You can safely use whatever your bike will run well on, without Knocking or Pinging. Kawi sets the timing to suit EPA requirements rather than optimum performance. As a result, the bikes need higher octane not to Ping.

The problem is that the 1700 is not really a high-compression engine, so it would ordinarily prefer regular which would be less likely to foul your plugs than premium. You have to strike a balance

I seem to be able to get away with using mid grade at 89 octane much of the time.

Another good reason to use Premium though is that the percentage of allowable Ethanol is generally much lower (Approx. 2% in Canada compared to 10% allowed in Regular/87 Octane and 5% in Mid Grade/89 Octane fuel). Unfortuneately, these figures vary from Province to Province and State to State.

 

Thanks for the info.
The dealer said it wasn't necessary, but said they would suggest mid grade if it seemd like there was a problem with regular.
I use Startron in my fuel in my boat, to counteract the effects of the ethanol, but the motor in the boat is a 454 pushing 390 hp.
I use premium in that.

 

The engine in your boat and the engine in your motorcycle are very close to each other in terms of horsepower per cubic inch/horsepower per cc.

Make sure and ask the dealer if they're going to tell Kawasaki they told you to use regular or mid grade against the Owner's Manual premium recommendation. I'd like to see that song and dance.

 

I run 89 no problems.


Sent from my iPhone using MO Free

 

Depends on where you live too. If you're at higher altitudes you can run lower octane.

 

I run 89 normally, but occasionally I run 87 in a pinch. Sometimes there is a little knock with the 87 (low RPMs in to high of a gear), so I try to avoid it.

 

I've run 87 since day one 2 years ago without a ping or a knock and I do lug the engine a lot. If you try 87 and it doesn't ping you're wasting you money on the upper octane. Higher octane does not mean greater power unless you have a knock sensor to tune to the timing too. Actually higher octane has less energy than lower octane. Also compression ratio in and of itself is not the determinating factor for a given octane. Valve timing is also a factor, intake and exhaust valve overlapping must be in the equation also.

 

I have used regular & premium in my 2009 Voyager the only difference that I have noticed is there is better throttle response with Regular gas and one other thing when you fill up with premium and it is a one hose pump with three grades of fuel, how much regular fuel do you get at premium price.

 

Kawasaki says use premium just so you waste your money because, apparently, they don't know anything about the engine they designed and built.

 

I agree. They dont know. I use regular no problem no ping.

 

I use 87, used to use premium but it kept backfiring. switched to 87 and no more backfiring

 

Right.

Just like they want your tires to wear out fast so you have to buy new ones often to make you a pissed off customer. Makes ZERO sense, that sort of logic.

 

I use 89 or 90 unless my dealer asks

 

I am using 89 octane, seems to run even better with my 2011 Vaquero than over priced and hotter running Premium.

 

Based upon comments here, I filled up yesterday with 89 instead of 91. So far, no pinging and I'm getting about 2 more mpg! It will be interesting to see if that holds up. :curl-lip:

 

My wife and I just got done with a 2250 mile vacation. I used premium 93 octane for the first half of the trip. Mostly all flat lands I then had no choice at one station and had to use mid grade 89 octane. About 75% mountains on the way back home. What I found was just amzing to me. I got Better milage and Better preformace from the engine. The bike responded quicker, accelerated quicker and NO pinging. So I will be using mid grade 89 from now on and maybe a tank of premium once a month.

 

Yup, still holding true for me as well. I'm averaging 40.5 mpg, which is over an extra mile per gallon. No pinging, more power, less money! I see nothing wrong with this equation!

 

87 octane regular gas has more power in it than the 89 or 93 octane "High Test" gas. The nomenclature of "high test" is the gas companies Madison Ave. creation to make you feel your getting something better.

Pinging not-with-standing... as the Vulcan does not have a knock sensor the only people benefiting is the gas station and oil company... you have none.

 

Just asking! Are you sure the 1700's don't have a anti knock sensor? I ask, because I thought I read in another post somewhere they do have the sensor. I have a new 2011 Nomad and have not even put any gas in the bike yet. Still using what the dealer put in it and I doubt they dumped in premium fuel. Weather here in Wisconsin has been raining every other day.

 

Yes I'm sure. There is no mention at all of knock sensors in the service manual.

 

hi. im on my second tank of 89 octane, to me it runs better and sounds more like a bike. definetly feels like more power and less back compression noises.and no midrange hesitation , in 3rd just cruising 30 mph its smooth not jumpy. i ran 87 in my vtx and it ran great for 6 years. and i agree , my dealer put 2 gallons in it when i picked it up and i doupt they put 91 or 93.

 

Our gas octane options around here are 87, 89, & 93. I used to run the 93 cause the manual calls for a minimum of 90. I tried the 89 a while back and discovered the bike had more power & got better gas mileage on 89 as opposed to 93 with no pinging. We do not have 91 octane option around here, if they did i would probably use it instead of 89.

 

What does your bike like?

I use 87. The day I picked it up, the service manager told me the book says at least 91 but that I should try 89. Then someone else told me I probably could use 87. I tried 87 and had some knocking. Went back to 91 for 9 months or so. Put an air kit on, the next time I filled up with 89. No knocking. Went on vacation and put 2,000 or so miles on Victoria with 89, no knocking. When I got back home, tried 87. No knocking. Been using 87 ever since and she runs great.

Bottom line, you will have to see what your bike likes and go with it.

 

89 is closer to 90 than is 93

It appears to me that, given a choice of 89 or 93, and that the manual calls for "at least 90," the selection of 89 could be as acceptable as 93. One octane cannot have any demonstrative difference in the performance or longevity of the engine. Just a thought.

 

It appears to me that, given a choice of 89 or 93, and that the manual calls for "at least 90," the selection of 89 could be as acceptable as 93. One octane cannot have any demonstrative difference in the performance or longevity of the engine. Just a thought.

If 87 doesn't ping or any other anomaly why use 89? Also 87 will give you better MPG.

 

64, you are answering a different question, "Given the choice of 87, 89, or 93, ...... ?"

While you can run an engine on lower-octane fuel in the short term, and in your case without any obvious negative effect, I wonder if somebody could let us know the consequences of routinely running with low-octane fuel in the long run? That is, for an engine that is thought to require high-octane fuel?

In other words, if an engine did require high-octane fuel yet did not show any short-term effects of running on low-octane fuel, are there any long-term effects that could show up?

My inquiring feeble mind wishes to know!

 

As of this post... I have not seen or heard of one thread, post, rumor or BS of ANY detrimental use of 87 on the Voyager in it's 3 years on the market.

Over the 2 years I've had this bike and knowing the issues running 87 I was/am keenly listening for pinging under load at low RPM's. I've lugged my Voyager down to 1K RPMS in 6th gear many times with very little exhaust noise and I've not had a hint of pre-detonation. Also I can't agree that "loud pipes" are masking the pinging.

Off the top of my head I can't think of any other bad thing but pre-detonation using low octane. If you don't have any pinging I don't see any long term issues.

As for Kawasaki's recommendation of 90 octane it's kinda ridiculous because it's all but impossible to get it anywhere in the USA. So if you really think you must us 90 you must use 93. Of course you could keep track of the octane of the last fill up and blend ratings to get the 90... but that's a real pain in the ass.

Use whatever rating you want... that's what I do and don't loose any sleep over it.

 

With all the noise that these rides make, you aren't going to hear initial knock/detonation until it gets fairly loud (severe), and since the manufacturer of my very expensive engine tells me it prefers 90-octane or better fuel. My engineering credentials are not to a sufficient level to challenge that assertion, so 90+ it is.

 

Subliminal Pre-Detonation

So we could hypothesize that there could be a level of predetonation occurring without our knowing about it, such that piston damage could occur over the longer haul. This could be the result even though in the short run a fill up of low-octane gas would not reveal an immediate effect.

What you are also saying is that, with a motorcycle, there is enough noise involved from other sources than one might not hear predetonation as readily as on some other vehicle. Thus one might have a problem with predetonation in a motorcycle and not be as liable to know about it.

This makes a lot of sense.

 

This makes a lot of sense.

What makes even more sense to me is that I'm simply not willing to risk damaging my engine for what amounts to mere pennies per fill-up.

Again, Ma Kaw (the manufacturer of the engine) says use 90-octane or better fuel, so that's what I use. 91-octane fuel is available pretty much everywhere I ride, so 91-octane it is. If on the rare occasion 91 isn't available, 93 always is, so that's what goes in the tank.

 

Been reading all the info on what gas to use!
I just bought a new 2011 Nomad last week and only have 110 miles on it. Used the gas the dealer put in the bike on delivery. I asked the service department what I should put in the bike and they told me not to bother with 91 octane. either use reg or mid grade. They have not had any riders complaining or report problems with gas issues. They said the manual is being over conserative and premium wasn't necessary.
I just filled the tank with mid grade 89 octane and have 30 miles on it and noticed the bike seemed to run just fine. I didn't even ask what grade the dealer put in on delivery. All the dealer said was to use a good brand of fuel.

 

All the dealer said was to use a good brand of fuel.

And surely you asked to what a "good brand of fuel" referred, right?

I simply don't understand why for a potential few pennies immediate savings anyone would intentionally disregard the manufacturer's recommendation with regard to the type and quality of fuel that should be ingested by these extremely expensive engines of ours.

If you're going to be your own engineer, why not just go ahead and use sewing machine oil in the crankcase and dirty bath water in the radiator? I mean, both will save you a few cents over the manufacturer-recommended fluids, right?

 

OK...I read thru this thread and there are some really valid points and some not-truths, here's is my experirnce over 36 years workin on skoots....

I see in my Vaquero from page 78 to 82 not one single mention of premium, mid-grade or regular. Since octane ratings vary thru-out the country manufacturors can only specify "octane rating" and not the above nmentioned descriptions. Premium down here is 93, premium in other areas is 91..see what I mean?

The term "pre-detonation" is funny and i laff at it's use. Detonation is the uncontrolled occurance of combustion which occurs AFTER the start of the normal combustion process, detonation is pretty harmful to an engine. So "pre-detonation" actually refers to normal combustion cuz that is what is occuring before detonation.

What peeps are really trying to convey is a mixed-up referance to pre-ignition and detonation, which are 2 completely different occcurances within the combustion chamber.

Detonation is caused by so many variables, not limited to octane too low, hot spots in the combustion chamber that ignite the surrounding a/f molecules, lean a/f ratios, high combustion chamber temperatures, ignition timing too far advanced, high levels of compression, wether static or as a result of turbo or blower usage. High compression and /or boosted engines WILL require high octane fuel to resist detonation.

Pre-ignition refers to the ignition of the a/f mixture BEFORE the spark jumps the gap. It is also caused by the many variables that are the same as the cause of detonation.

In either case the pinging we hear are the flame fronts from the different combustion processes colliding, kinda like the air masses colliding after lightning and the resultant thunder. The collision creates huge amounts of shock withing the engine, "ringing" the metal components like a hammer hitting a bell. Severe cases of either will collapse piston domes, distort cylinder bores and pistons like they were made of clay, break and crack rings, heads , cyliders, etc. Bad stuff.

NOW...this is what I have learned over 36 years of working on skoots.

Generally, factory specified octane ratings are for worst case scenarios in engine operation such as a real hot engine climbing some god-awful hill fully loaded. High combustion chamber pressures and temperatures may cause detonation and/or pre-ignition. Most modern sportbikes with over 12-1 c/r do run better and make more power on 93, but not all.

Ocatne levels DO NOT relate to a fuels ability to make power...PERIOD. It only relates to the fuel's ability to resist detonation and pre-ignition.

I have found thru EXTENSIVE dyno testing, set-of-the-pants testing, mpg calculations that our Vulcans can and in fact do run safely on 89. It's only one point below factory specs, which are inmy opinion more than what these engines need. Fuel of too high of an octane cannot release all of it's energy in an angine that does not need that octane level, it does not have enough compression to extract the thermal energy of that fuel. From my skoot and many others 87 is also perfectly fine.

Those including myself that notice better throttle response, engine performance and mpg with 87 or 89 vs 91 or 93 are not imagining these things. We are truly "listening" to what our engines are telling us, they like thel lower octanes as the octane levels more closely match what the actual combustion process requires for a ping-free process.

When we "de-restrict" our engines with a freer flowing exhaust system we improve what is called 'blow-down", which is the inadequate and incomplete removal of ehhaust gasses from the cylinder, diluting the incoming a/f mixture. This increases the temperature of that mixture making it more prone to detonation. A freer flowing exhaust can reduce the octane requirement of an engine dut to better scavenging of the exhaust.

BAK's allow cooler air into the engine, lowering intake charge temperatures can also reduce an engine's octane requirements.

My Vaquero makes almost 23 more H.P. and almost 27 pnds more torque than stock, i have advanced ignition timing in certain areas, runs on 87 octane and does not ping. My trip down to Key West last weekend netted an average of 54.5 mpg, coming back at a brisker pace netted 51.5 mpg.

Goes to show what these engines are capable of while using lower octane fuel, and saving some $$$ in the process

RACNRAY