Any info would really help me cause I'll really be breaking the bank over time with 93 oct

Ethanol itself doesn't do anything physically to an engine. It can cause detonation at a lower pressure than would otherwise happen with straight gasoline. It can cause rubber seals to fail, causing fuel leaks. But most importantly, it sucks moisture up out of the air and then phase separates into a water/ethanol layer, which when fed into the carbs, can cause severe damage to an engine.portugeezer wrote:What does ethanol do to an engine? I never hear anything about damage from it aside from on this forum. Maybe I should start using that stable marine stuff?
About the same that is in the underground tanks (FRP, or uncoated steel), underground lines (FRP, plastic, or uncoated steel), pumps (steel with aluminum risers), hoses (rubber), or dispensers (steel, aluminum, zinc, plastic).suvcw04 wrote:It will slowly eat at rubber, plastic and aluminum. The only thing it doesn't degrade is stainless steel. Have much stainless steel in the fuel system of anything that you own?
You have over 400k miles on your 78?Solina Dave wrote:I've owned my '78 GL1000 since it was new, and I've always used regular 87 octane fuel as stipulated in the users manual. I thought that they probably knew what was best, at least at the time. I've always use Shell fuel unless it was absolutely necessary to do otherwise. I fill the tank, and add stabilizer every winter before storage. In all of those years, and over 650,000 kms. I can say that my engine performance has been, and still is, very good, although I will say that the carbs were given the gold-plated treatment at about 450,000 kms. The rings and valves were also done at about the same time, but that was simply taking advantage of the opportunity to do so, when the engine was removed for stator replacement.
Like I was saying, I feel that if regular fuel has been working fine all these years, why mess with things now?
Come on spring..............Dave
91 research octane = 87 pump octane.f1xrupr wrote:I have a 1980 gl 1100 with a fresh rebuild (3000 miles ?). It has vary good compression. There is a brown factory tag on the bottom right tube of the frame that reads, "minimum 91 RON (research octane number). I can see a tremendous difference it low rpm performance (I believe it's referred to by most as "low rpm growl"). However, it makes good sense that using a low octane fuel in a "well broke in engine"may not seem to matter...
SnoBrdr wrote:You have over 400k miles on your 78?Solina Dave wrote:I've owned my '78 GL1000 since it was new, and I've always used regular 87 octane fuel as stipulated in the users manual. I thought that they probably knew what was best, at least at the time. I've always use Shell fuel unless it was absolutely necessary to do otherwise. I fill the tank, and add stabilizer every winter before storage. In all of those years, and over 650,000 kms. I can say that my engine performance has been, and still is, very good, although I will say that the carbs were given the gold-plated treatment at about 450,000 kms. The rings and valves were also done at about the same time, but that was simply taking advantage of the opportunity to do so, when the engine was removed for stator replacement.
Like I was saying, I feel that if regular fuel has been working fine all these years, why mess with things now?
Come on spring..............Dave
Is the engine all original?
Thought I was doing good at 130k miles.
Most seem to use Gates or Napa belts as they are great quality and you can get them just about anywhere for cheap.Solina Dave wrote:SnoBrdr wrote:You have over 400k miles on your 78?Solina Dave wrote:I've owned my '78 GL1000 since it was new, and I've always used regular 87 octane fuel as stipulated in the users manual. I thought that they probably knew what was best, at least at the time. I've always use Shell fuel unless it was absolutely necessary to do otherwise. I fill the tank, and add stabilizer every winter before storage. In all of those years, and over 650,000 kms. I can say that my engine performance has been, and still is, very good, although I will say that the carbs were given the gold-plated treatment at about 450,000 kms. The rings and valves were also done at about the same time, but that was simply taking advantage of the opportunity to do so, when the engine was removed for stator replacement.
Like I was saying, I feel that if regular fuel has been working fine all these years, why mess with things now?
Come on spring..............Dave
Is the engine all original?
Thought I was doing good at 130k miles.
I only ever do relatively light maintenance myself. Over the years, if it broke I fixed it, or had it fixed. I'm sure that I don't need to tell you that it's been an expensive trip. I could have probably bought a new one with the cash I've parted with, but I like the relatively primitive nature of this old relic, compared to the new ones. New ones have too much stuff on them that would get in my way.
Having said that, there has been many replacements of worn out parts such as a fuel pump, water pump, exhaust parts, gaskets, switches, calipers, and on and on. But, like I said, the carbs were done once and the engine was given a thorough going over when it was removed to do stator work, although I don't remember specifically what components were addressed. Engine work, at that level isn't for me. Just fix it so I can ride it! I ride it a lot, and I don't mind spending a few bucks taking care of it. I never ride it too hard, but I feel the machine seems to run better, if the machine is allowed to do what it was designed to do. Also, it's been doing well running on regular gas.
One last thing. I need, once again, to replace my timing belts, preferably with the best ones available. It seems that all I'm seeing is a lot of conflicting ideas in regards to profiles, part numbers, brands, a different part number on the belt to that of the number on the box, Gates, Honda OEM etc. etc. The belt that's in there now seems to have lasted well, but I'd consider buying ahead of time, rather than remove the existing belts to see what they are, and then having to purchase, and wait for delivery. Any ideas?
f1xrupr wrote:Yep T-rat, you are right...the poorest fuel cost us more...go figure! It does however help prevent pre-ignition in high compression engines.