Results 1 to 22 of 22
  1. #1
    Senior Member retiredsquid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Northwest Arkansas near Beaver Dam
    Posts
    341
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Fuel Requirements

    My owners manual indicates you can run anything between 87 and 91 octane fuel, but premium is recommended for optimum performance.

    I suspect I will likely run either 89 or 91 octane since I can actually find those two without ethanol added to it.

    What are ya'll using and do you notice any difference in performance and fuel economy using the various octane ratings?

  2. #2
    Spyderless Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    north/central n.j.
    Posts
    6,544
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by retiredsquid View Post
    My owners manual indicates you can run anything between 87 and 91 octane fuel, but premium is recommended for optimum performance.

    I suspect I will likely run either 89 or 91 octane since I can actually find those two without ethanol added to it.

    What are ya'll using and do you notice any difference in performance and fuel economy using the various octane ratings?

    I use 91 or 93 08 Gs M5 [stock], My highway MPGs range from 34 to 37, The rare times that i can't find any gas but 87,
    After 75 miles or so on that tank i can feel a slight loss of performance.

  3. #3
    Senior Member retiredsquid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Northwest Arkansas near Beaver Dam
    Posts
    341
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Thanks, that was what I wanted to know. Similar to what happens with the Corvette.

  4. #4
    PostZilla member Bob Denman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Grahamsville, NY
    Posts
    43,945
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by boborgera View Post

    I use 91 or 93 08 Gs M5 [stock], My highway MPGs range from 34 to 37, The rare times that i can't find any gas but 87,
    After 75 miles or so on that tank i can feel a slight loss of performance.
    The same results with my RT...

    Out with the old; in with the "WOO-HOO "
    2014 RT Limited: #2444: Born on Jan 30th, 2014

  5. #5
    Senile Member M2Wild's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Ellington, CT and Sandy Creek, NY
    Posts
    1,424
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    I switched over from 87 to 91 last year. Couldn't feel any difference. Going back to 87 and staying there. O2 mod did kill my gas milage. Might switch back this season.
    Silver SM5 PE# 1274, Hindle Exhaust, Touring Windshield, Caliper Trim, B.E.S.T. 3 Year Ext, Nuvi 255 GPS, Fog Lights, Sport Rack, Back Rest, 12V Outlet, Talon 3300p Alarm, NMN Mud Flap and TipZ LEDs, SpyderLovers Emblems, Kuryakyn Widow Pegs and Axel Trim, Luimoto seat skin, Evo Air Filter and O2 Mod, Cranker Tank Bag, Blue Sea fuse block, MAD/AMS/MBG, Oddyssey battery, IPS.

    Service Bulletin Applied: Gen II parking brake, 2nd SW patch, evap can/hose update, Gen II DPS

  6. #6
    TroubleMaker HDXBONES's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    2,526
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by retiredsquid View Post
    My owners manual indicates you can run anything between 87 and 91 octane fuel, but premium is recommended for optimum performance.

    I suspect I will likely run either 89 or 91 octane since I can actually find those two without ethanol added to it.

    What are ya'll using and do you notice any difference in performance and fuel economy using the various octane ratings?
    Our 08 SM5 runs best on 93. Fuel mileage is consistently in the mid 30's. BRP has told us that the Spyder's ECM can detect ignition detonation that occurs with a lower octane fuel, and retard timing accordingly to control it. With that comes a loss of performance, and fuel mileage. Some say that they don't notice a difference with a lower octane rating, and I'm sure they don't. Some of us do feel the difference, and many have reported better mileage as well. Altitude, riding style, terrain, weather, and riding environment all play into the equation as well......


    2011 RoadGlide Ultra / 2009 Buell Ulysses


    a former Spyder owner

  7. #7
    Senior Member retiredsquid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Northwest Arkansas near Beaver Dam
    Posts
    341
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    We used to be able to get 93 octane here until the tree huggers forced ethanol on us. Now it is 87, 89, or 91 octane. A few and that is very few gas stations sell real gas without ethanol, but most of those are 91 octane only.

  8. #8
    Alignment Specialist bone crusher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    MD
    Posts
    4,748
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    I've tried all three...no real difference...at least not enough to justify 20 cents or more per gallon.

    Then someone pointed out that it's only like a dollar difference per tank load...and that's a good point....however, I really don't see any difference and that is the overriding issue for me...so, 87 I go...
    Bone Crusher
    If you work to make money, you'll never be happy, as there's never enough money...if you work to take good care of people, the money will always be there....Sean O'Connell, 1999

  9. #9
    Alignment Specialist bone crusher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    MD
    Posts
    4,748
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    funny...this just out on yahoo....

    http://financiallyfit.yahoo.com/fina...waad=ad0035&nc
    Bone Crusher
    If you work to make money, you'll never be happy, as there's never enough money...if you work to take good care of people, the money will always be there....Sean O'Connell, 1999

  10. #10
    Senior Member Sny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Hoffman Estates, IL
    Posts
    793
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    100% agree with that article...

    With one comment. They says premium doesn't help unless you own a premium vehicle with a high output motor. While the Rotax isn't low compression low output like some certain bikes, I don't think it's really high output for it's size/configuration either. I think BRP's recommendation of 87 octane means it shouldn't need to do any timing changes to prevent detonation at that octane level baring unusual circumstances (poor air conditions, pressure, very high ambient temps etc.)

    So that said... I still run premium. Just paranoid I guess
    tHe SmOkEr YoU dRiNk ThE pLaYeR yOu GeT!

  11. #11
    Senior Member Pandy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Ladson, South Carolina
    Posts
    424
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Octane

    Just completed a three day run on the Blue Ridge and ran regular 87 all the time. With but 3100 miles on the RT, we turned in a steady 33mpg. Speaking with our local Spyder guru, he said try running all three grades over a period of time to see which works best. Made some comment that no two engine/ ECM combinations are alike and we might find that we get better performance out of premium, or just plain old regular. No more than the cost difference is right now, the experiment is on. Oh, he did mention a Power Commander mod. I dunno 'bout that.

    Patrick
    2011 RTS 2006 Yamaha Morphous (x2) IBA 56167

  12. #12
    Consumer Advocate akspyderman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Chugiak, Alaska
    Posts
    14,459
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    My experience: Tried 87 octane for the first 3 tanks this year on RTS--the bike did not seem to run as "peppy," also noticed less fuel mileage per gallon. I'm back to 91 octane untill I can't afford it any more. Also drive a Subaru Tribca (V6 and recommended 90+octane)--exactly the same results. Back to premium.

  13. #13
    Senior Member BIG RED 1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Boerne, TX
    Posts
    1,242
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Local 87 is 10% ethanol and BR1 seems to run very well on it. I prefer no ethanol but that is what it will get most of the time in the local area. I got 30.1 on a fill today. Gotta live with it...


    BIG RED 1 is a 2011 RT-S SE5. I am George Lewis. I live two miles from Boerne, TX. I am 81, retired USAF and Sony Corp. I also have a GW MotorTrike. My email: scoot62@aol.com


    If you have not been to Luckenbach, your journey is not complete.

  14. #14
    Alignment Specialist bone crusher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    MD
    Posts
    4,748
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by akspyderman View Post
    My experience: Tried 87 octane for the first 3 tanks this year on RTS--the bike did not seem to run as "peppy," also noticed less fuel mileage per gallon. I'm back to 91 octane untill I can't afford it any more. Also drive a Subaru Tribca (V6 and recommended 90+octane)--exactly the same results. Back to premium.
    Careful, there is a break-in period regardless of what fuel you are running and your mileage will get better over the first 1000 miles...
    Bone Crusher
    If you work to make money, you'll never be happy, as there's never enough money...if you work to take good care of people, the money will always be there....Sean O'Connell, 1999

  15. #15
    Senior Member Star Cruiser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Wasaga Beach, Ontario
    Posts
    780
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    I had always stayed true to only using premium if the engine called for it because of compression requirements. I read here that the timing changed to stop knock. I tried a tank of premium, mid- grade & regular. I didn't notice a difference between mid-grade (89) and premium (91), but they both performed better than regular (87). No milage difference between any of them for me. It took about 100 km to see the difference. Premium is 60 cents more a gallon here in Canada, mid-grade is 40 cents more. I use regular if I am just cruising on the highway but go to 89 if I am looking at any performance riding (my usual fill-ups). I don't bother with 91 Octane.
    Last edited by Star Cruiser; 04-25-2011 at 12:07 AM.

  16. #16
    Consumer Advocate akspyderman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Chugiak, Alaska
    Posts
    14,459
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Hi Bone Crusher: My RTS has over 14,000 miles on it. I went through the break-in period last summer.

  17. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Fountain Inn,SC
    Posts
    464
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    run 87 most of the time get 33 to 35 mpg. tried higher grades couldn't tell any differance

  18. #18
    Alignment Specialist bone crusher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    MD
    Posts
    4,748
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by akspyderman View Post
    Hi Bone Crusher: My RTS has over 14,000 miles on it. I went through the break-in period last summer.
    Did you see a change in mileage to the upside after a thousand or two miles?
    Bone Crusher
    If you work to make money, you'll never be happy, as there's never enough money...if you work to take good care of people, the money will always be there....Sean O'Connell, 1999

  19. #19
    Consumer Advocate akspyderman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Chugiak, Alaska
    Posts
    14,459
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Bone crusher--mileage did seem to improve after the initial 3000 miles or so. I started in the high 20's (27) and most tanks average (31) now. I am not an agressive driver, drive with the windscreen at its lowest point most of the time, and keep the revs mostly around 4500.

  20. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    PUNTA GORDA fl
    Posts
    158
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    87-91 for me. Bike runs very smooth at lower rpms on hight test.

  21. #21
    Senior Member Raptor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    S.F. Bay Area
    Posts
    1,857
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Yup, definitely saw an improvement in mileage per tank as the miles were put on the engine. I pretty much stick to 89 and every so often 91 octane now. I do feel at least "the perception" of better performance with the 89-91 octane. I cannot really confirm improved MPG, but the machine does seem to run better with the better grades of fuel. I do not put in any additives either.
    "Life must be understood backward. But it must be lived forward."

    2-Spyder Family. '09 Phantom GS (#14) and 2010 RS-S

  22. #22
    Alignment Specialist bone crusher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    MD
    Posts
    4,748
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Raptor View Post
    Yup, definitely saw an improvement in mileage per tank as the miles were put on the engine. I pretty much stick to 89 and every so often 91 octane now. I do feel at least "the perception" of better performance with the 89-91 octane. I cannot really confirm improved MPG, but the machine does seem to run better with the better grades of fuel. I do not put in any additives either.
    Yeah...I think most sources will say that it's a psychological effect more than a true mechanical one...

    I use 87 and my bike is fine with it...when running 93, I really didn't see a change, except for an additional 20+ cents/gallon.

    I do have numbers on my old BMW...I get about 2mpg higher with 89, even though the old '92 only 'needed' 87...funny thing is that with 93, it runs the same as with the 87....odd...I guess with age, it gets a little pickier. Who knows...
    Bone Crusher
    If you work to make money, you'll never be happy, as there's never enough money...if you work to take good care of people, the money will always be there....Sean O'Connell, 1999

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •