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

[Jim&Teresa]

Very happy with 2014 RT MPG, even happier with the whole awesome machine!

Great thread. Anyone know what else EcoMode actually does besides suggest where to shift? Does it restrict fuel flow some? Anything else?

By the way I am averaging 32.6 MPG on my 2014 RTS after my first 5 fill ups. I have about 800 miles so far on the bike. Taking it to MO Friday so it will be cool to get a few interstate only reports.

I use ECO mode and don't know the answer to your question. However, I've noticed that my mileage has improved as the 2014 RT Limited is breaking in and I'm getting more use to it. The last three tanks (all premium, 91 octane, Spyder has about 2200 miles on it) are 40.4, 37.1, and 39.1 MPG....when I first rode the bike, the first few fill-ups were around 30 - 34 MPG....nice to see the improvement. Also, the range is great as last fill-up I had just under 200 miles on it and it took just under 5 gallons -- low fuel light was NOT on yet. I think that comes on when you have about a gallon left.

We'll have to wait and see what the ECO mode really does other than suggesting shift points! :thumbup:

 

[Bob Denman]

Time to blow my own horn a bit...

I just stopped, and filled the baby up:
206.6 miles...
4.762 gallons!
43.4 mpg! :2thumbs:

 

[Nito]

I'm on my third tank of fuel, trike has done about 300 miles. I've been filling up when there are 3-4 bars left on the fuel gauge, how accurate is that? At what point do you guys think of filling up?

My first tank was 119miles with 2 bars left on the dash (20 litres went in). Next fill up 100 miles with 4 bars left (14 litres in) 26 litre tank capacity. Pointless me talking mpg with you guys as our gallons are different, in UK gallons I've worked the consumption out as 27mpg first tank, 34.5mpg second tank. Hope it'll continue improving.

The engine feels like its loosening up now, felt very tight at first. The manual break in recommendations are pretty lame and very vague imho; no full throttle, no prolonged running for 3k miles. What is prolonged running? an 800 mile journey, or a 70 mile motorway journey?

I'm increasing the revs gradually, kept predominantly below 4k for the first 200 miles. Then let it go to about 4.5k upto about 250 miles, now I'm letting it go to around 5k occasionally, and will gradually keep increasing by 500 rpm evey 50 miles or so. I'm not putting it under any heavy load and am letting engine braking do its thing regularly as I'm riding lots of back roads where I'm up and down the gears and revs. Have had to do some motorway riding which I hate and there is an unpleasant drive through vibration around 3800-4200 ish rpm, my wife's has the exact same, think its just the engine isn't yet developing the power it should here so probably struggling at that particular point, so we've been avoiding motorways and bedding them in on more suitable roads.

Interesting thread,
cheers
Nito


ps
3.785 US gallons to a litre.
4.546 Uk gallons to a litre.

 

[Texas]

Nito,

My gauge does the opposite. I'll have about 60 miles showing on the trip meter before the needle starts to drop. However, I pushed the RT a little bit further this past fill-up, because when I got down to the last bar, I suspected there was more fuel hiding in the tank than what was indicated. On my current tank, all of my mileage is In-Town driving, so I may not push it so far this time.

It sounds like you're running higher RPMs than those of us who are getting much higher mileage, so my recommendation (if you want to see higher MPG) is to keep it under 3K as much as possible. If you use ECO mode, it will help you control this, as well as change throttle response for increased mileage.

 

[Texas]

I owned a 1989 Honda Pacific Coast -- Purchased new with factory windshield. The biggest complaint I had (and really the only one) was the short windshield resulted in the wind hitting me right in the face. I noticed that was the principal complaint of many owners of that particular model. Added a face shield to my helmet but the wind noise was totally unsatisfactory.

This comment may have no bearing on the Spyder or the windshield you are contemplating buying, but just food for thought!

The PC was a great bike. Those who owned them, loved them; but most people never gave it a chance. It's too bad Honda doesn't bring it back as an updated version.

I have the shorty installed now. I like the wind hitting me in the face; although it doesn't hit me probably the way you're thinking. I really like the shorty shield, and I won't be putting the stock shield back on until the temperatures drop back down below 70.

 

[Nito]

Nito,

My gauge does the opposite. I'll have about 60 miles showing on the trip meter before the needle starts to drop.

I should clarify, being a base RT I'm running the standard gauge in the MFD (Multi function display) not the Auxiliary gauges. I'm not too worried about economy at the moment, just trying to get it run in and hoping the economy improves a bit over the break in. Last tank was worse just now at 26.57 mpg but more enthusiastic riding. That said, I managed to squeeze about 2 litres more into the tank than where it previously appeared full. Quite hard to brim the tank as the spout is at an angle. I'll need to watch this, I can't seem to get the fuel up to the spout level where the vents are. Is there an over flow, it just seems to be taking gas so I stopped before it flooded everywhere. But it was dry underneath so maybe I could have squeezed some more in. That may have affected the figures above as I don't recall taking so long to try and fill it right up last time.

Cheers
Nito

 

[Knarfoh]

Last tank was worse just now at 26.57 mpg but more enthusiastic riding. That said, I managed to squeeze about 2 litres more into the tank than where it previously appeared full.

One consistent problem with the Spyders over the years seems to be "how much fuel they take to refill" when the fuel gauge reads empty. The 2012 has a tank that is around 6 gallons but I have put between 3.5 gallons and 4.5 gallons to fill it up. One gallon is quite a difference, especially if tracking the fuel mileage in your head or doing rough calculations.

Quite hard to brim the tank as the spout is at an angle.

People have suggested holding the pump handle down; turning it to the right; fully inserting the pump head and then slightly pull up on it so it doesn't rest against the stop that is built into the tank; pump as slow as you can; etc.

We just have all agree the Spyder tanks are notoriously difficult to fill properly and the fuel gauges appear to not be that accurate since the amount of fuel consumed varies before it reads "empty".

That said - the ony way to truly know your mileage is to track it. I use the website fuelly.com. These are my stats for EVERY fill-up since I bought my 2012

Another comment I would like to make -- according to fuelly.com, my BEST mileage was 40.8 mpg. LOL.

If you look at the actual fuelly.com chart, that excellent mileage report of 40.8 mpg was preceded by one of my worst:

However, if you add the 40.8 and the 22.7 together and divide by 2 you get 31.7 which is in the same ballpark as what is reported over time.

The point is: fuelly.com tracks every gallon of fuel you purchase and every mile driven. Overtime, those errors in filling up your tank even out.

However, if I didn't know better I might be bragging about getting 40.8 mpg in one post on SpyderLoers OR lamenting I only got 22.7 mpg in another post. The truth is I am getting close to 31 mpg on my 2012 overtime which is what most people are reporting who keeps meticulous records.

 

[Nito]

I track my mileage with every tank on all my toys. With regards to filling the tank, I withdraw the nozzle fully so the auto cut doesn't come on and literally try to brim it so its almost up to the neck filler. Even withdrawing the pump and so you can see the fuel there, it still was taking about 2 litres more. The filler neck is angled and the tank must be a funny shape, I'm going to try and see if I can get fuel just out of the tank and slightly lapping into the filler spout next time. Because potentially it was 2 litres lighter at the last fuel load.

But hey, I'm still a rookie!

 

[Texas]

Nito, I don't know what the fuel nozzles are like where you live. Even here in the states, they vary from place to place. That being said, I've never had a problem getting the RT full, but that may be due to me haveing to deal with the most impossible tanks to fill from some past bikes. I find the RT to be a pleasant experience.

Our gas stations where I live are really good about having level areas where the vehicle sits, so there are no issues with first making sure the vehicle is level. When I fill the tank, I start by putting the nozzle in and letting it run until it shuts off. After that, I'll back the nozzle out to where just an inch or two is past the vents, and then I'll squeeze the trigger just enough to get fuel to come out at the absolute slowest rate. I'll then continue filling until fuel is clearly coming out of the vents. Yes, sometimes this means cleaning up a bit of fuel around the filler, but I'm ok with that.

Using that procedure, I know I filling the tank within very close specs everytime, and my average MPG numbers reflect that.

 

[Nito]

I use the same process Texas,

This is what I mean, slowly getting fuel in with the handle withdrawn so the level is just above the vents. Being my first proper fill like this, it seemed to keep taking fuel but the level wasn't rising to the vents, or rather when it did it quickly dropped back down, so I was worried there may have been an overflow but after closing the bike up and walking around there was no fuel on the ground. Next time I'll let it get past the vents as I won't need to worry if it has an overflow. I stopped just near the vents but it was still taking fuel on, next time I'll take it further. At least if it brims to the vents you know you've taken on a full fuel load and consistent for mpg recording purposes.

Cheers
Nito

 

[Knarfoh]

but that may be due to me having to deal with the most impossible tanks to fill from some past bikes. I find the RT to be a pleasant experience.

For me the Spyder has definitely been the least reliable in terms of an accurate fuel gauge; how many gallons it takes to fill; and difficulty in filling the tank. However, over time you will learn from experience and just like a Jedi Knight, you will rely on mind tricks to discern when you are (actually) nearing empty. Go to the dark side and you may find yourself stranded on a back road near the bogs.

 

[JB3wheeler]

2014 RTL MPG Report

I have a 2014 RTL with about 600 miles on it; I live in western New York State. If I buy ethanol free gas with as high of octane as I can find, I average between 39 to 40 mpg around town (bike not broken in yet). You can see a list of stations offering ethanol free gasoline at pure-gas.org. Select your state or province and scroll through the towns/cities to find a station near you. It gives you which grade(s) are available ethanol free. My closest station offers only the highest grade available (91) as ethanol free.

 

[Texas]

Mileage Updated. As you can see (Look at the first post), mileage has been consistent around 43 MPG for the past few hundred miles since I changed to the sport shield. This is also all city driving; running stoplight to stoplight. We have yet to take a highway or Back Country road trip since changing the shield because we haven't had enough time, but I'm eager to see if we can squeeze out another 1 or 2 MPG once we do.

I am very pleased with the consistent high MPG I've been getting. At this point, I don't think I can get my average any higher.

 

[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!)

 

[Namvet1966]

My first fill up...2014 RTS

Basic Stats

37.9 (0.0) Avg MPG


37.9 -- Last MPG


37.9 (6/9/14) Best MPG

 

[Texas]

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"!

 

[Bob Denman]

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

 

[SPYD1]

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.

 

[Bob Denman]

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

 

[sddinnh]

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

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