Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Fuel\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Fuel\s*$/: 23 ]

Total 23 documents matching your query.

1. Fuel (score: 1): Author: Craig Smith <CraigS@iewc.com>; Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 15:19:25 -0500; I was tooling around this weekend in my 71 and I was at a parking lot of a local adult beverage seller when a fellow came up in a custom crotch rocket. I think it used to be a Kawasaki, anyway, the e; /html/spitfires/2000-06/msg00396.html (7,693 bytes)
2. Re: Fuel (score: 1): Author: john donohoe <gt6driver@yahoo.com>; Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 13:57:53 -0700 (PDT); I've wondered the same about the 108 octane race fuel available at my local svc station... If it didn't kill my engine, I'm afraid it would be addictive! (it's like 4.50 a gallon) John Donohoe '70 GT; /html/spitfires/2000-06/msg00397.html (8,665 bytes)
3. RE: Fuel (score: 1): Author: "Simmons, Reid W" <reid.w.simmons@intel.com>; Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 14:16:18 -0700; We used to run 135 Octane aviation fuel in our race cars back in the 60s. Then the SCCA really clamped down on fuel types so we had to use pump fuel readily available to any motorist from your friend; /html/spitfires/2000-06/msg00399.html (8,473 bytes)
4. Re: Fuel (score: 1): Author: mark holbrook <rolling_rock_12@yahoo.com>; Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 14:31:28 -0700 (PDT); I think this is too high. Anything over about 94 or so is not needed. Sure it will help clean out the engine if you use it a couple times, but I don't see any advantages on a stock engine. Now when y; /html/spitfires/2000-06/msg00400.html (10,003 bytes)
5. Re: Fuel (score: 1): Author: "Graham Stretch" <technical@iwnet.screaming.net>; Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 00:14:27 +0100; Hi Mark 94?94! the 2000, 2500 2.5PI are all supposed to be fed with 100 or **(5 Star UK not a swearword!) Graham. 2500PI MKII Sprinted Dolomite 2000 MKI Toledo 1300 Front Wheel Drive http://members.t; /html/spitfires/2000-06/msg00405.html (11,147 bytes)
6. Re: Fuel (score: 1): Author: HD50EL@aol.com; Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 19:44:25 EDT; I must be lucky, because I get my aviation fuel for free. I have a friend that is in the business of rebuilding wrecked, or otherwise damaged aircraft, and when they drain the tanks on these aircraft; /html/spitfires/2000-06/msg00406.html (8,385 bytes)
7. Re: Fuel (score: 1): Author: Joe Curry <spitlist@gte.net>; Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 17:07:51 -0700; Speaking of fuel, What is the consensus of the octane required to run in a 11:1 Spitfire engine? I have decided that I will be buying that nice red racing fuel, but I believe it comes in various octa; /html/spitfires/2000-06/msg00409.html (9,012 bytes)
8. Re: Fuel (score: 1): Author: mark holbrook <rolling_rock_12@yahoo.com>; Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 17:52:35 -0700 (PDT); Yes I know that back in the day Triumphs were designed to run on 100 octane. When they shipped them over here did the US have 100 on tap? I have had no problems with pinging using 94 as a daily drive; /html/spitfires/2000-06/msg00410.html (12,914 bytes)
9. Re: Fuel (score: 1): Author: "Stephen Hall" <shall@fastpointcom.com>; Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 21:52:24 -0400; That brings up a good point, actually. There are two methods for calculating the Octane rating of gasoline, as shown in the following article I found on an MG website: "In Britain, the Research Octan; /html/spitfires/2000-06/msg00414.html (15,899 bytes)
10. Re: Fuel (score: 1): Author: Atwell Haines <carbuff@nac.net>; Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 21:44:33 -0400; Posted octane on US fuel pumps is an average of the motor and research octane. The Brits use the higher of the two. So a US 92 octane premium corresponds to 95 or so in the UK. May be off a point or; /html/spitfires/2000-06/msg00415.html (8,407 bytes)
11. Re: Fuel (score: 1): Author: "MikeC" <mikech@sprynet.com>; Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 20:37:35 -0600; Waste of money. If your car is not designed or altered to need it, high octane has no benefit. High octane fuels are designed for engines with very high compression ratios or forced induction (racing; /html/spitfires/2000-06/msg00416.html (9,540 bytes)
12. Re: Fuel (score: 1): Author: HD50EL@aol.com; Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 23:19:19 EDT; << Waste of money. If your car is not designed or altered to need it, high octane has no benefit. High octane fuels are designed for engines with very high compression ratios or forced induction (rac; /html/spitfires/2000-06/msg00420.html (9,391 bytes)
13. Re: Fuel (score: 1): Author: Joe Curry <spitlist@gte.net>; Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 20:54:56 -0700; Well of course you would prefer to burn the good stuff. At the price you pay for it, it's cheap at 100 times the price!! :) JOe; /html/spitfires/2000-06/msg00421.html (9,890 bytes)
14. Re: Fuel (score: 1): Author: "MikeC" <mikech@sprynet.com>; Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 22:16:49 -0600; Odd. I don't see the correlation between slow burning and better fuel economy. Slow burning means the piston is pushed down slower, resulting in less power and usually less MPG's. Your engine may req; /html/spitfires/2000-06/msg00422.html (8,440 bytes)
15. Re: Fuel (score: 1): Author: OHFASTONE@aol.com; Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 00:52:23 EDT; <snip> <<That brings up a good point, actually. There are two methods for calculating the Octane rating of gasoline, as shown in the following article I found on an MG website: "In Britain, (RON) is; /html/spitfires/2000-06/msg00423.html (8,942 bytes)
16. Re: Fuel (score: 1): Author: OHFASTONE@aol.com; Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 01:35:07 EDT; <<Odd. I don't see the correlation between slow burning and better fuel economy. Slow burning means the piston is pushed down slower, resulting in less power and usually less MPG's>> Actually the slo; /html/spitfires/2000-06/msg00426.html (8,315 bytes)
17. Re: Fuel (score: 1): Author: "Dean Dashwood" <Dean.Dashwood@enron.com>; Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 09:41:31 +0100; And that's still cheaper than regular petrol in the UK (I'm serious...) I've wondered the same about the 108 octane race fuel available at my local svc station... If it didn't kill my engine, I'm afr; /html/spitfires/2000-06/msg00428.html (7,868 bytes)
18. Re: Fuel (score: 1): Author: "Terry L. Thompson" <tlt@digex.net>; Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 11:57:55 -0400; I was always under the assumption that if it cost more, it must be better for the car (after all...it's SUPER UNLEADED PREMIUM! Doesn't that sound better for your car than Regular?) Anyhow. Because O; /html/spitfires/2000-06/msg00449.html (10,994 bytes)
19. Re: Fuel (score: 1): Author: "MikeC" <mikech@sprynet.com>; Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 18:13:19 -0600; All of the examples you cited require an extremely high compression ratio, something our Spitfires do not have. Diesels ~ 20:1 and extreme race engines, pumped with 30 lbs of boost. There is a balanc; /html/spitfires/2000-06/msg00477.html (8,710 bytes)
20. Re: Fuel (score: 1): Author: OHFASTONE@aol.com; Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 20:43:44 EDT; <<All of the examples you cited require an extremely high compression ratio, something our Spitfires do not have>> Well thats almost right. Diesel is the only one that requires a high compression. Me; /html/spitfires/2000-06/msg00482.html (8,872 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]