triumphs
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: unleaded fuel

To: Jim Altman <jaltman@altlaw.com>
Subject: RE: unleaded fuel
From: "Johnny Storm: International racing car driver" <hiu06f@bangor.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 12:28:49 +0000 (GMT)
Cc: triumphs@triumph.cs.utah.edu
On Mon, 15 Dec 1997, Jim Altman wrote:

> One of the occasionally heard reasons for the fall of the Roman Empire
> was their use lead pipes for water and the long term gradual retardation
> caused by the lead levels.


 They would have disapeered even faster if they had been heating their
 villas with a fuel with high benzine. Hang on benzine, sounds a bit like
byzantine...curious huh????

Johnny '77 spit











> 
> I've run all my LBC's on unleaded for years here in Canada without any
> problems and no pinging either.  actually I always run 'em on the cheap
> lower octane stuff and they always run fine.  I compared it with using
> higher octane(94), but found no difference in performance.  Isn't the
> exhaust from leaded fuel especially toxic?  Isn't this why they got rid
> of
> lead in paint...because it is toxic for children?   I really don't see
> the
> arguement for leaded fuel as there are lots of English cars still
> running
> without it.                                   Has anyone used a generic
> Cat.con on any of there vehicles without using an EG valve?  I was
> curious
> if my Spitfire would burn one of those types or converters up fast or if
> it
> would reduce the emissions adequately?  I'm having some trouble getting
> this thing to pass the emissions tests here as my car doesn't have any
> of
> smog gear on it.
> 
> Jim Altman  jaltman@altlaw.com   non illegitimus carborundum 
> http://www.altlaw.com/    69-TR6#CC28754L  W4UCK
> 


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>