Author | Topic |
Location: Hobart, Tas
Registered: May 2002
|
Re: RIP = LRP ?
|
Sun, 24 August 2003 06:37
|
|
draven wrote on Thu, 21 August 2003 16:28 | I always ran my ra65 on pulp, just for the extra octane. you should be able to change over straight away, no problems
|
Unless you mean something 98 RON like OPTIMAX, you're wasting your money. Around here, anyway, premium unleaded costs more than LRP but has the same octane rating (95-92). Regular unleaded is 91-92 I belive.
BTW The ra65 requires LRP for the higher octane rating over regular unleaded, not for the valve seat lubrificationing. Also, I don't think we had unleaed at the time in 1985, which is the reason we have anlog EFI but with no O2 sensor, whearas other countries.
Here's something else... LRP is just unleaded + valve seat conditioner stuff anyway thesedays, so there's a lot of pre '86 cars running around with no cats. Remeber a few years ago now when the government was pushing for leaded petrol cars to try running on unleaded for the envoronment? hah.
|
|
|
| Subject | Poster | Date |
|
RIP = LRP ?
|
boudan | Wed, 20 August 2003 13:51 |
|
Re: RIP = LRP ?
|
Norbie | Thu, 21 August 2003 00:45 |
|
Re: RIP = LRP ?
|
ra23celicachick | Thu, 21 August 2003 02:19 |
|
Re: RIP = LRP ?
|
draven | Thu, 21 August 2003 06:17 |
|
Re: RIP = LRP ?
|
Astro | Thu, 21 August 2003 06:23 |
|
Re: RIP = LRP ?
|
draven | Thu, 21 August 2003 06:28 |
|
Re: RIP = LRP ?
|
Stefan | Sun, 24 August 2003 06:37 |
|
Re: RIP = LRP ?
|
gtman | Thu, 21 August 2003 07:29 |
|
Re: RIP = LRP ?
|
manipulate | Thu, 21 August 2003 08:53 |
|
Re: RIP = LRP ?
|
EVOSTi | Thu, 21 August 2003 11:52 |
|
Re: RIP = LRP ?
|
Callifo | Thu, 21 August 2003 13:29 |
|
Re: RIP = LRP ?
|
Norbie | Thu, 21 August 2003 13:51 |
|
Re: RIP = LRP ?
|
Callifo | Thu, 21 August 2003 14:09 |
|
Re: RIP = LRP ?
|
speakafreaka | Thu, 21 August 2003 14:16 |
|
Re: RIP = LRP ?
|
Clown | Thu, 21 August 2003 14:39 |
|
Re: RIP = LRP ?
|
ra23celicachick | Thu, 21 August 2003 22:24 |
|
Re: RIP = LRP ?
|
Soarer | Fri, 22 August 2003 00:36 |
|
Re: RIP = LRP ?
|
rob-ae86 | Fri, 22 August 2003 02:17 |
|
Re: RIP = LRP ?
|
Cyber-punk | Wed, 27 August 2003 02:21 |
|
Re: RIP = LRP ?
|
Norbie | Wed, 27 August 2003 03:40 |
|
Re: RIP = LRP ?
|
Callifo | Wed, 27 August 2003 05:16 |
|
Re: RIP = LRP ?
|
Norbie | Thu, 21 August 2003 23:07 |
|
Re: RIP = LRP ?
|
Norbie | Fri, 22 August 2003 03:59 |
|
Re: RIP = LRP ?
|
Soarer | Fri, 22 August 2003 04:15 |
|
Re: RIP = LRP ?
|
Simon-AE86 | Fri, 22 August 2003 04:24 |
|
Re: RIP = LRP ?
|
Alchemist | Fri, 22 August 2003 05:29 |
|
Re: RIP = LRP ?
|
SeptemberSquallIndustries | Sun, 24 August 2003 08:34 |
|
Re: RIP = LRP ?
|
speakafreaka | Mon, 25 August 2003 08:30 |
|
Re: RIP = LRP ?
|
speakafreaka | Fri, 22 August 2003 08:44 |
|
Re: RIP = LRP ?
|
purpleminiep | Sun, 24 August 2003 07:28 |
|
Re: RIP = LRP ?
|
Stefan | Sun, 24 August 2003 07:34 |
|
Re: RIP = LRP ?
|
Volatile | Sun, 24 August 2003 09:03 |
|
Re: RIP = LRP ?
|
purpleminiep | Sun, 24 August 2003 14:59 |
|
Re: RIP = LRP ?
|
gtman | Wed, 27 August 2003 03:37 |
|
Re: RIP = LRP ?
|
Norbie | Wed, 27 August 2003 07:51 |
|
Re: RIP = LRP ? ..
|
RA40Celica | Thu, 28 August 2003 04:50 |
|
Re: RIP = LRP ?
|
gtman | Thu, 28 August 2003 06:01 |
|
Re: RIP = LRP ?
|
Callifo | Wed, 10 September 2003 12:17 |
|
Re: RIP = LRP ?
|
draven | Wed, 10 September 2003 12:32 |
|
Re: RIP = LRP ?
|
Callifo | Wed, 10 September 2003 12:36 |