Ethanol in a Duc?

[Cloner]

Fuel also lubricates valve guides to some extent, for what that's worth.  Some Ducati models, especially two-valvers, already have valve guide issues that might be exacerbated by the use of a non-lubricating fuel.

[Skyshadow]

OR! buy some FCR's to throw on when/if I get bored of tinkering with E85 to find out it's possibilities.

[Howie]

The lack of lubrication will affect electric fuel pumps and injectors not designed for E85, clearly not a problem with a carbed Monster.  Valve guides?  Maybe to some extent but oil dripping down through the guide is the major sourceThe E85 works so well on your Evo in largely because of the turbo.  The power increase mostly is a result of increased boost.

As far as jets go, you would probably wind up buying a handful of jets and start drilling.  after you got the main jet cirrect it would now be time for dealing with pilots,air bleeds and needle profile.  Timing might be done with the Igntech.  Then, after timing you are back to fueling since that will change.  Then you have the notably less than ideal compression to deal with.  Custom pistons?  Forced induction? 

[Greg]

Reviving this thread cause now it is cost efficient to go E85.

How do you figure it is cost efficient to go E85? I'm assuming this is because you see E85 being advertised for a lower price, but if you do the math it is actually more expensive. if you go to http://fuelgaugereport.opisnet.com/index.asp you will get the national average for fuel.
Assuming you put Premium in your Duc, it currently shows Premium at $4.05 and E85 at $3.22, however if you look at the column next to E85, it gives the price of E85 adjusted for the difference in BTU as being $4.24.

Unless you can get E85 for substantially less than Premium, you are making a bunch of modifications that will actually cost you more to fuel your bike.

[ducatiz]

No one should have to use premium in their Ducati unless the engine has been modified.

[Greg]

No one should have to use premium in their Ducati unless the engine has been modified.

Many do, but I was giving a worst case scenario. If you use regular the btu adjusted priced differential is even wider.  Regular = $3.78 versus $4.24 for E85

[Skyshadow]

Greg, As i pointed out before in the same post your highlighted but only one part of it. It is cheaper, MUCH CHEAPER in my Evo and that is my REAL life experience with E85 as a power adder. Didn't go by some fancy website. I also stated I didn't know how it would work out in our bikes and wanted input (kind of the point of the thread...). So no I didn't do this cause I saw that it was advertised cheaper, but gee thanks....

And why shouldn't we use 91? It burns cleaner, more efficiently and has a less chance of pre-det

[Greg]

No problem at all, just trying to make sure you understood the pricing issue, as many don't, as all they look at the posted $/gallon. Keep us posted on your undertaking  

[Howie]

<snip>

And why shouldn't we use 91? It burns cleaner, more efficiently and has a less chance of pre-det

Nope, less efficient and more carbon.  You want the octane you need, not more.  If it don't ping on 87 run 87.

[Curmudgeon]

Nope, less efficient and more carbon.  You want the octane you need, not more.  If it don't ping on 87 run 87.

Ping? Imagine most people here could only hear whether their Ducati were pinging..., if it were pinging BADLY!!!

As has already been observed, most cars these days have knock sensors and will advance the timing to utilize the highest octane provided. In cars which specify 91 - 93 M+R/2, they will get significantly better mileage on the more expensive pump 93, which in most cases with premium brands is also cleaner and contains the best additive package. (One 1995 vehicle I own without knock sensors has had its timing advanced by 2 degrees for best performance and mileage because the manufacturer left that lower in case 93 were not always available.) At least with cars which are filled weekly and drive similar routines, it's pretty obvious quickly which octanes and brands are yielding the best mileage and performance.

Of the 6,500 European vehicles I delivered new, each owner was instructed what to burn. The only way to obtain the mileage on the window sticker was to use several specific brands of pump 93. Using 89 dropped the mileage ~ 10%+ and 87 was even less. So..., using cheap gas was with those European vehicles ALWAYS a false economy.

The water appears muddy with Ducati because they apparently always specified 98 RON. You have older bikes with carbs and crude maps which obviously tolerate 89 M+R/2 just fine.

I'm less sure that post 2009 Euro 3 bikes with higher compression (11:1-3) and more performance and ragged-edge lean mixtures and Siemens ECU's can tolerate 89 without a degree of misfiring that would not be very audible on a bike. Over time that misfiring is going to cause damage. I'd rather not discover metal particles when I drain my sump however. Additionally, the only "pure gas" available to me is 93 and 87 (for farm vehicles). Normal spirited riding with a 14T is producing 42 - 45 MPG, so I think I'm in the ball park.

ducpainter is always suggesting lower octane and threatening carbon build up running 93 M+R/2. That is likely fine for the older bikes. Less sure about my 796. Regardless, any carbon is easily controlled by BG CF-5 additive in the recommended dose every few thousand miles. If not needed, CF-5 hurts nothing and is widely approved by many European manufacturers. On this page... http://www.bgprod.com/products/fuelair.html

I'm just suggesting that recommending what works on the older bikes may or may not be appropriate. It's a pity that Ducatis don't have a pair of knock sensors and a map which adjusts timing every 1/500th second..., but they don't. Two of my cars do however...

[DucNaked]

I've run 87 in 2009 m1100s for two years now and she loves it! I've seen no decrease in mileage from premium. And maybe it's physcological, but I think it runs better than it did.
I agree with painter in this ragard. 

[Curmudgeon]

I've run 87 in 2009 m1100s for two years now and she loves it! I've seen no decrease in mileage from premium. And maybe it's physcological, but I think it runs better than it did.
I agree with painter in this ragard. 

Correct me if I'm wrong but yours is the older style head with dual spark and 10:7 vs the 796 & 1100evo with 11:3 and a new head design. Your 1100S is only 1/2 way there, right?