So what's the current Two stroke oil favorite for

[TonyCH]

I just saw an episode on "Engine Masters" where they used a built LS engine with 10:1 compression and tested the power differences that result from 87, 91, California gasoline ( can have up to 10% ethanol), 100, 116 octane leaded race gas and E-85.

When comparing E-85 to other fuels you must remember that the "85" in the name doesn't indicate octane. It indicates its 85% ethanol. Here in Europe E85 is about 104 octane (this is 100 octane in USA octane rating).

Another thing to consider is that if the LS-engine was fuel injected it most likely can automatically take advantage of the high octane figures. Ie. advance timing further than with lower octane fuels. If its carburated then it must be tuned to each fuel. So it would seem like the fuel "gives" more power but it infact just allows more radical tuning, which can produce more power.

And lead in gas does not give any performance advantage. Its there just to protect valve seats. I use lead additive in my big block Chevy which has old heads without hardened seats.

E85 is very popular in Europe with high boost turbo cars due its high octane (104 octane is higher than any pump gas you can buy).

 

[OM617YOTA]

E85 is popular here in the states for the same reason.

I called e85 basically racing gas at the pump, and someone here on the forum absolutely lost their mind over that.

 

[Smitty Smithsonite]

As long as the engine is set up for it, you can make big power with it. My buddy built an '11 Camaro that makes 900 RWHP on E-85. Can crank boost and timing way up on the stuff. But, run it in my Flex-Fuel Silverado, and my mileage and power would take a nosedive, just based on the power and mileage differences I see between regular E10 and ethanol-free. I'll never run E-85 for that reason. Whenever I fill with ethanol free, I get city mileage that flat SMOKES my highway mileage on E10. 3 to 4 MPG everywhere.

Here's the Camaro. Thing is so STUPID fast I can't help but laugh hysterically. When I shot this video he was "only" at 770- 800 to the rear wheels with regular 93 pump gas.

 

[calamari]

When comparing E-85 to other fuels you must remember that the "85" in the name doesn't indicate octane. It indicates its 85% ethanol. Here in Europe E85 is about 104 octane (this is 100 octane in USA octane rating).

Another thing to consider is that if the LS-engine was fuel injected it most likely can automatically take advantage of the high octane figures. Ie. advance timing further than with lower octane fuels. If its carburated then it must be tuned to each fuel. So it would seem like the fuel "gives" more power but it infact just allows more radical tuning, which can produce more power.

And lead in gas does not give any performance advantage. Its there just to protect valve seats. I use lead additive in my big block Chevy which has old heads without hardened seats.

E85 is very popular in Europe with high boost turbo cars due its high octane (104 octane is higher than any pump gas you can buy).

"Engine Masters" does everything on a dyno and what they do is mostly as a result of viewers comments and input. In this case to remove as many variables as possible and because the engine did have a throttle body, they set the timing manually and based upon mutiple pulls on the dyno establishing where power started to drop off as an indication of optimim timing for power with the fuel. They used leaded 100 and 116 octane Sunoco gas because viewers made claims about it's power knowing that the lead, as you noted, was a lubrcant for the valve's seats. Watch the episode as it's both interesting and informative.
This is straying from the OPs question but as a separate factoid, I drive a 1988 Chev. 5.7 litre K 1500 that I bought new. It has 414,000 miles on it and during its lifetime I've kept constant notes about mileage. E 85 isn't readily available where I live in Calif. but when I used to drive to Montana to hunt every year it was everywhere. Although my truck isn't made to run E 85, (can corrode parts in the fuel system) I incorrectly put two tanks of it through my truck on one trip. It was at a uniform altitude and all freeway. I would normally get a little over 15mpg at that steady state driving regimen but for those two tanks I got 20+ mpg. I didn't think it was worth risking a breakdown a long way from home in a very sparsely populated area so only ran those two tanks. My O2 sensor and rudimentary computer recognized the higher octane and adjusted the mixture and timing accordingly I assume. My truck took advantage of the slight power gains "Engine Masters" found throughout the RPM range that E 85 provides. I seem to recall they have an episode where they made 1,200 hp plus on it with a boosted engine.
Using E 85 in a saw may cause more trouble than it's worth since timing has to be adjusted to take advantage of the higher octane and that's not easily adjustable from what I've found on the few saws I've messed with. I think it's based on the gap between the coil and the magneto which requires the saw to be pretty much disassembled to change it. Should run cooler though w/o timing change if the fuel system can take it.

 

[TonyCH]

Yeah, I would not run E85 or any other ethanol containing gas in a chainsaw. The carb membranes and other rubber parts really do not like ethanol. My favorite for 2 stroke engines is alkylate gas.

E85 has a higher octane than other common gas station gases but it has less energy content than regular gas. So, usually your mileage will suffer with the E85. I run E85 in my Audi A6, I converted it a year ago. Main reason being that E85 is much cheaper than the 98E5 (98 euro octane and 5% ethanol) my car usually uses. But, my car uses about 30% more E85 than 98E5. Price difference is bigger though. The most common problem with using E85 is the fuel pump. Normal gas lubricates the fuel pump but running mostly ethanol does not and fuel pumps go bad quickly unless you use lubricating additive like Red Line. Or one can also upgrade to an aftermarket fuel pump rated to run E85.

 

[North by Northwest]

I've used Amsoil Interceptor in all my 2 stroke equipment for many years with no problems...

That's what I am currently using in both my Polaris 700 SKS & 850 RMK Mountain sleds . The Dominator was causing power valve fouling even with the oil injector pump leaned out . Amsoil Regional mgr. sent me their most recent bulletin , advising that Interceptor would be a better alternative for my recreational riding application . 2 yrs now with much better plug & power valve performance . I always run 94 octane Sunoco in these two high performance liquid cooled twins . Saber in all my handheld two strokes ! I think I may switch over to Interceptor from Maximma 927 semi caster in my 370 Can-Am Quailifier Enduro this spring .

 

[calamari]

"Engine Masters" went out of their way to remove variables but I don't recall how they dealt with any of the sensors that were essential for the engine to run.
My example of fuel economy wasn't even close to scientific since I still had a little gasoline in the tank for one fill up but barely made the station with the other. It seems counter intuitive that a fuel that makes more power and can run more ignition timing would have poorer fuel economy. If it takes 40 hp from an engine to go 70 mph at cruise setting then just the reduction in throttle plate opening from increased advance and the 3 hp increase from E 85 seems to result in better mileage, not worse but then everybody says it doesn't so that must be true.

 

[calamari]

This guy does practical testing of various "things" in our life. He did a test of E 85 that verifies poorer fuel economy. I have no idea why mine jumped so much when I mistakenly put E 85 in my old POS but it was the only change and when I went back to 87 octane gas the fuel economy went back to its historic levels.
Look into some of the tests he does including chain saws and sharpeners.

 

[KASH]

Well Broken we have another common love old LawnBoys.I have about 20 of them from a 1953 model 8 rope start with around 1.5hp one of the first LawnBoys after the rpm buy out to one of the last Duraforce models.The Dura force was a one piece casting job and the carbs were too lean and the coils were junk.My favorite is a 1958 5200 C engine with the tin foil air cleaner I went through three decks clearing my bush properties.The rewind on the c engine probably cost more to build than the Duraforce engine with its Mickey Mouse one piece modular carb.I also have a Toro with the two stroke runs great but I never use it because it is self propelled.
I mix all mine with quart of oil to 5 gallons gas.You can see the lowering of product quality with each newer model a crime for such a well built product at the start.
I have many garden tractors and a couple of tiny LawnBoy SnowBoy snow throwers but I have a burning need for a LawnBoy Loafer rider .I have never saw one in real life but they look way cool.
Kash

 

[TonyCH]

I have no idea why mine jumped so much when I mistakenly put E 85 in my old POS but it was the only change and when I went back to 87 octane gas the fuel economy went back to its historic levels.

I have no idea either, other than it might have run lean for some reason. Most probably your ecu was not advanced/smart enough or not performance orientated enough to make use of the higher octane. Most simpler ecus only learn for the first 20-40 miles and then settle to preprogrammed fuel and timing tables. So, they don't really do anything smart if wrong fuel is used. This can lead to engine damage so don't recommend trying E85 without some thought of what should be done.

EDIT: just saw that you have a '88 Chevy. Yeah, I think the most advanced Chevy fuel injected car at that time was the Vette with the Bosch designed TPI injection. Even those ecus (ECMs) are very limited in functionality and could not adjust to E85 by itself. At minimum a ecu chip tuning would be needed.

To make use of the E85 one must reprogram the ecu to use E85 and/or use a conversion kit with an ethanol sensor and control electronics. Most commonly the performance guys use the reprogramming method and common users buy the conversion kit. Some modern conversion kits also are programmable so they are fine for performance applications too. Both approaches work ok.

Ps. This is the manufacturer whos kit I used. They only had one model a year ago and it was about half the price of the plus model. Maybe its the eco-model now?

 

[calamari]

I have no idea either, other than it might have run lean for some reason. Most probably your ecu was not advanced/smart enough or not performance orientated enough to make use of the higher octane. Most simpler ecus only learn for the first 20-40 miles and then settle to preprogrammed fuel and timing tables. So, they don't really do anything smart if wrong fuel is used. This can lead to engine damage so don't recommend trying E85 without some thought of what should be done.

EDIT: just saw that you have a '88 Chevy. Yeah, I think the most advanced Chevy fuel injected car at that time was the Vette with the Bosch designed TPI injection. Even those ecus (ECMs) are very limited in functionality and could not adjust to E85 by itself. At minimum a ecu chip tuning would be needed.

To make use of the E85 one must reprogram the ecu to use E85 and/or use a conversion kit with an ethanol sensor and control electronics. Most commonly the performance guys use the reprogramming method and common users buy the conversion kit. Some modern conversion kits also are programmable so they are fine for performance applications too. Both approaches work ok.

Ps. This is the manufacturer whos kit I used. They only had one model a year ago and it was about half the price of the plus model. Maybe its the eco-model now?

It was a one time goof up on my part that saved me a few bucks. I imagine that being at relatively high altitude (4,500') and light load (pretty flat freeway with no passes to go over) the O2 sensor and limited ECU capability leaned it out to compensate for a rich condition at high altitude giving better mileage because it probably over leaned the engine. All I can say is that I didn't blow it up and get myself stuck 50 miles from another human being with no cell coverage in a blizzard and die...like it used to be before phones allowed foolish behavior to not be fatal.

 

[North by Northwest]

Well Broken we have another common love old LawnBoys.I have about 20 of them from a 1953 model 8 rope start with around 1.5hp one of the first LawnBoys after the rpm buy out to one of the last Duraforce models.The Dura force was a one piece casting job and the carbs were too lean and the coils were junk.My favorite is a 1958 5200 C engine with the tin foil air cleaner I went through three decks clearing my bush properties.The rewind on the c engine probably cost more to build than the Duraforce engine with its Mickey Mouse one piece modular carb.I also have a Toro with the two stroke runs great but I never use it because it is self propelled.
I mix all mine with quart of oil to 5 gallons gas.You can see the lowering of product quality with each newer model a crime for such a well built product at the start.
I have many garden tractors and a couple of tiny LawnBoy SnowBoy snow throwers but I have a burning need for a LawnBoy Loafer rider .I have never saw one in real life but they look way cool.
Your right , when Toro bought out Lawnboy it was the last nail in the coffin , unfortunate . The duraforce had a few yrs of leading the pack until cost savings and cheaper construction & inferior components lead to its demise !

 

[OM617YOTA]

The newer flex fuel vehicles don't use an ethanol sensor. Just a wide band O2 sensor, programming to recognize what's going on, and big enough injectors that the computer can richen things up enough, when needed.

 

[TonyCH]

Yeah, the conversion kits for older vehicles do however, as its much easier than to go with a wide band, which the original ecu does not understand.

 

[Joisey]

I spoke to a rep at Amsoil and was told that their Saber professional oil (yellow label) has zero ash.

 

[thenne1713]

Kash your engines don't even start up North due to the extreme Cold , let alone oil failure related , its due to Cold seizure !

I seized a ring on a 2-day old $700 saw, but did not realize... due to med issues, did not crank for 2-1/2-year, so out of warranty, quoted $640 to repair w/ new PC-Kit (Later repaired for $12 w/ new ring); looked like Magic Marker, film so thin locked down that piston ring on what was otherwise spotless piston. Oil was (Namebrand-c, petro non-syn, 40:1); I have since run Echo synthetic 50:1 w/ beautiful results for past 13-years... I chose ECHO Power Blend because 1) Synthetic; 2) Echo was FIRST to offer 5-year warranty, so they believe in their oil? i WOULD NOT fear any synthetic or syn blend name brand

 

[Brufab]

Anyone use that opti-II multi ratio oil in there saws that take 16-1? Thanks fellas!

 

[champion221elite]

Amsoil Sabre. Mixed at 40:1. Minimal smoke, burns clean and no problems for years now.

 

[Ronaldo]

Anyone use that opti-II multi ratio oil in there saws that take 16-1? Thanks fellas!

I have used the Opti-II at 40 to 1 for a lot of yrs. I really like it. No deposits and a nice light film on all internals.

Sent from my SM-G930VL using Tapatalk

 

[huskyespañol]

Husqvarna xp 40/1 - 50/1.
Gasolina 95 octanos en invierno / 98octanos en verano