philthyphil Posted February 12, 2017 Author Share Posted February 12, 2017 Huh, cause he told me on the phone, Nels that is, that I HAVE to run premium gas of at least 91 octane with the flash. His words, not mine. I also notice no difference between running 87 or 91 even after the flash and Akra Carbon. Ah! Well that's the first I hear of it. When I bought mine a year ago, he had said 87 was fine. But I still haven't heard from the horse's mouth if the timing on the tune was specifically modified for a certain octane rating. Otherwise you're putting in a high octane gas that more difficult to ignite in the engine that we have.... Yea, that was initially my thoughts on the octane situation as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philthyphil Posted February 12, 2017 Author Share Posted February 12, 2017 Yea, I've known about the horrors of ethanol. Unfortunately there a very few, if any, gas stations in my area that don't have the stuff mixed in. To the best of my knowledge there are only like 5 gas stations in the state of California that don't use ethanol. The nearest one to where I am is over 100 miles away, so I'm stuck with ethanol blend gasoline. Just a thought, but can a person get it at a marina? I'm sure they have it for boaters and maybe they would like a biker's money as well. Crazy thought, I know. I may be able to go to the marinas in my area and get it, but I'm sure that would cost significantly more, and I'm positive it would be a huge PIA. I go through a tank of gas daily. I basically just have to use whatever is readily available to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philthyphil Posted February 12, 2017 Author Share Posted February 12, 2017 This whole octane thing with 2wdw is confusing. The tune doesn't change your compression ratio. Yamaha says it will run on 86 octane. Here in PA right now 87 is $2.46. 89 is $2.66. 93 is $2.95. Big jump in price. If 2wdw advances the ignition timing in their tunes than it would require more than 86 octane. They say they don't advance it but still want 91 octane. I've only run my bike 40 miles on 87 octane on my fully stock tune and got 39 mpg. Running wise it's great. 39 mpg, not so great. When the weather improves (again) I'll ride some more. Yea, 39 mpg is not so great stock. Before I got the flash I was getting 43 mpg with 87 octane, and I have a severely heavy throttle hand. Now with the bike flashed I'm averaging about 39 mpg with 91 octane, so I lost a little with the flash. That's okay though. I'm willing to trade a little economy for some performance. 90% of my riding is done in town, from stop light to stop light. This obviously isn't ideal for fuel economy. The fact that I'm addicted to grabbing a hand full of throttle every chance I get isn't too good for fuel economy either.. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhb Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 as bad as ethanol is, modern engines are designed around it and its properties, the real problem is if you have a vintage bike not set up for ethanol, then you get rotting rubber and more damage to internal seals and parts. ethanol is here to stay, searching far and wide to get straight gas is false economy and a waste of time and money. Again a higher octane rating is designed, in the case of our bikes and a flash tune, to prevent pre ignition, not boost horsepower or have anything to do with higher compression. It is true that higher compression engines benefit from higher octane fuel, but it is not the point in this case with FZ/MT 07s. quote from 2wdw: " One important issue is fuel. In the states we have 10% ethanol. We also run 91 or 92 octane as a premium fuel. You will want to run something as similar as possible." meaning only his dyno runs are based on using this fuel, nothing more, nothing less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pineappleunderthesea Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 quote from 2wdw: " One important issue is fuel. In the states we have 10% ethanol. We also run 91 or 92 octane as a premium fuel. You will want to run something as similar as possible." meaning only his dyno runs are based on using this fuel, nothing more, nothing less.I'd be nice to see his dyno runs performed at 87, 89, 91 and 93 octane, I guess that would be an indirect way to tell us for what octane the tune was designed for (I don't know how to change that sentence around without ending with a preposition...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markstertt Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 It's all about preventing Pre-ignition, not performance per seI believe we're talking about detonation (pinking) as pre-ignition is another issue, one can lead to the other but in this case detonation caused by an aggressive advance curve accompanied, perhaps, by to large a throttle opening at to low an rpm (lugging?) is probably the culprit. Just my opinion of course. Depending on the amount of advance, lugging (engine loading) might not be at as low an rpm as one might think. All speculation of course, since only the tune supplier knows what ignition curves are programmed into his tunes, as well as what A/F ratios etc., so if said tuner recommends 91 octane then he probably has a reason for it. If you can't open your throttle fully because of detonation, then of course, your performance suffers. I do believe that a performance tune for the FZ-07 doesn't automatically imply that high octane fuel and poor fuel mileage ensues, Hordpowers performance gains are based on his dyno tuned PCV maps and ecu flash, running 12.5-1 comp. ratio, on 87 octane with average fuel mileage in the high 50's and producing approx. 88 hp. I'm running his PCV maps, airbox and Yosh ex. and run 87 octane and average 57-58 mpg and have no issues with detonation even when accidently lugging out of a corner in the wrong gear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hamster Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 Interesting subject, the regular or premium fuel choice: https://www.youtube.com/shared?ci=NP4_cA5Vjh4 So they test both in a regular car, apparently there isn't a performance change and premium fuel is more pollutant... go figure if it applies to our babies... Safe riding! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philthyphil Posted February 13, 2017 Author Share Posted February 13, 2017 It's all about preventing Pre-ignition, not performance per seI believe we're talking about detonation (pinking) as pre-ignition is another issue, one can lead to the other but in this case detonation caused by an aggressive advance curve accompanied, perhaps, by to large a throttle opening at to low an rpm (lugging?) is probably the culprit. Just my opinion of course. Depending on the amount of advance, lugging (engine loading) might not be at as low an rpm as one might think. All speculation of course, since only the tune supplier knows what ignition curves are programmed into his tunes, as well as what A/F ratios etc., so if said tuner recommends 91 octane then he probably has a reason for it. If you can't open your throttle fully because of detonation, then of course, your performance suffers. I do believe that a performance tune for the FZ-07 doesn't automatically imply that high octane fuel and poor fuel mileage ensues, Hordpowers performance gains are based on his dyno tuned PCV maps and ecu flash, running 12.5-1 comp. ratio, on 87 octane with average fuel mileage in the high 50's and producing approx. 88 hp. I'm running his PCV maps, airbox and Yosh ex. and run 87 octane and average 57-58 mpg and have no issues with detonation even when accidently lugging out of a corner in the wrong gear. Wow! How the hell are you getting 57-58 mpg? I haven't been able to get any more than 42 mpg on the avg reading on my bike. I am able to get 55 ish on the real time mpg if I really baby the throttle on the freeway, but my average has never been above 42.7 mpg or so. Now that I have the flash it is even lower. Reading 36 mpg on the average right now. I do at least 90% of my riding in town. Are you doing mostly freeway miles or something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peteinpa Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 Interesting subject, the regular or premium fuel choice: https://www.youtube.com/shared?ci=NP4_cA5Vjh4 So they test both in a regular car, apparently there isn't a performance change and premium fuel is more pollutant... go figure if it applies to our babies... Your missing the BIG point on this. There are more pollutants, but that is caused by un burnt gas coming out the tail pipe. Some of the premium gas isn't burning wasting power and MPG. Got new red 2015 FZ-07 on 7/22/16! Black 2006 Honda ST1300 53K miles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beemer Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 I understand ethanol gasoline burns cleaner and that's a great thing but the process of making ethanol gasoline creates pollution itself so we can't ignore that and just say ethanol gas is best for controlling pollutants in the air, not to mention new problems with the disposal of the waste from its manufacturing and new problems with the land because so much corn has to be grown to produce it. Aren't those things counter productive? We don't want to create three problems while eliminating one. Besides, I want better performance and better fuel economy from my gasoline so based on all the pros and cons from scientists about ethanol gasoline I choose to use ethanol free. (I don't trust big bro either ) Beemer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markstertt Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 philthyphil, my mileage is an average of riding styles, I don't baby it because it's fun to have the front wheel come off the ground under power, I have a homemade 42mm throttle drum so it's kind of hard to stay out of it, I don't ride much freeway at all. The bikes gauge usually shows an average of around 62 mpg but I use the bikes odometer mileage and actual gallons at fill up to calculate the 56-58 mpg that I average. This mileage stays pretty consistent as long as I'm indicating in ECO mode which is up to 75 mph in 6th gear, I don't pay much attention to rpm in the gears as I found the tach bar scale annoying to find and read and shift and watch for deer, cars etc. I don't get near redline, don't need to with this engines midrange power band and my engine mods, Hord air box, PCV w/ Hordpower map, Yosh exhaust with baffle, iridium plugs. After being on this forum for awhile, I see there are a lot of guys getting similar mileage. On longer rides I just figure around 120 miles is 2 gallons used, so far so good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reboot Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 I believe we're talking about detonation (pinking) as pre-ignition is another issue, one can lead to the other but in this case detonation caused by an aggressive advance curve accompanied, perhaps, by to large a throttle opening at to low an rpm (lugging?) is probably the culprit. Just my opinion of course. Depending on the amount of advance, lugging (engine loading) might not be at as low an rpm as one might think. All speculation of course, since only the tune supplier knows what ignition curves are programmed into his tunes, as well as what A/F ratios etc., so if said tuner recommends 91 octane then he probably has a reason for it. If you can't open your throttle fully because of detonation, then of course, your performance suffers. I do believe that a performance tune for the FZ-07 doesn't automatically imply that high octane fuel and poor fuel mileage ensues, Hordpowers performance gains are based on his dyno tuned PCV maps and ecu flash, running 12.5-1 comp. ratio, on 87 octane with average fuel mileage in the high 50's and producing approx. 88 hp. I'm running his PCV maps, airbox and Yosh ex. and run 87 octane and average 57-58 mpg and have no issues with detonation even when accidently lugging out of a corner in the wrong gear. Wow! How the hell are you getting 57-58 mpg? I haven't been able to get any more than 42 mpg on the avg reading on my bike. I am able to get 55 ish on the real time mpg if I really baby the throttle on the freeway, but my average has never been above 42.7 mpg or so. Now that I have the flash it is even lower. Reading 36 mpg on the average right now. I do at least 90% of my riding in town. Are you doing mostly freeway miles or something?I get close to the same on my bike with 2WDW flash and Akra Ti. I run 91 clear and am far from "eco". I also weigh in at 145lb. Not sure how long you have had the reflash but it can take a tank or two before your MPG come back around. Most my day to day is freeway though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhb Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 I understand ethanol gasoline burns cleaner and that's a great thing but the process of making ethanol gasoline creates pollution itself so we can't ignore that and just say ethanol gas is best for controlling pollutants in the air, not to mention new problems with the disposal of the waste from its manufacturing and new problems with the land because so much corn has to be grown to produce it. Aren't those things counter productive? We don't want to create three problems while eliminating one. Besides, I want better performance and better fuel economy from my gasoline so based on all the pros and cons from scientists about ethanol gasoline I choose to use ethanol free. (I don't trust big bro either ) The politics of ethanol gas overshadows its' efficiency. valuable land is being taken over for ethanol production at the expense of food production, in the Philippines this is a major concern as big land owners can make more money growing crops for ethanol production than rice. But I think that is another topic on another forum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beemer Posted February 14, 2017 Share Posted February 14, 2017 I understand ethanol gasoline burns cleaner and that's a great thing but the process of making ethanol gasoline creates pollution itself so we can't ignore that and just say ethanol gas is best for controlling pollutants in the air, not to mention new problems with the disposal of the waste from its manufacturing and new problems with the land because so much corn has to be grown to produce it. Aren't those things counter productive? We don't want to create three problems while eliminating one. Besides, I want better performance and better fuel economy from my gasoline so based on all the pros and cons from scientists about ethanol gasoline I choose to use ethanol free. (I don't trust big bro either ) The politics of ethanol gas overshadows its' efficiency. valuable land is being taken over for ethanol production at the expense of food production, in the Philippines this is a major concern as big land owners can make more money growing crops for ethanol production than rice. But I think that is another topic on another forum I just wanted to inform, not debate and some uninformed people here appreciated being told about the pros and cons of ethanol free gasoline. I'm glad I could help them. Beemer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member forcefed86 Posted February 14, 2017 Premium Member Share Posted February 14, 2017 7k bike, hundreads of dollars in upgrades, only to cheap out 25 cents in gas!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pineappleunderthesea Posted February 14, 2017 Share Posted February 14, 2017 7k bike, hundreads of dollars in upgrades, only to cheap out 25 cents in gas!!I don't think the issue is spending more, for me the issue is if 93 octane gives you a power advantage over 87 octane. No one for sure seems to know if the tune plays around with timing in order to take advantage of 93 octane. If not, then in our "low" compression engines, 93 octane is harder to burn and theoretically your mpg could go down...but overall there should be no harm in putting in a higher octane in an engine that does not require it, if that's the main issue here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peteinpa Posted February 14, 2017 Share Posted February 14, 2017 Strange my 2006 Honda ST1300 has a pair of knock sensors and the FZ-07 has none....Unless I missed it or them. ST1300 calls for 91 octane in the book and STILL has knock sensors. When knock is detected ignition timing is retarded in degrees till it stops just like on most cars. I can run 87 but have to tolerate the lower power and MPG. Running 93 octane in an engine that calls for 86 wastes power and MPG. Got new red 2015 FZ-07 on 7/22/16! Black 2006 Honda ST1300 53K miles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gregjet Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 This ethanol debate will go one forever. OK. I will talk low ( 87-89 and 91RON), med(91 and 95ron) and hi( 97 et al and, 98 and 100RON) as octane ratings rather than a number as there are US/Canada and other countries that use different octane standards. The main effective difference between these is the amount of activation energy it takes for them to start combining with the oxygen in air. With sufficient heat AND compression petrol( gas) will spontaneously combust ( ie combine without input of furthur energy). The amount of actual power output by the process is dependent on the composition of the fuel ( not all fuel has the same hydrocarbons), the ratio of air to fuel vapour, how much actually manages to vaporize or get to small enough droplets to burn to completion. Basically you do not get MORE power from just changing the octane rating unless the tuning was done for the other fuel. Higher octane fuels also burn a little slower ( because it takes more activation energy to start each molecule ) so benefit from more advanced ignition. Over advancing a lower rating fuel will make it produce less power. Having said that modern engines are notoriously badly advanced. Partially because they are designed to run at a less than optimum air fuel ratio. The first thing to look at for fuel choice is compression ratio. This used to be easy . Too high and the motor would pre detonate. Honda "stuffed" that nice simple rule up by figuring that by designing the combustion chamber properly, you could run much higher ratios without pinging and run on. But the rule still sort of applies. Higher compression( for a head design), higher octane rating needed. The 07 has a seriously high compression ratio for a road bike and I use 95RON, as it seems to run smoother and get slightly better economy. Still, a motor must be tuned FOR the chosen fuel to be used optimally. If a tuner tunes a motor properly for a particular rating , it SHOULD be most efficient at that rating. So putting higher rated fuel in a motor designed for lower and tuned for it will produce LESS power and more unburnt or partially burnt exhaust. Interestingly alcohol which has slightly less power per volume also burns at a slightly lower temp and produces less nitrogen oxides as a result . Even from higher comp motors. Ethanol: First ethanol is problematic for older vehicles when the following applies. Ethanol reacts with copper and zinc. Even if your carb has aluminium bodies ( ie not pot metal) it will slowly react with the jets, floats, needles etc if they are brass. Alcohol has been used for years in ultra performance motors because you can run seriously high comp ratios without predetonation. Runs cooler as well. There are carbs specially designed for such use with steel instead of brass. Our fuel injection has steel injectors and parts. Alcohol has no real effect on it. Ethanol reacts or dissolves some rubbers and plastics , NOT ALL. A choice of a suitable plastic or rubber will mean there is no effect. Problematic polymers are often extant on older vehicles. Modern vehicles have suitable materials including fuel tanks and lines. Our bike certainly does. Interestingly petrol( gas) actually dissolves MORE types of polymers than alcohol. Fuel tanks. Alcohol absorbs water from the atmosphere. In an enclosed tank, it can only absorb whats in the air in the tank ( and then not all of it). Some water will evaporate and deposit on the inside of the tank, but less than the alcohol or petrol as they have a lower vapour pressure. Still it can cause rust. If you keep your tank full it won't do much. If you have a plastic tank designed for alky fuels they won't care at all. Hope that helps. Go forth and modify my son...go forth and modify... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stickshift Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 My Aussie user manual stipulates that minimum 95 RON must be used (full power model). Yamaha's 2014 service manual also stipulates premium unleaded (and up to 10% ethanol acceptable), this means 95 or greater RON in Australia. I'm not able to see any knock detector fitted (which could inform timing) - owner's should use lesser fuels at their own risk! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gregjet Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 The LAMS OM says the same, though it has half an integer less comp ( still 11:1 though). I tried 95 and 91 ( haven't tried the NSW 94 ethanol which my Subaru likes). It runs crap on 98 previous version of BP's 98 as far as I am concerned, BUT I haven't tried the new forumlation yet ( and prob won't as the 95 seems to be smooth enough with the reflash). Previous formulation was designed for supercharged and turbo engines and I found it crap at small throttle openings on most bikes. It had a very high activation energy. Don't know about the new one, as I researched the previous one when I was racing and all my prod. bikes started running crap on it. BP themselves told me it was designed for very high cyl pressures. Knock detector is ( I think) on the back of the motor under the throttle bodies. Go forth and modify my son...go forth and modify... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stickshift Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 Good info Greg. I imagine your ecu tune would have advanced the ignition timing in the upper rev range, even more reason to use 95. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member fzar Posted June 27, 2017 Premium Member Share Posted June 27, 2017 According to the owners manual its designed to run on (R+M)/2 of 86 or higher that doesn't exceed 10% ethanol. Or a research octane number of 91 or higher. If knocking (or pinging) occurs, change brands or use premium. I know this is for stock and not after its been flashed, the question I have is : Has anyone got in contact with whoever did their flash and gotten an answer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhb Posted June 28, 2017 Share Posted June 28, 2017 According to the owners manual its designed to run on (R+M)/2 of 86 or higher that doesn't exceed 10% ethanol. Or a research octane number of 91 or higher. If knocking (or pinging) occurs, change brands or use premium. I know this is for stock and not after its been flashed, the question I have is : Has anyone got in contact with whoever did their flash and gotten an answer?Yes, and I mentioned it before I think, Nels @2Wheeldynoworks recommended I use 95-97 RON to extract the best performance. Flash, Active Tune, LeoVince, DNA stage 2 filter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2wheeldynoworks Posted June 29, 2017 Share Posted June 29, 2017 91aki/95ron minimum is our recommendation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
level41 Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 You don't need 91 oct. In fact, the FZ runs best on 87. By changing the exhaust to a more open type of exhaust, there is less back pressure, and the engine will run cooler, and lower PSI. That makes that you can run even lower octane fuel (if it existed), not higher. The fuel commander would add only marginally more fuel in the mid range, to get the lean burn out, but that gives only a very small HP increase (3 to 5 HP). So, I'd say, no. 91 oct is nothing more but a $$$ waste; and even the cheapest fuel has higher octane than necessary. If you want to be safe, get mid-grade; when racing all out, but if it's used as a regular daily commuter, 87 oct (regular) is the way to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.