Club Triumph

I know this is how long is a peace of string question.....

I run my 2000 auto on supper unleaded and add lead additive to the mix.

However it looks as if im getting around 120 miles per tank. ( Town use and nursed ).

Does that sound about right?

Sounds like a lot of fuel to me. How big is a tank? 10 gallons/45L?

However,depending on journey length, especially this time of year where more choke is needed, and joking aside, how hilly the area is, along with traffic, it can all kill fuel consumption. My dera old dad has always had 2 litre automatics, dating back to the 1960's. They all did the same 15/16mpg in town. Even his last car, a Cmax. But Brighton is hilly, and he did 1-2 mile journeys, and traffic has got terrible (probably explains why consumption has not improved, the advancements in engines negated by increased congestion) As a comparison, my Toyota diesel does about 35mpg around Brighton, my old vitesse 2.5 sub 20mpg, but 30 on a run. Current 2 litre Toledo did 35/36mpg average on the RBRR, but in town only struggles to beat 20mpg.

So where doe that leave you? I would be checking a few things. Mixture is correct, the choke mechanism is working correctly and (less important for short journeys) the distributor is advancing correctly and vacuum advance works. 

Do you really need Super unleaded fuel and a lead additive.  Just running it on straight normal unleaded would be cheaper.

Yes I think your right about what you said.

Not only do you lose HP but also fuel consumption with age.

I think when warm weather returns, I will check the mixture and other bits.

Also maybe some new tyres wouldnt go a miss.

As to the fuel im my opinion only. I think that normal unleaded 91/92 octane fuel with more ethanol is not good enough for classic cars. Especially if not run very often.   

Supper unleaded is around 97/98 octane rated and with far less ethanol in it so more closer to classic old school fuels.

And as to the lead additive, again without harder valve inserts I feel that Supper or normal unleaded doesnt offer the same protection without the lead additive. ( Maybe im wrong about this?)

For an engine that's not had major surgery (i.e. new valves) the general reckoning is that the "lead memory" effect will last long enough that you'll have saved yourself the cost of an unleaded conversion by the time you need one.

So Rob you think that it should be fine to run her on normal unleaded without the additive? 

The only Triumph I have has issues with using unleaded was a Mk1 2000 engine that hadvhead work done.

All the others have been driven very hard at times with no ill effects. Triumphs seem fairly good at tolerating it.

Yes, as Colin said, normally fine. The only one I've had problems with was a Toledo that did half the RBRR with a dodgy float valve that meant it was running very weak, followed by the rest of the run being thrashed mercilessly to make up time...

Wow ok so cheap fuel it is 

Should save a few bob and will go to the parts needed