was subsequently dropped out of solution and overwhelmed the system.)
From Ben Visser, retired Shell fuels/oils expert who writes for General Aviation News: "The water reaction tests in D-910 (AvGas specification) are also important, to ensure that all of the water in your fuel tanks can be sumped. Here again, all of the non-oxygenated (non-ethanol) auto fuels that I have tested passed this spec. Conversely, all of the alcohol-containing fuels failed the test."
From one of the most vocal proponent of autogas STC's, the EAA:
"Alcohol in autogas when used in aircraft has caused numerous problems such as fuel leaks and fires due to rapid deterioration and swelling of rubber gaskets and seals. Fuel tank quantity floats made of cork and/or composite materials are attacked by the alcohol in fuel and allow particles to float in the fuel, clogging fuel screens, plugging carburetors, etc.
Sloshing compound used in many fuel tanks to seal leaks also reacts with
the alcohol, causing fuel leaks and fuel system contamination. ... Swollen float needle tips cause alean mixture and eventual engine
damage. Cessna aircraft with rubbertipped fuel strainer plungers are also
damaged by the use of autogas with alcohol and frequently leak after a short time of use with an autogas/alcohol mix. Most recently a “malfunction†appeared in the FAA alerts describing a
Piper
aircraft that caught fire in flight due to a leaking fuel strainer gasket that was swollen by the use of alcohol mixed with autogas. The pilot was able to turn off the fuel to stop the fire and save himself but he was forced into becoming a glider pilot. Any rubber part such as fuel lines,
fuel cells, and 0-rings in fuel selectors are subject to damage from alcohol
mixed in the fuel." (Bold emphasis is mine.)