is this a mistake in destroyer

[marmar]

---

Members don't see this ad.

I think this must be a mistake, 80 ochem destroyer. do we not make the more substituted double bound in elimination? in here they say not when we remove the cl. any idea? or this is a mistake?

 

[mike787]

(CH3)3CO- is big and bulky and will eliminate to less substituted. I think its correct.

 

[klutzy1987]

Its because of the cutting tool used. T-butoxide is big and bulky and therefore will make a double bond in the most readily accesible location-the zaitchev.

 

[mintz123]

E2 elimination is usually performed under the conditions of having a strong, bulky base with a less hindered halide, in this case, secondary halide. Therefore a less substituted alkene is formed.

However, if this were a E1 rxn, then a more substituted alkene would form (Zaitsuv Rule).

 

[shoombol tallah]

Its because of the cutting tool used. T-butoxide is big and bulky and therefore will make a double bond in the most readily accesible location-the zaitchev.

great explanation but i think you meant t-butoxide will make a double bond in the least substituted location = hoffman elimination 👍

 

[klutzy1987]

great explanation but i think you meant t-butoxide will make a double bond in the least substituted location = hoffman elimination 👍

Oops im sorry thats what i meant. lol my bad