What grade of fuel for a GS?

[Hoomgar]

......and what oil company do you work for???? No all kidding aside, your experiences go against the grain of just about everything I've read about gas. No matter how much sense a statement makes though results matter more. I will try this, probably on the bike as it runs out of gas often and I'm very in tune with how many miles it will go on a tank (and it's far cheaper to fill that tank than my trucks!) Any noticable improvements will be reported.

I am the master of that I always get different results than everyone else. I am also the master of "firsts" as it seems the stuff that happens to me people are always saying "well that's a first" and "I've never seen that before"



he he, sux to be me

 

[mcycle-nut]

[ But here is the kicker and I tested it two summers in a row because me and my brother in laws go around on this one. One of them is ignorant enough to believe that all fuels come out of the same tank and you just pay more because your stupid.

I used to work with a guy who YEARS ago worked for a fuel company. All they did was add colouring for the different grades of gas. 8O I don't think they even measured octane levels back then. This guy is in his late sixties. Obviously they don't do this now. 8)

 

[Anonymous]

You make an excellent argument for wasting your money, Hoomgar. I'll continue to save mine by running cheap 87 octane gas. Frankly, I don't believe the improved gas mileage claim you make, and the running better is more subjective than anything.

But, to each his own. It's a free country, so go ahead and waste your money. Fine with me...

210,000 miles on GS bikes in 18 years, all on regular gas. No problems, no pinging, no performance loss of any kind.

I could experiment with premium fuel to see if mileage improves, but I just don't feel like paying extra for that experiment. I'll just continue to enjoy the GK.

Nick

 

[Anonymous]

Hoomgar,

I am confused about a section of one of your posts. (Refer to Apendix A)

(This is not a personal attack, so please DO NOT view it as such)

In this post, you implied that the grade (or purity) of fuel burned in an engine has a direct impact on the quantity (and retention) of sludge build-up in the crank case and/or some other passage where oil flows.

I have been churning over this suggestion for a few days now, but I cannot seem to determin how these fuel impurities can directly affect how clean the oil is. How are these impurities introduced into the oil?

The only senario that I can think of is pre-mature wearing or damage to the rings causing blow-by.

If this was what you were implying, then I would further suppose that you are saying that the amount of crud and carbon left behind is so significant, in contrast between octanes (lets say 89 and 93), that an abnormal amount of wear occures in the lower octane run engine (in contrast to the higher octane run engine).

OK, I am willing to recognize the possability of that, BUT...

You went further to imply that by mearly changing octanes (from 89 to 93), that somehow this damage will not only be reversed reducing blow-by, but it will directly cause the sedements/buildups in your oil passages etc to disapate.

This seems highly improbable!!

What does seem likely is that the person(s), that owned the vehicle(s) before you, never bothered to change the oil at reasonable intervals, causing exessive oil breakdown and thus exessive deposits. When you aquired the vehicle(s) you began to take care of them. By changing the oil every 1000k, you where flushing out a lot of that build-up that had been accumulating over the many years of abuse and neglect.

It seems to me that oil has the ability to pick up and suspend (for any given length of time) a limited amount of "crud." By changing it, before the oil had a chance to break down, you where able to remove more crud then the oil was depositing.

Of course this is only my opinion, so I may be misguides in my conclusions. Or maybe I compleatly misunderstood that you where saying, so please feel free to correct me if I have miss-understood or otherwise etc.....

Van



Apendix A "Here is yet another one you can do that you will notice if you are honest with yourself (you = anyone) if you buy a used car with a fair amount of miles on it that have all been put on with low octane fuels and then you do nothing but run high grade gas in it. You will find yourself needing to change the oil about every 1000 miles until you get all the sludge out from running the good gas in it now. It really is true. You can see it almost melt out the years of crap that have built up in there as you run it. It will calm down then after a few thousand miles and several oil changes."""

 

[Hoomgar]

Hoomgar,

I am confused about a section of one of your posts. (Refer to Apendix A)

(This is not a personal attack, so please DO NOT view it as such)

Not taken as a personal attack Just my chance to stir up a conversation on here as I usually do not do that like some others on here do.

In this post, you implied that the grade (or purity) of fuel burned in an engine has a direct impact on the quantity (and retention) of sludge build-up in the crank case and/or some other passage where oil flows.

I wasn't implying where anything built up as I am (as you should be able to tell) only parcially educated in the workings of internal combustion engines. I just know that stuff had built up that was coming out in excess after I got the vehicle in question and started to take care of it my way.

I have been churning over this suggestion for a few days now, but I cannot seem to determin how these fuel impurities can directly affect how clean the oil is. How are these impurities introduced into the oil?

At the time you posted this my post that you are quoting was not even one complete day old 23+ hours. So you could not have been churning for days on this

The only senario that I can think of is pre-mature wearing or damage to the rings causing blow-by.

Bingo! Older engines with a fair amount a miles on them was what I was refering to. These are my kind of vehicles with my budget.

If this was what you were implying, then I would further suppose that you are saying that the amount of crud and carbon left behind is so significant, in contrast between octanes (lets say 89 and 93), that an abnormal amount of wear occures in the lower octane run engine (in contrast to the higher octane run engine).

Um, I don't know??? I was making no referance to wear. Only build up. Keep in mind this has been my experience so this is "speculation". I am not saying that what is happening is because of this or that but that I really think that it is because I do this and that happens. It's speculation at best on this one.

OK, I am willing to recognize the possability of that, BUT...

You went further to imply that by mearly changing octanes (from 89 to 93), that somehow this damage will not only be reversed reducing blow-by, but it will directly cause the sedements/buildups in your oil passages etc to disapate.

Now you got me wrong. I never said that. I was implying that build up was being lossened and removed by running cleaner fuels. No refernce to any damage or wear as a result of either fuel. I feel that lower octane fuel are perfectly safe to run in your engine. My point is that in my experience I get better mileage and performance out of the higher grade fuels and have even noticed on older engines that they seem to be "cleaned" out a bit by the running of the better fuels. It sure seems it. But your next point is a possability that I did not consider before and could also be right.

This seems highly improbable!!

What does seem likely is that the person(s), that owned the vehicle(s) before you, never bothered to change the oil at reasonable intervals, causing exessive oil breakdown and thus exessive deposits. When you aquired the vehicle(s) you began to take care of them. By changing the oil every 1000k, you where flushing out a lot of that build-up that had been accumulating over the many years of abuse and neglect.

It seems to me that oil has the ability to pick up and suspend (for any given length of time) a limited amount of "crud." By changing it, before the oil had a chance to break down, you where able to remove more crud then the oil was depositing.

Of course this is only my opinion, so I may be misguides in my conclusions. Or maybe I compleatly misunderstood that you where saying, so please feel free to correct me if I have miss-understood or otherwise etc.....

Van

This is highly possible. You could be right about that. It makes perfect sense.

Apendix A "Here is yet another one you can do that you will notice if you are honest with yourself (you = anyone) if you buy a used car with a fair amount of miles on it that have all been put on with low octane fuels and then you do nothing but run high grade gas in it. You will find yourself needing to change the oil about every 1000 miles until you get all the sludge out from running the good gas in it now. It really is true. You can see it almost melt out the years of crap that have built up in there as you run it. It will calm down then after a few thousand miles and several oil changes."""

My mileage claims I can prove btw. That is the one thing I am stating that is a fact and not speculation. I have tested this one over and over on many vehicles and found it to be true on every single one of them. I am fairly confident that anyone could duplicate this one if they would be honest with themselves about the testing procedures and results.

My personal feelings are that it is an absolute waist of money to put low grade fuels in my engines. Others do not feel that way. Isn't it great to live in a country where we are allowed that luxury?

 

[Anonymous]

Hoomgar,

Thanks for your reply and corrections. Also much thanks for your good-naturedness.

I will make one correction to my post. I should have written a "couple days" instead of a "few days." In my use of the word days I wasn't intending to mean 24hr peiriods, only that yesterday after I read the post I thought a lot about it, and then this morning i considered it for some time then replied to your post.

I have been churning over this suggestion for a few days now, but I cannot seem to determin how these fuel impurities can directly affect how clean the oil is. How are these impurities introduced into the oil?

At the time you posted this my post that you are quoting was not even one complete day old 23+ hours. So you could not have been churning for days on this

cheers,
van

 

[Gary Lich]

[

So you have to understand that with what I have done and seen over the years I am quite skeptical about the application of low octane fuels for anything of mine other than maybe lighting bush fires

Wow! Did I type all that???

LIGHTING BRUSH FIRES 8O (you haven't been hanging out in Southern California during the past year have you :?:

 

[Hoomgar]

[

So you have to understand that with what I have done and seen over the years I am quite skeptical about the application of low octane fuels for anything of mine other than maybe lighting bush fires

Wow! Did I type all that???

LIGHTING BRUSH FIRES 8O (you haven't been hanging out in Southern California during the past year have you :?:

It wasn't me! I swear! 8O

 

[Evil Hobbit]

On the subject of oil.
One of my students works at the Valvoline oil bottling plant. He says to avoid the All Climate oil at all costs. He states the the Dura blend is the way to go. On a side note the Maxlife is great stuff for the older cars, I've used it and love it, I have 2 1992 Ford areostars (183K and 100k miles) makes them run like they are new.

 

[Gary Lich]

On the subject of oil.
One of my students works at the Valvoline oil bottling plant. He says to avoid the All Climate oil at all costs. He states the the Dura blend is the way to go. On a side note the Maxlife is great stuff for the older cars, I've used it and love it, I have 2 1992 Ford areostars (183K and 100k miles) makes them run like they are new.

Ask your student if he knows what is the ratio (% synthetic vs % dyno) that goes into a quart of their "Dura Blend".( I was always curious about how much synthetic you actually got for the extra buck and a half per qt.) Also, it would be interesting to hear the reason why one should avoid the "All Climate" stuff (10w-40 Valvoline all climate is the only thing I have ever run in both of the GS's I have owned).

 

[Anonymous]

Also, it would be interesting to hear the reason why one should avoid the "All Climate" stuff (10w-40 Valvoline all climate is the only thing I have ever run in both of the GS's I have owned).

read the "More Than You Ever Wanted to Know About Motor Oil" paper on "The GS Garage" page.

According to the numbers posted there, Valvoline is one of the comparatively worst oils listed.

it has a high %ash residue, and lower Viscosity Index, etc...

read the article if you want to know more.

van

 

[Planecrazy]

Well, Nick and a few others were quite adamant in their disdain over the use of high octane fuel and synthetic oil but as Hoomgar so appropriately put it, personal experience can be very convincing and there is nothing wrong with letting positive personal experience be your guide.

My experience with both high octane fuel and Mobil One has in some cases been nothing short of amazing. My best friend, for example, bought a 1991 Chevy Cavalier and began using Mobil One as soon as the break-in period was over. As you all probably know, the Cavalier is not known for being a particularly long-lived vehicle. It is good basic transportation, plain and simple, and that is about it.

To make a long story short, that Cavalier was driven very hard it's entire life. My friend, shall we say, is a very "spirited" driver. He had some routine maintenance done at 140,000 miles and a mechanic friend of his opened up the top of the motor at the time for inspection. To put it mildly, the mechanic barely believed his eyes, as the insides looked as if they were brand new -- no wear whatsoever!

At around 240,000 miles the car finally suffered a terminal engine failure, but I'm convinced (as is my buddy) that the motor would have run significantly longer if he had driven it more gently. We are also quite sure that the religious use of Mobil One was a key factor in prolonging the life of a vehicle that typically doesn't make it past 100,000 miles without major wear-related engine work of some kind.

We have both run all of our cars on Mobil One for years, and would never consider anything else. You non-believers can argue all you want about how much $$ you save running regular motor oil, but I'm completely convinced that in the long run I wind up avoiding engine work the rest of you are eventually faced with.

Same goes for premium fuel. I bought my GS550 in 1989, and before I started running premium the carbs needed rebuilding every two years, even though I wasn't putting many miles on it (or maybe because of it). After I started using premium, the required carb rebuilds kind of went away ... and I'm ashamed to admit that I never drained the carbs during the winter and rarely ever added Stabil (I know better now). Maybe I've been lucky -- I don't know, but I can't help but conclude that there is a direct correlation between the quality of product I'm putting into my engines and the way my engines suddenly stopped having the sorts of problems that were commonplace before...

I also have found that the bike seems to get better mileage on premium. Admittedly, I have not paid careful attention to specifics (as Hoomgar has), but the impression has always been that efficiency improves every time I run higher octane. For me it's a no-brainer -- save money and aggravation by running the "good stuff!"

Peace,
Steve 8)

 

[Anonymous]

You guys are so amusing to me. Continue pouring money down the drain while you treat the symptoms instead of the problem.

A well tuned motorcycle with clean carbs and fresh carb parts runs best on regular fuel. That's what it's meant to do.

Very amusing indeed how so many people could be so gullible about this premium fuel business.

I'm through with this thread. It's time to find entertainment some place else. :wink:

Nick

 

[arveejay]

[ But here is the kicker and I tested it two summers in a row because me and my brother in laws go around on this one. One of them is ignorant enough to believe that all fuels come out of the same tank and you just pay more because your stupid.

I used to work with a guy who YEARS ago worked for a fuel company. All they did was add colouring for the different grades of gas. 8O I don't think they even measured octane levels back then. This guy is in his late sixties. Obviously they don't do this now. 8)

I don't know about the 60's but currently at the pipeline there are 3 types of gasoline, leaded premium, unleaded premium, and unleaded. The only diference in shell and amoco or whatever gas is the additive. Brand names are the same as unbranded, as I said each type has it's own additive. When you buy a tank truck of gasoline you choose what type of jobber it will be delivered to and the proper additive is automatically added to the gas. In the early 70's before automation, the additive was pumped into a bucket, carried to the top of the tanker, and poured in before adding gas to mix it well. If you pull up to a pump which offers 4 octane grades the dispensor (Refered to as pumps) will blend the 2 grades together to acheive the octane you requested. Octane level is constantly monitored to ensure it is what it says it is. We are monitored by the division of weights and measures and octane and volume are guarenteed as posted.

 

[arveejay]

You guys are so amusing to me. Continue pouring money down the drain while you treat the symptoms instead of the problem.

A well tuned motorcycle with clean carbs and fresh carb parts runs best on regular fuel. That's what it's meant to do.

Very amusing indeed how so many people could be so gullible about this premium fuel business.

I'm through with this thread. It's time to find entertainment some place else. :wink:

Nick

I can't say if high octane will increase or decrease milage or performance. When I bought a new 850 in 1980 I asked what octane I should use and the dealer said brand didn't matter as long as it was 88-89 octane and that's all I have ever used.

 

[Evil Hobbit]

Ask your student if he knows what is the ratio (% synthetic vs % dyno) that goes into a quart of their "Dura Blend".( I was always curious about how much synthetic you actually got for the extra buck and a half per qt.) Also, it would be interesting to hear the reason why one should avoid the "All Climate" stuff (10w-40 Valvoline all climate is the only thing I have ever run in both of the GS's I have owned).[/quote]
I'll ask about the ratio. He gave me some chemisty talk about the blend of synthetics and the ability of the viscosity to hold up. What it comes done to is the all climate's lubricating properties are not as long lasting as the Durablend.

 

[Planecrazy]

You guys are so amusing to me. Continue pouring money down the drain while you treat the symptoms instead of the problem.

A well tuned motorcycle with clean carbs and fresh carb parts runs best on regular fuel. That's what it's meant to do.

Very amusing indeed how so many people could be so gullible about this premium fuel business.

I'm through with this thread. It's time to find entertainment some place else. :wink:

Nick

What's amusing, Nick, is how easily we can press your "buttons."

While nothing you've said is unreasonable, you don't take into account the fact that some of these older bikes (and other products mentioned) were designed to run on higher octane than what is sold today, so higher octane is actually what they were "meant to do." You also fail to address the fact that several of us are running bikes that don't suffer from any of the "problems" you speak of, yet they do indeed run even better and more efficiently on higher octane fuel.

Furthermore, you dismiss out of hand the results others have achieved without bothering to offer any concrete evidence that supports your position. Now it's just fine if you've done well buying the cheap stuff (and I'm happy for you), but when I see distinct improvement in my experience having tried it first "your way," unless you've tried it "my way" there's not much basis for your position...

Go ahead and do a moderate highway and city loop on your bike. Pay careful attention to your gas mileage. Then do it again under the same conditions with higher octane and see if the improved mileage doesn't more than outweigh the extra cost per tank. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if you were pleasantly surprised yourself at the result. I don't expect you to do the same with regard to Mobil One, but hey, that's fine with me ... you'll rebuild your motor before I rebuild mine -- to each his (or her) own.

Peace,
Steve 8)

 

[Hoomgar]

I'm undecided on oils but have had great success with two of the worst rated oils in the charts and that is the Pensoil and Valvoline. Both have worked well for me.

One thing I find interesting is that artical on new engine break in. (trying to find the link, it's elsewhere in this forum) he makes statements about the types of oils to use when and it really makes a lot of sense. I am going to follow his advice when we get mine back together. I want to see how true it is so I guess I am willing to test on my own bike.

I really don't have a prefered oil at this time as I have never noticed anything much to my attention in any way. The only thing I can say is some of the Quaker State oils from a long time ago would separate when left on a shelf for a few months. Not sure if that is an indication of a problem or not but I know it made a lot of people uneasy about the stability of the oil. It never stoped me from using it though when it was all that was available and I know some people who swear by it.

As for the octane I can't help, deny or apologize for my findings on that. Sorry Nick has to get so upset when other people have experiences that do not parrallel what he knows to be true so I typically try to avoid the outright argumentative type of conversations when we are sharing experiences. I just know what I have tested and found to be true for me as well as many family and friends over the years as well. Anyone reading I would encourage to make their own decisions based on what they find to be true and not on what i or any one else has said alone. It's just tips shared from first hand experience. Hope it helps.

 

[Hotblack]

Vandemon had some acute opbservations about the whole 'runs cleaner' thing, it can be deceiving and easy to attribute your observations to a false cause. My engines dont really get very sludgey though, so it's not an experiment I'm interested in. I am interested in the mileage experiment though, and that should be an easy one to control the variables in. I'm also really loaded, I thing I can spring for the extra .50 or so per tank for a few fill ups in the spirit of adventure. If what Hoomgar says holds water I should see some definite improvement, and that would be good news for me because an L tank affords a meager cruising range.

I would still like to get 'the real dirt' on gasoline, exactly how it's manufactured, etc.

Also one other variable to affect different brands of gas, or actually gas from station to station, is the condition of the tank it's stored in, and how often the contents turn over.