[/B][/QUOTE] What makes it better with a higher octane is that combustion increases (and so does the efficency and power in your engine). Which makes the discharge of CO and ozon lover.
Have I ever said anything like Europe are better then America?
So when you run a dyno test in Sweden and one in the USA they wouldn't be comparable since we uses different fuels. Shouldn't there be a standard for this kind of tests? [/B][/QUOTE]
Yes, as a small engine warms up, the piston gets hotter faster and thus the increased risk of engine failure. On my temp guage on my rmk i can note a small difference of the actual temp of the exhaust gases. Valid argument on the carbon dioxide release (not CO but CO2) However, when one considders that snowmobiles ( the two strokes) are about 90%-95%, or somewhere around there, inneficiant, i am not to worried. Most of the dark blue smoke and someitmes black smoke is unburned fuel. I am not sure if there is any differance in europe. 87 octane in aluminum engines is bad, 91 is better 87 in steel engines, no biggie ( cars) I have run 87 before in my sled, i dont like it, but 91 is all i need, however i think i would like to try some 98 or 110
I think we got off on the rong foot.
lets try this agian, i am dano a.k.a dan I live in upper minnesota and ride a 99 rmk 700 with a 141x2 ( so i didnt have to extend the tunnle) I dislike trail riding to a great degree, i prefer to make my own trails I am not a fan of short tracks or fan cooled engines, i like the speed, but i am more in it for the torque. i would rather go only say 90 or less, but be able to do that in powder or up a hill. in the action shots part of this forum under a post called wyoming pics from Cobra, in there is me on my rmk out in wyoming in the rockey mountains.
you?
dano