PREMIUM ONLY?

[BWC]

With 7000 km on the S10 I recently ran it well into the reserve,then fueled up with a local no name brand of regular 87.
Noticed no difference in the running of the engine. Did a slow crawl through town, fan on at times with no notice of pinging etc.
If we plan to take these bikes to remote areas such as Alaska,Yukon and Northwest Territories regular is sometimes the only fuel available. I tried this one tank to find out and I'm now back to premium.
The best thing to do is just remove the warning sticker on the tank. Works for me.

 

[simmons1]

I have been running 87 in my Tenere with no noticeable issues. I also run 87 in my WR250R and ST1300 which also call for higher octane fuel.

My 2004 KLR on the other hand calls for 87 and pings like mad unless I use 89 or higher. YMMV

 

[20valves]

The best thing to do is just remove the warning sticker on the tank. Works for me.

::026:: ::021::

 

[doctorj]

What problem? And what's this "we" crap. It's a problem for you, not me.

One thing I noticed while in CO is that the premium grade of fuel was the only alcohol-free grade in some towns. That's reason enough there for Y to recommend premium. I'm not too worried about the extra $0.50 per fill-up it will cost. Good grief, the things people choose to worry about..... :

Me thinks you misunderstood my post. And worrying is not the same thing as asking about people's experience. I am not complaining about the cost of using premium (well not too much) but wonder about how it runs on the other stuff when that is all that is available. I mean it is an adventure touring bike and will be taken to lots of back road and back country locations. IIRC, on the Alcan and up the haul road, some of one's choices are pretty limited.

doctorj

 

[justbob]

The last 3 touring bikes I bought were supposed to be "premium fuel only" bikes ,none of them have ever have premium gas in them.
No signs of any problems in over 100,000 miles between them. Most of the fuel has been 89 octane

 

[SisuTen]

UN-believeable ???

 

[~TABASCO~]

I dont know the answer, this is just a hypothesis and someone might know more about this than me............ I was talking to a friend about this last week.. Your thoughts.........

Is it possible that the bike was developed for 87.. But when all the engineering was done with the ECM, exhaust, converters, Etc it barley would not pass the US emissions with 87 ? Is it possible that they knew they could squeak by the test by running 93 then printing that the bike "requires" 93. With the 93 blend, it might have a different formula to burn just a bit different and more "clean" when it came out the rear exhaust... If so, they would pass the stringent test, but they then had to mandate that all the US bikes where "required" to run 93.... The average Joe would say 'dang, well if they say so" and pump it in...

Lets think about this like engineers for a second. IMOP, YAMAHA Motor Co are some of the smartest engine developers on the planet. They are an Engineering mecha. Do you think they would build there "Take on the world ADV" bike that could only run on 93 ? People will say it needs 93 because it doesn't have a knock sensor. Don't you think that Yamaha knew this from day ONE.. If this bike really HAD to have 93 (other wise it would break and blow up), if this was really the case Yamaha would be laughed at and this new engine would be a JOKE... Do you think this just slipped Yamaha's brain... I dont think so... IMOP, I think the bike can and will run on anything you put in it. Yamaha wants these bikes ridden all around the world. And they want to keep there reputation as a motor Co that can go anywhere and do anything, and do it for a LONG time... Not sure if your going to find 93 in South America, North Africa, Alaska, and Russia... IMOP, Yamaha has built in parameters in the 'system' that will allow for 87 Etc. There might be sensors & or software no one knows about that will allow for this fuel. Yamaha motor engineers are very smart and I dont think they built there 'premo ADV' for only 93.... Going back to the first paragraph, I think it has to do more with something they cant control, and that's US EPA.... ::009::

 

[Pirate63]

That makes alot of scence Tabasco ::026::

 

[colorider]

That makes alot of scence Tabasco ::026::

Welcome to the Forum! It's good when we bring someone out of "lurk mode" and see their first post.

How about posting an intro in the "Member intros" area as well.

Thanks!!

Rod

 

[doctorj]

The last 3 touring bikes I bought were supposed to be "premium fuel only" bikes ,none of them have ever have premium gas in them.
No signs of any problems in over 100,000 miles between them. Most of the fuel has been 89 octane

Well since you are my motorcycle "guru" (and based on the sense that Tabasco made) ::008::, I'm gonna use some 89 or plus and see if my Raven beauty talks back to me. I also can't see this as a serious around the world adventure bike if required premium fuel when in far away third world countries etc.

doctorj

 

[martinh]

I have put in all graded of gas. 89 to 93 I have not seen or felt any difference in the bikes performance. ::021::

 

[doctorj]

I appreciate you guinea pigs for trying out different grades of fuel.

doctorj

 

[SisuTen]

I appreciate you guinea pigs for trying out different grades of fuel.

doctorj

Doc, you're killin' me ::025:: ::025:: ::025:: ::025:: ::025::

 

[colorider]

I have put in all graded of gas. 89 to 93 I have not seen or felt any difference in the bikes performance. ::021::

I have tried all that are (normally) available here: 85, 87 and 89 - and noticed no discernible difference in performance or noted any difference in mileage.

YMMV

 

[SisuTen]

I have tried all that are (normally) available here: 85, 87 and 89 - and noticed no discernible difference in performance or noted any difference in mileage.

YMMV

You haven't tried 91 RON yet?

 

[JohnB]

I only have 87, 89 and 93 available here but have only used 93 so far.

 

[colorider]

You haven't tried 91 RON yet?

Senior moment.....

"85, 87 and 91"

Thanks!!

Rod

 

[Jim]

This is very good news considering the cost of gas.

 

[SisuTen]

Senior moment.....

"85, 87 and 91"

Thanks!!

Rod

I haven't tried lower ratings yet. Good to know they work without issue. Thanks!

 

[~TABASCO~]

Im running 89....... no issues