Gas Octane

[Spyderjuice]

The book says to use minimum of 81 octane. The tech at the dealer said use 93 octane and the spyder would run better. I tried and I think it ran worse for about a quarter of a tank and then it seems to have leveled out. Didn't start well and sputtered some. I'm probably going back to 81 as the book suggested.

What has been the experence or what is the advise of others? What octane are you using? :dontknow:

Juice

[zzneonzz]

My dealer also recomended Premium gas and i have tested it with running both on my SE5 and i seem to get about 2mpg more using premium as well as a little better performance. I usually run 89/93 octane as i get better performance using those. Most people here from prior posts are using 87 or Regular. If you do a search on the forums here you will find a ton of information on this subject.

[Spyderjuice]

Thanks for the information. I need to learn to do a search before I start a thread. :opps:

Juice

[boogllasti]

Anything higher than 87 octane is a total waste of money. It will not run 'better' in the Spyder, nor will you get better MPG. It may run 'okay', but many have found it runs worse (including myself).

Only an engine that specifically requires the higher octane will benefit from running it. Period.

Another thing to consider is your 'higher octane' fuel is almost always older - as in not as fresh - as the lower octane. It sits much longer without being turned over because it doesn't sell as much - thus it picks up moisture and loses octane - thus becomes stale.

If you want the rotax to perk up - expensive gas isn't the way.

Add Ken's O2 mod, an aftermarket exhaust, Race Airflow setup and fuel pressure mod - it WILL awaken the beast that has been sleeping in your Spyder!

[LittleJohn]

Anything higher than 87 octane is a total waste of money. It will not run 'better' in the Spyder, nor will you get better MPG. It may run 'okay', but many have found it runs worse (including myself).

Only an engine that specifically requires the higher octane will benefit from running it. Period.

Another thing to consider is your 'higher octane' fuel is almost always older - as in not as fresh - as the lower octane. It sits much longer without being turned over because it doesn't sell as much - thus it picks up moisture and loses octane - thus becomes stale.

If you want the rotax to perk up - expensive gas isn't the way.

Add Ken's O2 mod, an aftermarket exhaust, Race Airflow setup and fuel pressure mod - it WILL awaken the beast that has been sleeping in your Spyder!

THEN you might need the extra octane....LOL
:popcorn:

[zzneonzz]

Anything higher than 87 octane is a total waste of money. It will not run 'better' in the Spyder, nor will you get better MPG. It may run 'okay', but many have found it runs worse (including myself).



I'm sorry but you can not say it WILL NOT get you any better MPG because it did on mine. Wasn't enough for the added cost but it was definately better. As well the spyder ran better from a cold start with the higher octane once again this was on mine. It seems different on a per machine basis. Or maybe it's an SE thing :D

Best thing to do is try it see if you notice a difference and if you don't then use the 87 but for me i'll stick with atleast Mid Grade.

[AMTJIM]

:agree:...SV and Spyder did much better...got 36+ mpg on my trip to Ruidoso. I do also agree some remote locations may not have true octane rating or quality fuel from sitting. I wish there was just one big fuel tank and octane was injected from a different tank according to your choice at time of purchase!

[SpyderDee]

SpyderDawg's Spyder was having some sputtering and the engine had even stopped a couple of times. He had made an appintment to have the Spyder taken to the dealer to see what was going on. I read some of the threads regarding using the 87 Octane as opposed to the high grade he was using. He switched to the 87 and once the tank was "cleared" of the premium, he hasn't had any problems.

[NancysToy]

Under normal circumstances, premium, like ethanol containing fuels, burn more slowly than lower grade fuels. They tend to have less heat or energy capacity, although that parameter is not directly related to octane. The slower burning will prevent knocking, but less energy cpacity may provide slightly lower miles per gallon. Individual results may vary, due to slight differences in engines or tuning, altitude, and the age or source of the fuel. Use what makes you happy, and makes the Spyder run acceptably.
-Scotty

[Smylinacha]

I use 93 in mine and it runs better - doesn't hesitate like it used to and I have better mileage.

[boogllasti]

Unless you have a different way of measuring the actual gas being used other than the Spyder gas gauge, I don't think you can get a MPG reading more accurate than within 2 mpg.

If your 'gain' is no more than the potential accuracy of the tools used for measurement - then I don't think you can really bank on the results.

You could run the tank bone dry and put in 5 gallons exactly measured and run her dry - do this with both fuels and see if there is any difference.

I would also be careful using mid-grade as it usually is the biggest ripoff on the market. There is typically no 'midgrade' tank underground - it is mixed on-site by the pump pulling some from the 91 and some from the 87. The ratio can and does vary from station to station.

In the end - higher octane doesn't have more power, nor can it deliver more MPG - that is not what it is designed to do at all.

The sole purpose of higher octane gas is to reducing engine knock. If your engine isn't knocking - higher octane gas doesn't do anything.

The only way you can get better MPG from higher octane is if your engine knocks when running 87 and doesn't knock when running 91.

[kiwi]

I beg to differ with the previous accuracy comments and believe it is possible to calculate MPG to at least a tenth of a mile.
Simply fuel the beast to the top,reset your trip meter, ride around till close to MT. Stop at favourite gas station again, fill tank to top. Note the gas added (usually to 3 decimal places on most pumps) Do the math........Magic!

[zzneonzz]

I beg to differ with the previous accuracy comments and believe it is possible to calculate MPG to at least a tenth of a mile.
Simply fuel the beast to the top,reset your trip meter, ride around till close to MT. Stop at favourite gas station again, fill tank to top. Note the gas added (usually to 3 decimal places on most pumps) Do the math........Magic!

:agree:

[Smylinacha]

Unless you have a different way of measuring the actual gas being used other than the Spyder gas gauge, I don't think you can get a MPG reading more accurate than within 2 mpg.

If your 'gain' is no more than the potential accuracy of the tools used for measurement - then I don't think you can really bank on the results.

You could run the tank bone dry and put in 5 gallons exactly measured and run her dry - do this with both fuels and see if there is any difference.

I would also be careful using mid-grade as it usually is the biggest ripoff on the market. There is typically no 'midgrade' tank underground - it is mixed on-site by the pump pulling some from the 91 and some from the 87. The ratio can and does vary from station to station.

In the end - higher octane doesn't have more power, nor can it deliver more MPG - that is not what it is designed to do at all.

The sole purpose of higher octane gas is to reducing engine knock. If your engine isn't knocking - higher octane gas doesn't do anything.

The only way you can get better MPG from higher octane is if your engine knocks when running 87 and doesn't knock when running 91.

All I know is when I was running 87, :spyder:would spit and cough upon start up. I'd have to let it sit for a little while before I'd take off. It would hesitate in between gears. W/ 93 I don't get any more hesitation. I swapped pipes though so not sure if that makes a difference or not. HDX says I'm getting better mileage - not a whole lot better but better than before.

[boogllasti]

I beg to differ with the previous accuracy comments and believe it is possible to calculate MPG to at least a tenth of a mile.
Simply fuel the beast to the top,reset your trip meter, ride around till close to MT. Stop at favourite gas station again, fill tank to top. Note the gas added (usually to 3 decimal places on most pumps) Do the math........Magic!

I fully understand the idea used here to get an idea of MPG.

The accuracy is fully dependent on a few key factors:

What is 'full' or 'top of tank' ?

Was it cold or warm when you filled up?

Was the riding style and terrain the same for both tests?


Many seem to have a problem knowing exactly when the Spyder is full as that totally depend on how far you stick the filler hose in.


Adding the pipe would certainly make a difference in how she runs.

Someone out here (I think Magic Man) did an experiment where they filled with premium and it ran like a dog - then drained the tank 100% on the bench and filled her back up with 87 and she ran like a charm.


I should also mention that altitude and octane have some relationship on how much is needed to avoid the pings.

I have yet to hear anyone say that their Rotax was pinging or knocking - which is entirely different than lag or sputter. Higher octane can only fix ping and knock issues - it has no special magic to fix other problems.

As far as warming up - my dealer told me to always get 1-2 bars before riding - and yes- the Rotax WILL sputter if you don't follow that rule.

As with anything in life - your own mileage may vary---:D

[SLO RYDER]

I've been running 87 in mine and it seems to run fine.

I was surprised to find that my spyder coughs and sputter's as well if I don't let it warm up. I've had a Yamaha FJR 1300 and two BMW's, current one being a R1200RT with fuel injection and can start them and ride off. I was going to contact my dealer and see if they can adjust the mapping to reduce this. A fuel injected motor, in my opinion, should not do this. I'll also try to contact BRP to see if they have a reason that this is happening.:dontknow: Other than that I've only had mine a week but love it.

[Smylinacha]

I've been running 87 in mine and it seems to run fine.

I was surprised to find that my spyder coughs and sputter's as well if I don't let it warm up. I've had a Yamaha FJR 1300 and two BMW's, current one being a R1200RT with fuel injection and can start them and ride off. I was going to contact my dealer and see if they can adjust the mapping to reduce this. A fuel injected motor, in my opinion, should not do this. I'll also try to contact BRP to see if they have a reason that this is happening.:dontknow: Other than that I've only had mine a week but love it.

If we could remap this thing, we'd be all over it! Dealers won't be able to and I doubt if BRP will do anything about it - that map is locked up tight in the BRP vault and they will never give up that info unfortunately. Hopefully down the road someday, someone will crack the code and maybe we can remap ourselves - like the old power commander days.

[NancysToy]

I've been running 87 in mine and it seems to run fine.

I was surprised to find that my spyder coughs and sputter's as well if I don't let it warm up. I've had a Yamaha FJR 1300 and two BMW's, current one being a R1200RT with fuel injection and can start them and ride off. I was going to contact my dealer and see if they can adjust the mapping to reduce this. A fuel injected motor, in my opinion, should not do this. I'll also try to contact BRP to see if they have a reason that this is happening.:dontknow: Other than that I've only had mine a week but love it.
You,ve got me beat. MY BMW R1100RT needs to be choked (enriched) to start, and held there for a while until it will even fast idle. I can take off then, but it has to stay in fast idle until at least one bar comes on. This is a common trait of the earlier RTs and their fuel injection. So is throttle surge. It all is dependent on the mapping, cold-start enrichment compenstation (if any) and the engine characteristics. The book says 1-2 bars, the dealer says 1-2 bars, and 1-2 bars seems to work the best for the Spyder. Otherwise, be prepared to baby the clutch and throttle. If you want something to compare to, try my 65 Bonneville with dual carbs, and no chokes, just ticklers. You can start it cold, but keeping it running is an art in cold weather.
-Scotty

[GA-SPYDER]

:agree:...SV and Spyder did much better...got 36+ mpg on my trip to Ruidoso. I do also agree some remote locations may not have true octane rating or quality fuel from sitting. I wish there was just one big fuel tank and octane was injected from a different tank according to your choice at time of purchase!
Not jacking the thread, but, I used to live in Alamagordo, many years ago, and loved to ride up in the mountains around Cloudcroft and Ruidoso. Sure do miss it.:thumbup:

[baldev]

[quote=HDXBONES;51726]You're way off base dude. Here's how it works; the lower the octane rating, the more uncontrolled the mixture burn is.


In all my life in the gas business that's the biggest croc I ever heard. No scientist or dissertation required and baseless to argue.

I have heard it from some of the best scientist from Texaco and Shell quote " they are idiots who think adding premium gas to vehicles that does not need it will make any difference BUT let them we want their business and the money is good". I have never seen any of those working in the industry add premium gas when not required.
BUT if it makes you happy and YOU THINK it benefits.....................Go waste, I do not care BUT please do not "idiotised" some of us who are sane.http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/23/23_33_16.gif (http://www.smileycentral.com/?partner=_undefined)

[AMTJIM]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octane_rating

[boogllasti]

I've been running 87 in mine and it seems to run fine.

I was surprised to find that my spyder coughs and sputter's as well if I don't let it warm up. I've had a Yamaha FJR 1300 and two BMW's, current one being a R1200RT with fuel injection and can start them and ride off. I was going to contact my dealer and see if they can adjust the mapping to reduce this. A fuel injected motor, in my opinion, should not do this. I'll also try to contact BRP to see if they have a reason that this is happening.:dontknow: Other than that I've only had mine a week but love it.

This is very common and well known on these Rotax engines. Good idea to get that oil flowing anyway.

I have found out that since I added the fuel pressure mod (along with race airflow, o2 mod and Hindle) that if I want to I can take off dead cold without any sputter.

I increased my fuel pressure from 50 psi to 60 psi after adding the fuel mod. It made all the difference in the world! Spyder goes like a bat out of hell now! On 87 octane too! :D

As far as the octane debate - do some research online and you will find the information is very clear about higher octane not helping (and possibly hurting) performance *if* the engine doesn't specifically require the higher octane - which the Rotax doesn't.

I've never checked MPG on the Spyder - and don't plan to, but I have done various mods to increase power and I've got a good seat of the pants feel for what really works.

I'll be installing my Veypor VR2 this weekend so I can actually see any performance gains or losses, as well as 1/4 mile and 0-60 times.

[boogllasti]

Good paragraph from the wiki link posted above:

Many high-performance engines are designed to operate with a high maximum compression and thus demand high-octane premium gasoline. A common misconception is that power output or fuel mileage can be improved by burning higher octane fuel than a particular engine was designed for. This is not true. The power output of an engine depends in part on the energy density of its fuel, but similar fuels with different octane ratings have similar density. Since switching to a higher octane fuel does not add any more hydrocarbon content or oxygen, the engine cannot produce more power.

[AMTJIM]

What we have:
High-performance engines typically have higher compression ratios (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compression_ratio) and are therefore more prone to detonation, so they require higher octane fuel
Yeah, what HDX said:
Higher octane ratings correlate to higher activation energies (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Activation_energy). Activation energy is the amount of energy necessary to start a chemical reaction. Since higher octane fuels have higher activation energies, it is less likely that a given compression will cause detonation.
It might seem odd that fuels with higher octane ratings explode less easily and can therefore be used in more powerful engines. However, an explosion is not desired in an internal combustion engine. An explosion will cause the pressure in the cylinder to rise far beyond the cylinder's design limits, before the force of the expanding gases can be absorbed by the piston traveling downward. This actually reduces power output, because much of the energy of combustion is absorbed as strain (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strain_(physics)) and heat (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat) in parts of the engine, rather than being converted to torque (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torque) at the crankshaft (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crankshaft).

[Calif-spyder]

I would be very surprised if the Spyder didn't have two octane tables in the tune.
I know for a fact that GM has been doing that at least since 2002,
it protects the engine from bad gas, if the computer detects knock or if it predicts knock might accure it will go to the lower octane tables and reduce timing,

BRP spent a lot of money developing the spyder and it looks like they went all out with sensors and electronics I don't see them skimping with the tune.
Mark

[SpyderDog65]

87 or 91 who know everyones got a different opinion about it. the way i figure it. use what makes u happy cause everyone has a different opinion on the subject

[Roaddog2]

No problems running on 87 :doorag:

[throneroomdancer]

Scotty...just wanted you to know I've enjoyed your responses to the many posts since the Spyder forum began. You are a gold mine!

[boogllasti]

Now now - let's not get personal here and start attacking.

Everyone is welcome to their opinion. Some opinions are based on facts, and some on fiction - but they are each persons opinion.

Rather than waste time attacking out here, if you really want to learn about octane - take 30 minutes and do some reading out here on the net.

You will find that you are correct when you say "I wouldn't add it to a vehicle that I didn't think would benefit from it either...."

Some vehicles certainly can benefit from running premium, the Spyder just isn't one of them - according to the people that designed it.

There is plenty of scientific data available on the internet that proves higher octane can not improve power or MPG unless used in an engine that specifically requires it. The Spyder doesn't (pg 22 of owners manual).

Those engines that do require it don't get more power or mpg from the fuel or the higher octane - they simply require the higher octane in order to run smoothly without knocking.

Other engines may have anti-knock systems in place to keep them running smoothly. It's simply two different solutions to the same problem in order to keep the engine running smooth. High compression engines, turbo and super charged engines may very well require the higher octane to solve the knocking problem. The Spyder engine doesn't fall into those catagories.

The error in this whole arguement is that many incorrectly think that higher octane gas has more useable power in it - it doesn't. Basic physics will tell you that you cannot get more power from something than it contains, and 87 and 91 octane gasses have identical amounts of power in them.

If you have firm scientific data (dyno and mpg readings taken in a controlled environment with calibrated equipment) that shows the Spyder to get better MPG or have more power when running premium gas, I'm sure the engineers at BRP would appreciate you sharing this data.

Seat of the pants dyno or gas-pump mpg readings without consistent riding done in a controlled environment are just not accurate enough to be taken as proof.

[NancysToy]

Those engines that do require it don't get more power or mpg from the fuel or the higher octane - they simply require the higher octane in order to run smoothly without knocking.

Actually, some get more power and mpg. My wife's Chevy HHR is one of them. Considerable improvement in power (not tested) and mpg (long-term records). This is a result of the engine management system. This thing will run on regular without knocking a bit. The computer adjusts it, and you don't notice any problems at all. It comes alive with premium, however, and the mileage goes up at least 2 mpg. Doesn't downshift as much in cruise control on the freeway, either. If you put 12,000 miles on a vehicle a year, and average 25 mpg, the cost is less than $100 more. Use what makes you happy, just don't expect miracles unless the vehicle is designed to need premium.
-Scotty

[boogllasti]

Well, I guess we are just going to disagree on this. There are volumes of data available online about this subject that can educate you on octane.

When it comes down to it, since you are only using seat of the pants testing - if your Spyder engine is actually knocking with 87 - and NOT knocking with 91 - then I guess you have your answer.

Again, I've never heard of any Spyder having knocking issues - which is the only issue that higher octane addresses.

If better performance or MPG was available with higher octane - don't you think BRP would embrace this theory and promote it?

I fail to see how having an A&P applies to this situation, but I guess I'll just take your word that you know more than the BRP engineers and the volumes of data available online.

Most issues with engine 'sputter' on the Spyder have been due to running on a cold engine or having the VSS kick in. Higher octane won't cure either of those problems.

If you feel you're getting more bang for your buck with premium - by all means - keep spending that extra $$$ - I'm sure Exxon appreciates it. :D

Ride on - and enjoy!

Some like 91, the rest of us have no problems with 87.

I'll spend the extra $$$ on high-octane beer instead - :D

[boogllasti]

"Again, as I've said in a previous post, if the Spyder has a knock control system, it would make corrections long before you heard any knocking. Since we have no access to the ECM as end users or even at the dealer level for this issue, I haven't learned if it does or not. Because we don't hear about knocking issues, and the fact that BRP invested a lot of effort in other advanced systems, I'm assuming that it does. If that is the case, and higher octane fuel prevents the detonation in the first place, I end up with more power, period."


Two different ways to solve the knocking problem : Anti-knock system or higher octane.

Assuming you are correct that the Spyder uses the first solution - the problem is already solved by the knock-control system. Why would you need to solve the problem again with higher octane?

Maybe you have something wrong with your Spyder if you're having such knocking issues. I would have your dealer check things out - maybe your knock-control isn't working properly?

I've not heard of a single case of engine knock on the Spyder, but there's always a first for everything. Perhaps your dealer can figure out the problem at your 6,000 checkup.

[SpyderMark]

Assuming you are correct that the Spyder uses the first solution - the problem is already solved by the knock-control system. Why would you need to solve the problem again with higher octane?

I think you're missing the point...

A knock-control system retards ignition timing to mitigate or eliminate knock. Retarding ignition timing (without changing other engine parameters) has the side-effect of reducing engine power output. *If* the Spyder's engine control system incorporates a knock sensor which must continually retard ignition timing to prevent knock while using the min recommended 87 octane fuel, it stands to reason reducing or eliminating the knock by increasing the fuel's octane negates the need to retard ignition timing in the first place. In this case, switching from 87 octane to 91 octane doesn't result isn't more engine power being produced, per se, but it will eliminate the artificial reduction of produced engine power imposed by the engine control system when it retards ignition timing to prevent knock.

This entire discussion is speculative until we ascertain whether the Spyder incorporates a knock sensor. That being said, it seems to me BRP would not have published a minimum octane in the Operator's Guide if the Spyder's engine control system incorporates a knock sensor. Theoretically, the knock sensor would compensate for lower octane fuels by simply further retarding the timing. Additionally, for a vehicle marketed and sold in large part based on its performance, one wonders why BRP fails to mention the potential power and economy gains available by simply using higher octane fuel -- especially considering the Spyder's lackluster fuel mileage.

Regards,

Mark

[boogllasti]

Well said Mark.

I think this horse is dead, perhaps from drinking the wrong octane or from having its timing retarded too much.:D


:bdh:

[Way2Fast]

There is a limit on how far the ignition timing can be retarded. A computer controlled "anti knock sensor" can not do miracles. It has to be designed to ONLY retard the timing to the point where decent drivability still exists. These days, with the high cost of gasoline, manufacturers who adverise that minimum regular 87 octane gas can be used add a selling point to their product. Will the vehicle run best on 87....not always. Given the Spyders high compression ratio I would not use any fuel under 93 octane in it.

[spyryder]

I have it on good authority that the factory system DOES NOT have knock detection.;) I also checked the parts book and no knock sensor that I could find.

[boogllasti]

I found this previous post by Magic Man.

Hope this is okay to re-post?

Not sure what more proof one would need.

I also tried a tank of 93 and found it didn't run as well.


_________________________
From Magic Mans previous post:

The lower compression of this series of 990 Rotax as compaired to the 136hp version coupled with the higher flash point of the 93 octane fuel can actually make the Spyder have some driveability problems at lower RPMs. This we actually have experienced first hand in our own test on our Spyder last weekend.

We filled up an almost empty tank with 93 and drove the bike. After a few minutes when the 87 fuel was completely out of the fuel rail and lines the bike began to have a low speed "miss" or "stumble" that was not there before.

We went back to the shop siphoned out the fuel till no bars were shown went and refilled the tank with 87. Again after a few minutes when the fuel lines and rail were clear of the 93 the "miss" or "stumble" was gone.

There have been several automotive tests and service bulletins on this topic for just the same reason. The higher octane fuel can indeed cause drivability problem in todays engines designed to use the lower octane, lower flash point fuel. Higher octane fuel that is designed to "resist engine knock" or detonation, also has a reluctance to burn properly at low engine speeds because of the lower compression chamber pressures in todays low compression motors.

The higher a fuels octane number the greater it's resistance to pre-ignition it has. Diesel fuel has an octane number over 600 but would not even run in a Spyder as you all know. Unfortunately that higher octane of 93 fuel can also make the flame front spread too slowly in low compression motors causing these types of problems. Especially, at lower engine speeds when compression chamber pressures are at there lowest due to reduced volumetric efficiency of the motors at these engine speeds.

I did this test this last weekend to finally be sure once and for all that indeed it was running worse on the higher flash point 93, and to tell you the truth it really does not run as well at all.

________________________________

[Calif-spyder]

I have it on good authority that the factory system DOES NOT have knock detection.;) I also checked the parts book and no knock sensor that I could find.
I was going to suggest someone look to see if there is a knock sensor part number. I am VERY, VERY disappointed that BRP doesn't have knock protection, for as much as we are paying for these bikes and the technology they did put into it I think they dropped the ball big time.

since the spyders don't have knock protection I will put higher octane fuel in my bike.
Mark

[Calif-spyder]

when I get my spyder I will take it to the race track and run the 1/4 mile with both 87 and 91 octane, I will also look for driveability on the way to the track
Mark

[spyryder]

My thoughts are that 87 octane is recommended in large part to meet emission requirements. Because it burns faster, combustion would be more complete by the end of the power stroke, compared to higher octanes, lowering hydrocarbon production. Especially at the lower rpm's and throttle positions that they are tested at. As a manufacturer, BRP couldn't recommend actions that would violate emission standards. (My 04 Hemi pickup (that required a minimum of 89 octane at 10:1 compression) had a second set of spark plugs in each cylinder that functioned only at idle to ensure a more complete burn to meet emissive req's.) Higher AFR's and lower octane ratings may be how BRP manages the regulations...
Where did you hear that about the HEMI??? I've got an '05 300C HEMI which I've owned since new and I assure you that all 16 of those plugs are firing....except when the multi-displacement system (which your truck doesn't have btw) cuts out 4 of the cylinders.:dontknow:

[Spydyr]

Now now - let's not get personal here and start attacking.

Everyone is welcome to their opinion. Some opinions are based on facts, and some on fiction - but they are each persons opinion.

Rather than waste time attacking out here, if you really want to learn about octane - take 30 minutes and do some reading out here on the net.

You will find that you are correct when you say "I wouldn't add it to a vehicle that I didn't think would benefit from it either...."

Some vehicles certainly can benefit from running premium, the Spyder just isn't one of them - according to the people that designed it.

There is plenty of scientific data available on the internet that proves higher octane can not improve power or MPG unless used in an engine that specifically requires it. The Spyder doesn't (pg 22 of owners manual).

Those engines that do require it don't get more power or mpg from the fuel or the higher octane - they simply require the higher octane in order to run smoothly without knocking.

Other engines may have anti-knock systems in place to keep them running smoothly. It's simply two different solutions to the same problem in order to keep the engine running smooth. High compression engines, turbo and super charged engines may very well require the higher octane to solve the knocking problem. The Spyder engine doesn't fall into those catagories.

The error in this whole arguement is that many incorrectly think that higher octane gas has more useable power in it - it doesn't. Basic physics will tell you that you cannot get more power from something than it contains, and 87 and 91 octane gasses have identical amounts of power in them.

If you have firm scientific data (dyno and mpg readings taken in a controlled environment with calibrated equipment) that shows the Spyder to get better MPG or have more power when running premium gas, I'm sure the engineers at BRP would appreciate you sharing this data.

Seat of the pants dyno or gas-pump mpg readings without consistent riding done in a controlled environment are just not accurate enough to be taken as proof.
In the factory service manual BRP doesn't recommend 87 octane, they recommend, " a MINIMUM of 87 octane." Everyone is going to interperet it differently but I take that to mean this is the very minimum you should try to get by with, not the best thing you can use! I also believe that premium and high octane are two different things and I just can't help but think that a 10.7:1 compression engine spinning at 10,000 RPM, wouln't benefit from a higher octane or a premium fuel.

[Spydyr]

My thoughts are that 87 octane is recommended in large part to meet emission requirements. Because it burns faster, combustion would be more complete by the end of the power stroke, compared to higher octanes, lowering hydrocarbon production. Especially at the lower rpm's and throttle positions that they are tested at. As a manufacturer, BRP couldn't recommend actions that would violate emission standards. (My 04 Hemi pickup (that required a minimum of 89 octane at 10:1 compression) had a second set of spark plugs in each cylinder that functioned only at idle to ensure a more complete burn to meet emissive req's.) Higher AFR's and lower octane ratings may be how BRP manages the regulations...
BRP doesn't recommend 87 octane, they recommend a MINIMUM of 87 octane!

[boogllasti]

My Nissan has had the double plug setup for years - and they fire all the time - and it runs on 87 as recommended by Nissan.

While I'll be installing my Veypor vr2 this weekend so I can test 1/4 mile, hp, etc. - I'm not going to bother trying premium gas again. I tried it and had the exact same results that Magic Man did.

To measure and noticable difference in HP or MPG it would take a consistent environment, accurate riding patterns and good measuring devices.

Does anyone know if the high-compression 135hp version of this Rotax requires premium?

[Spydyr]

"Again, as I've said in a previous post, if the Spyder has a knock control system, it would make corrections long before you heard any knocking. Since we have no access to the ECM as end users or even at the dealer level for this issue, I haven't learned if it does or not. Because we don't hear about knocking issues, and the fact that BRP invested a lot of effort in other advanced systems, I'm assuming that it does. If that is the case, and higher octane fuel prevents the detonation in the first place, I end up with more power, period."


Two different ways to solve the knocking problem : Anti-knock system or higher octane.

Assuming you are correct that the Spyder uses the first solution - the problem is already solved by the knock-control system. Why would you need to solve the problem again with higher octane?

Maybe you have something wrong with your Spyder if you're having such knocking issues. I would have your dealer check things out - maybe your knock-control isn't working properly?

I've not heard of a single case of engine knock on the Spyder, but there's always a first for everything. Perhaps your dealer can figure out the problem at your 6,000 checkup.
A knock sensor doesn't solve the problem, it just relieves the symptoms. It prompts the computer to retard timing which reduces knock but at the same time reduces power!

[Spydyr]

I think you're missing the point...

A knock-control system retards ignition timing to mitigate or eliminate knock. Retarding ignition timing (without changing other engine parameters) has the side-effect of reducing engine power output. *If* the Spyder's engine control system incorporates a knock sensor which must continually retard ignition timing to prevent knock while using the min recommended 87 octane fuel, it stands to reason reducing or eliminating the knock by increasing the fuel's octane negates the need to retard ignition timing in the first place. In this case, switching from 87 octane to 91 octane doesn't result isn't more engine power being produced, per se, but it will eliminate the artificial reduction of produced engine power imposed by the engine control system when it retards ignition timing to prevent knock.

This entire discussion is speculative until we ascertain whether the Spyder incorporates a knock sensor. That being said, it seems to me BRP would not have published a minimum octane in the Operator's Guide if the Spyder's engine control system incorporates a knock sensor. Theoretically, the knock sensor would compensate for lower octane fuels by simply further retarding the timing. Additionally, for a vehicle marketed and sold in large part based on its performance, one wonders why BRP fails to mention the potential power and economy gains available by simply using higher octane fuel -- especially considering the Spyder's lackluster fuel mileage.

Regards,

Mark
I know I maybe interpereting it wrong but I'm glad to see that you noticed MINIMUM octane rating too.

[AMTJIM]

I "borrowed" a set of water injectors from a Merlin engine and run 100 LL fuel that passes through a magnetic IR filter. Each cylinder exhaust port is routed through a "Y" collector check valve with half the exhaust exiting normally, while the other half runs through a carbon scrubbing hepa filter and cryogenic chamber then directly to the airbox. The rear pulley has been removed and replaced with a speed tensioning pulley with a 75 mph break-out that has a sin-wave inhibitor signal to allow for speeds in excess of 175 mph.

[boogllasti]

Make sure you add a mixture of high S-value phenylhydrobenzamine and 5% reminative tetryliodohexamine, other wise you may crack a girdlespring .

[AMTJIM]

Maybe, but you have to go through NASA training school first. I will let you borrow the stratosphere suit, but you have to bring your own diapers.

[SpyderMark]

My thoughts are that 87 octane is recommended in large part to meet emission requirements. Because it burns faster, combustion would be more complete by the end of the power stroke, compared to higher octanes, lowering hydrocarbon production.

I would argue this to be true for an engine without a knock sensor -- an engine incapable of modifying ignition timing to compensate for octane.

*IF* the Spyder's engine control system does not use a knock sensor, and its ignition timing is optimized for 87 octane, using a higher octane would result in an incomplete combustion event and higher hydrocarbon emissions as you noted.

If, on the other hand, the Spyder *DOES* incorporate a knock sensor, the engine control system would advance timing when switching from lower octane to higher octane fuels allowing more time for the combustion event. In this case, there shouldn't be much difference in hydrocarbon emissions.

An incomplete combustion event results in more than just increased hydrocarbon emissions including:


Lower economy (because you exhaust unburned fuel)
Lower power (unburned fuel exhausted wasn't used to make power)
Higher combustion chamber deposits (I'm sure as an A&P you've cleaned your share of dirty plugs )
I'm sure there are more, but I've only had one cup of coffee so far...

Regards,

Mark

[Calif-spyder]

this would have been a great question to have asked Sunday during the live chat.
Mark

[SpyderMark]

The motorcycle systems that I'm familiar with don't have the ability to advance ignition timing to optimize for fuel or other conditions. Only the ability to retard timing (to a point) when knock is detected. A temporary offset to the main ignition tables in the ECM.....

We're talking around each other here. I'm not saying the system would advance the ignition timing beyond the optimized setting. But if the system retarded the timing on account of 87 octane fuel, and the rider subsequently introduces a higher octane fuel, the system would then "advance" the timing back to its original, optimized setting.

Here's what I should have said, "If, on the other hand, the Spyder *DOES* incorporate a knock sensor, the engine control system would advance timing when switching from lower octane to higher octane fuels allowing more time for the combustion event. In this case, there shouldn't be much difference in hydrocarbon emissions."

I only mentioned this in response to your suggestion higher octane fuels result in higher hydrocarbon emissions. I suggest that isn't necessarily the case for an ignition system optimized to burn high-octane fuel. The timing of such a system would be tuned to account for the longer burn time of high octane fuel. I would think only a system with static timing -- a system not able to retard timing -- would exhaust unburned fuel, and only if the rider were attempting to burn high-octane fuel (slower burn rate) in such a system optimized for 87 octane (higher burn rate).

Perhaps if I stated my position a little differently...

I've *never* heard of a vehicle manufacturer optimizing the engine to burn high octane fuel, then recommending a minimum octane they know will activate a knock sensor which will retard the timing and reduce engine performance. Seems kinda silly to me. :dontknow:

The vehicles I've seen that use knock sensor technology *AND* can use high-octane fuel ususally state something to the effect that 91 octane is recommended, but lower octane fuels may be used with a subsequent loss in performance. There is no such statement in the Spyder Operator's Guide.

Regards,

Mark

[boogllasti]

Again, very well said Mark.

I have it on good authority that unless you have radical temp or altitude concerns, the rotax in the Spyder isn't high compression enough to require the higher octane gas - and running it in most cases will actually cause performance and MPG to DROP.

What Mark has said is right on target. Sure, the manual says MINIMUM - which means the spyder can run it just fine. I'm positive if the Spyder ran better or required higher octane - the folks at BRP would have stated so in the manual.

[DragonSpyder]

I have ran every octane available. I switch every time I fill up hoping to feel a difference. I can't say I have noticed a difference in performance. Unless someone gets one on a dyno or to a strip to test I can't see paying the extra money from this point forward.

[spyryder]

Here's a little copy 'n paste from an other forum:

with regards to a dyno, if we could figure out how to mount a spyder on the dyno, we would have numbers. at this point we are basing our info on the extensive development we've done on the aprilias. i'm sure the 106 h.p. figure is a crank number which would put the rear wheel power in the low-mid 90's. our figures are a conservative estimate based on the stage one aprilias engines we've built. the same heads, cams, pistons & fueling on an aprilia rsv-r makes over 150 r.w.h.p..

also, the factory system does not have knock detection but with our modified spark curves we have no problem running 91 oct fuel with the higher compression.

Any guesses as to who wrote that? :D

[SpyderMark]

I think it's me not explaining myself well...

I'm trying to say that it IS optimized for 87 octane, but maybe 87 isn't always the optimum fuel. That's when the knock control would operate, taking timing away under high load conditions. As the condition subsides timing is returned to it's original settings.

Ahhhh, I see what you're saying. *If* that's the case, then theoretically the computer wouldn't retard timing -- or retard it as much -- if you use higher octane. But that means you would only realize the increased performance from the higher octane during those times when the knock sensor is activated -- the rest of the time you're simply wasting gas. ;)

I really like these types of discussions because I enjoy digging into the details. The good thing is we can all learn a lot by sharing our knowledge. The bad thing is this discussion is all still speculative until we know whether the Spyder uses a knock sensor, and if the system is optimized for 87 octane fuel.

Regards,

Mark

[spyryder]

Ahhhh, I see what you're saying. *If* that's the case, then theoretically the computer wouldn't retard timing -- or retard it as much -- if you use higher octane. But that means you would only realize the increased performance from the higher octane during those times when the knock sensor is activated -- the rest of the time you're simply wasting gas. ;)

I really like these types of discussions because I enjoy digging into the details. The good thing is we can all learn a lot by sharing our knowledge. The bad thing is this discussion is all still speculative until we know whether the Spyder uses a knock sensor, and if the system is optimized for 87 octane fuel.

Regards,

Mark
Read Post #65:banghead:

[SpyderMark]

Read Post #65:banghead:

I understand you believe the Spyder does not incorporate a knock sensor (I suspect you are right), but you must understand there are just too many "Internet experts" out there to take another poster's word on technical details. If you have a source that may be independently verified please share it with all of us.

Regards,

Mark

[AMTJIM]

DIE THREAD....DIIIEEEEEEE

[SpyderMark]

DIE THREAD....DIIIEEEEEEE

The continuing tale of the undead thread!

[spyryder]

I understand you believe the Spyder does not incorporate a knock sensor (I suspect you are right), but you must understand there are just too many "Internet experts" out there to take another poster's word on technical details. If you have a source that may be independently verified please share it with all of us.

Regards,

Mark
Do the initials "Ken Zeller" (Evoluzione) sound familiar? You've taken his word as fact regarding some other issues.;)

[spyryder]

All that tells me is that the Aprillia doesn't have knock detection....

And more food for thought...Sounds like it's only mounting the Spyder on the dyno that's an issue....not the VSS....Hmmmm....

:banghead: Here's the whole thread then! He's talking about the Spyder. Please read post #6.

http://www.spydertalk.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=3122&hl=knock+detection

[NancysToy]

Once upon a time, a wicked scientist created an indestructable thread, that was endless, and could never be destroyed...
-Scotty

[spyderrider44]

Once upon a time, a wicked scientist created an indestructable thread, that was endless, and could never be destroyed...
-Scotty
:yikes: :clap::mad:

[spyryder]

bump.....welcome:opps::D

[bjt]

YouTube- Broadcast Yourself.

[ataDude]

...deleted song...


Bahawaaaaaaaaa. :yikes: :D :2excited: :thumbup:

[jeuchler]

Wait...so you're saying that gasoline is available in different "o c t a n e s ?"

Gee, I wonder if switching to a premium gas will boost performance. Or maybe mileage. We should do some long term tests under controlled conditions. And maybe we should do a dyno test. Unless we can't.

(OK, n o w is this the longest thread we've posted to? It sure seems reminiscent in length to the old "How many PE Spyders does it take to screw in a lightbulb?" threads...)

Man, HDX, you weren't kidding when you told me about the "Octane Wars!" :joke:

[AMTJIM]

You could probably visit any website on the internet and there's at least 1 octane thread and a thread about an airplane on a conveyor belt. They all read exactly the same and have similar outcomes. If you find yourself in an eviroment where one or more of the engines you run needs the higher octane to operate correctly...use it, if it's running fine, don't waste your money. My cars and motorcycles didn't need it in seattle, but the Focus and TL1000R had to have it in the El Paso desert. The Caliber and Odessy don't need it, but the SV1000S did and so does the Spyder. I've never needed it in a V-8 or V-6.

[SpyderMark]

You could probably visit any website on the internet and there's at least 1 octane thread and a thread about an airplane on a conveyor belt. They all read exactly the same and have similar outcomes. If you find yourself in an eviroment where one or more of the engines you run needs the higher octane to operate correctly...use it, if it's running fine, don't waste your money.

Well why didn't you just tell us when the discussion started; you coulda saved us all a bunch of time!

Of course, even tho you knew the outcome, I see you read to the end.;)

Just goes to show, what else would we be doing if we weren't here reading undead threads?

Regards,

Mark

[BeRight]

Gas octane and oil threads will never die - - have continued to live on motorcycle and car forums so why not Spyder forums.

Dummy me uses lowest octane that is recommended by manufacturer and oil that meets manufacturers specs. My approach is not recommended for anyone because it would mean the end of the best and longest threads of all time.:):)

[AMTJIM]

What I really want to know is...if you have an airplane on a conveyor belt that can instantly match the rotational tire speed of the airplane...can the airplane take off?

[bjt]

What I really want to know is...if you have an airplane on a conveyor belt that can instantly match the rotational tire speed of the airplane...can the airplane take off?

Yes, unless the wheels break from the tires rotating so fast. :D Then airplane go boom boom.

[Greg H.]

When I took delivery of my Spyder on Saturday, the dealer recommended burning only Premium. That's all I need to hear. :thumbup:

[NancysToy]

When I took delivery of my Spyder on Saturday, the dealer recommended burning only Premium. That's all I need to hear. :thumbup:
Beware the dealer that tells you something different than the BRP manual. Not necessarily a bad thing, but then again... I would question this guy unmercifully.
-Scotty

[jeuchler]

Beware the dealer that tells you something different than the BRP manual. Not necessarily a bad thing, but then again... I would question this guy unmercifully.
-Scotty

Hey, Scotty, what octane fuel do you use in that tricycle in your avatar?!

[SpyderMark]

Hey, Scotty, what octane fuel do you use in that tricycle in your avatar?!

Would that be octane, or methane? Did I just hear a barking spyder? :opps:

Regards,

Mark

[NancysToy]

Hey, Scotty, what octane fuel do you use in that tricycle in your avatar?!
Strictly regular (with fuel stabilizer) in this crate motor. The old hotrod Briggs required premium, though. Milled head and thin head gasket on that one. No knock sensor here. :D
-Scotty

[NancysToy]

Looks like you'd sense it if it were knockin'......
Not as much as when I had the old-fashioned engine, with the open spark plug connector. LOL
-Scotty

[Questions]

I believe that the minimum octane is going to perform the best because thats what the ecm was calibrated for. 93 octane takes for energy to burn, in other words, it would need the timing advanced to take advantage of the better fuel and show gains.

[Spyderman62]

Ok, I'm like adding my 2 cents worth for to debate, but unless I missed a post in there ( come on folks 4 pages, alright already) anyhow.....The science proves the need or lack of it and supporting technical info shows that in a controlled enviorment, an engine that does not require a slower burn does not benefit from a slower burning fuel. That argument aside for a minute, lets also remember that all states are different in the winter/summer blends, and the amount ( screw the label on the pump ) anyway the amount of ethanol or other gas oxygenating crap they put in there, also artificially rasies the chemical cetane ( correct wording?) and also affects the Rom number. We have a mid grade fual in the Illinois, that when mixed at certain stations is cheaper due to the corm alchohol and additives, that allows the octane rating to be higher, and the btu level to be lower. Guess what, lower BTU, less power. In you grandads car who cares, in my SPyder at a critical stoplight drag against a felow hotrod, or God for Bid, on a cold day of riding, (yeah we ride in 15 degree weather) it then makes a bif freekin difference. I personally, avoid as much grain alcohol or ethanol as possible. I will say this, I ride from full to about a quarter indicated (2 bars) put in 4.? gals, have a smile on my face and could care less how much fuel mileage I get - Its the fun factor for me! Otherwise 37-38 is not bad and I am having the time of my life. If I wanted fuel miege, I would have bought a freekin scooter - Ok I feel better, you all may continue the great fuel debate - I always enjoy the banter :)

[Roaddog2]

Cool..... Our old friend the Octane Thread is back! Don't forget kids, now that it's colddddd out, higher octane ratings are better for you and your Spyder...so cheap I squeak usin 87 and luvin it nojoke

[Roaddog2]

That's probably why all your fluids pour out that thing every chance they get.......just sayin.....
Yepper you :cus: just sayin :doorag:

[Roaddog2]

Not going to ask how you grounded it to shut it down....
Been there done that wiped out once on my Rupp mini bike hand went under tank throttle wide open hand stuck between tank spark plug the burn did not hurt at all compared to the shock treatment I got :2thumbs:

[Roaddog2]

Cam2 would solve all your woes.......:2thumbs:
It did with my 4 plug stroker that and aviation fuel the glide yes but :spyder:I see no difference :doorag:

[mc2276]

I use regular. I put premium in once, engine just sounded like it was running way to rich. I have not put anything but regular in it since. I have added a fuel injector cleaner once and some dry gas (did not like the feel after i filled up at one station, but it ran better after). I haven't had any problems with using regular, and I was riding to work when we had 15 degrees (windchill) here (wonder how cold that was while riding?).

[Roaddog2]

High voltage therapy at an early age, huh? Now the picture is getting clearer....:yikes: I thought I told you about that know go put your tongue on a Flagpole for me :thumbup:

[Zerocool]

so cheap I squeak usin 87 and luvin it nojoke

So, I'll chime in too.

Just dumped a can of Seafoam into the tank on Saturday, ran :spyder: to operating temp... no sputter, no coughing, no hesitation, and the Hindle growls like a monster... so, the question is, how bad does our gas s--k here in CT???

Geez!

[bone crusher]

Anything higher than 87 octane is a total waste of money. It will not run 'better' in the Spyder, nor will you get better MPG. It may run 'okay', but many have found it runs worse (including myself).

Only an engine that specifically requires the higher octane will benefit from running it. Period.

Another thing to consider is your 'higher octane' fuel is almost always older - as in not as fresh - as the lower octane. It sits much longer without being turned over because it doesn't sell as much - thus it picks up moisture and loses octane - thus becomes stale.

If you want the rotax to perk up - expensive gas isn't the way.

Add Ken's O2 mod, an aftermarket exhaust, Race Airflow setup and fuel pressure mod - it WILL awaken the beast that has been sleeping in your Spyder!


:agree:
Studies on this over and over again...better octane DOESN'T make your bike run better...the bike is made for 87 octane...that's all you need!

[bone crusher]

try reading this for some good info:

http://www.mastermuffler.net/10th-biggest-automotive-myths.html

This is from the ftc...

http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/consumer/autos/aut12.shtm


Higher octane gas ain't worth it!!!!!

[jetskier]

I run nothing but Shell V-Power at 99 RON octane here in the UK. This is a highly filtered fuel designed with the Ferrari F1 team and is available at pump. It's about 10% more expensive than regular. Contrary to some of the BS written in this thread a higher octane helps keep engine temps down. Not a problem here in the UK at the moment though! :yikes:

[BajaRon]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octane_rating

Good reading. These statements in the article were interesting in regards to previous posts.

A common misconception is that power output or fuel mileage can be improved by burning higher octane fuel than a particular engine was designed for.

The detergents in the fuel are the same, Premium does not "burn cleaner."

[LDFIREWORKS]

i run high test in all my bikes, i think it runs cleaner, but iam not really sure it is just a habit i guess:2thumbs:

[BajaRon]

try reading this for some good info:

http://www.mastermuffler.net/10th-biggest-automotive-myths.html



So much for that... I agree with 9 out of 10 of the "Facts" on this page but I disagree with the 1st one.

Fact: Brake Dust never causes squeaks.

[BajaRon]

As far as I know, we still aren't certain if the Spyder ECU utilizes any form of knock control.

And this is the question that we should be asking (answering) here. Facts are facts as far as octane, what it does and does not do. Wives tales, seat-of-the-pants, long practiced habbits and your best buddies opinions are not of much practical use (though they seem to be quite popular).

However, the unknown variable that I think we can all agree on (can't we all just get along?) is whether or not our Spyders have the ablility to sense knock, adjust timing, etc., for octane value, and thus take advantage of Premium fuel.

From what I understand it takes at least a few (if not several) miles for the computer to sort all of this out completely. So just switching from regular to premium for 1 tank may indeed cause a reduction in performance because the system may need more time to make 100% of the necessary changes.

I have tried premium fuel and did not notice any improvement in cold starts, backfiring, throttle response, fuel mileage or any other function. I didn't see any reduction in any of these areas either. But I do not think this is necessarily a conclusive finding.

So, I'd like to know, does the Spyder have the capability to utilze the potential of Premium fuel or not? If it does I will certainly take another shot at Premium fuel for a longer period of time before I make a final call on this one.

[spyryder]

The Spyder does NOT have a knock sensor.....this has been discussed previously.:spyder:

[ataDude]

The Spyder does NOT have a knock sensor.....this has been discussed previously.:spyder:

I agree... have been through the shop manual in detail and there is no mention of one anywhere.

.

[spyryder]

I agree... have been through the shop manual in detail and there is no mention of one anywhere.

.

No mention of one in the BRP parts list either.

[bone crusher]

try reading this for some good info:

http://www.mastermuffler.net/10th-biggest-automotive-myths.html

This is from the ftc...

http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/consumer/autos/aut12.shtm


Higher octane gas ain't worth it!!!!!


Never quoted myself before....hmmmm....this is a simple discussion...check the facts...higher octane has no positive effect...if the bike needed 93, it'd be figured for it...

[BajaRon]

The Spyder does NOT have a knock sensor.....this has been discussed previously.:spyder:

Oops! Must have missed that one...My bad!

Well, that puts the stake in the heart on this one for me then. Maybe Nitrogen in my tires will make me go faster!

[ataDude]

Yes, it's been discussed, and no, it doesn't have a stand alone knock sensor. But as we have no end user or dealer access to the actual tables in the ECU, we don't know for certain that there isn't a knock sensing system in the ignition circuitry similar to what Harley has been using since 2002. I find it hard to believe that for all the advanced electronics on the Spyder, there is no knock control system being used, unless the ignition timing is severely retarded from the get go. Look at the parameters- the Rotax is almost 11:1 compression, it has to operate from sea level to 10,000 ft elevation or more, from 1500 to 10,00 rpm, from 0 to 100% throttle positions, unloaded or heavily laden, stock exhaust or performance, and I don't recall hearing anyone complain about detonation. Sorry guys, but I don't believe that a fixed ignition map from the factory is that versatile. If ignition timing is really that retarded to cover all those bases, imagine the performance and fuel mileage gains that are being compromised. I have a sneaking suspicion there's more to it than what you think you see(or don't see) on the surface....

Well, that explains 25-30 mpg. :D :yikes:
.

[spyryder]

Yes, it's been discussed, and no, it doesn't have a stand alone knock sensor. But as we have no end user or dealer access to the actual tables in the ECU, we don't know for certain that there isn't a knock sensing system in the ignition circuitry similar to what Harley has been using since 2002. I find it hard to believe that for all the advanced electronics on the Spyder, there is no knock control system being used, unless the ignition timing is severely retarded from the get go. Look at the parameters- the Rotax is almost 11:1 compression, it has to operate from sea level to 10,000 ft elevation or more, from 1500 to 10,00 rpm, from 0 to 100% throttle positions, unloaded or heavily laden, stock exhaust or performance, and I don't recall hearing anyone complain about detonation. Sorry guys, but I don't believe that a fixed ignition map from the factory is that versatile. If ignition timing is really that retarded to cover all those bases, imagine the performance and fuel milage gains that are being compromised. I have a sneaking suspicion there's more to it than what you think you see(or don't see) on the surface....

This is from the manual:

The ECM is programmed with data (ignition mappings) that it uses to provide optimum ignition timing.

It receives signals from a variety of sensors that tell it what the engine is doing and what are the operating conditions. It compares all the data it receives with the ignition mappings and uses it to control ignition spark timing, duration and firing order to ensure optimum engine operation.

The crankshaft position sensor (CPS), the manifold absolute pressure sensor (MAPS) and the throttle position sensor (TPS) are the primary sensors used to control the ignition timing.

Also the AAPTS (Ambient air pressure and temperature sensor) works in conjunction with the MAPS. The AAPTS is used to compare MAPS readings. The ECM uses the comparative results to improve engine operation in high altitude areas.

[bone crusher]

As a side note, at higher altitudes, many states use lower octane, not higher octane....take Colorado, for example...they drop below 87 to 85 or 83...

[LDFIREWORKS]

RUN SUPER HIGHTEST DONT BE CHEEP....................:2thumbs:

[bone crusher]

RUN SUPER HIGHTEST DONT BE CHEEP....................:2thumbs:

Read my post above with facts about doing such (and links)...it is only a waste of money....being cheap has nothing to do with it...it's more like being foolish...nothing shows that running 93 octane when the vehicle requires 87 will do anything worthwhile....these are the facts...

[SpyderDog65]

The book says to use minimum of 81 octane. The tech at the dealer said use 93 octane and the spyder would run better. I tried and I think it ran worse for about a quarter of a tank and then it seems to have leveled out. Didn't start well and sputtered some. I'm probably going back to 81 as the book suggested.

What has been the experence or what is the advise of others? What octane are you using? :dontknow:

Juice

I use Mid-Grade 87 Octane and mine runs just fine if u use mid-grade u get a little of both 81 octane and a little of the 91 octane ive always used mid-grade never get sputtering or missing at all :) Michael


Red Se5,6 Spoke rims,Venom Exhaust by Motad,MonoSeatCover,NMN Juicebox,NMN 8k HiD HeadLights,NMN Tripleplay Taillights,NMN Fender Tips,NMN Extra Brakelight,NMN Carbon Fiber SE5 990 Handlebar Inserts,Kewlmetal Mirror Extensions,Kewlmetal SpiderWeb Side-Panel Radiator Exhaust Insert,Kury ISO Handgrips/Throttleboss,Kury ISO Footpegs(These Pegs SUCK),ProPad Gelseat Cushion.

[BajaRon]

87 octane and 11:1 compression aren't known for playing well together.

I agree. In the normal world our 10.8:1 would not work well with 87 octane. So it does leave a lot to the imagination.

I found this statment on Volvo engines. (Ok, so the Spyder isn't running a Volvo engine. Still, general engine characterists will be similar as long as the parameters are similar.)

"Any normally aspirated engine of up to about 10.8:1 compression ratio can handle 87 octane with knock sensors--as all modern vehicles do including all Volvos."

What's interesting to me is that the compression ratio mentioned here is exactly what our Spyders are running (if the Spec sheet is accurate). Wonder how BRP came to this particular C/R? The same engine in the Aprilia is running 11.8:1 compresson and delivers 139hp.

The Aprilia recommends premium grade fuel but we're talking apples and oranges here.

[Spydyr]

Where are you guys reading that BRP recommends "87 octane" and that it was designed to run on "87 octane". The factory service manual states a "Minimum 87 octane". It doesn't say it's designed to run on 87 octane. It doesn't say that 87 octtane is the best to run. I take that to mean that 87 octane is the lowest you should possibly try to get by with, not the best you can run. My oil dipstick has a minimum level. Does that mean It's a waste of money to fill it to the max mark.

[ataDude]

http://www.funtasticllc.com/FunGoRound.jpg

[bone crusher]

Where are you guys reading that BRP recommends "87 octane" and that it was designed to run on "87 octane". The factory service manual states a "Minimum 87 octane". It doesn't say it's designed to run on 87 octane. It doesn't say that 87 octtane is the best to run. I take that to mean that 87 octane is the lowest you should possibly try to get by with, not the best you can run. My oil dipstick has a minimum level. Does that mean It's a waste of money to fill it to the max mark.

Your analogy does nothing to help your statement, it just proves the other side....your oil dipstick is a level of minimum oil for engine function...if you run it on minimum, you are just as good as if you run it on the max line...just be careful it doesn't go below the minimum line...this is the same with octane...you only NEED 87 octane to run your vehicle...all this crud about higher octane gas and better performance has not been proven...read the links I posted earlier in this thread...there is truly no discussion regarding this topic...put in higher octane, waste your money...it does NOTHING to help your bike run better...

[bone crusher]

http://www.funtasticllc.com/FunGoRound.jpg


too funny...:banghead:

[jetskier]

With all said it's not possible to buy 87RON in the UK. Minimum is 95 but 98 is the norm and both 99 and 102 are available at pump at a slight premium and are sold as high performance cleaner burning fuels for sports cars and privateer racers. Like I said before higher RON might not give you better performance but they help reduce engine temps, friction and are cleaner filtered.

[bjt]

With all said it's not possible to buy 87RON in the UK. Minimum is 95 but 98 is the norm and both 99 and 102 are available at pump at a slight premium and are sold as high performance cleaner burning fuels for sports cars and privateer racers. Like I said before higher RON might not give you better performance but they help reduce engine temps, friction and are cleaner filtered.

Doesn't the UK calculate octane differently than the US? May be that 95 UK is comparable to 87 US. In Michigan, our premium gasoline is only 91 octane, midgrade is 89 and 87 is regular. Over 100, like 105 or so, is considered racing or airplane fuel and is not sold at the average gas station.

EDIT: Just looked it up and Europe uses the RON (research octane number) number only. The US and Canada uses the average of the RON and the MON (motor octane number), (R+M)/2.

[Spydyr]

Your analogy does nothing to help your statement, it just proves the other side....your oil dipstick is a level of minimum oil for engine function...if you run it on minimum, you are just as good as if you run it on the max line...just be careful it doesn't go below the minimum line...this is the same with octane...you only NEED 87 octane to run your vehicle...all this crud about higher octane gas and better performance has not been proven...read the links I posted earlier in this thread...there is truly no discussion regarding this topic...put in higher octane, waste your money...it does NOTHING to help your bike run better...

I wasn't making a statement I was asking a question! Am I wasting my money putting more oil in if the spyder is designed to run at the minimum level?
If "higher octane gas and better performance has not been proven", how can you say ".it does NOTHING to help your bike run better"?
No sides here. I've heard interesting comments both ways. Another question. Is the only difference between regular and premium the octane rating? I think I should start a new thread with that one.

[spyryder]

P. 567 of the service manual recommends "REGULAR UNLEADED". Do people set valves to different clearances from what's "recommended"? :dontknow::popcorn:......where's that dead horse thingy? :D

[spyryder]

Where are you guys reading that BRP recommends "87 octane" and that it was designed to run on "87 octane". The factory service manual states a "Minimum 87 octane". It doesn't say it's designed to run on 87 octane. It doesn't say that 87 octtane is the best to run. I take that to mean that 87 octane is the lowest you should possibly try to get by with, not the best you can run. My oil dipstick has a minimum level. Does that mean It's a waste of money to fill it to the max mark.

The service manual AND the operators manual clearly state "regular unleaded".:read:

[Spydyr]

P. 567 of the service manual recommends "REGULAR UNLEADED". Do people set valves to different clearances from what's "recommended"? :dontknow::popcorn:......where's that dead horse thingy? :D
My 2008 shop manual, BRP part#219 100 283 only has 479 pages but on page 473 it says "octane 87 or higher".

[bone crusher]

try reading this for some good info:

http://www.mastermuffler.net/10th-biggest-automotive-myths.html

This is from the ftc...

http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/consumer/autos/aut12.shtm


Higher octane gas ain't worth it!!!!!


I'm posting for a third time for those who don't want to read! This is not opinion...there is NOTHING that states that a vehicle requiring 87 octane works better with higher octane...period...

[spyryder]

My 2008 shop manual, BRP part#219 100 283 only has 479 pages but on page 473 it says "octane 87 or higher".
Well then look in your operators manual under specifications.....look at fuel type, should be on P. 104:f_spider:

[spyryder]

My 2008 shop manual, BRP part#219 100 283 only has 479 pages but on page 473 it says "octane 87 or higher".

Yikes!!! P.473 on mine shows how to adjust front suspension preload. :f_spider:

[northramp]

Can you can put Avgas 100 LL (low Lead) in it? Back in the day lead was used as an anti knock for your valves. would that help, harm or do nothing to the Rotax?

[ataDude]

Here's another:
http://www.mcawilliams.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/merry-go-round.jpg

[Spydyr]

The service manual AND the operators manual clearly state "regular unleaded".:read:
The factory shop manual also says "87 or higher", not maximum 87, or 87 or lower. I couldn't find regular unleaded in the owners manual, only "unleaded gasoline Minimum Octane Rating 87". I'm trying to find out where people are reading, "designed for 87 octane" or "higher octane doesn't benefit the spyder", other than on forums. Bone Crusher pointed that none of this has been proven, so after 5 pages of chatter, I'm with HDXBones, we don't know anymore than when we started.

[northramp]

good point HDX didn t think of that
thx
Northramp:doorag:

[Spydyr]

Well then look in your operators manual under specifications.....look at fuel type, should be on P. 104:f_spider:
My page 104 of the owners manual is vehicle identification but I see it on 108. Looks like the same page as in the shop manual.

[NancysToy]

Here's another:
http://www.mcawilliams.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/merry-go-round.jpg
Keep 'em coming Atadude. I'm not getting on, either.
-Scotty http://forum.thestompbox.net/images/smilies/1a_snow.gif

[bone crusher]

Master Muffler and the FTC aren't on my short list of authoritative performance guru's......


that's only two sources....there are dozens of others...not much on the other side of the argument...

Enough said for me...I'm done on this thread...I'd rather waste my money on other things as opposed to throwing it in my gas tank...

:banghead:

[retread]

Just my 2 cents, if my Spyder gets what it needs to do what I want on 87 octane, I've got plenty of other stuff to spend my money on for it besides gas.

john

[BajaRon]

Beating a Dead Horse!


Dakota Indian tribal wisdom says; "When you discover you are riding a dead horse, the best strategy is to dismount.

However, many on this forum have other strategies for dealing with dead horse issues, including the following:

1. Buying a stronger whip.
2. Changing riders.
3. Say things like, "This is the way we have always ridden this horse."
4. Appointing a committee to study the horse.
5. Arranging to visit other sites to see how they ride their Dead Horses.
6. Increase Dead Horse riding standards.
7. Appointing someone to revive the Dead Horse.
8. Creating a training session to increase Dead Horse riding ability.
9. Comparing their Dead Horse to someone elses.
10. Using Smoke and Mirrors to make it appear that their horse is not dead.
11. Outsourcing the Dead Horse riding duties.
12. Harnessing several Dead Horses together to increase performance.
13. Declaring that "No horse is too dead to be beat just one more time."
14. Increasing nutrient content in the feed to improve Dead Horse performance.
15. Do a Cost Analysis to find ways to make Dead Horse riding more efficient.
16. Recommend accessories to make the Dead Horse run faster.
17. Declare a Dead Horse "better, faster and cheaper" than a live one.
18. Form a Dead Horse support group.
19. Ridicule anyone who points out that the horse is (in fact) Dead.
20. Give Dead Horse gift cards for special occasions.
21. Make up and declare Dead Horse statistics that have no basis in fact hoping that if repeated enough times people will believe them.

[Roaddog2]

I don't think the horse is really dead yet, matter of fact it could probably withstand continued beatings.....:doorag:HDX is that you with the bat I'm tellin Pat:ani29: