I blame AndyW for pointing me to Fuelly.com to check my actual MPG as the instrument MPG is optimistic. The result was a little disappointing and instead of an expected 43/44 mpg that I was seeing from the bike average readout, the actual average over a few fill ups is 39.7 mpg I have checked the 2010/11/12 models and they are all about 42-42.5 average over all bikes on the site. I knew the 2013 was going to be more economical but was surprised at the size of the improvement; 49.5 mpg over all of the 2013 bikes in real world conditions. That's an improvement of 17%! Or are the earlier bikes just ridden faster :biggrin:
I'm averaging 43.7 according to Fuelly. 3300 miles and 27 fill ups. Although most of that is 2 up riding with the occasional quicker trip when solo.
When both your cars struggle to get more than low 20s, you don't worry about the mpg on the bike :biggrin: But it's around the 38-39 mark.
If you are concerned about MPG, get a Honda........C50 :biggrin: Seriously is the MPG out by that % as the speedo is also out?
Paul, It would be interesting to know what you get after the CJS remap. I believe the odometer is supposed to be accurate and the speedo +6/8%. Reasons why I'm bothered..... 1) I would like to have a usable 180-200 mile range when on long trips rather than thinking 150 is pushing it (nearly literally). 2) Mr C, My father is Scottish so I inherited the mean gene. 3) I think my bike is running pretty rich (Mivv decat).
My bike always shows around 42mpg'. I've just refitted the dB killer baffle and this has taken the average to 44mpg on the computer. When I fill up the range shows 200+ but I've never got that. I'm 1\8th Irish so I've got that tinker gene that says ride it like you stole it. If I'm out with my brother then I get under 100 miles between fill ups, yellow lamp to full. Good test this Saturday. Ride to the wall with 50mph average for 180 miles. Sadly I'm going with a hardlyableto, trophy and a fixed.
I honestly have no idea what fuel consumption I get from my bikes, car, van, lawnmower, whatever. I have far more important things to worry about, like where my next beer is coming from. And what can you do about it once you know, anyway? If you've got a gas guzzler there's precious little to do other than sell it or put up with it. That's not to say the cost isn't important; it is. I've found myself earning less and less money these days, and the issue of fuel consumption has crossed my mind several times. But the majority of bikes use roughly the same fuel for the same amount of power (maybe a couple of BMWs do better), so the only real option is to downgrade to a smaller bike, and I've no intention of doing that.
My 2013 model is getting much better fuel consumption compared with my 2010 model. I recently got 49 mpg average over 2,600 miles while on a tour down to the Alps (solo, with panniers and a tail bag) compared with about 39 mpg which I used to get on my old 2010 model. I'm not worried about the running costs (petrol is only a small part anyway) but the increase in range is very noticeable. I'm getting at least another 30 or even 40 miles before the light comes on, so more like 150 miles rather than 120 before SteveB
If your all using fuelly.com don't forget the measurements are in US gallons which are smaller than ours!
Err actually no - Go to settings and select UK gallons. Then all mpg figures are UK corrected I think there is a little part of me thinking this may form part of my justification to change my 2010 bike for a new economical one in the next couple of years :biggrin:
Not fussed on bike but am in car, as the difference between good mpg and bad, when claiming per mile, can be costing me or making me money for every mile I do for the company. Prefer they pay me ;-) it was a key decision factor for my recent car choice.
Well 3 other colleagues ordered axactly same, and I was with MBUK guy a month ago and they cant get near demand. Tbh any 2.2 C class model is delayed at the mo, low emissions plus 18p business miles and decent mpg with a dash of decent spec equals company car driver heaven
Actual consumption may not matter as much, but consumption figures are a useful way to gauge your riding. A smooth progressive riding style is more economical. Indicates better control and forward planning. Especially useful on long trips. I now try to eke out a tank as far and long as I can.
Running good MPG bikes (including my 80 MPG Honda NC700) makes running the 749s easier on the wallet Accelerating torque & MPG rate higher than overall speed for me. Maybe a long stroke V twin from Ducati like some of the bikes from the past, would stand us in good stead in these tight times? Although saying that, if anything came along more torquey than my old SS..... Money wise, it's the bloody insurance that kills ya though isn't it? ;(
I think fuel consumption is an area bike manufacturers need to take a much healthier interest in. The cost of fuel is plain criminal, and it's only ever going to get higher. We're in an era of 200bhp bikes, and while I hesitate to say that's enough (too much is never enough), I think they would do well to step back and take stock, concentrate on getting the same power and usability in a more economical way. Turbos have been used to good effect in the car world for years, perhaps it's time to re-evaluate their use on bikes.
