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

[Texas]

----------------------------------------------------------
D I S C L A I M E R
This thread is intended only for those who are interested in the RT's capability in stretching MPG. If this thread does not interest you, please do not make negative posts about it, or any members who post in this thread.
----------------------------------------------------------

Now on to the subject....

I purchased my 2014 RT-S on 2/1/2014. Knowing this is a 1,000+ lb trike, and disappointed with the average MPG that many owners have reported, I wanted to see just what the new RT was capable of getting. As time goes on, I will continue to update this thread with the results I have received. Along with each MPG report, I will try to also supply information such as temperature, mode, type of driving, etc...

So far, MPG is very good for a trike of this weight and drag. The MPG report for 2/16/2014 is my best to date. While it consisted of mainly back country roads, at times there were also strong cross winds, and some of the roads were very rough, as I crossed more than 30 cattle guards, to give you an idea of road condition.

----------------------------------------------------------
MPG REPORT

2/1/2014:
181 Miles - 5.11 Gal. - 35.42 MPG
ECO/All Highway/High 70s

2/9/2014:
201 Miles - 5.08 Gal. - 39.57 MPG
ECO/City/Back Country/Highway/Low 70s

2/15/2014:
188 Miles - 4.83 Gal. - 38.92 MPG
ECO/Back Country Roads/1.25 hours in Traffic at idle/Low 70s

2/16/2014:
210 Miles - 5.18 Gal. - 40.5 MPG
ECO/Mainly Back Country Roads/Mid 70s

2/22/2014:
187 Miles - 4.70 Gal. - 39.8 MPG
ECO/Mainly Back Country Roads/Low 70s

3/10/2014:
202 Miles - 5.34 Gal. - 37.8 MPG
ECO/Mainly City Roads with some Back Country Roads & Oil Change Performed During This Tank/Low 70s

3/22/2014:
187 Miles - 5.12 Gal. - 36.52 MPG
ECO/City/Highway/High 60s

3/22/2014:
203 Miles - 5.55 Gal. - 36.58 MPG
ECO & Normal/Highway/30+ minutes of Idle Run/High 60s

3/30/2014:
224 Miles - 5.61 Gal. - 39.93 MPG
ECO/City/Back Country/Highway/Low 80s

4/19/2014:
196 Miles - 5.29 Gal. - 37.05 MPG
ECO/Mostly City/Some Highway/High 70s-Low 80s

4/25/2014:
170 Miles - 4.00 Gal. - 42.5 MPG
ECO/Highway/Low to High 80s to mid 90s

4/26/2014:
200 Miles - 4.78 Gal. - 41.84 MPG
ECO/Highway/Low to mid 80s

4/26/2014:
101 Miles - 2.20 Gal. - 45.90 MPG
ECO/Highway/Low to mid 80s

4/26/2014:
102 Miles - 2.32 Gal. - 43.97 MPG
ECO/Highway/Low to mid 80s

5/10/2014:
229 Miles - 5.51 Gal. - 41.56 MPG
ECO/In Town/Back Country/Low to mid 80s

5/12/2014:
156 Miles - 3.51 Gal. - 44.44 MPG
ECO/In Town/Mid to High 80s

5/16/2014:
147 Miles - 3.60 Gal. - 40.81 MPG
ECO/City/Mid to High 80s

5/17/2014:
176 Miles - 3.99 Gal. - 44.11 MPG
ECO/City/High 80s to Low 90s

5/23/2014:
169 Miles - 4.09 Gal. - 41.32 MPG
ECO/City/Low to Mid 80s

5/30/2014:
257 Miles - 6.04 Gal. - 42.55 MPG
ECO/Highway/Back Country/City/Low to Mid 80s - CalSci Tinted Shorty Windshield was added

6/3/2014:
199 Miles - 4.59 Gal. - 43.36 MPG
ECO/City/Mid to High 80s

6/9/2014:
195 Miles - 4.50 Gal. - 43.33 MPG
ECO/City/Mid to High 80s

6/14/2014:
224 Miles - 5.41 Gal. - 41.40 MPG
ECO/City/High 80s to Low 90s

6/20/2014:
190 Miles - 4.25 Gal. - 44.71 MPG
ECO/City/High 80s

6/27/2014:
194 Miles - 4.53 Gal. - 42.83 MPG
ECO/City/High 80s to Low 90s

7/06/2014
200 Miles - 4.62 Gal. - 43.29 MPG
ECO/City/High 80s to Mid 90s

7/11/2014
168 Miles - 3.73 Gal. - 45.04 MPG
ECO/City/High 80s to Low 90s

7/15/2014
207 Miles - 4.62 Gal. - 44.81 MPG
ECO/City/High 80s to Low 90s

7/25/2014
144 Miles - 3.41 Gal. - 42.23 MPG
ECO/City/Low to High 90s

8/01/2014
209 Miles - 4.66 Gal. - 44.85 MPG
ECO/City/Low to High 80s

8/05/2014
180 Miles - 3.98 Gal. - 45.23 MPG
ECO/City/Low to High 90s

8/14/2014
183 Miles - 3.97 Gal. - 46.10 MPG
ECO/City/Low to High 90s

9/04/2014
184 Miles - 4.37 Gal. - 42.11 MPG
ECO/City/Low to High 90s

9/14/2014
156 Miles - 3.427 Gal. - 45.52 MPG
ECO/City/Low to High 90s

----------------------------------------------------------

[MidTNDawg]

Sounding better. Is this due to breaking-in or other changes?

[Texas]

Well to me, the MPG from 2/15 is not accurate due to the time I had to sit at idle in traffic; so if you un-factor that, then mileage has continued to improve. Since these figures were all within the first several hundred miles, I'm thinking that break-in has a lot to do with it, although I continue to perfect the throttle and shift times. I've been purchasing my gas at the same place for the past three fill-ups (87 octane), so that has remained consistent. The roads I drive are fairly hilly, and the wind is almost always a cross wind, because it is usually blowing strong from the South, and my rides take me West-East. My mileage shouldn't get a lot better, and once I see it stabilize, I'll begin testing with ECO Mode off.

[SpyderAnn01]

What is your average speed? Can you calculate that from the hour meter? That might be interesting data. At first I thought mid 70 and low 70 were your speeds not the temperature. LOL

[Chupaca]

nice report..should help those wondering and give them a point of reference...

[Bob Denman]

"T"
I'm digging this information!! Thanks!
And with only about 800 miles on the bike; what'll it be doing at 8,000 miles, and is fully loosened up?

[Texas]

What is your average speed? Can you calculate that from the hour meter? That might be interesting data. At first I thought mid 70 and low 70 were your speeds not the temperature. LOL

Ann,

I can only answer those who ask about speed, to say that those concerned about speed won't see the full benefits of MPG. While I have not been able to find an aerodynamics graph, I can tell you there are several dynamic factors at play including rolling resistance due to tires, road surface type and hills, wind resistance to to speed and direction of the wind, as well as air mass (cold air is much more dense than warm air, which causes more resistance). I should have also mentioned in my mileage report, that I always have the windshield down. In fact, I would like to see someone produce a good looking shorty windshield. While I wouldn't use it during the winter months, I would use it when temperatures are above 78F. Also, wind resistance is not linear. In other words, if the force of wind resistance is 8 at 10 MPH, it is at least 30 at 40 MPH, not 32. However, we deal with speeds much higher than 40, so you can see how limiting Force as much as possible is more efficient.

The average speed meter is always misleading, so I don't mess with it. To give you an idea, watch your own, and you'll see what I mean. It factors in such things as sitting at idle in traffic, stop lights, etc..., and I don't consider that to be an accurate representation of experienced speed. I could have gone 1 mile overall at 100MPH, but sat at idle for 10 minutes, and it would have said my average speed was 10MPH.

I would say to those concerned about speed, don't mess with the physics of high MPG. You probably aren't ready for it yet. I know when I was younger, I thought about it, but internal emotions would not let me control it. As I got older, those internal emotions didn't fluctuate as much when I twisted the throttle. When I did twist the throttle, it was sort of a "been there, done that" feeling. Instead, I became more interested in the forces that we don't see, but play a big factor on efficiency. I also enjoy filling up with gas when I leave home, going out for a long ride for several hours, seeing my wife enjoy the trip, as she wants to see the scenery and not worry about her helmet shield being ripped away, and not having to fill up with gas again until I come home.

One of several by-products is also the fact that it is just a safer way to ride. I lost two friends when I was young. Both were with me at the time. One in a group ride, and one was just the two of us on separate bikes. I also almost lost my father while he was with me on his own bike (it took him a year to recover). I also have countless other stories about friends who have lost legs, put in comas, etc... No one is going to intimidate me to drive fast. I've been there, done that, and seen things that no one should ever see. People can go fast if they want, but it only takes one accident.

[carajony]

I filled up today... Third fillup.. went 183 miles from full to almost fumes... My Fuelly put me at 31 MPG for this fillup. Im at about 350 miles so far. Hope it gets better. I was always averaging about 24 MPG on my 12 RTS. I like to open it up alot...lol...

[JimFoy]

I was averaging about 24 mpg on my 2012 RT, but on the first 3 tanks on my 2014 RT, I'm getting over 30.

[Guzzi]

3 fillups so far, avg 32.5 mpg. Much better than my 2012.

[Texas]

It's great to hear from owners of older RT models what an improvement the 2014 RT is. That is one area that I can't speak on, as I didn't have a previous RT, or Spyder for that matter, but what I'm hearing is about a 33% improvement in MPG.

[Purple Guy]

Thanks for the stats!

[Texas]

Mileage Report updated. MPG is a slight drop from the last ride, last weekend. Today there were wind gusts at over 20 MPH, and I drove through the entire city to and from my destination, whereas last time I did not. I'm guessing if I had stayed away from all of the stop lights, mileage would have been a bit better than the last time. We may go out on a ride tomorrow, and if we do, I'll choose a different route to avoid as many stop lights as possible to see if there is a difference.

[ulflyer]

I've had two fill-ups at 29 mpg and two at 32mpg. I'm a moderate rider but run a lot of interstate at 70mph. My previous '11 Rt averaged 30 mpg. Looks like my '14 will be about the same. No complaints as I didn't buy with expectation of fantastic increases. Perhaps it will get better as it gets more miles on it.

I've had a couple of Suzuki 400 scooters that showed a marked improvement after 6000 miles....took them a looooong time to break-in.

[Texas]

I've had two fill-ups at 29 mpg and two at 32mpg. I'm a moderate rider but run a lot of interstate at 70mph. My previous '11 Rt averaged 30 mpg. Looks like my '14 will be about the same. No complaints as I didn't buy with expectation of fantastic increases. Perhaps it will get better as it gets more miles on it.

I've had a couple of Suzuki 400 scooters that showed a marked improvement after 6000 miles....took them a looooong time to break-in.

I believe the drag coefficient is the RT's enemy. I also believe that if you were able to find a road where you could do a constant 50-55 mph, you would see a huge difference in MPG. From BRP's website:

Optimize your shifting behaviour with the new ECO mode smart assist, reducing your fuel consumption on long trips. Combined with the fuel efficiency of the Rotax® 1330 ACE™ engine and new 6-speed transmission, it gives the Spyder RT a range of up to 252 miles on one tank at 62 mph (406 km at 100 km/h)*. * Tested at constant speed. Fuel mileage may vary depending on Spyder RT models, personal riding habits, weather conditions, trip length, vehicle condition, vehicle configuration and other conditions. Up to 202 miles tested at constant speed 75 mph (325 km at 120 km/h). Break-in mileage may vary.

Now the RT's fuel tank size is 6.9 gallons. Many people say that some of that fuel isn't usable, but for the following calculations, let's just say it is:

At 62 mph: 252 / 6.9 = 36.52 MPG
At 75 mph: 202 / 6.9 = 29.28 MPG

Having gone through a few tanks, and knowing what I did to achieve my numbers (about 40 MPG), I do believe that in static air, at a constant speed of 55 mph, 40 MPG should be achievable, which goes to show that a change of 20 mph (55 vs. 75) results in an additional 10 MPG (+74 miles per tank); which leaves one to wonder what the results would be at a constant 80, or 85 mph? Here in Austin, we have a highway where the speed limit is 85, however, if you ran the RT on that road at 85, you might find yourself desperately needing gas just after 100 miles.

[SpyderAnn01]

I picked up my RTS SM6 on Friday and headed to California for the weekend. 600 miles round trip and I got 33 mpg. All freeway travel. I am pretty happy about that and I am hoping that it will only improve from here.

[ARtraveler]

Thank you for posting the information about mileage on the 2014. It gives us some good benchmark information.

[Bob Denman]

Now the RT's fuel tank size is 6.9 gallons. Many people say that some of that fuel isn't usable, but for the following calculations, let's just say it is:

At 62 mph: 252 / 6.9 = 36.52 MPG
At 75 mph: 202 / 6.9 = 29.28 MPG

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.

[SpongeBob]

First fill up ... 36 mpg.

The '11 RT-S was about the same and my '12 Goldwing CSC trike got about 30 mpg, so I'm OK with that.

[Texas]

First fill up ... 36 mpg.

The '11 RT-S was about the same and my '12 Goldwing CSC trike got about 30 mpg, so I'm OK with that.

My first tank was my worst in MPG, so I'm guessing you'll see an increase as well. Congratulations on your new RT-S. That new silver color is really nice. Between that, the Cognac and Black, it was a very tough decision to make. Ultimately it was my better half who tipped the scales in favor of black.

[Bob Denman]

But everybody knows, that Cognac is the Smoothest color...

[Hawk]

But everybody knows, that Cognac is the Smoothest color...

I got 35 on my last fill up. Check my Fuelly link in my signature.

[Texas]

MPG Report Updated

[Texas]

Mileage Report Updated

[Hawk]

Mileage Report Updated

Nice Texas!! 224 to a tank!! On a side note, I just got my over 200 tank at 206 and probably could have gone another 20, but didn't want to risk running out. Put 5.5 gals in. I don't use the ECO mode, but probably shift around the same rpm anyway.