Fuel options for 1969 Fury with 383 engine (UK)

[system11]

So it seems like I'll be picking my new Fury up next week - I live in the UK and the best fuel we have is generally Shell V-Power, which is supposed to be 99 RON. For a 1969 383 4 barrel, what kind of additives if any should I look at adding to look after the engine - would this one do the trick?

Millers VSPe - Classic VSPe Power Plus

 

[65sporty]

The fuel and additive you suggested should both work. If the engine has never had any head work then the lead additive will help the valves, if it has had a valve job with hardened seats you don't need the additives. Congrats on your purchase and enjoy driving it

 

[CBODY67]

Congrats on the purchase and the fact you can get 99 Research Octane fuel for it!

There are other additives in the fuels that can do the same thing as Tetraethyllead did in prior times. From an article in a motor home magazine, from the earlier '80s, there are two types of lead-substitute additives. Sodium based and lead based, I believe. Being that lead is a deadly poison that can penetrate the skin, even the ones which used to be sold in the USA were VERY "watered-down" such that a full quart would not put the fuel up to even "low-lead" standards.

The fuel additive I used to buy for my '67 Newport took about 2 oz per tank, so I presume it was sodium based? But that came to a halt one day when the accel pump on the ThermoQuad I had on it stopped working. When I removed the primary venturi cluster I discovered that the anti-pullover weight under the cluster, from the accel pump circuit, was firmly stuck in its bore. I got it freed-up and removed for inspection. Some sort of clear residue was around it. I cleaned it off and reinstalled. No problems past that. Also didn't use any more sodium-based additives, either.

I'd recommend checking with your regional Shell gasoline people and see what their recommendations might be, for older vehicles which were designed to run on leaded fuels. There could well be something available over there that we don't have available in the USA.

Before Chrysler went to induction-hardened exhaust seats, like for the '72 model year, they recommended one tank of three be leaded fuel, if the other two were unleaded.

I also found a paper in a Chilton magazine that Chrysler did. They took a low-lead spec '72 Town & Country wagon, with the HD trailer package and 440 V-8. Hooked it up to a trailer that put the combined vehicle weight at the max spec they recommended for that car. Then they put it on the test track for a durability test on straight unleaded fuels, with the non-hardened valve seats.

By 12K miles, the heads were trashed from valve seat recession/erosion. That's under heavy load all the time. Much more than what a normal street car would see, typically. In other words, something that's not going to happen "over-night" or in one tank of fuel . . . unless it was already in such a state that it was getting ready to happen anyway . . . any you got to be the lucky owner when it did.

In the mean time, drive and enjoy the car for what it is. Check the age of the tires, too! Anything close to 6 years old needs to be changed before it comes apart/fails. Look at the condition of the rubber fuel lines (fuel tank forward) for deterioration from ethanol'd fuel blends. Might plan on a new fuel pump too, for the same reason, even if it's not leaking now.

Enjoy!
CBODY67

 

[system11]

Engine totally rebuilt within the last few years, it's in good shape right now and it's the ethanol I'm more worried about!

 

[bigmoparjeff]

The ethanol is only an issue when the car sits for long periods of time with old gas. If you store the car over the winter, best case scenario is to run it completely out of fuel before you put it away. Personally, I've never had an ethanol problem with a car that sat over the winter with fuel in it, though I have had issues with small engines in a leaf blower and generator.

 

[CBODY67]

The issue with long-term storage is the temperature swings of ambient air and the related condensation which might form on the inside of the tank. Which then is absorbed by the ethanol and becomes "phase separation" of the fuel, which sinks to the bottom of the tank. FIRST thing that goes into the fuel lines when the fuel pump sucks it toward it and the carb.

Theory is that the fuller the tank, the less condensate which can form. Only thing is that many tanks from the earlier '70s and onward have expansion areas where fuel won't get to, so "open metal" for condensate to form on. Having the vehicle in a somewhat heated enclosure would probably minimize the temp variations and resultant fuel issues.

Otherwise, drain everything. BUT even so, when the fuel pump's diaphragm becomes dry for a period of time, it will become brittle and fail when wet fuel is reintroduced into it, it's claimed. For some, the cost of a new mechanical fuel pump can be less than the labor expense for them to install it themselves. Never figured that a fuel pump would become a maintenance item!

CBODY67

 

[67Monaco]

If you drive it often, no worries. If you let it sit, use a fuel stabilizer / fuel drier.

 

[system11]

The car will be living at a local temperature/humidity controlled secure facility, and taken out for a drive every 2-3 weeks minimum, until the road salting season starts. Once the salt goes down at the first sign of a minor frost (they love that stuff here because people are idiots), it's going to be run up to temperature and do a few laps of the private road around the facility instead, and not coming back out on the roads until they've stopped throwing salt all over them....

It really is a question of what's best for the engine when running but it looks like my initial guess is good enough from the answers - thanks!