Rykers Require 87 Octane - Not 92!

[Aufgeblassen47]

There seems to be some confusion about which octane is really needed for the Ryker (maybe it is just ME that is confused).

Ryker Manual page 37 states:

"Use regular unleaded gasoline with a minimum AKI (RON+MON)/2 octane rating of 87, or a RON octane rating of 92. The USA uses the (RON+MON)/2 number whilst Europe (and others) use the RON rating. This means a Ryker will run perfectly fine on 87 all day long.

All higher octane/way more expensive fuel will do, is reduce or eliminate any "pinging" during hard acceleration. Nothing more. It will NOT increase MPG, no will it give you more HP. Plus, unnecessary higher octane pollutes more.

Literally EVERY Ryker owner who has never tried 87, should! They very well could be pleasantly surprised!

In the Manual, where it says "For optimal performance use.... 91 octane", they are only talking about possible engine pinging.

 

[Hypurone]

In the Manual, where it says "For optimal performance use.... 91 octane", they are only talking about possible engine pinging.

Well, technically yes but in reality, using the higher octane allows the ECM to use a different timing map (more advancement) without detonation. Which will in fact give better performance by accessing all available power the engine has at any given load....

 

[BLUEKNIGHT911]

Well, technically yes but in reality, using the higher octane allows the ECM to use a different timing map (more advancement) without detonation. Which will in fact give better performance by accessing all available power the engine has at any given load....

This is true, but how much performance does that mean ???? ….. I have never seen any Dyno numbers for any Spyder engine , stock or modified.... Any other measurement of performance is pure speculation and will vary Hughly …. depending on who's driving, type of surface, weather conditions etc. etc. ….. for my 2014 RT paying .50 to .60 cents more per Gal ( in Vt. ) … for less than 1% improvement ( a guess ) just isn't worth it to me …… Mike hyea:

 

[oregoncoast]

Some years ago there were several studies on using higher octane. Not being sure what I was reading I was using 91, until I realized it only required 87 on re-reading the manual. The studies basically said using higher octane than required was a waste of money. The Ryker manual is poorly written and vague about several things. I am frugal but not cheap, spending more on gas than I need to is just a waste of money for myself.
And of course each person can make there own decision on what to use. On one trip I got got exceptional mpg, but it was a warm day and I was at a t study 40 mph. I think weather and humidity and winter vs summer gas has a big impact on mpg and not octane. When someone says "optimal" without explaining what it means I tend to ignore it.

 

[Aufgeblassen47]

Well, technically yes but in reality, using the higher octane allows the ECM to use a different timing map (more advancement) without detonation. Which will in fact give better performance by accessing all available power the engine has at any given load....

MAINLY the ECM adjusts the spark plug timing accordingly. This does not affect HP or MPG. The BTUs/lb. of fuel is identical, all grade of gasoline. The spark plug timing also is adjusted according for varying elevations (& other conditions).

When I went from PREMIUM (required!) to REGULAR in my Slingshot, I experienced NO decrease in MPG whatsoever, and no noticeable power decrease.

The bottom line is, if you don't have significant pinging under HARD acceleration with 87 octane, even HP will have zero increase going higher octane.

BTW: We had an '81 Ford Fairmont 4 cylinder. It called for regular gas. It (back in the uncertain oil supply & sporadic oil shortage days) had some "lean burn" system to squeeze miles out of every drop of fuel. Under HARD acceleration, it pinged horrifically! Even light acceleration it had moderate pinging, and even at steady speed (no acceleration) is still had some. We put 60,000 miles on said car, no engine problems.

For those that think light ping on acceleration is going to "ruin" an engine is being hyperbolic.

 

[Chupaca]

All in all...

What it boils down to is.... you can use 87 and better. There was a time they recommended only high octane and even then folks ran on the lower grade and there were no issues. There will be slight difference as you can see stated above but unless your driving some gas guzzeling SUV the difference in price for running a better fuel is not much....:thumbup:

 

[Aufgeblassen47]

What it boils down to is.... you can use 87 and better. There was a time they recommended only high octane and even then folks ran on the lower grade and there were no issues. There will be slight difference as you can see stated above but unless your driving some gas guzzeling SUV the difference in price for running a better fuel is not much....:thumbup:

True, but..... it still it true that "a penny saved is a penny earned" (like my grandmother who survived the Great Depression always said :lecturef_smilie. Especially when for all practical and all likely purposes, spending more makes literally no difference.

 

[KC61]

I say that running a higher octane than recommended is a waste of money is pure and simple BS. My wifes new VW Tiguan R-Line calls for 87 octane, but the performance and fuel economy advantages can clearly be seen and felt when using 91 octane. I'm sure the Ryker will be the same way. Mine will have premium all the time.

 

[ARtraveler]

I will repeat what I have posted in a couple other threads.

I quit using premium in all my Spyders a couple years back. Alaska gas contains no ethanol. I use 87 octane. I have noticed no difference in performance or mileage. IMO, the computer learns the new gas and the Spyder runs accordingly.

My car (Subaru 2017 Outback) and Vulcan 900 MC also run on the 87. I am also saving 20 cents per gallon in the process. In summer, I would have a $300 per month gasoline bill.

 

[KC61]

The BP's around here sell non ethanol Premium 91 octane, I run that in My Yamaha Stratoliner as well as the VW. Most gas stations in Kansas have a non ethanol option for a little more money.

 

[JS3535]

Well, technically yes but in reality, using the higher octane allows the ECM to use a different timing map (more advancement) without detonation. Which will in fact give better performance by accessing all available power the engine has at any given load....

:agree:

 

[Aufgeblassen47]

The BP's around here sell non ethanol Premium 91 octane, I run that in My Yamaha Stratoliner as well as the VW. Most gas stations in Kansas have a non ethanol option for a little more money.

Here in FL, it is almost always always massively higher in price. The slight increase in MPG of non-ethanol, is simply not worth the added expense.

 

[BajaRon]

The fuel issue, like many others, will rage on regardless of how many opinions are posted. But I will say there can be a good deal of difference between 'Required' and 'Optimal'.

When I graduated high school a 'C' was required. But an 'A' was definitely optimal. That was a long time ago. Things may have changed.

 

[Aufgeblassen47]

The fuel issue, like many others, will rage on regardless of how many opinions are posted. But I will say there can be a good deal of difference between 'Required' and 'Optimal'.

When I graduated high school a 'C' was required. But an 'A' was definitely optimal. That was a long time ago. Things may have changed.

It is probably closer to the 1% someone previously mentioned than the difference between a C and an A.

 

[Hypurone]

This is true, but how much performance does that mean ????

the million dollar question that may never be answered in the Spyder/Ryker arena....

I will repeat what I have posted in a couple other threads.

I quit using premium in all my Spyders a couple years back. Alaska gas contains no ethanol. I use 87 octane. I have noticed no difference in performance or mileage. IMO, the computer learns the new gas and the Spyder runs accordingly.

My car (Subaru 2017 Outback) and Vulcan 900 MC also run on the 87. I am also saving 20 cents per gallon in the process. In summer, I would have a $300 per month gasoline bill.

And what a lot of folks forget is that not everyone has "non-ethanol" fuel available to them. Octane plays an even larger role in the ethanol arena. I had my 2010 Camaro with a CR of 10.7:1 dyno'ed on both regular and premium before adding the supercharger. The folks at the dealer were "doing me a favor" and filled the tank with regular when I bought it! Yikes! The car is designed to run on anything between 87 & 91... There was a 2% difference in HP output between the 2 octanes....

I had the same car dyon'ed after adding a Supercharger with pure gas a friend brought from out of state and with the ethanol crap we have here. The difference in power (due to timing being pulled when on ethanol gas) was 8%!

Now the Spyder or Ryker engines won't have that high of a return but there will most certainly be a difference. If the ECM is pulling timing to "safely run & avoid detonation" there is power reduction. Most folks just aren't sensitive enough to feel it or never run the engine like some of hooligans do....

The wife's 2008 Camry Hybrid runs very subdued on regular. With a simple bump to "Plus" which is 89 here, it runs like a demon and the mileage is 1mpg better...

 

[Aufgeblassen47]

The wife's 2008 Camry Hybrid runs very subdued on regular. With a simple bump to "Plus" which is 89 here, it runs like a demon and the mileage is 1mpg better...

A one (1) tankful comparison is far from accurate. There are many variables, such as temperature, humidity, road conditions, prevailing winds, source of fuel, etc., etc. You would have to do at least 20 tankful of each type & do an average.

But YES! Ethanol contains more energy that pure gasoline. But the difference in price still make it cheaper per mile to use ethanol.

 

[JAS POWER]

If your owners manual says 87 is ok, then run it!

Either the engine doesn't have that high of a compression ratio or the computer can compensate for the lack of octane, either or your fine with the 87!

Why all the fuss over this :dontknow:

 

[Aufgeblassen47]

If your owners manual says 87 is ok, then run it!

Either the engine doesn't have that high of a compression ratio or the computer can compensate for the lack of octane, either or your fine with the 87!

Why all the fuss over this :dontknow:

Because some people are "anal" about stuff. Many years ago I was a regular at a VW TDI (diesel)message board. Folk there were horrified at things I did (or didn't) do with it maintenance wise. Twenty (20) years later, my son in CA uses said car daily, it runs great at 269,000 miles, and almost everything is still factory original! Only major item replaced was A/C compressor.

 

[BajaRon]

It is probably closer to the 1% someone previously mentioned than the difference between a C and an A.

I get between 10-15% better fuel mileage running premium over regular fuel. This was in my 2008 RS. I have not done any comparisons with my Ryker.

 

[Aufgeblassen47]

I get between 10-15% better fuel mileage running premium over regular fuel.

Must have been going more downhill. I was in Greeneville a bunch of times, when I was leased on to Land Air.

BTW: Premium costs considerably MORE than 10-15% more than regular, even if true.