Ducati.ms - The Ultimate Ducati Forum banner
  • Hey Everyone! Enter your bike HERE to be a part of this months Bike of the Month Challenge!
1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
161 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
So I usually use 92...but my '12 PP really backfires and pops, especially when easing off the throttle for a shift, or just slowing down. Embarrassing.

I put in 87 and it seemed to be much less....

Is this explained mechanically?

Mat
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
532 Posts
Same here, when gas prices went crazy no one was and is buying premium at $3.90 a gallon, so it sits and degrades.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,303 Posts
I never use more than 89 on the MTS. Once I could get around to getting it dyno tuned, I'll probably have it done with 87 oct.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
206 Posts
If you guys can run your Multistrada 1200's on petrol with a octane level of 89 or less then that explains a lot of the problems you in the USA are having with after arket exhuasts and the like.
For that octane level to work with your bikes they must be in a state of detune to what comes over to Australia.
Our vintage fleet of motor cars run on 91octane. If you have anything from Europe it's 95octane or more and then you get 98octane which I use in my Multi 1200 which also has a upper cylinder lubricant in the fuel.
My hand book says not to use any less than 95octane.
Some bikes like BMW have a anti knock that will stop the bike from throwing you off if 95octane is not available to get you out of trouble but even then the bike doesn't like it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
275 Posts
If you guys can run your Multistrada 1200's on petrol with a octane level of 89 or less then that explains a lot of the problems you in the USA are having
Octane ratings shown at the pump are different in the US and Canada compared to the rest of the world and are typically 4-5 points lower than would be shown for exactly the same fuel in Australia or Austria.
 

·
Member
Joined
·
7,733 Posts
So I usually use 92...but my '12 PP really backfires and pops, especially when easing off the throttle for a shift, or just slowing down. Embarrassing.

I put in 87 and it seemed to be much less....

Is this explained mechanically?

Mat
You do not have a high compression, ie above 11.5:1, or an older, carboned-up engine that might benefit from higher octane fuels which are intended to reduce pre-ignition in high comp and carboned-up engines, so the combustion is less complete due to slower flame front and the uncombusted fuel then ignites in the hot exhaust system. Less complete combustion from using high octane fuels in engines that are not high compression may actually lead to premature carbon build up as well. Use 87 and you'll be fine. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
166 Posts
Due to the fact that RON is always from 4 to 5 points higher of its equivalent to PON or AKI, the number conversion between USA and Europe octane ratings will approximately be as follows:

USA (PON) –> Europe (RON)

87 –> 91
89 –> 93
91 –> 95
93 –> 98


If you guys can run your Multistrada 1200's on petrol with a octane level of 89 or less then that explains a lot of the problems you in the USA are having with after arket exhuasts and the like.
For that octane level to work with your bikes they must be in a state of detune to what comes over to Australia.
Our vintage fleet of motor cars run on 91octane. If you have anything from Europe it's 95octane or more and then you get 98octane which I use in my Multi 1200 which also has a upper cylinder lubricant in the fuel.
My hand book says not to use any less than 95octane.
Some bikes like BMW have a anti knock that will stop the bike from throwing you off if 95octane is not available to get you out of trouble but even then the bike doesn't like it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
206 Posts
Due to the fact that RON is always from 4 to 5 points higher of its equivalent to PON or AKI, the number conversion between USA and Europe octane ratings will approximately be as follows:

USA (PON) –> Europe (RON)

87 –> 91
89 –> 93
91 –> 95
93 –> 98
Thanks for the convertion that clears it up a bit.
But if they can run there bikes on less than your 91 would that not suggest
that maybe the Multies sent to the US are in a state of detune, ie: less compression?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,987 Posts
to the OP: Lower octane burns at a faster rate. Higher octane burns at a more "controlled" rate and/or flame-spread. That's why a high comp. engine would ping or detonate on low octane fuel. If you run too high an octane in engines that don't really need it, you run the risk of carbon residues in the combustion chamber, and maybe the exhaust. I've always run 87 octane in my ST2 and ST4s. No pinging can be heard, and I went over 53Kmi. on the ST2 when I sold it...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
373 Posts
I don't see any good reason to use less than 91 (US).

1) Ducati recommends no less than 91. (Smarter than me with engines)

2) Just because you don't hear detonation, doesn't mean the engine isn't, and Multi's don't have knock sensors.

3) If you are putting lower grade because of the price, well you are saving what, a whole ~$1!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
472 Posts
I don't see any good reason to use less than 91 (US).

1) Ducati recommends no less than 91. (Smarter than me with engines)

2) Just because you don't hear detonation, doesn't mean the engine isn't, and Multi's don't have knock sensors.

3) If you are putting lower grade because of the price, well you are saving what, a whole ~$1!
With our crappy CA gas, I'd be deathly afraid for my motor using 87 octane. And yes, it's (on average) .80c a tank savings between regular and premium.

To the OP, I'm guessing it's the lean ECU causing unburned fuel? Just a guess. Ducati race ECU and full termi may clear that up for you. ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
131 Posts
I don't see any good reason to use less than 91 (US).

1) Ducati recommends no less than 91. (Smarter than me with engines)

2) Just because you don't hear detonation, doesn't mean the engine isn't, and Multi's don't have knock sensors.

3) If you are putting lower grade because of the price, well you are saving what, a whole ~$1!
I totally agree. Many European car companies suggest using the highest octane available as well. Even our Premium gas is a corn infused government regulated ethanol cocktail to begin with.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
300 Posts
LT Snyder uses 87 in all his bikes. I'm not that brave so I have been using 89 in my three. No problems to report.
FWIW.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
166 Posts
I was told by two local motorcycle (one Ducati) dealerships that they use 87 in all of their test bikes and they only keep 87 in the shop.

LT Snyder uses 87 in all his bikes. I'm not that brave so I have been using 89 in my three. No problems to report.
FWIW.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
161 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
I'm not using 87 octane b/c I'm trying to save money....

I'm now using it exclusively b/c the bike runs DRAMATICALLY better on it vs. 92. The backfiring, popping, etc...when rolling off throttle is now almost entirely gone.

Full Quat-D system.
 

·
North Carolina, USA
Joined
·
3,321 Posts
So what reason does Ducati have for recommending at least 91 octane for US bikes? Just asking...

FWIW, I've always used premium in my bikes, even those I'm sure didn't really need it. It's a habit I can't break.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,476 Posts
I'm not using 87 octane b/c I'm trying to save money....

I'm now using it exclusively b/c the bike runs DRAMATICALLY better on it vs. 92. The backfiring, popping, etc...when rolling off throttle is now almost entirely gone.

Full Quat-D system.
Everyone has their opinion on what fuel is better to run, so be it!
I will tell you, the drivability issues you describe are not affected by the octane rating of a fuel...(I test the stuff for a living)...something else has made your bike happy! :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
275 Posts
Ducati recommends no less than 91. (Smarter than me with engines)
Correct. The manual for my 2010 MTS1200 says on page 149 "Use low-lead fuel with 95 octane rating at origin minimum" and on page 179 "Unleaded fuel with 95 fuel octane rating (at least)".

If we assume they mean 95 Italian RON octane, that would be 91 US/Canadian (PON) octane.

It seems very clear to me that running lower octane than called for will not harm the engine. This is a subject that gets beaten to death endlessly on forums (bike, sportscar, etc.) and it's often pointed out that certain fuels just aren't available everywhere, yet engines rarely explode.

I think the worst that could happen running 87(PON) instead of 91(PON) would be a small performance hit. It seems reasonable for riders to experiment to see whether they see an advantage (such as subjective performance differences) with different octanes.

For me, my bike runs fine on what I feed it (whatever the highest octane available is) and the price difference is trivial.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
206 Posts
Correct. The manual for my 2010 MTS1200 says on page 149 "Use low-lead fuel with 95 octane rating at origin minimum" and on page 179 "Unleaded fuel with 95 fuel octane rating (at least)".

If we assume they mean 95 Italian RON octane, that would be 91 US/Canadian (PON) octane.

It seems very clear to me that running lower octane than called for will not harm the engine. This is a subject that gets beaten to death endlessly on forums (bike, sportscar, etc.) and it's often pointed out that certain fuels just aren't available everywhere, yet engines rarely explode.

I think the worst that could happen running 87(PON) instead of 91(PON) would be a small performance hit. It seems reasonable for riders to experiment to see whether they see an advantage (such as subjective performance differences) with different octanes.

For me, my bike runs fine on what I feed it (whatever the highest octane available is) and the price difference is trivial.
I had a 2002 last of them Suzuki TL1000R, put a full Yoshi exhaust on it and a power commander, I'm in Australia.
Back then 98 octane was not everywhere and we wore riding back from Melbourne to Adelaide via the coast. The guys I wore ridding with decided to ride inland a bit and I needed fuel. The manufacturer recommended 95 octane and above but in this little town we pulled in didn't have any. I needed fuel despretly so I put $5 of 91 octane in to see me to the next major town. It was like riding a rodeo bull. That bike shook it head bucked it's rear wheel, motor back fired, spluttered and the like, it hated it. There was times there I thought it was just going to stop so from that experiance when a manufacturer recommends 95 octane and more I'm not going to put in less and lets see what happens, they quote this for a reason, just like there service recommendations.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,554 Posts
Correct. The manual for my 2010 MTS1200 says on page 149 "Use low-lead fuel with 95 octane rating at origin minimum" and on page 179 "Unleaded fuel with 95 fuel octane rating (at least)".

If we assume they mean 95 Italian RON octane, that would be 91 US/Canadian (PON) octane.

It seems very clear to me that running lower octane than called for will not harm the engine. This is a subject that gets beaten to death endlessly on forums (bike, sportscar, etc.) and it's often pointed out that certain fuels just aren't available everywhere, yet engines rarely explode.

I think the worst that could happen running 87(PON) instead of 91(PON) would be a small performance hit. It seems reasonable for riders to experiment to see whether they see an advantage (such as subjective performance differences) with different octanes.

For me, my bike runs fine on what I feed it (whatever the highest octane available is) and the price difference is trivial.
Have you ever seen what happens to pistons that detonate? You wouldn't say what you just said if you had.
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Top