ADVrider

Go Back   ADVrider > Bikes > Beasts > The British Invasion: Triumph Tigers
User Name
Password
Register Inmates Photos Site Rules Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 05-07-2013, 10:43 AM   #16906
swimmer
armchair asshole
 
swimmer's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2007
Location: tucson
Oddometer: 4,470
Quote:
Originally Posted by browneye View Post
Sorry, but that's a dumb reason to decide on a bike. If you're after the best mpg's get an electric.
Why is it dumb? For people that commute every day on their bike like me it matters. For people that would prefer to use less gas for personal reasons it matters. It's dumb to dismiss the priorities of others.
swimmer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 10:44 AM   #16907
cug
--
 
Joined: May 2009
Location: Sunny California
Oddometer: 4,858
Quote:
Originally Posted by dljocky View Post
Sorry guys. For some reason, I was thinking they got high 30's to very low 40's. This may be a game changer. Thanks again for the info!
It's all in the right hand and the exhaust. Don't get an Arrow. Don't get the Arrow map for an aftermarket exhaust. Keep it in the efficient rev range and you're getting good mileage.

Push it hard with high revs, low gears all the time, install an Arrow exhaust + map and your mileage is toast to the point you mention above.
cug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 10:45 AM   #16908
cug
--
 
Joined: May 2009
Location: Sunny California
Oddometer: 4,858
Quote:
Originally Posted by browneye View Post
Sorry, but that's a dumb reason to decide on a bike. If you're after the best mpg's get an electric.
That's total BS. For some people fuel consumption is a very important argument. If that's not the case for you that doesn't make it a "dumb reason".
cug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 10:49 AM   #16909
dljocky
Studly Adventurer
 
Joined: Dec 2008
Location: Yorktown, Va
Oddometer: 857
Really? I mean, really??



Quote:
Originally Posted by browneye View Post
Sorry, but that's a dumb reason to decide on a bike. If you're after the best mpg's get an electric.
dljocky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 11:40 AM   #16910
lmychajluk
Beastly Adventurer
 
Joined: Jul 2008
Location: Meadowlands, NJ (just east of the USA)
Oddometer: 1,858
Quote:
Originally Posted by dljocky View Post
Sorry guys. For some reason, I was thinking they got high 30's to very low 40's. This may be a game changer. Thanks again for the info!
Between breaking it in, winter/summer gas switchover, adding some farkles, etc... I've not been very consistent between fillups, but overall I'm averaging 44mpg so far over ~1500mi, with my last fill up at 53mpg (I was a bit surprised, actually). I've read that you'll start seeing some improvements after a few thousand miles.
__________________
-Lee
NE ADV Event Calendar (Request Additions here.)
2013 Triumph Tiger 800
2008 Suzuki SV650n (Sold... I miss that bike...)
lmychajluk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 11:48 AM   #16911
browneye
PIN IT & BANG GEARS
 
browneye's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Location: Orange County, CA
Oddometer: 5,290
Fuel Consumption

Yes, really guys, really.
What difference does it make if a bike gets 42.7 or 48.2? Or 50? You pick a number.
I mean, come on. If you slog it through sand or mud for a day any big ADV bike is going to get maybe 30. If you're lucky. I can get 40 or 50 depending on how hard I twist the throttle. I don't ride along babying the hell out of it to try and stretch fuel out. if fuel costs are a big consideration for what you buy you should think about not buying a bike at all - you can't afford it.

So why would you eliminate a bike because it got 40mpg instead of 50? Let's say you buy 5 gallons of gas for $4.25 a gallon for $21.25 and one takes you 200 miles an the other 250 miles? I know, you're gonnna say 'what about long term use?', like,over the life of the vehicle, right? The average rider puts 5K miles on a year. So one costs $531 and the other costs $425, @$4.25 per gallon. Hmmm...I'm gonna pick one over the other for $106 in fuel savings over a year? Really? You could even use the same argument for a bike that got 35-38, like a 950SE. There's still not that much difference in operating cost for fuel.

I see people drive all over town looking to save ten cents a gallon to fill up their car. Let's say they buy 15 gallons of fuel, that's $1.50 in savings. If their car gets 25mpg, which is a lot but let's just use that, They can drive about 7.5 miles before they use up their savings. No accounting for their time and hassle. Or they buy regular instead of premium for their euro-car because it saves $2 to fill up. They lose that savings in fuel economy over the tank of gas because the ECU has to tune back the motor to run the low octane fuel.

Sorry, I still think it's a dumb reason to consider one bike over another because of a percieved difference in fuel economy. And I say 'sorry' because I don't wish to insult anyone, and I'm not saying you are dumb, it's just a dumb reason - it's just not logical thinking, not the big picture.
__________________
Chris Brown - "The Browneye"
"Without Motorcycles, People Live Very Boring Lives." - Malcolm Smith
Camp Nelson 2014 RRLaguna Seca 2012 RRSequoia 3-Day CampoutThanksgiving 2012
browneye is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 11:51 AM   #16912
Yossarian™
Deputy Cultural Attaché
 
Yossarian™'s Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Location: the 'Ha
Oddometer: 9,638
I can honestly say I've never bought (or didn't buy) a bike based upon the mileage it returned.

However, it does provide a certain level of satisfaction when the fuel efficiency of a bike proves to be greater than expected.
__________________
Successfully surviving motorcycling since 1976.
Yossarian™ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 12:18 PM   #16913
swimmer
armchair asshole
 
swimmer's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2007
Location: tucson
Oddometer: 4,470
Quote:
Originally Posted by browneye View Post
Yes, really guys, really.
What difference does it make if a bike gets 42.7 or 48.2? Or 50? You pick a number.
I mean, come on. If you slog it through sand or mud for a day any big ADV bike is going to get maybe 30. If you're lucky. I can get 40 or 50 depending on how hard I twist the throttle. I don't ride along babying the hell out of it to try and stretch fuel out. if fuel costs are a big consideration for what you buy you should think about not buying a bike at all - you can't afford it.

So why would you eliminate a bike because it got 40mpg instead of 50? Let's say you buy 5 gallons of gas for $4.25 a gallon for $21.25 and one takes you 200 miles an the other 250 miles? I know, you're gonnna say 'what about long term use?', like,over the life of the vehicle, right? The average rider puts 5K miles on a year. So one costs $531 and the other costs $425, @$4.25 per gallon. Hmmm...I'm gonna pick one over the other for $106 in fuel savings over a year? Really? You could even use the same argument for a bike that got 35-38, like a 950SE. There's still not that much difference in operating cost for fuel.

I see people drive all over town looking to save ten cents a gallon to fill up their car. Let's say they buy 15 gallons of fuel, that's $1.50 in savings. If their car gets 25mpg, which is a lot but let's just use that, They can drive about 7.5 miles before they use up their savings. No accounting for their time and hassle. Or they buy regular instead of premium for their euro-car because it saves $2 to fill up. They lose that savings in fuel economy over the tank of gas because the ECU has to tune back the motor to run the low octane fuel.

Sorry, I still think it's a dumb reason to consider one bike over another because of a percieved difference in fuel economy. And I say 'sorry' because I don't wish to insult anyone, and I'm not saying you are dumb, it's just a dumb reason - it's just not logical thinking, not the big picture.
It's not about costs for me and probably most people who are also interested in good mpg. Some people have different values/concerns that's all.
swimmer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 12:20 PM   #16914
cug
--
 
Joined: May 2009
Location: Sunny California
Oddometer: 4,858
Quote:
Originally Posted by browneye View Post
Sorry, I still think it's a dumb reason to consider one bike over another because of a percieved difference in fuel economy.
That's mainly because you think fuel economy is only about cost of ownership.
cug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 12:23 PM   #16915
KDXfile
Gnarly Adventurer
 
Joined: Feb 2009
Location: Hoover, AL.
Oddometer: 175
Quote:
Originally Posted by browneye View Post
Yes, really guys, really.
What difference does it make if a bike gets 42.7 or 48.2? Or 50? You pick a number.
I mean, come on. If you slog it through sand or mud for a day any big ADV bike is going to get maybe 30. If you're lucky. I can get 40 or 50 depending on how hard I twist the throttle. I don't ride along babying the hell out of it to try and stretch fuel out. if fuel costs are a big consideration for what you buy you should think about not buying a bike at all - you can't afford it.

So why would you eliminate a bike because it got 40mpg instead of 50? Let's say you buy 5 gallons of gas for $4.25 a gallon for $21.25 and one takes you 200 miles an the other 250 miles? I know, you're gonnna say 'what about long term use?', like,over the life of the vehicle, right? The average rider puts 5K miles on a year. So one costs $531 and the other costs $425, @$4.25 per gallon. Hmmm...I'm gonna pick one over the other for $106 in fuel savings over a year? Really? You could even use the same argument for a bike that got 35-38, like a 950SE. There's still not that much difference in operating cost for fuel.

I see people drive all over town looking to save ten cents a gallon to fill up their car. Let's say they buy 15 gallons of fuel, that's $1.50 in savings. If their car gets 25mpg, which is a lot but let's just use that, They can drive about 7.5 miles before they use up their savings. No accounting for their time and hassle. Or they buy regular instead of premium for their euro-car because it saves $2 to fill up. They lose that savings in fuel economy over the tank of gas because the ECU has to tune back the motor to run the low octane fuel.

Sorry, I still think it's a dumb reason to consider one bike over another because of a percieved difference in fuel economy. And I say 'sorry' because I don't wish to insult anyone, and I'm not saying you are dumb, it's just a dumb reason - it's just not logical thinking, not the big picture.
This is what I've been thinking; If you're ready to drop $15k to buy a bike you really enjoy riding, then what's an extra +/- few bucks a day in fuel costs either way...
__________________
2013 Beta 250 RR
2009 KTM 450 EXC
KDXfile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 12:30 PM   #16916
cug
--
 
Joined: May 2009
Location: Sunny California
Oddometer: 4,858
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDXfile View Post
This is what I've been thinking
Actually, are you sure? You have stopped short of thinking it through completely. Fuel consumption has to do with environmental impact, range to empty, times you have to fill up during your normal commute, planning ahead to find gas stations when you need them, wasting an expensive resource, financing whatever a rich sheik in the Middle East wants to do with his money, ... and so on and so forth.
cug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 12:40 PM   #16917
swimmer
armchair asshole
 
swimmer's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2007
Location: tucson
Oddometer: 4,470
Quote:
Originally Posted by cug View Post
Actually, are you sure? You have stopped short of thinking it through completely. Fuel consumption has to do with environmental impact, range to empty, times you have to fill up during your normal commute, planning ahead to find gas stations when you need them, wasting an expensive resource, financing whatever a rich sheik in the Middle East wants to do with his money, ... and so on and so forth.
cug, I am picking up what you are putting down.
swimmer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 12:48 PM   #16918
browneye
PIN IT & BANG GEARS
 
browneye's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Location: Orange County, CA
Oddometer: 5,290
Quote:
Originally Posted by cug View Post
Actually, are you sure? You have stopped short of thinking it through completely. Fuel consumption has to do with environmental impact, range to empty, times you have to fill up during your normal commute, planning ahead to find gas stations when you need them, wasting an expensive resource, financing whatever a rich sheik in the Middle East wants to do with his money, ... and so on and so forth.

Environmental impact? Hmmm...there's a big difference there from 40 to 50mpg. Yep. If you're that concerned then my suggestion to go electric is a valid one.

Range to empty has some merit, but easily compensated or adjusted for.

Number of times you have to fill up? Well, that may be an extra tank every 3 or 4 months. I don't see that as being significant.

Planning ahead for a gas station? Egads. It's been said there's not a road in the country with a fuel stop greater than 130 miles. You really plan ahead for gas stations on your commute?

Rich oil sheik? Really? What bike you choose will have no bearing.

And so on and so forth.

Cug, you're a good arguer, but you've lost me on this one.
__________________
Chris Brown - "The Browneye"
"Without Motorcycles, People Live Very Boring Lives." - Malcolm Smith
Camp Nelson 2014 RRLaguna Seca 2012 RRSequoia 3-Day CampoutThanksgiving 2012
browneye is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 01:57 PM   #16919
cug
--
 
Joined: May 2009
Location: Sunny California
Oddometer: 4,858
Quote:
Originally Posted by browneye View Post
Cug, you're a good arguer, but you've lost me on this one.
That's because we have a different perspective to things. I like to have fun, I work a lot and I enjoy a good hobby. But with everything I do I like to keep things in perspective. And I keep the things I mentioned in mind.

See, I'm happy to save $5 a month on electricity maybe just by the fact that we are turning off the lights in rooms we aren't using at that time, or by not watching TV (and have a huge TV running all day) and so on. I'm happy if my average mpg in my car is 40 instead of 25. Or 50 on my bike instead of 40. Or that we create less garbage and can use a smaller garbage can. And so on ...

I'm not an environment nut who lives in the woods, but I still try to manage my environmental footprint carefully. And I don't even have kids. I can't get it into my head how people can be so f****** careless with all the above when they have kids that will have to live in the world we leave behind ... And I'm not talking about you right now. I don't know you, therefore I don't judge you. But I see enough craziness happening everyday that I plain can't wrap my head around.

It all starts with the little things. And I find it completely nuts if my motorcycle uses as much gas as my car.
cug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2013, 02:01 PM   #16920
cory1848
Gnarly Adventurer
 
Joined: Apr 2013
Location: Kissimmee Florida
Oddometer: 293
Quote:
Originally Posted by browneye View Post

Planning ahead for a gas station? Egads. It's been said there's not a road in the country with a fuel stop greater than 130 miles. You really plan ahead for gas stations on your commute?
Sometimes adventure bikes take you out of this country... Sometimes that difference of 50 miles to a tank may just be the deciding factor of walking 50 miles or coasting into a gas station, or in extreme cases, that 50 miles might be a life saver. There is plenty of merit for wanting good mileage.
cory1848 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Share

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

.
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


Times are GMT -7.   It's 10:07 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ADVrider 2011-2014