Pontiac - Street No question too basic here!

          
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 08-03-2010, 04:56 PM
ITSBACK's Avatar
ITSBACK ITSBACK is offline
Ultimate Warrior
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: NEW JERSEY
Posts: 2,757
Default Pump Gas Octane in 1967

Does anyone know what the gas was like in 1967 as far as octane of premium? I still cant understand why my 10.5 to 1 ran in 67 but not today. All you hear today is that you need to be 9 to 1 which is a loss of HP. Whats the deal?
Thanks,
Bill

  #2  
Old 08-03-2010, 05:13 PM
Ollie's Avatar
Ollie Ollie is offline
Ultimate Warrior
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Lynnwood Wa.
Posts: 2,853
Default

100 to 110 plus with real lead. Octane was measured differently too.

__________________
Its ok to giggle and snicker, Dont laugh and point
  #3  
Old 08-03-2010, 05:49 PM
ITSBACK's Avatar
ITSBACK ITSBACK is offline
Ultimate Warrior
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: NEW JERSEY
Posts: 2,757
Default

Is that why we need to be under 10:1 to run pump gas today and what did lead do?

  #4  
Old 08-03-2010, 07:48 PM
kate`s67gto's Avatar
kate`s67gto kate`s67gto is offline
Ultimate Warrior
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: ontario canada
Posts: 1,925
Default

The lead in gas of the 60's was for anti knock(raise the octane level) and for the valves lubrication. I believe it was in 1970 auto manufacturers started hardening the valve seats and guides for unleaded fuel.

__________________
Scott

If you always do what you always did
You always get what you always got
  #5  
Old 08-03-2010, 08:03 PM
Murf'sDad's Avatar
Murf'sDad Murf'sDad is offline
Ultimate Warrior
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Simonds, N.B.
Posts: 2,284
Default

In '67 you could buy Sunoco 260 for about $0.23/gallon in my area. By todays calculations the octane rating would be about 98 {(R+M)/2}. It contained lots of TEL which was deadly and would foul plugs in about 5 minutes if your carb wasn't set up properly and if it was, they would foul in 15 minutes at idle. But it protected your valves.

That's why your '67 would run on premium back then and not now.

Stewart

PS: I used to run it about every third or fourth tank to run it hard and "to clean things out".

__________________
1976 TA, nose converted to 1970 style, 406, ported #13 Heads, '70 iron intake without crossovers, Q-Jet - Cliff style, RARE OS manifolds, Pypes duals w/crossflow, UD 230/238 custom HR 4/7 swap cam with solid roller lifters , Hydro-Boost 4-wheel discs, 4 Speed, 3.23 posi.

“Nothing in life is so exhilarating as to be shot at without result.” - Winston Churchill
  #6  
Old 08-03-2010, 08:54 PM
captain42082's Avatar
captain42082 captain42082 is offline
Senior Chief
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: kentucky
Posts: 300
Default

I REMEMBER SUNOCO 260-I AM SOOOO OLD

  #7  
Old 08-03-2010, 09:00 PM
Murf'sDad's Avatar
Murf'sDad Murf'sDad is offline
Ultimate Warrior
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Simonds, N.B.
Posts: 2,284
Default

"How old are You", to resurrect Carson.

__________________
1976 TA, nose converted to 1970 style, 406, ported #13 Heads, '70 iron intake without crossovers, Q-Jet - Cliff style, RARE OS manifolds, Pypes duals w/crossflow, UD 230/238 custom HR 4/7 swap cam with solid roller lifters , Hydro-Boost 4-wheel discs, 4 Speed, 3.23 posi.

“Nothing in life is so exhilarating as to be shot at without result.” - Winston Churchill
  #8  
Old 08-03-2010, 09:49 PM
Tom Vaught's Avatar
Tom Vaught Tom Vaught is offline
Boost Engineer
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: The United States of America
Posts: 31,302
Default

I used to run Sunoco 280 gasoline, (this was the good stuff) before it was blended with the lower octane fuel (at the pump) to get 260, 240, etc.

Course you had to know the gas station owner really well and have access to the pure 280 gasoline (creative plumbing at the station). The owner was a circle track racer.

I never saw the 260 listed in my area below $.22 cents per gallon. You could get the other stuff for $.17 cents. 21 gallons times $.17 = $3.57 for gas per week.

$5.00 would get you a full tank of the good stuff ($.22 times 22 gallons = $4.84)

$5.00 per hour wages were high tech welding type jobs.

Tom Vaught

__________________
"Engineers do stuff for reasons" Tom Vaught

Despite small distractions, there are those who will go Forward, Learning, Sharing Knowledge, Doing what they can to help others move forward.
  #9  
Old 08-04-2010, 06:58 PM
FFD FFD is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 71
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Vaught View Post
I used to run Sunoco 280 gasoline, (this was the good stuff) before it was blended with the lower octane fuel (at the pump) to get 260, 240, etc.

Course you had to know the gas station owner really well and have access to the pure 280 gasoline (creative plumbing at the station). The owner was a circle track racer.

I never saw the 260 listed in my area below $.22 cents per gallon. You could get the other stuff for $.17 cents. 21 gallons times $.17 = $3.57 for gas per week.

$5.00 would get you a full tank of the good stuff ($.22 times 22 gallons = $4.84)

$5.00 per hour wages were high tech welding type jobs.

Tom Vaught
and something else when you filled up you got free stuff. Union 76 antenna balls.,B.C. glasses,Steak Knives in a bad part of Detroit never figured that one out. Were just some that come to mind. My favorite Reg. at .17 cents and in a wood case (24) bottles of Coke

  #10  
Old 08-03-2010, 10:09 PM
Kitch428m21's Avatar
Kitch428m21 Kitch428m21 is offline
Senior Chief
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: DUR'M, NC
Posts: 325
Default

Gulf had a NO-NOX commercial of a ZL-1 running flat out up Pikes Peak. '69 as I recall. If anyone finds that ad, paste it here.
Remember that smell at the pump while the full service attendant filled you up with that good stuff?

__________________
1970 Burgundy GTO hardtop. CVMS built 455 4sp.
May the Torque be with you!

John.
  #11  
Old 08-03-2010, 10:24 PM
ITSBACK's Avatar
ITSBACK ITSBACK is offline
Ultimate Warrior
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: NEW JERSEY
Posts: 2,757
Default

Thanks guys for the info. I am trying to figure out how to build my motor and could not understand what the deal was. I was born in 67, not like a few of you from what I am reading, but good thing otherwise it would be an unsolved mystery for me. Thanks guys.
Bill

  #12  
Old 08-03-2010, 11:34 PM
Grand73Am Grand73Am is offline
Ultimate Warrior
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Lawrenceville, GA
Posts: 2,953
Default

One misunderstanding that some people have is they think today's premium is much less octane than it was in the 60's. They remember the 100 octane premium ratings, as compared to today's 93 octane premium and think that yesterday's gas was 7 points higher octane. But it's not really as far apart as it seems, because the ratings are posted differently now than they were in the 60's.

There are 2 methods of measuring octane. One is "research" octane and the other is "motor" octane. The research octane number is always higher than the motor octane number. Back in the 60's and up to the early 70's, the octane rating that was posted on the gas pumps was the "research" octane number, which is the higher number. The gas companies wanted to advertise the highest number to make their gas seem better. I worked for HESS a few years around that time and they even bumped their Premium up to 101 octane for a while, so they could advertise HESS 101 octane at the stations. So, most Premium was around 100, but that was the "Research" octane number only.

Early in the 70's, the government made the oil companies start posting their octane ratings as an average of Research octane and Motor octane. You will see that formula on octane rating stickers on pumps still to this day. Look closely and it will say R+M/2. Averaging the Research number with the lower Motor number produces a lower number of course, which is the number you see today. So today's 93 octane Premium is a result of the R+M/2 formula. If you were to go back to the 60's and take that 100 octane premium and figure it through the R+M/2 formula, it would be much closer to today's 93 figure. So, while there may still be a point or two difference, the difference in actual octane between then and now is not as much as some people think. Certainly not even close to 7 points difference.

  #13  
Old 08-03-2010, 11:54 PM
68gtoMN's Avatar
68gtoMN 68gtoMN is offline
Ultimate Warrior
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Minneapolis Area
Posts: 2,260
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grand73Am View Post
One misunderstanding that some people have is they think today's premium is much less octane than it was in the 60's. They remember the 100 octane premium ratings, as compared to today's 93 octane premium and think that yesterday's gas was 7 points higher octane. But it's not really as far apart as it seems, because the ratings are posted differently now than they were in the 60's.

There are 2 methods of measuring octane. One is "research" octane and the other is "motor" octane. The research octane number is always higher than the motor octane number. Back in the 60's and up to the early 70's, the octane rating that was posted on the gas pumps was the "research" octane number, which is the higher number. The gas companies wanted to advertise the highest number to make their gas seem better. I worked for HESS a few years around that time and they even bumped their Premium up to 101 octane for a while, so they could advertise HESS 101 octane at the stations. So, most Premium was around 100, but that was the "Research" octane number only.

Early in the 70's, the government made the oil companies start posting their octane ratings as an average of Research octane and Motor octane. You will see that formula on octane rating stickers on pumps still to this day. Look closely and it will say R+M/2. Averaging the Research number with the lower Motor number produces a lower number of course, which is the number you see today. So today's 93 octane Premium is a result of the R+M/2 formula. If you were to go back to the 60's and take that 100 octane premium and figure it through the R+M/2 formula, it would be much closer to today's 93 figure. So, while there may still be a point or two difference, the difference in actual octane between then and now is not as much as some people think. Certainly not even close to 7 points difference.
One other important point: R+M/2 is an average. One can derive the octane by manipulating either component number in the R+M portion of the equation. Higher M number is better. Not all gasoline is equal with an R+M/2 of the same number.

__________________
'68 GTO 4-spd Hardtop (11)
'68 GTO Convertible AT (1)
'70 LeMans Sport

Land of Lakes Muscle Car Classic
Facebook Event
Facebook Wall (Kurt Smith,Minneapolis)
  #14  
Old 08-04-2010, 09:28 AM
ERIC AULL ERIC AULL is offline
Chief Ponti-yacker
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Long Island, N.Y.
Posts: 932
Default

I remember Sunoco 260 ! Find an airport and buy some 100LL, put some in your car and save a little for Cologne! Eric


Last edited by ERIC AULL; 08-04-2010 at 09:29 AM. Reason: spelling
  #15  
Old 08-04-2010, 12:46 PM
Mr. P-Body Mr. P-Body is offline
Ultimate Warrior
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,690
Default

Gulf No-Nox (I remember the ad, John "If this Camaro won't knock on Gulf No-Nox, what makes you think YOUR Camaro will?"), Super Shell were "100 octane" at the pump. Each oil company had their own version of "premium" gas, but all were "leaded" AND 100. We didn't have Sonoco stations in California, but guys were known to drive to Las Vegas and bring back many gallons...

Jim

  #16  
Old 08-04-2010, 01:50 PM
PONTIAC DUDE's Avatar
PONTIAC DUDE PONTIAC DUDE is offline
Ultimate Warrior
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: West Central Florida
Posts: 14,756
Talking

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. P-Body View Post
Gulf No-Nox (I remember the ad, John "If this Camaro won't knock on Gulf No-Nox, what makes you think YOUR Camaro will?"), Super Shell were "100 octane" at the pump. Each oil company had their own version of "premium" gas, but all were "leaded" AND 100. We didn't have Sonoco stations in California, but guys were known to drive to Las Vegas and bring back many gallons...

Jim
X2
A lot of us back then used Hess. Was the same as Sunoco 260. And cheaper by 2 [email protected] in 1969. LOL.

  #17  
Old 08-05-2010, 01:12 AM
lust4speed's Avatar
lust4speed lust4speed is offline
Ultimate Warrior
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Yucaipa, SoCal
Posts: 8,836
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. P-Body View Post
Gulf No-Nox (I remember the ad, John "If this Camaro won't knock on Gulf No-Nox, what makes you think YOUR Camaro will?"), Super Shell were "100 octane" at the pump. Each oil company had their own version of "premium" gas, but all were "leaded" AND 100. We didn't have Sonoco stations in California, but guys were known to drive to Las Vegas and bring back many gallons...

Jim
Yeah, but we did have Chevron 102 in SoCal. I remember it being like 4 cents more per gallon than Shell in the early 60's, which was a horrible increase when Shell premium was 28 cents a gallon.

...and I think that the old 100 octane would test out very close to 96 R+M/2

edit: at least I thought it was 102 and not 101. anyone remember?

__________________
Mick Batson
1967 original owner Tyro Blue/black top 4-speed HO GTO with all the original parts stored safely away -- 1965 Catalina Safari Wagon.

Last edited by lust4speed; 08-05-2010 at 01:20 AM.
  #18  
Old 08-04-2010, 01:57 PM
milkcrateracing's Avatar
milkcrateracing milkcrateracing is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Fallon NV
Posts: 181
Default

We did have Chevron white pump (Custom Supreme) @ 101 octane in Ca. I don't think it had any Techron in those days. I believe we gave up TEL for that.

__________________
Don Hayden <[email protected]>
68 GTO, 70 Tempest Wagon, Two GMC's, a caddy & the FULMNTE
  #19  
Old 08-04-2010, 04:06 PM
Tim john Tim john is offline
Ultimate Warrior
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,881
Default

Octane rating fluxuates based on temperature when tested as well. Another variable.

Tim john---

  #20  
Old 08-04-2010, 04:21 PM
72pontiac's Avatar
72pontiac 72pontiac is offline
Chief Ponti-yacker
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Waterford Mi.
Posts: 676
Default

if 1960's 101 is the same as todays 93 then we could still have 10.5 to 1 compression then why did i bump mine down to 9.5

Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:22 AM.

 

About Us

The PY Online Forums is the largest online gathering of Pontiac enthusiasts anywhere in the world. Founded in 1991, it was also the first online forum for people to gather and talk about their Pontiacs. Since then, it has become the mecca of Pontiac technical data and knowledge that no other place can surpass.

 




Copyright © 2017