Classic Alfa Forums

100% agree! All that legislation designed to get you to replace your "dirty, polluting, OLD car" is really only there to prop up an ailing car industry. Classics are just better

No argument from me on that one Lauren


Another angle not yet touched on is fuel quality.

According to my old superbike dyno man and tuner, whose brother in law was a respected petro-chemist, the standards of modern fuels vary quite wildly.

Whilst the tuner could see a mixture of dyno results due to nothing more than a change in the burning stuff, his "bil" would complain of how diluted the actual combustable portion of fuel had become diluted with cold start additives, lubricants to mask poor engineering, etc etc

Of course, if the fuel was better, delivering better overall efficiency, theyd ultimately sell less of it, so i strongly suspect we're not going to see any change there for a while!

Absolutely - plus of course there is the ethanol content to consider. I'm a bit concerned about that because my swirl pot is moulded fibreglass and lots of powerboats with moulded fuel tanks in the US and elsewhere have been suffering from engine problems as a result of the ethanol content in fuel. Dissolves the resin and then blocks the jets in the carbs...

Modern fuel quality is pretty poor, and variable, as you say. British Standards say Super Unleaded should be 97 RON, which is already one point lower than 4-star used to be...

There again, when I was out in California on business some years ago I was shocked to see the standard fuel octane rating was 88 RON , so it could be a lot worse I suppose

Yes, the yanks do have it slightly different dont they.

When i used to import day vans, such as gmc safari and chevy astro, i used to giggle at the labels in the engine bay, stating that they were set up for use on 84 ron unleaded!

Is it any wonder they have smog and emission issues when the fuel is like burning a stick of liquorice?