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, Dec 21, 2006

NikosR

Discussion Starter · Dec 19, 2006

Hi,

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 :???:

Save

1 - 5 of 19 Posts

flyingbiker

· #5 · Dec 19, 2006

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

): 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.

Save

flyingbiker

· #7 · Dec 20, 2006

Of course - calcs are right but too used to thinking in terms of miles/gallon (which btw ranges from 38 to 47, using US gallons). That basically translates into a range of between 211 and 263 miles, assuming every last drop in the tank is usable - hence I fill up at 200 miles or less.

Save

flyingbiker

· #10 · Dec 20, 2006

Thanks for the links (the xls did not work for me, but the html was fine). Certainly the case consumption varys widely with 'style' of riding. While the real-time consumption figures are of little use to me (I suspect it is calibrated for Imp gallons), I noticed on the freeway as traffic flow changes that in 6th increasing revs/speed improves economy up to something like 75mph (getting to the canyons can get boring hence the distraction!) even though wind resistance = v**2 . On this premise I justified to the wife the smaller sprocket could reduce my fuel bills, and reduce helmet bonking through smoother accelarations

Save

flyingbiker

· #14 · Dec 20, 2006

Guess weâ€™re digressing into another topic, butâ€¦ I too was inclined to not make the gearing change, but figured for <$30 and an hours effort (when it was pouring with rain so not losing ride time) I would give it a go. My sentiment was that it would only make a difference in 1st and top, as in between I would still change at the same revs. For the kind of riding Iâ€™m now doing I like the slightly faster take off in first and less need to slip the clutch when weaving through our miles of car parking (freeways) and side streets. I do like a relaxed top gear, but also noticed the slightly improved acceleration 6th now has (typical cruise revs have gone from 3600 to 4000). If I was going huge distances on the freeways Iâ€™d probably go back to a higher gearing, but nowadays given most of my riding are gratuitous trips to the mountains and airport the change suits me, but not to say itâ€™s for everyone.

See less See more

Save

flyingbiker

· #19 · Dec 21, 2006

FWIW I'm using the equiv grade (premium unleaded, 95 RON I believe), but rarely see close to 100mph (160kph) - just difficult to sustain much over 85 on my local routes. In the mountains (majority of the miles) I probably don't get over 75mph (120kph), but it's a constant rolling on and off of the throttle. The worst numbers have been when I used the bike multiple times to commute. I'm a lightweight at 50kg in regular clothes, so that probably helps on both economy and accelaration

Like Russ I just plug in the numbers from the fuel receipt and let the spreadsheet do the thinking. Also served me well when privately selling the last bike.

Save

1 - 5 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.

Top Contributors this Month