This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Fuel Tank Expansion

Joined Jun 2013
1 Posts | 0+
Napa Valley Floor
Hello: going to the dealer to check on an arctic white HS today. big concern is fuel tank polymer composition. have had 3 tanks on my 09 MS and really don't want to have to mess about with that crap again. any information would be appreciated. thanks in advance.
 
All I can tell you is that the new Hyper fuel tank does appear to be made of a different composition than the other bikes, though whether it'll prove to be more ethanol resistent in the long run will have to wait for the long run. The nice thing is that the tank is well recessed in the bike and shouldn't be the hassle it is on Monsters, Sport Classics and Multistradas where a swollen tank can get really loose or impede serviceability of the bike. The ultimate rule of law is that no vehicle can go out of emissions compliance in and of itself without modification or damage by the owner. This means that if your tank ever swells the manufacturer is obligated to replace it, regardless of whether the vehicle is still under warranty or not. Two tanks on my Multistrada and 3 on my Monster so far, but I don't care since they're free.
 
Ethanol-free pumps are popping up all over in my area. The more I read about what ethanol does to rings/tanks/rubber, the more I want to start using regularly. I have a big issue with the fact that they charge more for e-free...seriously, charging more for something that required less labor/refinement! YGBSM!
 
I never been to a pump in FL that didn't have a sticker that read "...may contain up to 10% Ethanol..." I think it was a federal mandate that unleaded had to have Ethanol, which is a total farse if you're into gov't pork conspiracies.
 
I fount this posted else where.....


"With all due respect, there is factual data to back the complaints about ethanol.

I work in the aerospace industry. E10 is NOT approved for use in aircraft. Period. Some folks do it under ideal conditions and get away with it, but they are taking their chances with engine-out situations.

In aircraft, ethanol-blended fuels are known to cause problems with:
--Carburetor icing
--Damage to fuel injection pumps
--Water in the fuel tanks
--Frozen fuel lines
--Aluminum tank corrosion
--Degradation of rubber lines, seals, and fittings (particularly on older airplanes... remember, a GA airplane has a useful life of several decades)

The only guys I know that ever risk flying E-10 are in newer aircraft with Rotax engines, these are sunny-Sunday fliers, they NEVER leave the aircraft parked out in the rain, and they do it knowing that they are violating the airframe and Rotax warnings.

In the Ferrari world, ethanol-blended fuels are causing massive headaches with corrosion inside their aluminum fuel tanks, and in the old aluminum Bosch CIS fuel distributors.

Ethanol-blended fuel killed the CIS fuel distributor in my '86 GTI. That car had zero fuel system problems until the mandated switch from MTBE to ethanol for oxygenation.

This is not a wild goose chase. It's chemistry.

Are the effects on the GC's nylon tanks debatable? Sure. We don't have a double-blind study with lots of samples to go on. We have a few riders who profess to have "no problems" and a few riders who have documented problems. But just because we do not have a conclusive study one way or another is not a reason to call it a wild goose chase. We have incomplete information (which the corn lobby actively works to keep incomplete), but there is still evidence from multiple sources to implicate material compatibility problems with ethanol-blended fuels.

Respectfully,
--Dan"
 
Last edited:
It'd be an easier pill to swallow if it had some performance or efficiency benefit...which, it does not. I think the environmental benefits have been argued, as well.
 
Shat! I stopped at the station with e-free fuel. 89 octane is the only option. I don't think taxing the timing system is worth it. That's assuming the ECU will compensate for lower octane fuel, which I'm not sure about.
 
Jerdog, I'm sure you meant ethanol free and not oxygen free, right? Oxygen is good stuff, ethanol bad, at least in our fine bikes. Anyhoo, at this point across our great expanse, you'll find ethanol commonly mixed with all grades of fuel regardless of octane rating. If you're lucky enough to live in a state that does offer ethanol-free grades of gasoline go for it. As to the octane rating, gatdammit, the higher rating offers increased knock resistance, but the knock sensor and ECU/EFI programming should be able to deal with just about any swill you put in there. Ducati (and all OEMs) rigorously test the crap out of their machines in every environment and with every fuel available and ensure they're safe in all circumstances. Of course they still come up with their optimum recommendations, but the bike is built to handle the rigors of touring in remote areas where those recommendations can't be met. So don't worry. Try the e-free 89 and if you get a hint of pinging/knocking you'll know whether to stick with it or not. Let us know what you find out. Unfortunately for me here in California there are no such e-free fuels easily available. Oh well.
 
I have been using 89 octane Ethanol free every chance I get. I have two stations that offers it. No problems.
 
I have been using 89 octane Ethanol free every chance I get. I have two stations that offers it. No problems.

Ah good to hear. I was so far relunctant to use anything lower than 90 octane products. I once stopped at a gas station while only what would I have thought to be a matter of few ounces of fuel left inb the tank. Luckily, a fellow rider fuelling up is truck showed me the location of another gas station.
 
Ran across this today

EPA Acknowledges Ethanol Damages Engines
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has publicly acknowledged that ethanol in gasoline can damage internal combustion engines. "In motorcycles and non-road products [using E15 and higher ethanol blends], EPA raised engine-failure concerns from overheating."

EPA Acknowledges Ethanol Damages Engines - Motorcycle USA
 
Give 'em credit, the AMA lobbied hard to get the EPA to admit that. That ethanol farm subsidy looks like unnecessary pork to me. Our MuZ Skorpion's original tank grew so much it became impossible to R&R, but they have been out of biz for while. I once spoke to a Monster owner who said he was on tank #3, all under warranty.

I don't understand how fuel tank expansion can be an issue on our 821s, it's covered with bodywork. I'll bet that's why Ducati did that. PA6 nylon is paintable, that's why they used it. So maybe they did switch plastics. And our 821s should be designed to work just fine on 10% in every other way.

Still, oxygenating additives are a requirement, and they do help reduce air pollution. Unlike MTBE, ethanol is fairly benign, health-wise. Fuel inevitably gets into the ground water and poisons our drinking water supplies. It's a Canadian plot, I tell you. :rolleyes:

I've been to Beijing, don't ever want to let it get anywhere near that bad here. :eek:
 
Last edited:
It's a Canadian plot, I tell you. :rolleyes:

Just going to leave THIS here... ;-)
I pity the people in Nebraska, which I think is where 93 gasoline is cheaper than 87, as it is loaded with ethanol and gets a huge subsidy. Not cool.

Also, I love how the EPA said E15 and above damages engines, completely ignoring the detriments of E10 that is basically at every pump everywhere. To the best of my effort, I only fill up my vehicles (bike and turbo Lancer) at Shell, as their V-Power is ethanol-free. I do get noticeably better mileage on that versus ethanol blended at other stations.

Wife's car is a Toyota so that just gets the basic crap wherever is cheapest.
 
Shell, huh. I think E10 is federally mandated across the US but have never checked. I am seeing more and more E-free pumps pop up, and the lines continue to grow for them.

The boating community in north FL loathes it. Boat engines are expensive and they say keeping the older ones alive on ethanol sux.
 
Just going to leave THIS here... ;-)
I pity the people in Nebraska, which I think is where 93 gasoline is cheaper than 87, as it is loaded with ethanol and gets a huge subsidy. Not cool.

Also, I love how the EPA said E15 and above damages engines, completely ignoring the detriments of E10 that is basically at every pump everywhere. To the best of my effort, I only fill up my vehicles (bike and turbo Lancer) at Shell, as their V-Power is ethanol-free. I do get noticeably better mileage on that versus ethanol blended at other stations.

Wife's car is a Toyota so that just gets the basic crap wherever is cheapest.

All gasoline brands have both pure and ethanol-containing gasoline under the same brand names. For example, Shell V-Power ranges from 91 to 93 octane both with and without added ethanol. It just varies from station to station, and it's up to the station owner whether or not to sell pure gas. In fact, in Madison, Wisconsin there is a Shell station that sells 93-octane V-Power with ethanol at most pumps, but which has a single pump, at a higher price, dispensing pure 91-octane gas.
 
I haven't looked into it, but I bet US station owners/distributors get a nice fat tax credit for selling ethanol blends...