Re: New guy looking for help with 1962 GMC
 

i have a question on the use of lead additive. i thought all engines built before unleaded gas came around, needed the lead to lubricate the valve seats. i have seen small block chevy heads with the seats completly gone. do the 305 heads have hardened valve seats? ive been running aviation gas mix in my 66 c1500 to keep some lead in the fuel, but that gets expensive. I use ZDDPLUS, oil additive with valvoline 10w 40 conventional oil, the rotella is excellent as well. both have great additives, just trying to put another option out there

RICK

Re: New guy looking for help with 1962 GMC
 

The 305 V6 engines didn't have hardened seats but GMC V6 engines 351 through 478 did have hardened valve seat inserts. Also the V6 did survive through 1974 so early 70's V6's were designed to run on low lead or no lead gasoline.

Re: New guy looking for help with 1962 GMC
 

thanks for the info

RICK

Re: New guy looking for help with 1962 GMC
 

Let me re-phrase what you are saying...I don't need to use a lead additive in my 305v6 from 1962? Am I understanding you correctly?

Thanks.

Re: New guy looking for help with 1962 GMC
 

No, I'm just informing you on changes that were made to the V6 in later years, if you would decide to go with later model heads at some point.

Re: New guy looking for help with 1962 GMC
 

No, you do NOT need to add a lead additive in your gas for the 305 V6. You can (It won't hurt anything) but it isn't necessary. The only gas thing you need to worry about is E10 Ethanol.

Re: New guy looking for help with 1962 GMC
 

Well that E10 ethanol is a bit worrisome. In many cases there is no choice if you want to put gas in there at all. I have had some bad experiences of rubber parts not holding up, but kits are not that expensive. All the rubber fuel lines are new, I hope they last.
What is really scary is the proposal to increase the ethanol to 15%, but from what I have heard manufacturers are pushing back as they say that level is too destructive on the fuel system.
What I have noticed on my newer vehicles is a significant drop in mileage this winter. They purport that the winter mixture is for pollution. What I don't understand is if you get 25% less mileage, you use more fuel to cover the same distance, what is gained??

Re: New guy looking for help with 1962 GMC
 

The few studies I have seen that showed fuel economy on the same vehicle, E-10 and pure gas, the difference has been pretty close to the amount of alcohol involved. At 10%, the fuel economy dropped by 10%. Net result is you pay more for less fuel.
The alcohol isn't a benefit, it should never have become a standard. While it sounded good in theory, it fails in practice. The crop production to produce the ethanol removes crops from the food/feed chain causing those crops to cost more overall. Part of the increase to fuel prices was the inclusion of ethanol. It wasn't a concern when only a few places were using a blend (had a farmers co-op that used alcohol/gas mixture back in the early 80s).

I went to look and see what the difference in "power" was and found a chart that doesn't include gasoline as a fuel, but claims to compare all the alternate fuels to gasoline... in the chart it is indicated that we import nearly 1/2 of the oil used... must be an old chart. As of 2013 we import nearly 33%, not half, of petroleum used.
The comparison baseline, according to footnotes, is based on E0, E10, and one other fuel... no wonder the chart indicates that E10 is equivalent to the baseline... it isn't measured against straight gas.
According to the chart on Wikipedia, 1 gallon of E10 is equivalent to 1.02 gallons of gas. That may be the effective numbers, but in MPG what I have observed is a lot larger difference, closer to 1 gallon of E10 being equivalent to 1.10 gallons of straight gas.

My old '63 Chrysler -hated- the blend. Lost so much power. I hate the price of straight gasoline though, as a local station here does sell it but its almost a dollar a gallon more (mostly because he doesn't like selling gas, his "in the black" is largely due to auto repair, so gas is a sideline that cuts into the auto repair time). But even though he is always higher priced, to get non-alcohol fuel isn't cheaper than the blend is difficult due to scarcity.

According to the same chart on Wikipedia, 1 gallon of E100 (ethanol) is equal to 1.50 gallons of gasoline, and 1 gallon of M100 (methanol) is equal to 2 gallons of gasoline. So not running straight anything if we can help it I hope!
Diesel is the only thing that is "higher" in power, and LPG/LNG is around 1 gallon equivalent to 1.5/1.3 gallons of gas (only a savings if LPG/LNG is cheaper).

Just a bunch of fuel trivia this morning... :)
I'm not sure how much of the data really applies in the real world, as opposed to the laboratory.
Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gasoline_gallon_equivalent

Re: New guy looking for help with 1962 GMC
 

i would say your real world #s on ethanol, methanol, & lpg are right on the money. living in iowa, we have had e-10 since the early 80's. i could tell back then that i could drive alot further on straight gas than ethanol. the price difference didn't use to be such a wide split. when it was about 10 cents difference, the cost of either fuel was about equal per mile. but anymore with 40 cents or more split, i think is cheaper per mile to run the ethanol, as well as being alot easier to find.

the bad side is ethanol is corrosive. it is hard on electrical windings in fuel injectors. it also degrades plastic, rubber, and aluminum parts in the fuel system.

from my experiance the older the vehicle, the more trouble and maintenance issues you will have with ethanol. part of this is because older vehicles tend to sit for periods of time without running. ethanol draws moisture.

i don't put e-10 in my 66 gmc' because i dont drive it every day. nor do i put it in my mower, chainsaw, weedeater, or any other small engine that sits more than it runs.

rick

Re: New guy looking for help with 1962 GMC
 

A friend of mine who has a lot of air cooled small engine equipment to maintain his place has stopped using ethanol based fuels entirely. It has ruined too much equipment and carburetors. He was using racing fuel in them, right, leaded 110 octane, he then changed when he learned that the racing fuel maker was offering a 97 octane, unleaded designed for small air cooled motors. Even though it costs $12.00 a gallon, comes out cheaper than replacing equipment.