98 RON bad for ST's?

[CallMeSteve]

I just got off the phone to the service dept at Brisbane Motorcycles.

I mentioned an intermittent problem with STrudel idling very badly when cold and she asked what fuel I use.  To my surprise she said to stay away from 98 and stick with 95.  "Too many additives" she said. Apparently they had a lot of trouble with several makes of bikes (most notably Ducatis she said) which gave no end of trouble until they drained the tanks of 98 and replaced with 95.

I must admit that being a 'purist' I most often spoil STrudel with 98. So I'll switch back to 95 and see if it helps with my morning idling problem.

I'm just wondering if anyone else has experience on this topic?

[Brock]

When I first collected my bike, I ran a spread sheet to record fuel usage amongst other things. The result was that plain unleaded was just as good as the higher rated fuels, just cost less. There was no advantage to to paying more, as the economy was the same as was the running/power.

My bike is now just short of 200000Ks from a starting 35000 Ks

[alans1100]

I use mainly ULP (91) in the 1100 but if I happen to be filling where E10 is available I'll use that. Cheaper than ULP but the same as PULP (95).

The 1300 mostly gets a mix of both ULP and PULP depending on when I fill her. During the week I can get PULP at the tyre dealer (with 4c discount) but on weekends it's either ULP or 98 (Vortex???) at the Caltex. And again E10 if I happen to be at a place that sells it. Also have had two 98 top ups when 95 wasn't available.

Ride to the city last Friday had me filling with 91 from the tyre dealer because the 95 pump was down and for the trip back home I used 95.

Never had an issue with any fuel anywhere on either bike.

[ruSTynutz]

I'll be sticking with 95 ULP in my ST1300...

Also there's no way I'd be putting BP 91 ULP in my bike as it can contain up to 10% Ethanol! 

Here are a few links to interesting articles concerning different fuels...

https://www.fcai.com.au/environment/can-my-vehicle-operate-on-ethanol-blend-petrol

https://motorbikewriter.com/is-ethanol-suitable-for-motorcycles/

https://www.roadrider.com.au/the-fuel-truth/

 

[Biggles]

I have always used 91 in my four STs with nary a problem.  Last month the valves and plugs checked out with no problems after 126,000 kays.  Over the life of this bike I have averaged 5.31 l/100km.  I have used E10 when there was no 91 (common among NSW Caltex and BP servos that I've used) with no problems, noting the E10 is rated at 94 RON.  I had never used E10 until recently having heard stories about seals being damaged, but figure a diluted tankful occasionally wouldn't be an issue.

[ruSTynutz]

Fair enough...

Still, I betcha there's heaps of people out there using BP's 91 Unleaded, blissfully unaware that it too contains ethanol...

I have used E10 when there was no 91 (common among NSW Caltex and BP servos that I've used) with no problems, noting the E10 is rated at 94 RON.  I had never used E10 until recently having heard stories about seals being damaged, but figure a diluted tankful occasionally wouldn't be an issue.

According to one of those articles I've linked to...

"Ethanol doesn’t work with carburettors or mechanical fuel injection. It is also a solvent which attacks metallic and rubber-based fuel lines, and has an affinity to water that can cause steel fuel tanks to rust. But one of the confusing things for riders is the octane rating. (Octane is a measure of a fuel’s ability to resist engine knocking or pinging which is an uncontrolled burn in the engine that can cause damage. Higher octane fuels resist knocking.) Most E10 is rated at 95 RON which seems like it could be suitable for bikes that require that higher octane rating. However, RACQ executive manager technical and safety policy, Steve Spalding, says ethanol-blended, higher-octane fuels may not necessarily meet the correct fuel requirements for a vehicle designated to run on PULP. While the RON may be high enough, there is another property in fuel, called Motor Octane Number (MON), which is rarely specified on the bowser. MON is usually about 10 numbers lower than RON, so a MON of 85 would be ok for a bike rated at 95 RON. However, ethanol fuels have much lower MON numbers than their RON which could be too low for your bike."

Cheers :)

[Biggles]

Yep, that's the kind of article I was referring to.  I deduce our fuel injection is electronic, and if the bike isn't left standing for long the tank corrosion problem should be minimised.  "Rubber based fuel lines" appear to be an issue.  Those things said, I'll continue to avoid E10 whenever possible.  After all, it's only a 50¢ per refuel saving we're talking about. 

[alans1100]

It seems BP have two ULP 91 products one is standard ULP and the other has 10% ethanol.

But under our advertising laws I think they'd have to state which was which on the pump.

https://www.bp.com/en_au/australia/products-services/fuels/regular-fuels.html

In SA I've only seen e10 at Liberty and United and one independant Mobil in Port Pirie

Liberty has replaced PULP (95) with E10 at most of their sites

As for Honda and E10

[ruSTynutz]

It seems BP have two ULP 91 products one is standard ULP and the other has 10% ethanol.

But under our advertising laws I think they'd have to state which was which on the pump.

https://www.bp.com/en_au/australia/products-services/fuels/regular-fuels.html

In SA I've only seen e10 at Liberty and United and one independant Mobil in Port Pirie

Liberty has replaced PULP (95) with E10 at most of their sites

As for Honda and E10

That's interesting re: normal unleaded being available...

I just wandered up to my local BP and, now the plot thickens...I spoke to the cashier and he said none of their fuel contains ethanol, this in spite of the sticker below the bowser display clearly saying (even if it was in small print) that 91 Unleaded may contain up to 10% ethanol...

I'm quite happy if that's correct though as my partner has been filling her car there for the last couple of years and had never seen the sticker...