The Triumph 2000 / 2500 / 2·5 Register Forum

I have been reading up some more about lead additives for the older car which is designed originally to run on lead fuel. I am currentlt using redex lead additive because some came with it and I also heard that changing what you use can sometimes upset it.
I know for some this is a touchy subject and some believe that running on unleaded is fine too. Bare in mind I use my car every day to work and back, doing about 5000/6000 miles a year in this lovely little car.

Could all you guys give me your opinion on whats both cost effective and the best to give me the best performance, fuel consumption, but.kist importantly to help.keep my engine running as smooth as it is.

Thank you

Just run it on plain unleaded. The additive is only needed if working really hard (eg towing)
The engine has a lead memory effect, so use and ignore.

Worst case, 50,000 miles you might need some head work done. Listen out for quiet tappers which indicate the start of problems.
I have never put anything in any of mine apart from when towing 1500kg's.

I use redex lead replacement just for piece of mind. its not that dear if you look on ebay for bulk purchaces. don't know if it really matters if you use it or not but im paranoid!

There are lot different thoughts on this subject -back in 2000 when leaded disappeared I did a lot research and went to a seminar in Sheffield that was organised by Millers Oils ( a well respected oil supplier based I believe in Huddersfield). The reason to use just one formulation of additive is simply that different types use different base products i.e. sodium, phosphorous, manganese etc. there is no problem changing additives - just not on a continual basis. The conclusion I came to that manganese based additives were less harmful to the engine than other based additives ( although there are some countries have banned manganese based additives). Some produces read well but in tests by the FBVC did not up to their claims. The FHBC fully endorse Millers VSP (valve seat protection as it was called). I have used it since 2000 in my Triumphs with no issues whatsoever. The additional benefit is that Millers adds upto 2 octane points to the fuel, and considering our vehicles were designed to run on 98 RON, it goes a long way to increasing standard unleaded to 97. Obviously super unleaded is increased to 99 /100 octane. It is also easy to dispense - each bottle treats 40 litres of fuel so you simply pour the bottle in the tank on filling up - no messy measuring out a set amount as with other additives.
The other point to consider now is the increased amount of Ethanol that is added to fuels, which is extremely harmful to older engines and components, which literally causes extensive internal corrosion to the fuel systems. Modern cars have been designed around ethanol and it isn't a particular problem, but Triumphs - no!! As a result Millers have introduced their Millers VSPe which helps to combat the problems in older engines with the effects of ethanol.
It can be bought for quite a reasonable price on Ebay for a box of 10 bottles......
I may sound like I work for Miller Oils - I can assure you I don't, and have no connection with them at all - just from a personal point of view I rate their products, and in answer to your query, especially their VSPe.
Phew....! I need brew after all that.....
John

I also decided to use Millers VSP, and continue to do so today some 13 yeas on. I buy mine through Opie oils. These days it is the VSPe, and have had no problems with both PI cars and carb'd cars. This includes the rally car, who's cylinder head has just been off after 40000+ miles of very hard use showing no valve seat recession. The octane boost is also useful!! At the end of the day it is your choice, but it is recommended that you stick to one particular brand rather than swopping and changing. You may also decide to take Alan's route, after all, if I only had the one car, I would have paid more in additive costs than a head refurb by now!

Just to muddy the waters.........
We have had our estate for circa 40k miles, tow a large trailer a fair bit, cruise at 70plus mph on the motorways, 2 RBRRs and we don't use an additive. No valve recession yet.

Colin

Fuel additive is of no benefit to our Triumph engines unless the car is to be driven very hard together with an engine speed of greater than 3500 rpm for an extended period (i.e. long enough for the exhaust valves to seriously overheat). And the so-called 'fuel catalysts' have no beneficial effects whatsoever under any conditions!

A more detailed explanation is given on webpage http://www.mintylamb.co.uk/wordpress/?page_id=76.

Quite David! My car seldom go LESS than 3500 rpm

That is my point, some additives did not reach the required standard in tests and as a result were not endorsed by that FBHVC and therefore should avoided. My observation was that Millers VSP (or VSPe as it now is called) was one additive that was endorsed by them as being effective in preventing or at least reducing the effects of valve seat recession. I agree that there is no evidence that these fuel catalysts that you place in the tank or in the fuel line are effective in their claims and should not be used.
The other way to look at is if you compare the cost of unleaded fuel against super unleaded for your 40 litre fill up against the cost of a bottle of VSPe that treats 40 litres of fuel, there is very little difference ( assuming most people would be sensible enough to bulk purchase it in packs of 10 or more to keep the cost down to a sensible figure rather than buying individual bottles when needed).
Over the last 13 years I have had no valve issues with any of my Triumphs, so I would rather use an endorsed additive than not...
But then this leads us on to whether there are benefits in using super unleaded in our Triumphs or whether to use an additive / octane booster, as the amounts of ethanol added by the fuel companies varies considerably dependent on location of the refinery, fuel grade and the outlet where the fuel is to retailed, and the less ethanol in the fuel we use the better....
Just my thoughts.....

And very good thoughts they are too, John! I wouldn't dispute anything you've said in your two posts in this thread.

I just wanted to emphasize that a fuel additive to prevent VSR is not generally a requirement for our engines, though I don't see that any harm - other than in the impact on one's pocket - could come from using it so long as it is FBHVC-approved and, as you say, not swapped between composition types too frequently.

The points you make about ethanol, including the possible benefit of Millers VSPe in helping prevent problems arising from it in old design engines, seem very valid to me. The octane improvement with this additive might also be useful for engines that might otherwise need retarding to avoid pre-ignition, though as I said in the Mintylamb article, my 2500S engine runs perfectly well on (standard grade) unleaded fuel with the original ignition timing. Other variants, perhaps especially the PI engines, may need attention in this respect of course.