The New And Improved Unofficial R65 Forum V2

Technical Discussion => BMW Technical Q&A, Primarily R65 => Topic started by: ukzknos on March 22, 2010, 05:20:11 PM

Title: Lead replacement additive, or not?
Post by: ukzknos on March 22, 2010, 05:20:11 PM

Are you using a lead additive or not (as I have read the threads about it distorting the carb diaphragms)?

Secondly, should we be running 'regular' unleaded petrol (95 RON) or 'Super Unleaded' (97+ RON)?

Title: Re: Lead replacement additive, or not?
Post by: Bob_Roller on March 22, 2010, 05:27:36 PM

I use 87 octane, can't quite remember what that translates into, on your octane rating system .

I need to use mid-grade or premium once the temperatures start to get around 100 F. (38C), or the bike detonates on heavy throttle use .

Title: Re: Lead replacement additive, or not?
Post by: ukzknos on March 22, 2010, 05:29:36 PM

Bob

We Brits don't need to worry about 100F temps!  ;D

Title: Re: Lead replacement additive, or not?
Post by: Lucky_Lou on March 23, 2010, 03:41:21 PM

No No No ......... a pain in the A*** i had nothing but grief with additives.Ive just run over 1000 miles without and no problems.
Lou

Title: Re: Lead replacement additive, or not?
Post by: Barry on March 24, 2010, 05:02:27 PM

Never used an additive and also never yet detected any measurable closing of the exhaust valve clearances. Early days though in terms of mileage.  I do retard the ignition by 2 Deg. to keep the pinging at bay.

I think the whole issue was overblown some when unleaded first came in.

Title: Re: Lead replacement additive, or not?
Post by: Rob Valdez 79 R65 on March 25, 2010, 07:36:06 PM

I did, once, sometime back in the '80s......

Title: Re: Lead replacement additive, or not?
Post by: Bob_Roller on March 25, 2010, 08:07:27 PM

This is just an observation from about the last 30 years or so .

Reading all of the articles in auto and bike magazines regarding comparison tests for after market fuel additives, and what ever is the newest hyped product of the time .

The usual conclusion, is that there is no real world data to back up claims of any better performance, or whatever positive benefit this product would have .

Most variations of the test results, were within the statistical error for such a test .

If there were any repeatable positive results, it usually was of such a small amount, that it wasn't worth the effort and expense .

Just the observation from another of life's  slackers .

Title: Re: Lead replacement additive, or not?
Post by: msbuck on March 25, 2010, 11:08:28 PM

Quote

I did, once, sometime back in the '80s......

 [smiley=lolk.gif] [smiley=rolleyes.gif] [smiley=cheesy.gif]
You're so funny, Rob!