Originally Posted by
Jetfixer
That's my point exactly. I am completely against having to have ethanol added to our fuels. I don't feel there is enough difference in engine performance to justify all the drawbacks of having ethanol in the fuel. And it's scientific fact that ethanol has less BTU's, which means in order to get the same engine performance from the fuel, you must burn more of it. Hence the lower MPG's. Since I ride my Spyder as a commuter-mobile and don't race it. I feel that I'm safe using the 89 non-ethanol as long as I don't lug the engine in too low of a gear.