Fuel

[mvk24_imp]

Kind of disagree with mvk

The CB1100 is designed to run on 87 octane and up to 10% ethanol (not 15%) and says this in the owne'rs manual.(as most Hondas have been for years)

Running any higher grade of gas than that, is just wasting money. You get no more performance and it doesn't run any "better" or cleaner. Of course, it's your motorcycle and your money.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z_IVvVz4SSg

See ferret i just watched that and took away that I definitely wanna keep using 93 octane. As he mentioned its not for power but he mentioned that factory rating rises if you raise the Ignition timing or go to high compression pistons ( my ECU was flashed and ignition timing altered by guhls) and the 93 octanes having more detergents to keep higher tuned engines cleaner.

Thats why I thought I was always supposed to use 93 to keep all my carburetors cleaner for longer? (The extra detergents)

I appreciate the video tho Idk how I never saw that one on their channel.

2014 CB1100, 1981 KZ440 LTD, 1993 Yamaha XJ600 Seca, 1994 Yamaha XJ600 Seca

[Houtman_imp]

I have used 93 Shell /BP all my life in my bikes and all other equipment with gas engines and never had ANY carb/fuel injection problems , if I waste money as long as it MY money than there is no problem.

[mvk24_imp]

I have used 93 Shell /BP all my life in my bikes and all other equipment with gas engines and never had ANY carb/fuel injection problems , if I waste money as long as it MY money than there is no problem.

Well Houtman you know how these NY prices can get out of hand

2014 CB1100, 1981 KZ440 LTD, 1993 Yamaha XJ600 Seca, 1994 Yamaha XJ600 Seca

[the Ferret]

Kind of disagree with mvk

The CB1100 is designed to run on 87 octane and up to 10% ethanol (not 15%) and says this in the owne'rs manual.(as most Hondas have been for years)

Running any higher grade of gas than that, is just wasting money. You get no more performance and it doesn't run any "better" or cleaner. Of course, it's your motorcycle and your money.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z_IVvVz4SSg

See ferret i just watched that and took away that I definitely wanna keep using 93 octane. As he mentioned its not for power but he mentioned that factory rating rises if you raise the Ignition timing or go to high compression pistons ( my ECU was flashed and ignition timing altered by guhls) and the 93 octanes having more detergents to keep higher tuned engines cleaner.

Thats why I thought I was always supposed to use 93 to keep all my carburetors cleaner for longer? (The extra detergents)

I appreciate the video tho Idk how I never saw that one on their channel.

2014 CB1100, 1981 KZ440 LTD, 1993 Yamaha XJ600 Seca, 1994 Yamaha XJ600 Seca

See ferret i just watched that and took away that I definitely wanna keep using 93 octane. As he mentioned its not for power but he mentioned that factory rating rises if you raise the Ignition timing or go to high compression pistons ( my ECU was flashed and ignition timing altered by guhls) and the 93 octanes having more detergents to keep higher tuned engines cleaner.

Thats why I thought I was always supposed to use 93 to keep all my carburetors cleaner for longer? (The extra detergents)

I appreciate the video tho Idk how I never saw that one on their channel.

2014 CB1100, 1981 KZ440 LTD, 1993 Yamaha XJ600 Seca, 1994 Yamaha XJ600 Seca
Well, the OP in all likelihood hasn't had a Guhl reflash (although it's possible I suppose). For HIM or anyone else with a stock CB 1100 as it came from the factory, the factory engineers determined that 87 grade up to 10% ethanol would be the recommended fuel for the machine.

Using 93 grade probably won't hurt a stock CB, but it's unnecessary, as determined by Honda.

[mvk24_imp]

Kind of disagree with mvk

The CB1100 is designed to run on 87 octane and up to 10% ethanol (not 15%) and says this in the owne'rs manual.(as most Hondas have been for years)

Running any higher grade of gas than that, is just wasting money. You get no more performance and it doesn't run any "better" or cleaner. Of course, it's your motorcycle and your money.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z_IVvVz4SSg

See ferret i just watched that and took away that I definitely wanna keep using 93 octane. As he mentioned its not for power but he mentioned that factory rating rises if you raise the Ignition timing or go to high compression pistons ( my ECU was flashed and ignition timing altered by guhls) and the 93 octanes having more detergents to keep higher tuned engines cleaner.

Thats why I thought I was always supposed to use 93 to keep all my carburetors cleaner for longer? (The extra detergents)

I appreciate the video tho Idk how I never saw that one on their channel.

2014 CB1100, 1981 KZ440 LTD, 1993 Yamaha XJ600 Seca, 1994 Yamaha XJ600 Seca

See ferret i just watched that and took away that I definitely wanna keep using 93 octane. As he mentioned its not for power but he mentioned that factory rating rises if you raise the Ignition timing or go to high compression pistons ( my ECU was flashed and ignition timing altered by guhls) and the 93 octanes having more detergents to keep higher tuned engines cleaner.

Thats why I thought I was always supposed to use 93 to keep all my carburetors cleaner for longer? (The extra detergents)

I appreciate the video tho Idk how I never saw that one on their channel.

2014 CB1100, 1981 KZ440 LTD, 1993 Yamaha XJ600 Seca, 1994 Yamaha XJ600 Seca
Well, the OP in all likelihood hasn't had a Guhl reflash (although it's possible I suppose). For HIM or anyone else with a stock CB 1100 as it came from the factory, the factory engineers determined that 87 grade up to 10% ethanol would be the recommended fuel for the machine.

Using 93 grade probably won't hurt a stock CB, but it's unnecessary, as determined by Honda.

See ferret i just watched that and took away that I definitely wanna keep using 93 octane. As he mentioned its not for power but he mentioned that factory rating rises if you raise the Ignition timing or go to high compression pistons ( my ECU was flashed and ignition timing altered by guhls) and the 93 octanes having more detergents to keep higher tuned engines cleaner.

Thats why I thought I was always supposed to use 93 to keep all my carburetors cleaner for longer? (The extra detergents)

I appreciate the video tho Idk how I never saw that one on their channel.

2014 CB1100, 1981 KZ440 LTD, 1993 Yamaha XJ600 Seca, 1994 Yamaha XJ600 Seca
Well, the OP in all likelihood hasn't had a Guhl reflash (although it's possible I suppose). For HIM or anyone else with a stock CB 1100 as it came from the factory, the factory engineers determined that 87 grade up to 10% ethanol would be the recommended fuel for the machine.

Using 93 grade probably won't hurt a stock CB, but it's unnecessary, as determined by Honda. O yes I forgot about the OP I apologize. I got lost in our own discussions of fuel now.

outside of the OP question now I have one

Cause I gotta be honest I'm not 100% sure what exactly ghul was doing to the ignition timing. My understanding was taking out the "factory retardation" but what exactly does that mean? Does that mean they advanced the ignition timing? Would possibly require the higher octane as mentioned in that revzilla video?

I had them do all offered services (raise red line, remove speed limiter, do whatever they did to the ignition timing) but not so sure what that ignition timing service actually does



2014 CB1100, 1981 KZ440 LTD, 1993 Yamaha XJ600 Seca, 1994 Yamaha XJ600 Seca

[PowerDubs_imp]

Why not email and ask them what octane they recommend?

I can say- at least whatever was done to my ECU def had ign timing changed in some way.

Can't speak to whether than means advanced in some areas- or 'restrictions' removed- which would mean advanced compared to where it was.

My dyno results on the Guhl ECU keeping in mind that I had already controlled / added fuel and still did- netted 3 wheel hp, and I figure that is all ign timing as everything else was unchanged.

Keep in mind just adding fuel (richer a/f) by itself cools the combustion chamber and can lessen the chance of detonation.

Very well may still be tame enough to run regular gas, but why risk it over a few bucks a tank.

Here in Colorado, regular grade E-10 gasoline is 85 octane, not 87. My CB ran great on 85 even at 14.000’+ elevation. Zero pinging, zero noticeable power loss, zero issues, and gas mileage in the mid-60’s.

Knocking depends on how much power you actually pull. Knocking isn't ever an issue if all you pull is 30 HP at 2500 rpms. The Honda guidelines do have to take into account that somebody may run her at high rpms all/many a times.
The impact of elevation (or atmospheric pressure), this is compensated for by the injection system.

None of that is true. 'Power' itself is irrelevant to pre-igntion / detonation.

HOW that power is made is a contributor- but the power value itself is not.

Meaning- higher compression ratio? More octane needed.

The VERY important variable is load, and time.

A high compression engine driven correctly can be fine- and give that exact same engine / fuel / vehicle to someone 'taking it easy' can damage it.

When you mention 'Honda has to take into account high RPM'- well, they certainly do- but not for pinging issues.

High RPM concerns are much more inertial mass, valve spring, rod bearing, oiling issues...and noise.

You see detonation problems at lower RPM & high load- as in your example- 2,500 RPM up a grade but in a high gear - more throttle, bogging around is MUCH worse than flying through higher RPM quickly- even if 8-9k.

In the 90's I used to have to park in a commuter lot at a train stop- and the road out of it was long, steep, and slow speed limit. The amount of cars driving up that hill always crawling slow both in car speed and too low engine RPM- sounding like cans of marbles used to drive me crazy.

All they had to do was downshift, let the rpm climb a bit, let the gearing do the work, which means they would have backed off the throttle- less load, and stopped the pinging.

[j3gq_imp]

Why not email and ask them what octane they recommend?

I can say- at least whatever was done to my ECU def had ign timing changed in some way.

Can't speak to whether than means advanced in some areas- or 'restrictions' removed- which would mean advanced compared to where it was.

My dyno results on the Guhl ECU keeping in mind that I had already controlled / added fuel and still did- netted 3 wheel hp, and I figure that is all ign timing as everything else was unchanged.

Keep in mind just adding fuel (richer a/f) by itself cools the combustion chamber and can lessen the chance of detonation.

Very well may still be tame enough to run regular gas, but why risk it over a few bucks a tank.

Here in Colorado, regular grade E-10 gasoline is 85 octane, not 87. My CB ran great on 85 even at 14.000’+ elevation. Zero pinging, zero noticeable power loss, zero issues, and gas mileage in the mid-60’s.

Knocking depends on how much power you actually pull. Knocking isn't ever an issue if all you pull is 30 HP at 2500 rpms. The Honda guidelines do have to take into account that somebody may run her at high rpms all/many a times.
The impact of elevation (or atmospheric pressure), this is compensated for by the injection system.

None of that is true. 'Power' itself is irrelevant to pre-igntion / detonation.

HOW that power is made is a contributor- but the power value itself is not.

Meaning- higher compression ratio? More octane needed.

The VERY important variable is load, and time.

A high compression engine driven correctly can be fine- and give that exact same engine / fuel / vehicle to someone 'taking it easy' can damage it.

When you mention 'Honda has to take into account high RPM'- well, they certainly do- but not for pinging issues.

High RPM concerns are much more inertial mass, valve spring, rod bearing, oiling issues...and noise.

You see detonation problems at lower RPM & high load- as in your example- 2,500 RPM up a grade but in a high gear - more throttle, bogging around is MUCH worse than flying through higher RPM quickly- even if 8-9k.

In the 90's I used to have to park in a commuter lot at a train stop- and the road out of it was long, steep, and slow speed limit. The amount of cars driving up that hill always crawling slow both in car speed and too low engine RPM- sounding like cans of marbles used to drive me crazy.

All they had to do was downshift, let the rpm climb a bit, let the gearing do the work, which means they would have backed off the throttle- less load, and stopped the pinging.

None of that is true. 'Power' itself is irrelevant to pre-igntion / detonation.
...
I don't wonna get into a useless argument, but I worked aircraft engines for years, on an engine test bed, with direct measurements of all parameters. The picture I painted is a simplified version for our m/c, but to say none of this is true is a bit stark ... unless supported by facts.You would have to tell us a bit about where you learned your lessons, and how ???

[GoldOxide_imp]

I've never heard/felt the CB1100 ping using regular octane fuel under any load, including during profuse hot, humid days in heavy non-moving traffic.

I have almost every time felt the CB1100 gasp and hesitate using high and highest octane fuel when moderately accelerating onto a highway.

[jtopiso_imp]

Why not email and ask them what octane they recommend?

I can say- at least whatever was done to my ECU def had ign timing changed in some way.

Can't speak to whether than means advanced in some areas- or 'restrictions' removed- which would mean advanced compared to where it was.

My dyno results on the Guhl ECU keeping in mind that I had already controlled / added fuel and still did- netted 3 wheel hp, and I figure that is all ign timing as everything else was unchanged.

Keep in mind just adding fuel (richer a/f) by itself cools the combustion chamber and can lessen the chance of detonation.

Very well may still be tame enough to run regular gas, but why risk it over a few bucks a tank.

Here in Colorado, regular grade E-10 gasoline is 85 octane, not 87. My CB ran great on 85 even at 14.000’+ elevation. Zero pinging, zero noticeable power loss, zero issues, and gas mileage in the mid-60’s.

Knocking depends on how much power you actually pull. Knocking isn't ever an issue if all you pull is 30 HP at 2500 rpms. The Honda guidelines do have to take into account that somebody may run her at high rpms all/many a times.
The impact of elevation (or atmospheric pressure), this is compensated for by the injection system.

None of that is true. 'Power' itself is irrelevant to pre-igntion / detonation.

HOW that power is made is a contributor- but the power value itself is not.

Meaning- higher compression ratio? More octane needed.

The VERY important variable is load, and time.

A high compression engine driven correctly can be fine- and give that exact same engine / fuel / vehicle to someone 'taking it easy' can damage it.

When you mention 'Honda has to take into account high RPM'- well, they certainly do- but not for pinging issues.

High RPM concerns are much more inertial mass, valve spring, rod bearing, oiling issues...and noise.

You see detonation problems at lower RPM & high load- as in your example- 2,500 RPM up a grade but in a high gear - more throttle, bogging around is MUCH worse than flying through higher RPM quickly- even if 8-9k.

In the 90's I used to have to park in a commuter lot at a train stop- and the road out of it was long, steep, and slow speed limit. The amount of cars driving up that hill always crawling slow both in car speed and too low engine RPM- sounding like cans of marbles used to drive me crazy.

All they had to do was downshift, let the rpm climb a bit, let the gearing do the work, which means they would have backed off the throttle- less load, and stopped the pinging.

None of that is true. 'Power' itself is irrelevant to pre-igntion / detonation.
...
I don't wonna get into a useless argument, but I worked aircraft engines for years, on an engine test bed, with direct measurements of all parameters. The picture I painted is a simplified version for our m/c, but to say none of this is true is a bit stark ... unless supported by facts.You would have to tell us a bit about where you learned your lessons, and how ???

None of that is true. 'Power' itself is irrelevant to pre-igntion / detonation.
...
I don't wonna get into a useless argument, but I worked aircraft engines for years, on an engine test bed, with direct measurements of all parameters. The picture I painted is a simplified version for our m/c, but to say none of this is true is a bit stark ... unless supported by facts.You would have to tell us a bit about where you learned your lessons, and how ???
The thing is that power output, engine load and engine speed are related. So you can see a correlation between self-detonation and power output, but the cause will be the excessive engine load. If you got the same power at different engine speed (e.g. shorter gear), it wouldn't self detonate. So it's not just power...