• There were many reasons for the change of the site software, the biggest was security. The age of the old software also meant no server updates for certain programs. There are many benefits to the new software, one of the biggest is the mobile functionality. Ill fix up some stuff in the coming days, we'll also try to get some of the old addons back or the data imported back into the site like the garage. To create a thread or to reply with a post is basically the same as it was in the prior software. The default style of the site is light colored, but i temporarily added a darker colored style, to change you can find a link at the bottom of the site.

Those that have done the cannisterectomy....

While that might be the case for you and your NON-STOCK fuel injection system, a great many of us have experienced increased performance and fuel economy with an octane higher than the 87 MINIMUM specified in the owners manual. To add more fuel to the debate, I was told by a BRP factory tech that the SM & SE Spyders DO have a knock sensing system that would allow 87 to be used, but ignition timing would suffer, reducing performance and MPG's.....:doorag:

And a great many of us have experienced crappy performance and surge with high octane fuel.
Some of us get great milage, some of us get poor milage.
Some of us have canister problems others do not.

I guess what I'm saying is that what works for you will not necessarily work for someone else. Though why that should be, is a mystry to me.

Your factory tech may be right but there's no mention of a knock sensing system in the shop manual, that I've seen.:dontknow:
 
While that might be the case for you and your NON-STOCK fuel injection system, a great many of us have experienced increased performance and fuel economy with an octane higher than the 87 MINIMUM specified in the owners manual. To add more fuel to the debate, I was told by a BRP factory tech that the SM & SE Spyders DO have a knock sensing system that would allow 87 to be used, but ignition timing would suffer, reducing performance and MPG's.....:doorag:

The new RT has the knock sensors too-- and while they recommend a higher octane--- I believe the reps and testers have said it runs just fine on 87. Either way (mechanical retarding or higher octane) the same goal of not knocking is attained. A stock bike certainly may react differently - as will being at different elevations, different intakes, pipes, etc.

I personally think the marketing of the higher octane fuels is suspect. Calling it 'premium' makes people think there is 'more power' or the gas is somehow 'better'---- when higher octane gas actually doesn't burn as well and has the same potential power per gallon that regular does.

It won't hurt anything (except maybe your wallet) to try the higher octane stuff--- but for me (and many others out here) we found it to not make any difference. Some found it to run worse - but I think they only ran a tankfull.

On the 1,600 miles I put on during the Smokies trip I got 22 mpg--- no matter what I was running.

I'll save some $$$ so I can buy more ESI goodies. I do need to check my plugs and lower my fuel pressure though-- could probably get back up to 30 mpg.
 
And a great many of us have experienced crappy performance and surge with high octane fuel.
Some of us get great milage, some of us get poor milage.
Some of us have canister problems others do not.

Considering higher octane gas burns slower - it wouldn't surprize me if it caused some of these issues.
 
The Update and the VIN

First of all, when Lamont offered to help us he asked those of us with problems to send him certain info; see here:

http://www.spyderlovers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=14122

Part of his request was to provide the VIN number.

This led to Carlo calling many of us to tell us that a "fix" was coming and that we should keep in touch with our dealers.

When we were at Mountain Motorsports on Friday of the Gatlinburg week, I personally saw the person who had the sign-up sheets for the "fix" check and record the VIN number of each bike in the line waiting for the "fix". So, there does seem to be some connection between the "fix" and the VIN though possibly at Gatlinburg the numbers were being recorded only for record purposes.

kt
 
First of all, when Lamont offered to help us he asked those of us with problems to send him certain info; see here:

http://www.spyderlovers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=14122

Part of his request was to provide the VIN number.

This led to Carlo calling many of us to tell us that a "fix" was coming and that we should keep in touch with our dealers.

When we were at Mountain Motorsports on Friday of the Gatlinburg week, I personally saw the person who had the sign-up sheets for the "fix" check and record the VIN number of each bike in the line waiting for the "fix". So, there does seem to be some connection between the "fix" and the VIN though possibly at Gatlinburg the numbers were being recorded only for record purposes.

kt

That would make sense to keep track of them. I would like to know if there are different versions of the 2nd update patch--- depending on whether you were running the stock pipe or something else........ I just remember hearing or reading that somewhere.....
 
Considering higher octane gas burns slower - it wouldn't surprize me if it caused some of these issues.

Higher octane burns slower so the pistons can fully compress the
fuel/air mix before it ignites. So it should add more power/mpg.
In high compression engines. I use it in my spyder and my hemi.
Works for me, But i think each spyder is assembled a little different
at the factory? [ that would explain a lot]
 
Higher octane burns slower so the pistons can fully compress the
fuel/air mix before it ignites. So it should add more power/mpg.
In high compression engines. I use it in my spyder and my hemi.
Works for me, But i think each spyder is assembled a little different
at the factory? [ that would explain a lot]

You'll only get more power if the engine requires the higher octane. The government has been releasing public info for 10 years or more about the myths of higher mpg or more power from 'premium' gas. Exxon got sued back in the 90's over some of their ads. It's not all about compression-- and there are plenty of engines that are far higher compression than the Spyder--- including the engine in the new RT. 'High' compression is a relative term.

If it ain't pingin' and the manufacturer doesn't require it--- the higher octane won't do squat.


http://www.state.mn.us/mn/externalDocs/Commerce/Gasoline_Octane_Facts_102902052227_OctaneFacts.pdf
 
Quote: "Your VIN # was specifically excluded from this update"

First of all, when Lamont offered to help us he asked those of us with problems to send him certain info; see here:

http://www.spyderlovers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=14122

Part of his request was to provide the VIN number.

This led to Carlo calling many of us to tell us that a "fix" was coming and that we should keep in touch with our dealers.

When we were at Mountain Motorsports on Friday of the Gatlinburg week, I personally saw the person who had the sign-up sheets for the "fix" check and record the VIN number of each bike in the line waiting for the "fix". So, there does seem to be some connection between the "fix" and the VIN though possibly at Gatlinburg the numbers were being recorded only for record purposes.

kt

Refering to what kentompkins is saying, maybe you should send off your info along with what your dealership is telling you to Lamonster and see if he can work with his BRP contacts to get you a better resolution to your problem. IMO, I could see the dealership maybe not covering the full second update (canister vent extension) for you if your not covered under warranty but it seems silly for them to not hook your Spyder up to their BUDS computer and install the second update to see if it helps you.
 
You'll only get more power if the engine requires the higher octane. The government has been releasing public info for 10 years or more about the myths of higher mpg or more power from 'premium' gas. Exxon got sued back in the 90's over some of their ads. It's not all about compression-- and there are plenty of engines that are far higher compression than the Spyder--- including the engine in the new RT. 'High' compression is a relative term.

If it ain't pingin' and the manufacturer doesn't require it--- the higher octane won't do squat.


http://www.state.mn.us/mn/externalDocs/Commerce/Gasoline_Octane_Facts_102902052227_OctaneFacts.pdf

It ain't pingin because the on board computer is retarding the timeing,
Hence more throttle to reach a set speed = less mpg.
I'll bet they don't require higher octane for fear of losing sales.
Just for the heck of it try at least 3+ FULL tank full's.
P/S They also don't require J/B's and other enigne mod's.
 
Well-- believe what you want guys..... Exxon will love ya for it-----:roflblack:

The rest of us will just save the $$$ and buy some more goodies.
 
what are you saving at 22 miles per the gallon? I get 33 on high octane fuel.

My low MPG is due to running too rich--- currently have my fuel pressure set @ 63 psi. Got plenty of uuumph any time I want it--- but wasting plenty of gas---- no sense in wasting the expensive stuff... On my 1600 miles for the Smokies trip---- ran anything and everything and the MPG never changed.
 
what are you saving at 22 miles per the gallon? I get 33 on high octane fuel.

No, at 22 mpg some thing isn't right, Did your milage just drop
suddenly ? If so like learned over 45 years of playing with cars,
bikes,atv's, snowmobiles,. Go back to the last thing that was
worked on. I run my spyder hard trough the hawk's nest on
the NJ,NY,PA. border and i can't make it eat that much gas.:dontknow:
 
Well, with a seal & low pressure air, there is no discernalble restriction from the tank to the open air/line. I'm going to try a new gas cap - Note, Carlo & his team responded quickly & offered no new info.

I will also go BACK to high octaine gas - There were no other problems noted = everything else was in spec.
 
No, at 22 mpg some thing isn't right, Did your milage just drop
suddenly ? If so like learned over 45 years of playing with cars,
bikes,atv's, snowmobiles,. Go back to the last thing that was
worked on. I run my spyder hard trough the hawk's nest on
the NJ,NY,PA. border and i can't make it eat that much gas.:dontknow:

As I stated--- I know what is wrong----- I have my fuel pressure up @ 63 psi ---- I think stock was around 50 psi. Between that and not having the second update are where my problems are. Running at the higher PSI she runs like a bat outta hell--- but probably too lean over the entire curve to be efficient. I have not pulled the plugs and checked them to see-- but I'm sure I'm running far too rich. I'm waiting to see if the come out with a Power Commander soon--- otherwise I'll have to go with a Juice Box--- and then will lower my PSI back to factory settings.

Plenty of folks out there running 87 as the manual states is okay that are getting 30-38 mpg. It ain't the octane that's the problem.
 
As I stated--- I know what is wrong----- I have my fuel pressure up @ 63 psi ---- I think stock was around 50 psi. Between that and not having the second update are where my problems are. Running at the higher PSI she runs like a bat outta hell--- but probably too lean over the entire curve to be efficient. I have not pulled the plugs and checked them to see-- but I'm sure I'm running far too rich. I'm waiting to see if the come out with a Power Commander soon--- otherwise I'll have to go with a Juice Box--- and then will lower my PSI back to factory settings.

Plenty of folks out there running 87 as the manual states is okay that are getting 30-38 mpg. It ain't the octane that's the problem.

I also am only getting 22mpg. I contacted Carlo about this and was told this mpg, 22 in city is what I should be getting for my conditions(se5,stock) and nothing was wrong. He also recommend only 87 octane. I average this since I first purchased, 9/08,2300 miles. I just got the 2 updates done today so hopefully this will improve!
 
I also am only getting 22mpg. I contacted Carlo about this and was told this mpg, 22 in city is what I should be getting for my conditions(se5,stock) and nothing was wrong. He also recommend only 87 octane. I average this since I first purchased, 9/08,2300 miles. I just got the 2 updates done today so hopefully this will improve!


Keep us posted--- hopefully things improve. I never really paid much attention to MPG before the Gatlinburg trip---- but I did notice my 'miles per tank' dropped off after increasing my fuel pressure--- then pretty much just got used to it--- UNTIL the Gatlinburg trip---- when Mike (someguy) still had 3 bars left when I was bone dry come fill up time.......
 
My low MPG is due to running too rich--- currently have my fuel pressure set @ 63 psi. Got plenty of uuumph any time I want it--- but wasting plenty of gas---- no sense in wasting the expensive stuff... On my 1600 miles for the Smokies trip---- ran anything and everything and the MPG never changed.

Is that good running it too rich though? Isn't that just as bad as running to lean?
 
Is that good running it too rich though? Isn't that just as bad as running to lean?

I dunno---- I just dunno. I think lean is worse because you can overheat the exhaust--- far as I know too-rich will foul the plugs and may eventually cause things to run bad--- but I have not seen that.
 
Is that good running it too rich though? Isn't that just as bad as running to lean?

Too Rich or Too Lean are relative terms. It depends on How Much too lean or too rich you are.

For power, cylinder temperature, throttle response and even fuel mileage, a bit on the rich side is much better than too lean. A slighly rich mix will effectively raise the octane level of the fuel.

The problem with the ideal fuel mix is that emissions go up some. That is why all of the above advantages are abandonded and our modern engines are purposfully run leaner than optimum.

Add to this a 10% Ethanol content which reduces fuel mileage about 10% (along with an overall reduction in performance) and you can see where richening up the mix and running 100% gasoline can really make some worthwhile improvements in all but the emissions category.

Though now it is pretty universally understood that the reduced emisions benefits of ethanol fuel is more than offset by the additional polution created in making ethanol, and the fact that you have to burn 10% more of it to go the same distance.

A more lean mix than what is necessary for lowered emissions can be quite detrimental in a number of ways including extremely high cylinder/exhaust temps, detonation or knocking, not to mention performance issues. A lean mix will effectively lower octane.

A much too rich mix will foul plugs, leave harmful deposits on valves and piston rings and can wash the protective oil film off the cylinder walls greatly increasing upper cylinder wear.

And, if rich enough, you will begin to get raw fuel mixing with your oil. That is Very Not Good!

Still, you're generally better off with a too rich rather than a too lean mix as negative effects come on much more quickly as you lean the mix than they do as you richen the mix.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top