This is where I report on what you, the visitors to this site, have said! You can read some comments in the Guest Book, but I will summarise responses I have received, both through Guest Book entries, and emails etc, on this page. The earliest responses are listed first, with subsequent entries listed as the page continues. Just click the Back button on your browser to go back to the previous page, or click on the old car pictures at the bottom of the page.

Previous Page

"Who Wrote This"?

Main Page

The Guest Book shows some interesting feedback from others who have had problems with LRP. The details of this web-site were circulated around local historic vehicle clubs, so many of the responses were from owners of historic vehicles. One of the first to write was Roger, who has a 1944 Indian motorbike. He said he only did around 1,500km after an engine-rebuild before having a major engine failure. While running on LRP he said that the engine would get so hot that after a decent ride the heat from the motor would boil the petrol in the petrol-tank! Scary!! After another rebuild, he began using Moreys lead-replacement additive, and has now covered more than 3,000km without problem. Another interesting one from the Guest Book was Peter, who has a 1985 Mercury outboard motor. This is a 6-cylinder 2-stroke engine. As recommended by even the NRMA, he switched to using Unleaded, as this is supposed to work better in 2-stroke engines. The result of using Unleaded was a slight drop in performance followed by a major collapse of a piston! As you may know, 2-stroke engines don't have valves (not the same as in a 4-stroke anyway), so VSR is not a problem. But octane-rating is! As previously explained, low octane fuel in a high-compression engine can cause the fuel to "explode" rather than "burn", and in this case it seems that it virtually blew the piston to bits! After the engine is rebuilt, he will be using Premium Unleaded and Flashlube. (The Premium Unleaded should give the necessary octane rating to prevent further detonation of the petrol, and while Flashlube probably isn't necessary in this case, it won't hurt to have the extra upper-cylinder lubrication that this will provide). Ray has a 1985 Holden Camira, and likes to keep his car in top-condition. He says that since the introduction of LRP he has spent more time tuning the car than he ever has with any car he's owned! He is still using LRP, but had to do a lot of fiddling with adjustments to the fuel-injection system to get the motor running to his satisfaction. Rob wrote me a very interesting email that shed some further light on this whole subject. He owns vintage Panther motorbikes, and says that they overheat and coke-up on LRP. He claims that lead performed another function apart from raising the octane and protecting the valve-seats. He says it also "catalysed the combustion". He says that by removing the lead and then using additives to raise the octane back to 96, they added carbon to the fuel; while at the same time making the fuel less capable of burning that carbon! The removal of the lead has made the fuel less "volatile", which he says is more of a problem in lower-compression engines.

Here is an update from Ray, with the Camira, above. He is now using standard unleaded and Flashlube. He says the car is going well, and doesn't ping on the lower-octane of  normal unleaded. And it is cheaper than LRP! Steve wrote to me about "Fuel Catalytic Converters". I don't have much detail on these, but they are devices that are fitted in the fuel-line that convert the fuel into a fuel that is useable by older vehicles. He said that in his vintage car club there were 6 people who had these fitted, and they all claimed that they worked. He had found a web-site for a similar device - although a different brand to the ones fitted on the club cars. The URL is: http://fuelstar.com.au I received an interesting one from Allan, who says that his experience with Flashlube went back some 5 years, when he had a company ute converted to gas. He fitted a Flashlube injector system, making sure that the drip-rate was as instructed. After about 6 months, the motor (a Holden 202) developed a miss-fire symptomatic of a blown head-gasket. On dismantling the motor, it was found that significant valve-recession had occurred. He claimed that the head was in good condition prior to the conversion to gas. He said: "I realise this is contrary to the experience of other users, but thought I'd let you know - others may have had a similar experience". I suppose there could be a lot of other factors (he doesn't say, for example, what distance was covered in the time after he first converted to gas) that contributed to the engine failure, but still, it is curious! You have to wonder, also, if the injector system was actually working properly? Anyone else had any similar experiences?  There is an entry in the Guest Book from the owner of a 1970 MGB. He is currently using Shell LRP, apparantly without problem, but had previously used Mobil LRP and experienced a loss of power and bad pinging. Proof again that all LRP is definitely not the same! Mike, from the Cairns Motorcycle Restorers Club emailed me saying that members of his club had been doing quite a bit of research into the problems associated with LRP. The owners of large-capacity Triumph and BSA twins seemed especially effected by problems with LRP. He also had tried Avgas, as an additive with Unleaded, and found it to be successful. From January 1st 2002, the sale of all leaded-petrol has been finally banned. Yes, apparantly it was still available at certain sites (if you knew whereto go!), but has now been stopped. Presumably this would also apply to the sale of Avgas to the general public. This was not feedback from you, but something I read in an artcile in a motorcycle magazine (sorry, I forget which one, but I think it would probably be either Two Wheels, or Road Rider).  The article concerned Shell's Optimax high-octane Unleaded. Apparantly there had been some roblems with this fuel on some high-performance bikes running this fuel. The problem, it was claimed, came from the fact that, in raising the octane rating of this fuel - in comparison to other "Premium Unleaded" fuels - they had made the fuel "more dense"; resulting in a richer mixture for the same fuel settings. It was claimed that modern high-performance cars were not effected because the electronics could detect the variation in the fuel characteristics and make appropriate adjustments. Motorbikes however, lacked the sophistication of these electronic fuel-injection systems, and so suffered mixture problems. It was suggested that because the engine was now getting "more fuel" for the same amount, the carburettor's fuel mixture would have to be leaned-off a little to compensate. So, if you are using Premium Unleaded and an additive (like ValveMaster of Flashlube), this might be something to consider; you may find it beneficial to lean the fuel mixture a little if you are using Shell Optimax. Remember not to try to determine correct mixture by the spark-plug colour though! Further to the item on the "Fuel Catalytic Converter" above, I have received a couple of emails about these, and also read some reference to them in magazines - in particular "Australian Motorcycle Trader". The principle seems to be that a device is fitted in the fuel line containing tin alloy pellets through which the petrol passes. (Another device adds pellets directly to the fuel tank). One such device is called "Fuel Cat". According to Australian Motorcycle Trader (April 2002, "Spanerman" section), Melbourne university tested a device similar to this and found it to be of no effect to the fuel. In the May 2002 issue of the same magazine, there was mention that the RAC in the U.K. had reported to the Office Of Fair Trading stating that tin alloy pellets would not have any effect on fuel combustion, and therefore could not be of any benefit to economy, performance, or valve-seat-recession. And more on these catalytic converters! Henri wrote to say that he has a few old cars. One was a 1980Volvo which suffered under the new fuel. He said that, where previously he would get 10,000 - 15,000km out of a set of plugs, now he was only getting 4,000km! He also noticed rougher running and harder starting, especially when hot. He then fitted a Fuel Star catalytic converter. This resulted in better performance and smoother running. He also noticed a very marked improvement in fuel economy. And after more than 10,000km, the spark plugs are still in good condition. He even fitted one to a diesel Hilux and noticed an improvement in power (which is interesting, because as far as I am aware, diesel didn't change with the introduction of unleaded). Henri mentions a couple of points with the Fuel Star. Firstly, it needs to run for around 500 - 1,000km before any difference is noticed. Secondly, it has to be mounted on the motor, not on the body. He says that unless the unit is subject to vibration, it doesn't work. Henri suggests that this is why tests conducted at the university etc didn't show any result, because they were mounted on a test-bench, not on the motor.  Henri is convinced that these units are the best answer to the problem of our new fuels.