Fuel

[dazzadot]

What fuel should I be using on my st1100 p? I've been using 91. I notice the bike runs a little hotter in the city, but not in the red. Would the fuel have anything to do with that?

[Bikebear]

Stick with 91, I've found on the 1100 up here more expensive fuel is a waste of money. You will find the temp will go up to about 2/3 to 3/4 in heavy traffic on hot days but the fan will cut in and it'll even out. Once you get into some clear air the temp will go back down again.

[dazzadot]

Thanks Craig. Hard getting use to having a radiator on a bike. All my years, I've never had a bike with one.

[alans1100]

What fuel should I be using on my st1100 p? I've been using 91. I notice the bike runs a little hotter in the city, but not in the red. Would the fuel have anything to do with that?

Stay with the 91 the engine is designed to run on it.

Warmer temps in summer will cause the gauge to read a little higher which is quite normal providing it stays in the normal range. If you're stopped at the lights the fan should come on when the gauge is about half way.

[Brock]

I ran higher octane when I first got the bike,  and then tried 91. As I run a spread sheet that records fuel usage, cost, range, Ks/$, it was easy to see that the only difference was cost per K.

[dazzadot]

Ok, looks like 91 is the go. Thanks

[royst1100]

mine plays up on 91 and got to use 98

[dazzadot]

when u say plays up, what do you mean?

[Wombat]

I use 98 for the cleaner engine. If it is the cost of fuel or availability of 91 Iridium plugs may be the answer. Mine runs hot in traffic that is 3/4 on gauge.

 

[saaz]

I have used everything (other than diesel..) in my 96 ST1100.  The bike will go on any of the octanes, but 91 is just fine.  In colder weather I find that 95 and 98 make the bike more cold blooded in starting and running until the bike reaches temperature, but this is probably not an issue in areas where it does not get that cold.  Best economy and performance has been with either 91 or E10, even though theoretically the E10 should not do as well - maybe it runs a bit leaner as it is an oxygenated fuel.  I have probably used E10 more than half of the time I have had the bike.

On mine the fan cuts in and out just after the half way point on the gauge. If the gauge does get higher then there might be cooling system issues, as even in the hottest weather the cooling system is up to it.

[royst1100]

misses coughs less power. 98 gives me smother running. one trip in current configuration with trailer had to use 91 (small town) by the time of our next stop "a stop for the night" it wouldnt idle. very hard two up with trailer. unhitch so i could fill up, next morning hairy run out of town then next fillup "250-300 kls" and smooth running again. has happened several times

[Brock]

That is most unusual, requires more investigation in another thread...

[Panman50]

I used to run my ZZR 600 on 91 octane but after further investigation I changed my fuel to 95 and won't go back.
If I remember the details correctly, in a nutshell it goes like this,
When leaded fuel was made the bad guy and unleaded came in most fuels were 91 octane, almost immediately this was followed by 93, 95 and now 98 octane as they found that 91 was really quite dirty and the higher octane fuels burned cleaner so less problems with the fuel systems and engine performance.
Then along came E10, well bugger me the fuel companies found a way to make fuel cheaper by diluting it with ethanol or methanol and convince us it's better for the environment. Problem is it's not all that flash for the longevity of engines, that's why it's only 10% although I believe you can get higher in Europe. It is also why Honda recommend 91 octane or higher and nothing greater than 10% ethanol or 5% methanol.
I changed from 91to 95 octane because my previous bike wasn't running the best and almost immediately found a noticeable improvement in performance. I delved a little further and the common feedback was that there wasn't a significant difference between 95 & 98 apart from the cost, so 95 was it for me.
Since then I have run nothing but 95, it sucks because it costs more but I thing long term it pays off because of less carby maintenance and better performance.
That's my 2 cents worth to the fuel conversation.
Regards,
Tom.

[Brock]

In the transition days PanMan, the low octane stuff was known as LRP (Lead Replacement Petrol) and it was crap. Clogged everything including the Petrol Pumps. My 1100 runs on 91 any brand and I havent needed to do any carby adjustments yet. ( about 100000Ks worth of running)

[StinkyPete]

On my Oz-Lap I regularly needed to fuel the ST1300 with 91 when 95 was unavailable and never noticed any difference.   However, I usually follow Honda's recommendation and fuel it with 95.

[Mypod]

I have been using 95 fuel, but lately the fuel stations changed to 98. I used it on a trip up to Mundaring, Toodyay, York and back home. Best fuel milage i ever got...23km/l. I'll admit...I'm not sure its worth 15c/l more than 91, but I have been using 98 ever since. I haven't noticed any difference in engine temp, 2/3 up the gauge on a 43C day in Perth when the thermo fan kicked in, and on the open road back down to 1/3 up. 

[Pezzz]

I have mainly used 98 but last fill up was 91. Will see how it goes. Heading to York on weekend so will see how it goes on country miles.
Dunno about temp as my temp sender doesn't work. Might get one of them before the weekend as well.

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk

[Pezzz]

I haven't noticed any difference in engine temp, 2/3 up the gauge on a 43C day in Perth

Yeah, I just don't ride on a 43C day.

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk

[jimwilly]

I think in some cases its not the RON rating but where you fuel your bike that is the problem.
I try and use Shell BP Caltex or similar rather than the discount brands.
Last year on a trip through the Snowys I filled up at a Servo at Tathra, shortly after it was running rough and stalled at an intersection.
Later I filled up at a Liberty and bike ran OK for a while then same thing.
My last tank fill was at Mt Gambier at a Mobil I think and problem was fixed.
I think some of the cheap imported fuel might not be the best quality.

[Lionel]

My ST1100P (2000) runs better and further on 98 - cost neutral to use 98.
My ST1100P (2002) runs no further on 98 - just costs more to ride the same distance.

"However, I usually follow Honda's recommendation and fuel it with 95."
Thanks, StinkyPete. I didn't know that. I've been running my ST1300 on 91.

"I think some of the cheap imported fuel might not be the best quality."
Jimwilly, my understanding is that our fuel refineries use the same oil imported from Singapore and the only difference may be in the additives. Matilda in Qld, in the early days, used to source its fuel from BP. Not sure what it does today.

[Wombat]

I am a bit like Brock and record the mileage and fuel regularly.  I reset the trip meter at fuel up. I know I need a life  but running 6 vehicles runs into some money for fuel and maintenance. I have found shell 98 vpower runs the best and at average 20kmpl.  last tank gull 91 17.65kmspl.  That is 450kms for tank 22.5l against 397kms. Country run nearly non stop with coffee.  Caltex is good but it does depend on where you get it as well.
In my diesel ute I had a servo with a lot of water in their tanks and it rusted the filters out.  I dont want to know about the motor. Trialling Iridium plugs so my trip to Morawa will tell. 

 

[Biggles]

I'll bet I'm as anal as Wombat about fuel monitoring, and I love a good fuel argument (with figures!)

Here's my last 30 refuellings extracted from my 17 column spreadsheet:

18.53     91
18.58     91
17.31     91
17.77     91
18.54     91
16.86     91
17.49     91
14.60     91
15.17     91
18.64     91
20.22     91
18.03     91
17.80     91
15.51     91  X
17.65     91
16.45     91
19.73     91
19.14     98
19.98     91
20.80     91
18.76     91
19.14     98
19.50     91
18.78     91
18.84     91
18.67     91
17.52     91
18.17     91
18.90     91

My thesis is the economy depends more on the trip than the fuel.
For example, the economy of 15.51 km/litre was all city riding, whereas all the rest had varying amounts of out-of-town riding.

The 19.98 km/l achieved on 98 RON was not as good as the 20.8 from the next tank which was 91 PULP
19.5 km/l on 98 RON was good to see, but so was 20.22 on 91 RON further up the table.

By all means spend 10+ ¢/l on Premium if you can feel it doing the bike good.  It's only around $2 for an average top-up.

I refuelled 73 times in 2013, so the 71 times I used 91 saved me around $142 or about 4x  25 litre fills.
So I reckoned I filled up four times for free compared with using 98 RON.     

[Brock]

My figures for 2012 & 2013

Year  Fills  Total Ks    Total Fuel  Total $   Av K/L  MPG (UK)  MPG (US)  K/$  Max Lt   Av Estimates
                                                                                                                        Empty   Res

2013   47   18582.2      1113.2      1589.96   16.68   50.74       42.21    11.69  27.5     467.13  383.72

2012  55    19800.5      1269.13    1737.68    15.60   44.37      36.91     11.39  27.52   436.84  358.84


Fuel economy slightly better last year, so must be doing some thing right.  All on 91

[Biggles]

Obviously, lighter riders get better fuel economy!   

[Brock]

That could be Biggles.

Most of my riding is to and from work, on back roads with a bit of traffic, so there is a bit of stop start and a bit of right hand twist. On a good cruise i will get 20 Ks /L