Are these mpg's normal?

So ive been reading forum posts and reviews on 2013 adv 650 vstrom about fuel mpg being from 50-60 but after just 1200miles brand new im avg about 43 mpg going 70mph for over 500 miles. Communting i avg 47. Is there something im missing? Babying the throttle ive gotten 50.3 mpg but faster than 30 and it plummets. Whats going on?

I've never had a bike with such mileage swings. I've gotten from 38 to over 50. I average low to mid 40s.
My ZX9 with over twice the horsepower was about the same. But it wasn't a dog.

2011 WeeStrom, 4200 miles on the odo
rode 126 miles, some two track dirt road a car could go slow on, some paved twisites, a 65 mph four lane stretch for a sandwich. then the reverse same route into a 30 mph wind. 58.8 mpg for that trip. the guy I got the bike from was averaging 50 to 55 mpg commuting.
remove your side bags and try it. they stick out there like a parachute

I had a 2009 Wee and would get 60mpg riding it hard and 70mpg riding like a granny. Averaged about 65mpg. UK gallons.
I test rode the new Glee and the computer mpg was not as good as my old Wee, although I obviously never owned the bike to calculate it accurately myself.

Hey my CB500X can get 69mpg if I stay below 62mph but if I get over 68mph it drops to closer to 59mpg.

Take the side cases off and run a tank of gas. Should be good for around 3-5mpg on the highway. With my '12 adv, i average 50mpg on the highway with just my top case, but last weekend I needed the side cases and cruised at an easy 70-75mph which resulted 45 mpg avg.

Also, the mpg I just quoted are my own calculations. Indication on the screen is overstating consumption. I fill up the tank to the neck every time and when at the next refill divide miles between fill ups by galons that I put in back up to the neck, I get a mpg that always better than what the bike read out is telling me. Do your own math, because the read out on the bike seems to be a guestimate.

Most importanty, don't worry. What you're seeing is the same as everyone else. With more break in miles you will start seeing your everage getting closer to 50 for mixed riding. When my bike was new, i was seeing 40-44mpg on the screen while cruising the highway all the time. Actual mpg always came out to be around 47-48mpg

Cheers,

Take a look at fuelly, the numbers may be slightly above average since most of the members on there are concerned about mpg, and might be nursing it to get the best they can, why else would you would you keep track? I ride for the enjoyment, not to save a buck. Not saying I have never checked my mpg's, but I'm not keeping a log on it, just enough to make sure the bike is running correct.

Mike.

http://www.fuelly.com/motorcycle/suzuki/dl650

There's no single magic bullet as far as mpg from one rider to the next, IMHO. It's a combination of many, many factors.

I can get anywhere from low 40's US mpg to mid 70's, on my NC700X :huh

Others can get high 90's, and their poorest number ever is way higher than the best I've ever got!

Low 40's to high 90's that's a huge swing! :eek1

Same with my BMW F800ST, I could easily drop into the low 30's, but on occasion saw mid 60's.

The only thing that usually remains constant and true, is the rider's driving style. They (I include myself in this... blush) may honestly believe they are "babying" their bike, yet be thought of as a ricky racer jack rabbit, by the guys who always report the outrageously enviable high numbers.

I remember a fellow rider on a Wee that got 60 mpg once on the Blue Ridge Parkway. I got 77 mpg that day, same road, same pace.

I echo the comment to check Fuelly. The DL650 is well represented with a large population sample with lots of mileage reported. I'd believe those figures over single owner claims.

Motorcycles have very high coefficients of drag. Drag is squared as speed is doubled IIRC and any increase in speed over 50 mph takes a huge toll on mpg no matter what type of motorcycle.

Unless you correct your odometer for error the MPG is worse than you think.

As you state: "Going 70 MPH for...."

It's all about aerodynamics. You and the bike are not exactly streamlined, and the faster you go, the more resistance you create.

Once you travel past 55 MPH, the CoG (Coefficient of Drag) multiplies, and it becomes harder and harder for the engine to push you and the bike into the oncoming air. This is why the speed limit was set at 55 MPH back in the early 70's - to save fuel during the Oil Embargo daze.

Manufacturers MPG quotes (read the fine print) are for steady cruising at < 55 MPH, and painfully slow starts and stops by a professional rider, etc. Your results may - and will - vary.

If you really want to achieve those posted magical MPG results, ride slow, never past 55 MPH, wear slippery clothing, tuck in tight, and accelerate and decelerate as slow as possible.

Not much fun, granted, but you DID ask!

I have about 14k miles on my 2012 DL650. My commute to work is 10 miles of rural back roads at 45mph, 35 miles of freeway at 70-75mph over two passes, and 5 miles of city. I average 50mpg doing that. That is without panniers

Putt-putting on dirt roads I get 60 or more.

Pushing a headwind across NV at 70-75mph with loaded panniers it will drop closer to 40.

The readout on the dash is slightly low compared to calculated. I don't think there is one single readout on that stupid thing that is accurate.

This is the graph of what The Prophet says. Listen to the Phrophet on this one..

This is for a push bike. At 60mph a push bike and rider needs 3KW to move through the air and look at how fast the power requirements are rising at that point. At 70 it's about 5kw already



Here is another one for more slippery cars..

My mileage drops rapidly after an "airspeed" of about 65 mph.

The MPG figures claimed by the Big Four manufacturers are now calculated using the WMTC harmonized test method. Similar to the EPA cycle in the USA the World Motorcycle Test Cycle uses a dynometer to induce a representation of real world use including normal starts, stops, accelerations and steady speeds more like real world use in a mix of city and highway operation and is easily duplicated in order to harmonize results worldwide. The old Japanese test method for >50cc road bikes used a steady speed of 60 kph. Whether or not an average rider can get the same results as the WMTC is doubtful but it is incorrect to say the mfg claimed figures come from putting along at 50 mph in a steady state.

There can be no argument that keeping speeds under 55 with as few starts & stops as possible gives the highest mpg but it bears little resemblance to the WMTC.

Fun is a relative thing....sometimes it's fun to see if you can top your last high mpg figure. Not all the time of course!

75mph from work to home. About 47mpg on the strom. Which is better than the 42-43 mpg on my cm450.

55-60mph it got 55-58mpg. (Strom). But it only has 1200 miles.

Ride a Wee (great bike) Get 60 MPG Rear tire lasts 11,000 miles = NO FUN!
Smoke rubber, burn Dino's and RIDE! Or buy a Prius = NO FUN!

I've been on a ride with someone else with a near identical DL. Both around the same size and weight, similar sized top boxes.

One bike got 4.5l/100km, the other 3.5l/100km.

While average speeds were the same the quicker bike was also the one getting best fuel economy. That rider held corner speed, used almost no brake (And these were bumpy winding roads) and was generally very gentle on acceleration out of bends - because he didn't NEED to thrash the throttle.

The other rider trail brakes into the corners, powers out and was generally running a gear or so lower than the other.

So - my experience suggests "riding style" is the majority of this.

Pete

To carry this discussion further - I doubt very much that 'miles' on the bike, or the "break-in" period has any real, significant effect on MPG results anymore. This may possibly have been true say 30 or more years ago, but with todays computerized machining, better assembly techniques, advanced technology and modern, improved materials, bikes are "Plug and Play" right out of the box.

If it were true, it would mean that there is a significant amount of mechanical resistance (Read "Friction") occurring inside the Engine and Transmission, which - think about it - would result in dire things. Excessive wear, heat, and all sorts of horrid, expensive damage would be the result.

Methinks it's one of those old, mythical, Chinese Whisper tales that struggles to go away.

Again - possibly true like 50 years ago, but no longer a reality.... IMO!

More likely it has to do with the behavior of the right, throttle hand, various speeds ridden, and wind resistance, etc.

oh no, guys, you have to do the break-in the Internet way, or you get no power out of your engine, just smoke, and consumption will skyrocket. Oh yeah, and the engine'll blow up too..

Haha boom! Well this trip back from chicago to fort riley will be much slower. Im going to try 65 the whole way. Also being straight highway i have chicken strips like a mofo.....