Page 1 of 1

Redex or catalyst balls for fuel??

Posted: Fri Jul 26, 2019 7:29 am
by darrenj
Can anyone tell me what would be better, redex lead replacement or the catalyst balls that go in the tank, has anyone had experience of using the second option, do they work, how many at a time, cheers guys.

Re: Redex or catalyst balls for fuel??

Posted: Fri Jul 26, 2019 7:38 am
by ManyMinors
Balls in the fuel tank seems a most daft idea to me. I wouldn't even consider it. If you want to use one of the fuel additives, use a well known brand. Personally I have never added anything to unleaded fuel in my (completely standard) Minor 1000 and it still runs perfectly happily with this neglectful treatment!

Re: Redex or catalyst balls for fuel??

Posted: Fri Jul 26, 2019 7:58 am
by Biggles1957
Catalyst - balls says it all! Load of rubbish. Never proven to work.

Re: Redex or catalyst balls for fuel??

Posted: Fri Jul 26, 2019 8:17 am
by Banned User
ManyMinors wrote: Fri Jul 26, 2019 7:38 am Balls in the fuel tank seems a most daft idea to me. I wouldn't even consider it. If you want to use one of the fuel additives, use a well known brand. Personally I have never added anything to unleaded fuel in my (completely standard) Minor 1000 and it still runs perfectly happily with this neglectful treatment!
Which is probably why the fuel catalyst fitted to my fuel line seems to work...

Re: Redex or catalyst balls for fuel??

Posted: Fri Jul 26, 2019 9:06 am
by Murrayminor
I believe there was a lot of testing of these balls and inline catalyst things in the past and they were found not to have changed anything in relation to valve seat damage.
I used to run a 1380 mini on shell V power and that was thrashed to within an inch of its life whilst competing and I never used additives.
I also ran a Hillman Imp rally road rally car and that too was given some stick but I used to add Valvemaster plus to the fuel but neither car ever had any issues.
I currently run my 1098 minor on unleaded and do not use additives, I think it depends on the use, if the engine is going to do high mileage and you are concerned then fit an unleaded head, otherwise I wouldn't let it bother you and save yourself some cash.

Re: Redex or catalyst balls for fuel??

Posted: Fri Jul 26, 2019 9:33 am
by darrenj
Thanks everyone, just don't have budget to get head done at the moment and wanted to make sure i didn't knacker the engine by not adding anything, as my 1000 is due back on the road hopefully in a couple of days as a daily runner,,plus first time with an old car,,

Re: Redex or catalyst balls for fuel??

Posted: Fri Jul 26, 2019 1:39 pm
by paul 300358
If you search the forum you will find that the advice for unleaded is to set the rocker clearance to 0.015" which is obviously 0.003" wider than the0.012" that is stated in the manual. You are also advised to check the rocker clearance every 3,000 miles. I know that many do this, but has anyone ever had a problem with the valve seats when running on unleaded?
When I rebuilt my engine I had hardened valve seat inserts fitted but have often thought that I have wasted my money.

Re: Redex or catalyst balls for fuel??

Posted: Fri Jul 26, 2019 4:15 pm
by panky
Personally I don't use anything in my classics, I used to use Castrol Valve Master but after seeing the state of a couple engines that used it I decided not to bother. They were both Commers with simple iron head engines, the first was a good mate of mine who measured it out carefully to the manufacturers instruction only to have one of the worst cases of valve seat recession I've seen - and that on an engine that only did a couple of thousand miles a year. The second was actually on a head that had had hardened seats fitted only for the valves themselves to wear away, both of the owners are knowledgeable guys who know their way around an engine and carried out regular servicing. Unless you are doing lots of motorway miles or straining the engine pulling a caravan regularly then I wouldn't bother.

Re: Redex or catalyst balls for fuel??

Posted: Fri Jul 26, 2019 5:56 pm
by Blaketon
Pellets in the tank is an old idea and I don't think it's ever been much good.

Mark, at Jigsaw Racing - https://jigsawracingservices.com/ (My MG Midget has a Triumph Spitfire engine) has advised that even with a lead free head, I should use something akin to https://www.millersoils-shop.co.uk/vspe ... -multishot , simply to offset the effects of ethanol. It just happens to have lead replacement into the bargain.

You could try avgas :wink: .

Re: Redex or catalyst balls for fuel??

Posted: Fri Jul 26, 2019 6:47 pm
by ampwhu
this is a similar conversation as buying winter tyres. you don't need winter tyres and you don't need lead in the fuel tank.

I've driven without adding lead pellets or any other similar rubbish since they stopped selling 4 star fuel 20 years ago

'Ive never had any problem ever. believe what you want and spend your money your way. i dont buy winter tyres either. i drive properly and don't have any issues in any of my classic cars or my modern SUV. i've heard some sales trap before and this rates as one of the best. :lol:

Re: Redex or catalyst balls for fuel??

Posted: Sat Jul 27, 2019 2:36 am
by irmscher
In the 70,s there was a similar thing called Armadol that never worked and had a high court case against them :(

Re: Redex or catalyst balls for fuel??

Posted: Wed Jul 31, 2019 12:07 pm
by Edward1949
Blaketon wrote: Fri Jul 26, 2019 5:56 pm ...……………………. I should use something akin to https://www.millersoils-shop.co.uk/vspe ... -multishot , simply to offset the effects of ethanol. It just happens to have lead replacement into the bargain.

:wink: .
Having worried myself by reading about the dire effects on classic cars of ethanol in petrol I now use this. In addition to the lead replacement + anti-ethanol benefits it claims to boost octane by up to 2 points. Can't say I've noticed any difference but on balance I feel happier with it in my fuel system.