So why exactly is it that Turbo Rs etc are so bloomin' cheap? Seems like you can pick up something from the mid 80's for less than 15k, even with sub 100k on the clock?
Before I do something extremely irresponsible with the contents of my building society book, can anyone enlighten me as to what these things are going to cost to run? I'm a pretty handy mechanic, have always done 90% of my own servicing. 15-20mpg ain't too scary as it won't do many miles anyway.
Cheers, Tim
In news: snipped-for-privacy@posting.google.com, Tim Harris decided to enlighten our sheltered souls with a rant as follows
If it's pre 1987, *avoid*.
Only go for a Turbo R if it's got EFi. Before 87 they had carbs, carb ones don't like unleaded fuel.
Did you just mention 20 mpg in the context of a Bentley Turbo R?
You're mad. Think 12 mpg, maybe 14 on a peaceful, quiet, 50ish mph run. 11 mpg in town, 8 if you use the performance.
Things to look for;
Rust. Dodgy suspension - not cheap, and the self levelling is similar to a Citroen set up Brakes - these things weigh over 2 tons Tyres - not cheap Smokey turbo - occasionally booting them actually does 'em good. Town based, chauffeur driven ones quite often furr up. Rear diff mountings - can rip out if driven "enthusiastically"
Pete M ( snipped-for-privacy@blue-nopressedmeat-yonder.co.uk) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying :
Standard coils, with the hydraulics purely as self-levelling. There's no inherent problems with the hydraulics - as you say, it's just standard Cit- style stuff. Give it a flush and some new fluid, nice shiny set of balls, and you're laughing. All the R-R bits are available from the usual Cit hydraulic specialists.
Why's that? Is it an octane thingie? Understood all Rolls engines ever made had hard enough valve seats etc to run happily on unleaded.
In news: snipped-for-privacy@davenoise.co.uk, Dave Plowman (News) decided to enlighten our sheltered souls with a rant as follows
I suspect it's octane related, yeah.
I know a guy who uses two '85 Turbos for weddings / chauffeur driving and he's always whingeing about it.
If he has the ignition set for unleaded it loses all it's power and flexibility, but if it's set for 4* it pinks its proverbials off.
All his enquiries as to how to sort it out have come back with the most faithful line in the motor trade "They all do that, Sir"
Shame really, it's a really nice one but it's worth about £12k due to being carb fed. If it was an EFi it'd be nearer £20k.
Saves him a fortune in fuel, he puts unleaded in with Redex octane boost, has the timing set to 4* and drives them really really gently. Pointless having Turbo ones really.
In news: snipped-for-privacy@individual.net, Pete M decided to enlighten our sheltered souls with a rant as follows
Whoops, I meant one '85, and an '87 EFI Turbo.
Why doesn't he simply use Shell Optimax, like all the rest of us who run cars which prefer higher octane fuels .
David Betts ( snipped-for-privacy@motorsport.org.uk) The Classic Car Gallery:
Strange, given that 5 Star wasn't around in '85. - 5 star only cars certainly have problems. I'd have thought Ultimax etc would have had the required octane rating. Perhaps it's blowing a bit too hard?
No probs there. Early to mid 90's jobs are still in the affordable 15k bracket, and anyway I've been putting octane booster in my Morgan for years now, so why not in a Bentley?
Ah. Being a bit optimistic, was I? Still, let's see: 5000 miles a year at say 10 mpg is 500 gallons at a fiver which is 2.5k or 50 quid a week... still doable, I reckon.
Do they? Where? I've only had a close look at one, and it was totally flawless. The only reason I didn't buy it was it had the most tasteless 2-tone paint and leather colours I've ever seen.
Mind you, the colour issue is probably going to be the stopper for me for any serious go at buying one. All the ones I've seen pictures of in eBay etc seem to have awful white or magnolia hide. Sorry, but there's no way I'd ever be seen dead driving around in something with white leather upholstery.
Thanks for the pointers.
Perhaps he's not the sort of prat who buys snake oil.
I buy snake oil if I have a snake that needs oiling. Are you suggesting Optimax isn't higher octane? Or what?
Tim Harris (brimscombe snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying :
Most left the factory with restrained tasteful paint. If it's had a tacky colour change, there's probably plenty of plug hiding beneath it.
Whilst I'm sure you have your reasons to think it doesn't make a difference, I ran my Golf GTI 8v on Optimax and it made a very noticeable difference. I actually drove the car harder and got better economy. Now, this was a '90 and designed when 4 star was still pretty much the default, but with engine management also expecting to take unleaded - but no cat.
Does Optimax make sense for most people? Probably not. Is it Snake Oil? Nah. It claims to be higher octane, something quite verifiable. All Shell fuels have detergents or whatever in, so the engine cleaning claims are merely being repeated. What octane is it? IIRC it was found to be pretty much 98, not the 100 that some people were saying.
It isn't bad fuel, though. It made no difference to my Beetle when I got bored of seeing if it ran well running it on Optimax from new - so I'm sure loads of people will get no benefit from it - but for high performance imports and older cars, it's probably alright.
Richard
RichardK-PB ( snipped-for-privacy@NOSPAMbtconnect.com) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying :
Shell claim 98 for Optimax, BP claim 97 for Ultimate.
I remember at launch that the Optimax brochures wouldn't disclose Octane ratings - leading to rumours that it was 100 octane ;)
Richard
It makes a very real difference on my SD1 which was designed for 4 star - and pinks badly on premium. On my E39 528, I can't tell any difference in performance, but it *may* make a difference of about 0.5 mpg on a long run.
it will only make a difference on an older car if it benefitted from higher octane fuels in the first place. With something like a Beetle I'm not surprised it doesn't make a difference.
On moderns with electronic management, it will only make a difference if the system includes a knock-sensor. My late-model Rover Mini, for instance, doesn't and there is no benefit to be gained from running a higher octane fuel.
David Betts ( snipped-for-privacy@motorsport.org.uk) The Classic Car Gallery:
David Betts ( snipped-for-privacy@motorsport.org.uk) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying :
Particularly because Richard's Beetle is (IIRC) on a 53 plate... There's a clue in "from new"...
Which I'm told my Beetle does - but since the poor thing has been abused from new, it's already far quicker than a 1.6 Beetle has any right to be.
God. It's nearly the car's 1st birthday. And I've had my Supra since May. Argh! What is happening to me! Actually, I should try the Supra on Optimax - I don't usually bother as the car does a good impression of a
2-stroke engine at present, at least when cold.Richard
It's on an '04 plate, but only because I managed to be patient for a week. There's a clue in my sig, too ;)
Richard
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.