Can anyone out there clarify the situation with choosing the right grade fuel and whats better for carbys.i have a 1968 105 1750 veloce with fully rebuilt engine,you hear so many different things with petrol,ie is it true that 98 ron is better in cleaning carbs,i swear that with bp premium or caltex engine runs better than with shell v,but my mechanic reckons petrol is all rubbish in oz and i should just use normal unleaded,please someone with knowledge clarify the situation.kind regards angelo
Quote from: lombardi on March 16, 2009, 07:53:46 AM
my mechanic reckons petrol is all rubbish in oz and i should just use normal unleaded
I would be worried about my choice of mechanic if they said this to me.
Personally, I use premium (preferably BP or Caltex). On your 1750, how much compression you are running may dictate what is needed?
We have some chemists on here that may answer this with more authority than me however.
Good points Phil.
I can say I used BP 98 with an old Ford Meteor and it made a noticable difference. The engine was worn out and an oil burner at that - but it was hell of a lot smoother.
Got good results with my 164 and I now just use Mobile 98 ron with my 156 twin spark. But that's a choice I made anyway.
Good advice and good fuel is the way to go.
Cheers.
mobile premium is the best quality fuel i think is synergy 8000
BP Premium or Mobil equivalent seems to produce the best performance. Shell has apparently acknowledged that their higher octane fuels are not as good.
I have used both Premium unleaded and Ultra in my Super but feel that Premium unleaded is the better option for my car.
Agree with Phil re choice of mechanic.
Barry
Hi All,
At the island last weekend one of the guys from the Nissan camp across the road from me swore by E85, they said they were getting better performance than with Avgas!
For us mere mortals however the choice of fuel is one of those never ending questions. Personally I think it's a bit like wine, some are better than others, but sometimes it depends on personal taste.
First the facts;
The octane rating of your fuel should be high enough to stop engine knock at normal advance. If you've got a fuel injected car it should have maps for 95 and 98 maybe 100 RON if it's very recent, in which case use whatever you want. If you've got carbs, the car would be jetted to a particular fuel, possibly leaded fuel still. Newer high octane fuels have a higher density than older fuels, which can mean that your car may run rich, get it tuned properly for 95 RON fuel and use that, brand of fuel really shouldn't matter. All Alfa motors run at relatively high compression, hence all should be run on at least 95 RON fuel, even the older ones (though the compression may be a bit down), otherwise the ignition will have to be retarded and performance will suffer.
Now the hearsay;
In Melbourne BP and Shell use the same base fuel mix, different additives turn one into V-Power, the other into BP Ultimate (from a friend of mine who works for Shell). I use Caltex 95 or 98 depending on the pump price, I haven't noticed a great deal of difference from either in the GTA. In my opinion Shell Optimax (now V-Power) was crap for a while, but now seems better. I have seen a comparative dyno test where fuels were compared, the winner was Mobil Synergy 8000 which got the most advance before pinging.
Now for the myths;
High octane fuel gives more power - absolute rubbish, unless the car needs it, it's wasted. This probably stems from the fact that many high performance engines require high octane fuel because of the extreme compression ratio's the run. To the novice it looks like high octane = high performance. I always get a chuckle at the people filling up their Falcodores with 95 or 98, simply wasting cash.
Cheers
Stuart
(one of the chemists)
Quote from: Stuart Thomson on March 17, 2009, 09:32:18 PM
Now for the myths;
High octane fuel gives more power - absolute rubbish, unless the car needs it, it's wasted. This probably stems from the fact that many high performance engines require high octane fuel because of the extreme compression ratio's the run. To the novice it looks like high octane = high performance. I always get a chuckle at the people filling up their Falcodores with 95 or 98, simply wasting cash.
Cheers
Stuart
(one of the chemists)
You say myths with a plural but debunk only one. What about the claim that 98 octane fuels will clean the engine, is this a myth too?
Stuart it may not give more power but seems to give more miles per gallon. whether that equates to better economy given the price difference is a different issue.
Quote from: Sheldon Mcintosh on March 18, 2009, 12:37:29 AM
Quote from: Stuart Thomson on March 17, 2009, 09:32:18 PM
Now for the myths;
High octane fuel gives more power - absolute rubbish, unless the car needs it, it's wasted. This probably stems from the fact that many high performance engines require high octane fuel because of the extreme compression ratio's the run. To the novice it looks like high octane = high performance. I always get a chuckle at the people filling up their Falcodores with 95 or 98, simply wasting cash.
Cheers
Stuart
(one of the chemists)
You say myths with a plural but debunk only one. What about the claim that 98 octane fuels will clean the engine, is this a myth too?
Nothing to do with the fuel, additives may help to remove some of the gunge.
Quote from: Ray Pignataro on March 18, 2009, 07:59:12 AM
Stuart it may not give more power but seems to give more miles per gallon. whether that equates to better economy given the price difference is a different issue.
Hi Ray,
Density is higher, therefore more fuel per squirt, or shorter squirt from injected motors. Also you can run more advance.
Cheers
Stuart
On the E85 - I caught some of the pre season lead up to the V8 Supercars and the comments have been that the fuel efficiency is down by approx 25% and they will require additional pit stops, particularly the endurance events.
So are the Ethanol blended fuels a benefit? Is there a power / performance benefit great enough to warrant less efficiency?
Environmental benefit, probably as it's from a renewable resource (corn / sugar cane) but if it's burning quicker is it viable?? Or is it just clever marketing ??
A bit off track - just thought I would throw it out there..
I know that with BP my cars have always run smoother.
Muast be the clean engine.
Cheers.
Stuart, if its the additive(s) (-just thought I'd get the plural in as well - stet -) that really count what about using bog unleaded with a good fuel additive in the tank? particularly with the 105's which, whilst they are carrying higher compressions than your average 1.8ltr of its era, I don't that they are carrying modern engine comprehesions, but could do with the additives more than the properties of the fuel necessarily, for the carbies?
Note: for all other than Stuart - no debunking emails required, I AM NOT A CHEMIST!
1750GT
What additives are recommended and what benefits,please elaborate for our benefit,any info would be greatly appreciated,spread the knowledge,as they say knowledge is power.ciao
Quote from: 1750GT on April 02, 2009, 09:42:03 PM
Stuart, if its the additive(s) (-just thought I'd get the plural in as well - stet -) that really count what about using bog unleaded with a good fuel additive in the tank? particularly with the 105's which, whilst they are carrying higher compressions than your average 1.8ltr of its era, I don't that they are carrying modern engine comprehesions, but could do with the additives more than the properties of the fuel necessarily, for the carbies?
Note: for all other than Stuart - no debunking emails required, I AM NOT A CHEMIST!
1750GT
Hi,
Even though the compression of the engine may not be the same as modern engines, the cars were designed to run on leaded fuel. The tetraethyl lead was added as a valve lubricant and octane booster, so bog standard (92) unleaded will ping unless you retard the ignition. I believe that the octane rating of the old leaded fuel was 95, so pulp is the way to go. Also if the heads have been shaved ever then the compression will be higher than original. Most of the additives in fuel are detergents and such to help keep the engine and fuel system clean, as well as stuff designed to help the fuel burn cleanly.
Cheers
Stuart
Thanks Stuart, so if your using V Power or equivalent (Which I presume is 95 octane?), do the fuel additives (such as lead aditives) actually do anything except for the carbie/engine cleaning qualities? and are they worth using, or just a waste of time?
1750 GT
Sorry to bump this thread guys, I just want to be clear.
I am (fingers crossed) about to start running my 1972 1300 GT Junior with newly reconditioned carbs.
I know there is some debate about which fuel is best, I would like to know
a) which fuels are 'safe' to run as in which will not damage the car and
b) your preference.
Thanks very much in advance.
I run the BP high end one. Have used Shell previously in my 99 GTV religously (at first just to get the free model cars).
I had some issues with rough running on the Toypta dn GTV6 on it so jumped off. Have been on BO ever since. I use it is all my cars (two Toytoa's, and the GTV6)and three bikes (Honda, Aprilia Scooter,and the Ducati) although I do add valve saver in the Duke.
I also use the Wynns spitfire injector cleaner every few tanks or before long run.
Don't know whether I am wasting money or not - don't really care. I will stick to this fuel regime until results give me a reason to change.
Other things to worry about other than fuel :-)
One opinion for your poll.
Catch ya
Shane
Even the handbook for my Sud and 33ti recommend RON of 97+. Old Leaded Super used to be RON98, but was lowered slightly before its phase out. (96 just pre vanishing) Anyone else remember LRP or lead replacement petrol?
Just go for 98 octane of which ever flavour you reckon gets the most gongs (though it may be hard to catch some 'Mobile' Fuels... :P )
re the Valvemaster type upper cylinder head lubricants....advice i've gotten is that alfas as high performance/high revving cars in the first place have hard valve seats, so I stopped using the above a couple of years back after doing so since the intoduction of 98 fuels after Supers (and LRP's) demise. No big dramas, been keeeping eye on valve clearances as per book.
Oh and for a really big rap ;), A Currant Affair (sic) did a test a few years back and BP Ulimate went further on a identical tank volume than Shell V-Power and Mobil Synergy 8000...!
Ok, so I will run the 98 Octane fuel.
Sorry for the further question, I have searched the forum and can't find a clear answer.
In addition to the fuel should I be adding any other additive, whether it be the lead replacement additive with every tank or another additive every x number of tanks?
Thank you
QuoteI am (fingers crossed) about to start running my 1972 1300 GT Junior with newly reconditioned carbs.
I know there is some debate about which fuel is best, I would like to know
a) which fuels are 'safe' to run as in which will not damage the car and
I believe that there was a thread a year or so ago and d it was confirmed that the 105 series engine was made with stronger valves suitable for unleaded petol - so your engine would not be damaged !
Thanks for the clear response.
I use BP98 90% of the time but im trying to also use e10/100
Quote from: Storm_X on February 13, 2011, 06:47:14 PM
I use BP98 90% of the time but im trying to also use e10/100
Doesn't E10 ruin carbs and various seals on older cars? I assume you're running carbs?
This could be an urban myth, I'm sure a friendly chemist will be along soon to correct me.
In the meantime I don't use Ethanol in any of my Alfas.
i have ran E10 in my 90 before just because i had no option it did go ok and fuel consumption was good but i could not bring myself to keep using it, prefer shell optimax
Yes, I'm with sheldon on that one. But a mate who has a treasure trove of cars (into Fiats: 1919, 1926, 500, Bambino, 128 sedan) including a De Dion Bouton (1914 i think by memory), swore by the United Boost 98. No longer available in Vic anyway, it had 10% ethanol, and he reckoned it was the only thing that would stop one of his trucks, yes into trucks and tractors, pinging. Said of all of the other 98 RON brands of fuel only the Boost 98 would work in his Commer truck with Humber Super Snipe engine....
He used to run all his vehicles on it and Quote: " despite all the predictions of doom and gloom and the sky falling, never have had any problems with fuel lines, filters, hoses, anything..."
In all but QLD by Uniteds' web site now, Boost 98 has been replaced by non-ethanol 98 RON Unleaded.
Fuel for thought...
Never did try it in my alfas though...
PS: Jeez Dehne! It hasn't been Optimax for years man!!! ;) The old blue pump has been red V-power for yonks! ;D The RON of e10 is not comparable with 98 Fuels like BP Ultimate; Shell V-Power; Mobil Synergy 8000; Caltex Vortex 98...
NB: Just googled Shell E-10. RON is 94...less than old plain 'Premium' unleaded, which is 95.
Oh, for those who dont know of the Mate 'Ron' I keep talking about...the Acronym 'RON' is Research Octane Number or the rating of a fuels "anti knock rating or resistance to detonation".
ULP or Unleaded is RON 91; E-10 is RON 94; Premium is RON 95; High Octane Premium RON 98. Plus, Shell V-Power 100 as well: RON 100...which contains 5% Ethanol; though I've read this is no longer available (?)
NB: United now list a 'Premium 100', with 10% Ethanol at six sites in VIC; 12 in SA and 1 in NSW. But, only three on home page. Albury, Bayswater and Blacktown...
NB:2: Boost 98 is listed as available at 18 NSW outlets and 1 in SA, though in good old 'conflicting information mode' on home page say its now only available in QLD...go figure!
Even the manufacturers/retailers are giving conflicting information ::)
where is the boost 98 located in Adelaide ?? i have heard about it before i think its near Adelaide airport.
whats the difference between ultimate 98 and boost 98.
oh and used E10/100 once
Hi Storm, google united petroleum website for the sites, if the info is accurate! ;) Maybe try ringing local distributor?
Not a chemist either, but, BP Ultimate like all other 'Pure' 98 RON Fuel is more highly refined to obtain the Octane figure, whereas Boost 98 or the like is 'Topped up' with ethanol to boost (?) octane. Then you get into the whole fuel density debate....not going there !
Footnote: United reckon their 'base' E-10 is 95RON...one point higher than Shell...
NB: all the old Mobil sites in this area have been taken over by United...
This link explains Alfa's recommendations for fuel including ethanol and it looks like none of our ethanol fuels are suitable.
http://www.alfaromeo.com.au/default.asp?action=article&ID=21654
This site http://www.onlinemechanical.net/ethanol-E10.html
says:
Alfa Romeo Post 1998 Alfa Romeo vehicles will operate satisfactorily on E5 ethanol blended fuel ( European Standard EN 228) E10 ethanol blend is NOT recommended as there are material compatibility and drivability issues. E10 may be used in emergency situations.E10 ethanol blended petrol is not recommended for earlier model Alfa's due to material issues
This one says no pre 1998 Alfas should use fuel with ethanol at all.
http://www.flexfuelkit.com.au/articles/8/1/Can-my-car-use-ethanol-blended-fuel-E10/Page1.html
I reckon someone had been using it in my brother's 164 before he bought it because the rubber boot and stuff on the fuel pump had gone mushy and the bottom of the tank was full of black gunk. The car had been sitting for a year.
Personally I will not use it because the last thing I want is another engine fire after losing a 75 to a fuel leak. It is bloody scary. I would also prefer not to have to pay for repairs to the fuel system if it gets damaged.