SimonM

How long does it take for fuel to go manky?

I ask because my gixxer has been laid up on the optimate for the past
few months due to a combination of crap weather, work commitments and
spending all my spare time trying to get my recently acquired Morini
running. Yesterday I got the irresistible urge to skive off work for a
few hours and go for a long blat but found that the bike is running
dog rough. The fuel light was on so I headed to the nearest petrol
station to fill up. No different with a tank full of fresh fuel, the
bike sounds like a tractor and coughs and splutters at low revs /
small throttle openings. On giving it beans it seems to clear itself
and hurtles forwards in the usual fashion. So, I gave the bike a good
thrashing to see if it cleared, but no joy. Still splutters at low
revs. What's up with it? I was thinking maybe the injectors are gummed
up, but then wouldn't that cause it to run rough right through the rev
range? I would have hoped it would take longer than a few months for
the fuel to turn to gunge.

Last time the bike was laid up for any length of time the alarm did
for the battery (hence the optimate). That time, on fitting a new
battery the red light stayed on with FI warning flashing (manual says
the bike will run in limp mode and to get it to the nearest dealer).
The dealer said the FI warning was caused by a sticking exhaust valve.
This was fixed under warranty and it has been fine since. This time
the battery was fully charged, the bike started first press and there
are no warning lights. But the bike certainly isn't running right.

Is it worth trying an injector cleaner fuel additive like redex or
similar? Or is this caused by something else?

--
SimonM
GSX-R 1000 K5

Spamtrap - change "deadspam.com" to "veryblack.co.uk"

Ace

On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 11:58:33 GMT, SimonM <zx-9r@deadspam.com> wrote:

>How long does it take for fuel to go manky?

It doesn't. It's a myth brought about by the deposits it can leave in
carbs if it's left to evaporate, particularly multiple times, which
can block up the jets etc.

--
_______
..'_/_|_\_'. Ace (brucedotrogers a.t rochedotcom)
\`\ | /`/ DS#8 BOTAFOT#3 SbS#2 UKRMMA#13 DFV#8 SKA#2 IBB#10
`\\ | //'
`\|/`
`

wessie

SimonM <zx-9r@deadspam.com> wrote in
news:tb6ua39a46v9kpq21i12lsdf50oje71pif@4ax.com:


> Is it worth trying an injector cleaner fuel additive like redex or
> similar? Or is this caused by something else?
>


I'd check the air filter first. There might be a spider's web, bird nest
etc that restricts air flow until you get a bit of pressure built up from
your forward momentum.

--
wessie at tesco dot net

BMW R1150GS

"Wessie is a lovely man with many wonderful qualities" TM Blaney

SimonM

On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 14:09:58 +0200, Ace <seesig@virgin.net> wrote:

>On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 11:58:33 GMT, SimonM <zx-9r@deadspam.com> wrote:
>
>>How long does it take for fuel to go manky?
>
>It doesn't. It's a myth brought about by the deposits it can leave in
>carbs if it's left to evaporate, particularly multiple times, which
>can block up the jets etc.

Hmmm..., having spent several hours stripping and ungumming the carbs
on the Morini I would say that fuel does, eventually, go manky.
However, it has to be said that the bike had been stood for years and
the previous keeper hadn't even drained the float bowls. The amount of
sludge had to be seen to be believed.

--
SimonM
GSX-R 1000 K5

Spamtrap - change "deadspam.com" to "veryblack.co.uk"

SimonM

On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 12:21:04 +0000 (UTC), wessie
<putmynamehere@tesco.net> wrote:

>SimonM <zx-9r@deadspam.com> wrote in
>news:tb6ua39a46v9kpq21i12lsdf50oje71pif@4ax.com :
>
>
>> Is it worth trying an injector cleaner fuel additive like redex or
>> similar? Or is this caused by something else?
>>
>
>
>I'd check the air filter first. There might be a spider's web, bird nest
>etc that restricts air flow until you get a bit of pressure built up from
>your forward momentum.

Good suggestion, ta. I'll send the Mrs in to check. Just in case the
spider is still in residence.

--
SimonM
GSX-R 1000 K5

Spamtrap - change "deadspam.com" to "veryblack.co.uk"

Mark Olson

Ace wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 11:58:33 GMT, SimonM <zx-9r@deadspam.com> wrote:

>>How long does it take for fuel to go manky?

> It doesn't. It's a myth brought about by the deposits it can leave in
> carbs if it's left to evaporate, particularly multiple times, which
> can block up the jets etc.

No myth. Fuel does indeed go 'off' over time. The volatile fractions
evaporate, and what's left is less than optimum. That said, since SimonM
has filled up a nearly empty tank with fresh fuel, this isn't his problem.
I'd advise him to run some quality fuel injector cleaner through the
system and see how it goes.

--
'01 SV650SK1 '99 EX250-F13 '98 ZG1000-A13
OMF #7

The Older Gentleman

SimonM <zx-9r@deadspam.com> wrote:

> How long does it take for fuel to go manky?

As Ace says, the problem isn't so much it going manky (though if left
long enough, the volatiles do evaporate, so he isn't quite right) as
fuel evaporating completely in carbs or injectors and leaving a gummy
deposit.

How long this takes is really a climate issue. I've left fuel for two or
three months in the UK, with no problems. Howedver, in a hot climate,
that's long enough for evaporation to occur and residues to form.

It is probably the most common bike problem of the era.



--
K1100LT 955i 750SS CB400F CD250 CM200 SL125
GAGARPHOF#30 GHPOTHUF#1 BOTAFOT#60
The bells, the bells.....

Ace

On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 07:47:09 -0500, Mark Olson <olsonm@tiny.invalid>
wrote:

>Ace wrote:
>> On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 11:58:33 GMT, SimonM <zx-9r@deadspam.com> wrote:
>
>>>How long does it take for fuel to go manky?
>
>> It doesn't. It's a myth brought about by the deposits it can leave in
>> carbs if it's left to evaporate, particularly multiple times, which
>> can block up the jets etc.
>
>No myth. Fuel does indeed go 'off' over time. The volatile fractions
>evaporate, and what's left is less than optimum.

Sorry, that's not true. I've checked this out with specialist
chemists[1], and the fact is that at normal temperatures the various
components all evaporate at around the same rate. If the float bowls
have completely dried out, then clearly there may be some crap left
which may bung up the system, but the fuel in the tank should be just
as good as new.

The myth is often 'proved' when people flush their systems and fill up
with fresh, but of course this will also have the effect of cleaning
out the crap, which is what I believe then makes it run better.

>That said, since SimonM
>has filled up a nearly empty tank with fresh fuel, this isn't his problem.
>I'd advise him to run some quality fuel injector cleaner through the
>system and see how it goes.

Indeed.

[1] Well only one, my Sister-in-law, who used to be GM at a chemical
bottling plant.
--
_______
..'_/_|_\_'. Ace (brucedotrogers a.t rochedotcom)
\`\ | /`/ DS#8 BOTAFOT#3 SbS#2 UKRMMA#13 DFV#8 SKA#2 IBB#10
`\\ | //'
`\|/`
`

Simon Wilson

Ace wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 07:47:09 -0500, Mark Olson <olsonm@tiny.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> Ace wrote:
>>> On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 11:58:33 GMT, SimonM <zx-9r@deadspam.com> wrote:
>>>> How long does it take for fuel to go manky?
>>> It doesn't. It's a myth brought about by the deposits it can leave in
>>> carbs if it's left to evaporate, particularly multiple times, which
>>> can block up the jets etc.
>> No myth. Fuel does indeed go 'off' over time. The volatile fractions
>> evaporate, and what's left is less than optimum.
>
> Sorry, that's not true. I've checked this out with specialist
> chemists[1], and the fact is that at normal temperatures the various
> components all evaporate at around the same rate. If the float bowls
> have completely dried out, then clearly there may be some crap left
> which may bung up the system, but the fuel in the tank should be just
> as good as new.
>
> The myth is often 'proved' when people flush their systems and fill up
> with fresh, but of course this will also have the effect of cleaning
> out the crap, which is what I believe then makes it run better.
>
>> That said, since SimonM
>> has filled up a nearly empty tank with fresh fuel, this isn't his problem.
>> I'd advise him to run some quality fuel injector cleaner through the
>> system and see how it goes.
>
> Indeed.
>
> [1] Well only one, my Sister-in-law, who used to be GM at a chemical
> bottling plant.

<suspicious look>

Well it definitely has a different smell to it after a while - very
distinctive.

</suspicious look>

I don't know exactly how long the 'knacker your carbs' period is, but I
have been long past it (probably by years) on a couple of bikes, as I
know to my cost. I'm not sure what happens with FI systems.

--
/Simon

mr p

On Jul 31, 3:49 pm, Simon Wilson <siwil...@nodamnspamn.hotmail.com>
wrote:
> Ace wrote:
> > On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 07:47:09 -0500, Mark Olson <ols...@tiny.invalid>
> > wrote:
>
> >> Ace wrote:
> >>> On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 11:58:33 GMT, SimonM <zx...@deadspam.com> wrote:
> >>>> How long does it take for fuel to go manky?

I was told that petrol does not last very long at all since the
chemicals they used to add to it have all been banned, this may or may
not be true though..

Simon

CT

Simon Wilson wrote:

> I don't know exactly how long the 'knacker your carbs' period is, but
> I have been long past it (probably by years) on a couple of bikes, as
> I know to my cost. I'm not sure what happens with FI systems.

For the last <fx:counts on fingers> 15 winters three different bikes,
all Kawasakis, all non-FI, have been laid up in the garage with nary a
glance for up to five months.

Without fail, each spring, apart from charging (or replacing) the
battery they have started up and run spot-on using the fuel left in the
tank.

I'm still of a mind that you would have to leave it for *yonks* to get
it to go 'bad', if at all.

--
Chris

Ace

On 31 Jul 2007 15:27:00 GMT, "CT" <me@christrollen.co.uk> wrote:

>For the last <fx:counts on fingers> 15 winters three different bikes,
>all Kawasakis, all non-FI, have been laid up in the garage with nary a
>glance for up to five months.
>
>Without fail, each spring, apart from charging (or replacing) the
>battery they have started up and run spot-on using the fuel left in the
>tank.
>
>I'm still of a mind that you would have to leave it for *yonks* to get
>it to go 'bad', if at all.

It's only an issue if you're talking about reducig it's volume by a
massively noticeable amount. So if you leave a tank open for a year,
you'll quite possibly be left with gunge in the bottom, but if it's
sealed even as well as a normal fuel tank, it'll be years before that
happens.

--
_______
..'_/_|_\_'. Ace (brucedotrogers a.t rochedotcom)
\`\ | /`/ DS#8 BOTAFOT#3 SbS#2 UKRMMA#13 DFV#8 SKA#2 IBB#10
`\\ | //'
`\|/`
`

The Older Gentleman

Ace <seesig@virgin.net> wrote:

> Sorry, that's not true. I've checked this out with specialist
> chemists[1], and the fact is that at normal temperatures the various
> components all evaporate at around the same rate. If the float bowls
> have completely dried out, then clearly there may be some crap left
> which may bung up the system, but the fuel in the tank should be just
> as good as new.

It takes a helluva long time for fuel in the tank to evaporate and go
off, but trust me, it does.

When I'm messing with SOBs, the one thing that makes me sigh and down
tools is that distinctive varnish smell from the carbs. On bikes that
have been standing for a really long time (like several years) you get
it from the tank as well.


--
K1100LT 955i 750SS CB400F CD250 CM200 SL125
GAGARPHOF#30 GHPOTHUF#1 BOTAFOT#60
The bells, the bells.....

The Older Gentleman

Ace <seesig@virgin.net> wrote:

> So if you leave a tank open for a year,
> you'll quite possibly be left with gunge in the bottom, but if it's
> sealed even as well as a normal fuel tank, it'll be years before that
> happens.

Yes, indeed.


--
K1100LT 955i 750SS CB400F CD250 CM200 SL125
GAGARPHOF#30 GHPOTHUF#1 BOTAFOT#60
The bells, the bells.....

Mark Olson

Ace wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 07:47:09 -0500, Mark Olson <olsonm@tiny.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Ace wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 11:58:33 GMT, SimonM <zx-9r@deadspam.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>How long does it take for fuel to go manky?
>>
>>>It doesn't. It's a myth brought about by the deposits it can leave in
>>>carbs if it's left to evaporate, particularly multiple times, which
>>>can block up the jets etc.
>>
>>No myth. Fuel does indeed go 'off' over time. The volatile fractions
>>evaporate, and what's left is less than optimum.
>
>
> Sorry, that's not true. I've checked this out with specialist
> chemists[1], and the fact is that at normal temperatures the various
> components all evaporate at around the same rate. If the float bowls
> have completely dried out, then clearly there may be some crap left
> which may bung up the system, but the fuel in the tank should be just
> as good as new.
>
> The myth is often 'proved' when people flush their systems and fill up
> with fresh, but of course this will also have the effect of cleaning
> out the crap, which is what I believe then makes it run better.

Well, it may be so that all fractions evaporate evenly, and not being a
chemist, I'll not make any more claims about that, but I'd be quite
surprised, even with my limited chemistry background, if that turned out
to be the case. In any event, there is also oxidation to consider,
according to the esteemed Mr. Adams:

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/060825.html

"The second cause of bad gas is oxidation–some of the hydrocarbons in the
fuel react with oxygen to produce new compounds, almost all of them worse
than what you started with. When oxidation becomes a problem, you'll know
it without lab tests--the gasoline gives off a sour odor."

No matter what the phyical basis behind it, it is well known that leaving
a bike (or any vehicle with a vented fuel tank) stand with fuel in it for
a matter of months, especially in warm weather, will result in nasty stuff
forming in the carburetors or various fuel injection gubbins.

I also like the rodent nest possibility, having seen plenty of evidence of
critters invading my garage, it's not unusual for them to pick an airbox
as a nice cosy nest to fill up with misc fluff and sunflower seed husks...

--
'01 SV650SK1 '99 EX250-F13 '98 ZG1000-A13
OMF #7

Ace

On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 11:53:03 -0500, Mark Olson <olsonm@tiny.invalid>
wrote:

>No matter what the phyical basis behind it, it is well known

i.e. a common myth.

>that leaving
>a bike (or any vehicle with a vented fuel tank) stand with fuel in it for
>a matter of months, especially in warm weather, will result in nasty stuff
>forming in the carburetors or various fuel injection gubbins.

No, it needs a lot longer than 'a few months'. Only if the volume of
the petrol has reduced by, say, 30% or more (guessing, but YKWIM) is
it likely to become an issue.

--
_______
..'_/_|_\_'. Ace (brucedotrogers a.t rochedotcom)
\`\ | /`/ DS#8 BOTAFOT#3 SbS#2 UKRMMA#13 DFV#8 SKA#2 IBB#10
`\\ | //'
`\|/`
`

wessie

Mark Olson <olsonm@tiny.invalid> wrote in
news:13auq7g3nf4u050@corp.supernews.com:


>
> "The second cause of bad gas is oxidation–some of the hydrocarbons in
> the fuel react with oxygen to produce new compounds, almost all of
> them worse than what you started with. When oxidation becomes a
> problem, you'll know it without lab tests--the gasoline gives off a
> sour odor."
>

You'll get very little oxidation if the tank is kept full.

I think people storing bikes make the mistake of draining the tank as they
think the petrol will go off. This means that any petrol left within the
tank will most likely evaporate leaving a sludge, as it is subject to
heating & cooling as ambient temperature varies.

A full tank does not contain much oxygen but is also less likely to be
affected by ambient temperature variation. The full load of petrol will
also minimise corrosion from condensation.

--
wessie at tesco dot net

BMW R1150GS

"Wessie is a lovely man with many wonderful qualities" TM Blaney

Champ

On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 11:53:03 -0500, Mark Olson <olsonm@tiny.invalid>
wrote:

>No matter what the phyical basis behind it, it is well known that leaving
>a bike (or any vehicle with a vented fuel tank) stand with fuel in it for
>a matter of months, especially in warm weather, will result in nasty stuff
>forming in the carburetors or various fuel injection gubbins.

My 750 turbo usually stands for 9 months of every year with fuel in
the tank, without the slightest problem.

I'm with Ace on this one.
--
Champ

ZX10R | GPz750turbo | GSX-R 600 racer
My advice as your attorney is to buy a motorcycle
To email me, neal at my domain should work.

Bear

In article <0h9ua353qu3l9hijpj8f1emf3h4pv3s7lp@4ax.com>, Ace says...
> On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 11:58:33 GMT, SimonM <zx-9r@deadspam.com> wrote:
>
> >How long does it take for fuel to go manky?
>
> It doesn't. It's a myth brought about by the deposits it can leave in
> carbs if it's left to evaporate, particularly multiple times, which
> can block up the jets etc.

Oh Christ, not this one again ...

Fuel does go off. It tends to do so in more open spaces, specifically
car tanks, although I've twice seen it happen to bikes that were left
1/4 filled.
--
Bear

Bear

In article <f8ni6u$bm2$1@registered.motzarella.org>, Simon Wilson
says...

> <suspicious look>
>
> Well it definitely has a different smell to it after a while - very
> distinctive.
>
> </suspicious look>

You won't change his mind. He *knows* he's right.

Just like over that "supermotard" thing - he was wrong about that too.
--
Bear

Catman

Champ wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 11:53:03 -0500, Mark Olson <olsonm@tiny.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> No matter what the phyical basis behind it, it is well known that leaving
>> a bike (or any vehicle with a vented fuel tank) stand with fuel in it for
>> a matter of months, especially in warm weather, will result in nasty stuff
>> forming in the carburetors or various fuel injection gubbins.
>
> My 750 turbo usually stands for 9 months of every year with fuel in
> the tank, without the slightest problem.
>
> I'm with Ace on this one.

I'd like to think that it *does* go off, but I have two cars in store
that we go and start about once every 8 weeks or so. Neither of them
show any problems with the fuel that's been in there over two years now.
Yes it takes time to fill the carbs / FI system, but when they fire,
away they go.

On balance I would have to say that it doesn't.

Actually thinking back, when I put the 116 back on the road it had been
stored for about 4 years. Ran fine on that fuel as well.....

--
Catman MIB#14 SKoGA#6 TEAR#4 BOTAFOF#38 Apostle#21 COSOC#3
Tyger, Tyger Burning Bright (Remove rust to reply)
116 Giulietta 3.0l Sprint 1.7 156 TS 166 V6 2.5 145 2.0 Cloverleaf
Triumph Sprint ST 1050: It's blue, see.
www.cuore-sportivo.co.uk

Ace

On Wed, 1 Aug 2007 00:59:46 +0100, Bear <bastardDOTbear@gmail.com>
wrote:

>In article <f8ni6u$bm2$1@registered.motzarella.org>, Simon Wilson
>says...
>
>> <suspicious look>
>>
>> Well it definitely has a different smell to it after a while - very
>> distinctive.
>>
>> </suspicious look>
>
>You won't change his mind. He *knows* he's right.

ooooooOOOOOOooooh. Who rattled your cage?

--
_______
..'_/_|_\_'. Ace (brucedotrogers a.t rochedotcom)
\`\ | /`/ DS#8 BOTAFOT#3 SbS#2 UKRMMA#13 DFV#8 SKA#2 IBB#10
`\\ | //'
`\|/`
`

Krusty

Ace wrote:

> On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 07:47:09 -0500, Mark Olson <olsonm@tiny.invalid>
> wrote:
>
> > Ace wrote:
> >> On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 11:58:33 GMT, SimonM <zx-9r@deadspam.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > > How long does it take for fuel to go manky?
> >
> >> It doesn't. It's a myth brought about by the deposits it can leave
> in >> carbs if it's left to evaporate, particularly multiple times,
> which >> can block up the jets etc.
> >
> > No myth. Fuel does indeed go 'off' over time. The volatile
> > fractions evaporate, and what's left is less than optimum.
>
> Sorry, that's not true. I've checked this out with specialist
> chemists[1], and the fact is that at normal temperatures the various
> components all evaporate at around the same rate. If the float bowls
> have completely dried out, then clearly there may be some crap left
> which may bung up the system, but the fuel in the tank should be just
> as good as new.

That may be true in theory (assuming your sister-in-law isn't a mong),
but it absolutely definitely does go off. I've got a spare tank for the
Fantic (big capacity hand-made alloy job) which sat with petrol in it
for a few years. I dug it out last year to see if it would fit on the
modified Tiger, & the 'petrol' that came out of it was a dark
brownish-yellow colour, & much thicker than fresh petrol. It also smelt
nothing like petrol.


--
Krusty
www.MuddyStuff.co.uk
Off-Road Classifieds

'02 MV Senna '03 Tigtona 955i '96 Tiger '79 Fantic Hiro 250

Monkey

Catman wrote:
> I have two cars in store
> that we go and start about once every 8 weeks or so.

Why, out of interest? It's a common thing for people storing vehicles for
long periods of time to start them every now and then, but I'm dubious as to
the benefit. To my mind, unless you're actually taking it for a decent
thrash, and building-up enough heat to burn-off any deposits in the system
and give it a good flush-through, then all you're really doing is chucking a
load more fuel into the cold pipes / carbs etc., which will leave even more
deposits.

OK, you'll spread some oil around the system, which I suppose could stop the
engine seizing-up when restarted, but surely after a week or two, anything
that was going to have dried-up will already have done so?

So is there a scientific reason for doing it?

--
ZX6R F2 - The Gravelseeker
BOTAFOT #121, BBB #2

Timo Geusch

Monkey wrote:

> Catman wrote:
> > I have two cars in store
> > that we go and start about once every 8 weeks or so.
>
> Why, out of interest? It's a common thing for people storing vehicles
> for long periods of time to start them every now and then, but I'm
> dubious as to the benefit. To my mind, unless you're actually taking
> it for a decent thrash, and building-up enough heat to burn-off any
> deposits in the system and give it a good flush-through, then all
> you're really doing is chucking a load more fuel into the cold pipes
> / carbs etc., which will leave even more deposits.

And plenty of condensation in the exhaust, don't forget that.


> OK, you'll spread some oil around the system, which I suppose could
> stop the engine seizing-up when restarted, but surely after a week or
> two, anything that was going to have dried-up will already have done
> so?

I'm actually rather suspicious of cars (and bikes) that have been
sitting idle and started regularly - IME it doesn't do them any good.
Cranking it from time to time, OK (to circulate some oil) but not
starting it up.

I used to have a Rover P6 that was very low mileage and that had been
run regularly - a lot of the things that needed fixing were from the
car standing around.

> So is there a scientific reason for doing it?

None I'm aware of.

--
Morini Corsaro 125 | CB450K4 | XL250 Motosport x2 | 900SSD
Triumph T-Bird chop | K1100LT BOTAFOF #33 TWA#10
The UKRM FAQ: http://www.ukrm.net/faq/index.html
"Je profite du paysage" - Joe Bar

The Older Gentleman

Timo Geusch <tnewsSPAMMENOT@unixconsult.co.uk> wrote:

> > Why, out of interest? It's a common thing for people storing vehicles
> > for long periods of time to start them every now and then, but I'm
> > dubious as to the benefit. To my mind, unless you're actually taking
> > it for a decent thrash, and building-up enough heat to burn-off any
> > deposits in the system and give it a good flush-through, then all
> > you're really doing is chucking a load more fuel into the cold pipes
> > / carbs etc., which will leave even more deposits.
>
> And plenty of condensation in the exhaust, don't forget that.

I start the 400 Four a few times over winter, but I set the tickover to
around 2k revs and let it run for at least 20 minutes, in order to get
everything good and hot.

That avoids the condensation problem. The real reason is to feed fresh
fuel into the carbs from the tank.

Before I shut it down, I turn off the fuel and run it till the carbs are
utterly dry.

--
K1100LT 955i 750SS CB400F CD250 CM200 SL125
GAGARPHOF#30 GHPOTHUF#1 BOTAFOT#60
The bells, the bells.....

Catman

Monkey wrote:
> Catman wrote:
>> I have two cars in store
>> that we go and start about once every 8 weeks or so.
>
> Why, out of interest? It's a common thing for people storing vehicles for
> long periods of time to start them every now and then, but I'm dubious as to
> the benefit. To my mind, unless you're actually taking it for a decent
> thrash, and building-up enough heat to burn-off any deposits in the system
> and give it a good flush-through, then all you're really doing is chucking a
> load more fuel into the cold pipes / carbs etc., which will leave even more
> deposits.

We get them up to full temperature.
>
> OK, you'll spread some oil around the system, which I suppose could stop the
> engine seizing-up when restarted, but surely after a week or two, anything
> that was going to have dried-up will already have done so?
>
> So is there a scientific reason for doing it?
>

Probably not one that I could give soundly. I don't think you'll find
too much oil actually dries up off the engine parts, but it can go a bit
manky IME. I just like to keep my non-scientific demons at bay that the
oils is being spread about a bit. Maybe it does nothing, but I also
like to check they've not been nicked, burned out and I love the sound
(Alfa engines in a large, echoey barn)

--
Catman MIB#14 SKoGA#6 TEAR#4 BOTAFOF#38 Apostle#21 COSOC#3
Tyger, Tyger Burning Bright (Remove rust to reply)
116 Giulietta 3.0l Sprint 1.7 156 TS 166 V6 2.5 145 2.0 Cloverleaf
Triumph Sprint ST 1050: It's blue, see.
www.cuore-sportivo.co.uk

Catman

Timo Geusch wrote:
> Monkey wrote:
>
>> Catman wrote:
>>> I have two cars in store
>>> that we go and start about once every 8 weeks or so.
>> Why, out of interest? It's a common thing for people storing vehicles
>> for long periods of time to start them every now and then, but I'm
>> dubious as to the benefit. To my mind, unless you're actually taking
>> it for a decent thrash, and building-up enough heat to burn-off any
>> deposits in the system and give it a good flush-through, then all
>> you're really doing is chucking a load more fuel into the cold pipes
>> / carbs etc., which will leave even more deposits.
>
> And plenty of condensation in the exhaust, don't forget that.

Get them right up to temp. The end cans get well dried out (at lest I
*think* they do)
>
>
>> OK, you'll spread some oil around the system, which I suppose could
>> stop the engine seizing-up when restarted, but surely after a week or
>> two, anything that was going to have dried-up will already have done
>> so?
>
> I'm actually rather suspicious of cars (and bikes) that have been
> sitting idle and started regularly - IME it doesn't do them any good.
> Cranking it from time to time, OK (to circulate some oil) but not
> starting it up.
>

You may well have a point there. Neither of them are likely to ever
come up for sale a they are the restoration jobs, so I'm not worried
about anyone being suspicious.

> I used to have a Rover P6 that was very low mileage and that had been
> run regularly - a lot of the things that needed fixing were from the
> car standing around.
>
>> So is there a scientific reason for doing it?
>
> None I'm aware of.
>

I bow to your greater expertise, but I still like the sound

--
Catman MIB#14 SKoGA#6 TEAR#4 BOTAFOF#38 Apostle#21 COSOC#3
Tyger, Tyger Burning Bright (Remove rust to reply)
116 Giulietta 3.0l Sprint 1.7 156 TS 166 V6 2.5 145 2.0 Cloverleaf
Triumph Sprint ST 1050: It's blue, see.
www.cuore-sportivo.co.uk

CT

The Older Gentleman wrote:

> I start the 400 Four a few times over winter, but I set the tickover
> to around 2k revs and let it run for at least 20 minutes, in order to
> get everything good and hot.

I do that occasionlly too.

A couple of years back, I was running the bike and one of my
neigbours[1] came round to complain that the fumes were going into her
back garden.

I pointed directly across the road, to where a double decker bus was
sat at the bus-stop idling away and asked if she wanted me to get all
the buses to switch of there engines too.

Some people have got nothing better to do than have a good moan.

[1] Retirement age woman.
--
Chris

SimonM

On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 11:53:03 -0500, Mark Olson <olsonm@tiny.invalid>
wrote:

>I also like the rodent nest possibility, having seen plenty of evidence of
>critters invading my garage, it's not unusual for them to pick an airbox
>as a nice cosy nest to fill up with misc fluff and sunflower seed husks...

Checked this last night. No foreign objects in the airbox though the
filter element was fairly clogged with dust. I gave it a blast with
compressed air and bunged it back in. Came back inside for a beer and
read the service manual, it says "Caution: Do not blow the air cleaner
element with compressed air". Oh, OK then.

Winter appears to have set in again here, but if it dries up later
I'll go for a run to see what's what.

--
SimonM
GSX-R 1000 K5

Spamtrap - change "deadspam.com" to "veryblack.co.uk"