Triumph Rat Motorcycle Forums banner

What sort of fuel consumption does your trip computer indicate? lt/100km answers only please!

1484 Views 18 Replies 7 Participants Last post by  flyingbiker

My bike is still quite new, I've covered just a bit more than 1000km and I get a 7.2lt/100km indicated fuel consumption. I wonder if this is average of what indications other people are getting.

Pls. don't start quoting mpg indications as I'm challenged in anything but metric :???:
1 - 3 of 19 Posts
On 2006-12-19 14:34, flyingbiker wrote:
All on the standard 19T sprocket, mostly one up with mix of LA slab (slow!) and canyon carving:
Best: 6.22 l/100km
Worst (but probably the best ride :p): 4.99 l/100km
Average since purchase in May 05: 5.65 l/100km
Fuel conservation is not a priority when I buy a bike, but I like to track the numbers as one measure of the bikes health. Just switched to the 18T, so will see what (if any) measurable effect that has.
I wonder if you've mixed things up. 6.22lt/100km is a greater (worse) consumption than 4.99 lt/100km.

Regardless, it seems everybody is getting more milage than I am. Maybe it is that my bike is still new, or my spirited riding, or all the hills and bends over here combined with high speed highway riding.
I wonder why people like to change to a lower drive ratio on the ST 1050? I find the acceleration and low down grunt more than adequate while at the same time I find myself looking for a seventh in high speed highway riding.

The only reason I would see would be city riding in heavy traffic, but that's not what the ST was made for. In any case, that's why God gave you a wet clutch for.

Things were different on the old ST, especially on the pre 02 models.
1 - 3 of 19 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.