i was up by road america getting gas, (93 octane) two kids on liter bikes pulled up and pumped in 110 octane race gas they told me there bikes ran better than with 93 octane. idont have any problems with 93 octane and $6.00 a gallon is there any reason other than track riding or racing to make the switch?

 

There is no reason unless you are going to tune to that rating.

 

I believe the owner's manual says 91 octane or higher so that means the engineers at Honda designed the stock components to work at 91 octane. Those 110 octane guys either have some aftermarket stuff meant for the higher octane or they are experiencing the placebo effect of it.

 

It smells good!!

Always best to stick as close as possible to the octane the engine was built to run. going higher does nothing in the way of perfomance, and can lead to less performance.

So, not even track riding or racing, its still not a good reason to run it on a stock bike. It would take quite a bit of modifications to warrant 110 octane.

But again, it does smell good.

Also, if they are running the leaded version, it can a problem on certain model bikes.

 

The guys I ride with all ride Busa's....they live on the 110 and swear by it.... I really dont see a reason to put it in my bike... Engineers get paid a lot of money to come up with the answers the suggestions they provide us with so I am going to stick with what the book says.

 

I would argue that a bike designed for 91 octane has maximum efficiency based around 91 octane fuel. If that sentence seemed obvious and redundant it was. We know that the higher the octane, the greater resistance that fuel has to ignition.

So we come back to our bike designed for 91 octane, and we throw some 110 in the tank. Let's walk through this slowly, a fuel is being used that is much harder to ignite than what the bike was designed for. A fuel that is harder to ignite may not ignite at all in such conditions. We know this is false to a sense because these bikes still run on 110. I argue that the 110 may not be igniting completely, thus resulting in a smaller and less forceful explosion in each cylinder, reducing the force on the piston, which pushes downward on the rod with less force, which turns the crank with less force.

If anybody finds and good studies or reviews on this topic online, please post it up. I am interested in the real findings and the above statement is just my opinion which is not infallible

 

ok so I couldn't resist. check out the article from http://popularhotrodding.automotive....gas/index.html

This article concludes that an engine tuned for 91 octane and the settings left constant for 91 octane will make the most power on 91 octane and actually lost power with 110 and 118 octane. Of course, with proper tuning for higher octane, more power could be achieved

 

Octane does absolutely NOTHING for performance. All it helps with is if your engine is pinging. Only fuel that helps performance is oxygenated fuel (which needs rejetting to run right).

 

I think it would be more correct to say that the energy potential in fuel and its octane RATING are two different things. Using fuel with an inadequate octane rating can have severe performance impacts. How good is your performance when your engine is completely destroyed? Some additives that increase octane rating actually reduce the energy in the fuel, but then again they may also make it possible to run at a higher compression ratio.

I just run 91 pump gas in my bike, but I've had cars that make much more horsepower on higher octane fuels. Knock sensors and automatic performance controls that adjust for this have been around for a long time in the auto industry. Of course, this just makes it more relaxing to put in the 87 in cars that allow for it.

 

Geeeze.... another octane thread.

Anyway, since I'm here.... does the manual for the 1000RR suggest 91 RON or 91 AKI?
Just wondering, as I've never read the RR manual.