2014 RT-S MPG Report for Texas (V2.0)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob Denman

Your results have been outstanding! :clap: :2thumbs:
By Sport Shield; are you referring to BRP's 23" screen?
(My last fill-up...41 mpg!)

---

I'm referring to the Sport Shield from CalSci. I requested it to be cut to 17", but they sent it to me as 18". I sent them an email asking them what can be done about this, but I didn't receive a response. I know I said I was going to do a review on the shield, but I've been waiting to hear from them to see if they are going to get me the 17" I ordered.

This being said, I can say that I feel much less resistance on the front end of the RT when heading into strong winds. I have much more to say about it, but I'm waiting to see what CalSci is going to do, as I really wanted the 17" shield that I ordered.

Welcome to the "Over 40 Club"!

Thanks! :D
:nopic: of that screen on your bike? :D
(Or should I just wait for your review of it??)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob Denman

Those numbers track pretty well with what I've gotten with my 2010
Poking along at 60 mph; I could squeak out 37 mpg...
Turn the flame up to 75 mph, and the mileage would drop to just below 28 mpg.

---

I have noticed the same thing on my 13 RTS. 50-65 approximately 36mpg and if I I go 75-77 I go down to around 30mpg.

These critters are definitely the aerodynamic equivalents of a big, old barn door... :shocked: :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob Denman

These critters are definitely the aerodynamic equivalents of a big, old barn door... :shocked: :D

---

Yup, especially with the stock screen. I went to the BRP Low, vented screen and like it a lot better now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob Denman

Thanks! :D
:nopic: of that screen on your bike? :D
(Or should I just wait for your review of it??)

---

Well I really wanted the 17". I don't know why CalSci sent me a 18", and I really don't know why they aren't responding to my email to get the issue resolved. I can tell you that if they don't resolve it in some way, my review won't be good. Give me a few more days to try to reach them, and if I can't, I'll post the review. I know you'll see it, as you don't miss a single post on this forum :chat:

UPDATE for "Bon Temps"...
With a total of 1906.2 miles of keeping track; the bike (and us!), has used 48.885 gallons.
38.993556 mpg overall! :2thumbs:

I haven't been precise or scientific about my mpg, but so far, my first 3 tanks seem to be 34.75, 38.4 (Eco... aggravating as heck, though), and 37.75 (no Eco), mostly highway and interstate. The first tank was all interstate, actually. This is using fuel with ethanol, 93 octane (choices here are usually 87, 89, and 93, and non-eth is rare).

And about psi and mpg, Bob, yes, the more air in the tires, the better mpg (learned that with the Prius; I run 40/38 on it), but the thing with the Spyders - where is that balance between mpg and premature center tire wear? There must be a 'sweet spot' somewhere. Guess we'll figure that out ;)

As my RS topped at 35 mpg (before I discovered that 5000rpm was optimal; that dropped it to 30 or so), I'm impressed that this heavier, bulkier creature is getting this kind of mileage right out of the gate.

Eco, though...sheesh. The bike feels like it's straining to get anywhere. It might save gas, but between the strained feeling and looking for that damned green shift arrow, not worth it to me. That's saying a lot for a Prius owner.

By the way, got laser aligned yesterday; the left side was off a bit, and the toe-in was incorrect.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob Denman

UPDATE for "Bon Temps"...
With a total of 1693 miles of keeping track; the bike (and us!), has used 43.885 gallons.
38.578 mpg overall! :2thumbs:

---

Congrats Bob! :thumbup:

That's great overall MPG! :yes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpyderDuck

I haven't been precise or scientific about my mpg, but so far, my first 3 tanks seem to be 34.75, 38.4 (Eco... aggravating as heck, though), and 37.75 (no Eco), mostly highway and interstate. The first tank was all interstate, actually. This is using fuel with ethanol, 93 octane (choices here are usually 87, 89, and 93, and non-eth is rare).

.....

Eco, though...sheesh. The bike feels like it's straining to get anywhere. It might save gas, but between the strained feeling and looking for that damned green shift arrow, not worth it to me. That's saying a lot for a Prius owner.

---

Duck, ECO does make the throttle very lethargic. Besides half of one tank, I have always used ECO. That half a tank though....Wow! It was like driving another machine (just like when I put my Prius in Power Mode). That throttle response can become very addictive, so that's why I have never really used it from the beginning. I should also mention that I always ride two-up with my wife, and I always use 87 octane; yet still achieve 40+ MPG on every tank (for the past couple of months). However, my style of driving doesn't need 93 octane or a 4 second 0-60 response.

On a side note, I know there has been a lot of talk about tires not lasting long on the new RT, but I wonder how much of this is due to people riding the new RT much harder (pulling more Gs around corners & braking). Based on what I'm seeing from my own tire wear, I believe I should be able to get 8,000+ on the rear and even more from the front.

There's no doubt in my mind, that the dance between the right wrist, and the "loud grip"; makes ALL of the difference! :D :2thumbs:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Texas

Duck, ECO does make the throttle very lethargic. Besides half of one tank, I have always used ECO. That half a tank though....Wow! It was like driving another machine (just like when I put my Prius in Power Mode).

---

Old school Prius here. 2007. No power mode. Mine still has the pretty colored screen, lol.

It wasn't the lethargy that got to me, though. It mainly was the hazard of looking for the arrow. Slow acceleration isn't a problem for me, if I want, but the feeling of the machine being held back just really bothered me, for some reason. I could have put up with it, but combined with the arrow... nah.

Never thought of hypermiling on a Spyder, unless they would let me try the hybrid. I would love to try that, but this is the next best thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpyderDuck

Old school Prius here. 2007. No power mode. Mine still has the pretty colored screen, lol.

It wasn't the lethargy that got to me, though. It mainly was the hazard of looking for the arrow. Slow acceleration isn't a problem for me, if I want, but the feeling of the machine being held back just really bothered me, for some reason. I could have put up with it, but combined with the arrow... nah.

Never thought of hypermiling on a Spyder, unless they would let me try the hybrid. I would love to try that, but this is the next best thing.

---

After a while, you won't even be looking for the green arrow. I find shifting is best, and smoothest, between 2500-3000 rpm. This range is where the green arrow pops up anyway. If you look at it this way, then you find yourself just listening for 2500-3000 rpm (after you get a feel for what that sounds like). Once you have that down, you'll be able to maintain your eyes on the road, and it'll be much more enjoyable. When driving in the city, I'm also always watching for the next stoplight and predicting it. I mainly let the RT decelerate and shift down on it's own, which is much more efficient as almost always use very little brake. I usually approach the light as it turns green and end up passing all of those people that flew by me and slammed on their brakes at the light. I never understood why people continue to drive like that. Personally, I find that style of driving exhausting (let alone the wear and tear on the vehicle).

I'll always love that little screen on the Gen II. It took me a while to get used to the Gen III not having it. Now after two years with it, I am used to it, but I would still love to have the Gen II screen back ;) I should also mention that I average 60+ MPG on my Prius. Not the best mileage, but better than probably 80%+. I like to see how high of mileage I can get, but I'll never be able to compete with the hyper-milers. They go to extremes, like coasting through stop signs, turning off the vehicle when going downhill, etc... I'm happy with 60+ MPG, and I'll keep my current Prius until an all electric vehicle comes out that I both like, and can afford (I love the Tesla S Performance Plus, but can't afford it right now).

I'm getting 25.5-32.5mpg on mine but hoping to see an improvement as I don't think I'd been brimming the tank fully before. Our gallons are bigger than yours too. Nice to know they are capable of big mpg but I'm not seeing it on our winding country roads, up and down the gearbox and I'm exploring upto 7k rpm at the moment. 600+ miles of running in so far.

I haven't tried sitting at a constant 56mph or anything, we don't have that type of road really, we'd get rammed by a lorry doing that speed on a motorway! Safer to keep ahead. Our country lanes are 60mph mostly but the bends mean you're up and down the gears. Feels like its starting to loosen up a bit at last though so hopefully it'll keep getting better.

Cheers
Nito

T,
My shift points:
1st to 2nd, 2nd to 3rd, and 3rd to 4th: 2,000 rpm
4th to 5th, and 5th to 6th: 2,500 rpm.
The bike seems happy with it... :thumbup:
And I'm NEVER in a hurry anyway! :D

That "Upshift" light bothered me too...
"Distracted Driving"; on steroids! :shocked:

I have watched with interest the on-going report on the MPG numbers which have been generated by Texas. It has been a welcome information source for myself and others.
I have calculated the average MPG for all the miles reported.
Total miles reported = 4304
Total gals. reported = 106.35
Average MPG = 40.470145

I think that's should give everyone a good point of reference as to miles in tank.
Thanks, to poster.
I think you are now at the point of diminishing return. You have given everyone all they need to make good decisions as to when to fill up.
.
I loved the report. Very useful.:congrats:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bob Denman

T,
My shift points:
1st to 2nd, 2nd to 3rd, and 3rd to 4th: 2,000 rpm
4th to 5th, and 5th to 6th: 2,500 rpm.
The bike seems happy with it... :thumbup:
And I'm NEVER in a hurry anyway! :D

That "Upshift" light bothered me too...
"Distracted Driving"; on steroids! :shocked:

---

Bob, you're getting lower shift points than I think I was even able to. I can't remember getting the 1330 to even allow me to shift any lower than 2,200, but then again, I'm using ECO. That might be a function of ECO :dontknow:. However, I also got a bit of surge when shifting below 2,500, but I don't when my shift points are over 2,500. Do you get any surge when shifting at 2,000, and/or are you not using ECO? If you are staying out of ECO, that may explain it; however it may also explain why you are getting slightly less MPG than me.

:opps: That might be my lousy eyeballs not being able to differentiate between 2,000 and 2,200 rpm... :opps:
And you ARE the mileage King! :bowdown:

I'll try your shifting technique, guys; there hasn't been nearly as much discussion about shifting the 1300 as the 998, so I do appreciate the input. I do let off the gas the moment I see a light turn yellow, and roll up to it, but other than that, I just ride. I like having the power available immediately if I need it, so don't think I'll go back to eco mode anyway.

As for the Prius, my top mpg was 62, but that was with the original OEM tires, which I could not find later. I never was a hypermiler. I consistently got 57 in summer, and 53 in winter, driving like a bat from hell. I haven't found tires that give me the mileage that I used to get. The dealer told me that it's common for the mpg to 'suddenly drop' after a few years. That was just after he sold me my first set of replacement tires, of course. Couldn't even reach 50 with those; 45-46 was it. Pfft. I now have Cooper LRR tires, and get 50-51, but still miss the good ol' days.

Fuel mileage in cages??
If you're looking for one that gets awful good mileage; take a look at Ford's Fiesta! :thumbup:
Sonny-Boy has a 2011 Fiesta SE. He consistently gets mileage in the 45 to 49 mpg range with it! :shocked:
I honestly figured that he was lying; until I drove it, and got 48 mpg...
Now; he DOES baby the car... his commute pretty much limits him to no more than 50 mph...
(But it's a GREAT road for bikes!)
And he's got 80,000 miles on that little cuss too! :D

Ok, stupid question time. Is there any reason there would be a mpg difference in an RT-S and a RT Limited?

My next car if I can figure out how to pay for it:

http://cdn.ecomento.com/wp-content/u...-S-740x425.jpg

Tesla S Performance Plus
All electric
0-60 in 4.4 seconds
250+ miles per tank
No maintenance
Massive storage
Height adjustable suspension


The 250 mile range works for 99%+ off my driving, so at .11 per kilowatt hour to charge it up, it's the perfect vehicle for me and the CO.

Well; the savings in gasoline costs ought to help... :D

yeah, if you figure our how to pay for one, let me in on the secret. I'd love to have one of those!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpyderDuck

Ok, stupid question time. Is there any reason there would be a mpg difference in an RT-S and a RT Limited?

---

:dontknow: GPS and Chrome weighs more, thus more weight means lower MPG?