RT 1330 MPG ??

[Steve W.]

To get a better idea of fuel mileage, you really only need to fill the tank TWICE.

Fill it the first time at the beginning of the trip, record your starting odometer reading.

For every following fuel stop, it does not matter whether you put in two gallons or fill the tank, just record the amount.

When you are done with the trip, fill the tank again, record the ending odometer reading.

Total up all the fuel you have added, divide the number of miles travelled by that fuel total, you have MPG. :dontknow:

Yeah, individual calculations will be all over the place, but if you didn't fill the tank to the same point you did when you started EVERY TIME, you don't really know how many gallons it took to travel the miles since the last fuel stop.

.

 

[ARtraveler]

If you have not looked at it already, post #41 might be helpful.

 

[redrazor]

:lecturef_smilie:Gas is still the cheapest thing I've ever had to put into any vehicle I've owned! ie: Maintenance, Tires, Electrical problems, accident repairs, and Miscellaneous repairs and broken stuff .....$$$$$

I sure didn't get a Spyder to save money on gasoline. I never give a hoot about my other vehicles MPGs either .... unless I notice something seriously out of line with the shut-off volume I see on the gas pump when I fill up. Remember ...... Ride to Live, and Live to Ride!!:yes:

 

[Possible]

Mileage isn't horribly important to me with my motorcycles, but I do care. And when I see a vehicle that is smaller, lighter, makes less
horsepower, and still gets worse mileage than my car, I wonder what the deal is.

 

[Snoking1127]

Yesterday we went from Gold Canyon, Az through Apache Junction on old highway, Idaho and across Brown to Ellisworth/Usery Pass, Lake Saguaro, up to Beeline and back down to Fountain Hills at 65 for 10 miles, and returned on the reverse route. 100.7 miles and 2.507 gals of gas(40 mpg). So going slower really does improve mileage. BTW my Cell Phone mount worked well.

 

[BLUEKNIGHT911]

Mileage isn't horribly important to me with my motorcycles, but I do care. And when I see a vehicle that is smaller, lighter, makes less
horsepower, and still gets worse mileage than my car, I wonder what the deal is.

The fact of the matter is, Spyders score poorly in WIND tunnel tests ..... as compared to two wheel Motorcycles they are hugh .... compared to Auto's the are way less aerodynamically. .... Waaaaaaaaaaaaay back I saw a motorcyle ( 200cc class ) that had a Tear-Drop shaped cover ..... At the Salt Flats it did over 150 MPH.... pretty impressive. Back in the day the Shelby Cobra was very successful, when it competed on the shorter race courses, that didn't have 1 to 2 mile straights. .... Then Peter Brock designed designed the " Daytona Coupe body " for the Cobra roadster frame/ chassis. Even with less HP they put the fear-of-god into Enzo and His Ferrari's ...... It's that simple. ..... Mike :thumbup:

 

[ButterSmooth]

The fact of the matter is, Spyders score poorly in WIND tunnel tests ..... as compared to two wheel Motorcycles they are hugh .... compared to Auto's the are way less aerodynamically. .... Waaaaaaaaaaaaay back I saw a motorcyle ( 200cc class ) that had a Tear-Drop shaped cover ..... At the Salt Flats it did over 150 MPH.... pretty impressive. Back in the day the Shelby Cobra was very successful, when it competed on the shorter race courses, that didn't have 1 to 2 mile straights. .... Then Peter Brock designed designed the " Daytona Coupe body " for the Cobra roadster frame/ chassis. Even with less HP they put the fear-of-god into Enzo and His Ferrari's ...... It's that simple. ..... Mike :thumbup:

Had a friend in '65 with a 'Shelby American AC Cobra Powered by Ford', (289). Our local Ford dealer was big into racing at the time and had a stable of Cobras and Shelby GT 350s. Those were the days... Even saw Ken Miles race the 427 Cobra when he was struggling to make it go straight under acceleration with one front wheel off the ground. Thanks for the flash-back.

 

[Dudley]

I didn't take time to read all the responses, so I am just going to ask. What numbers did you use to determine 20 MPH. Was it 156/6.9? That would equal to 22.6 MPG. Just a heads up. If you bought a Spyder for high gas mileage, you may be disappointed. With the weight, body size, wind resistance etc., of this machine it is not a 2 wheeler that will get you 45 to 50 MPH. Just ain't gonna happen. At 156 miles before the light came on you probably pumped about 4 gallons. Your thoughts.

 

[IGETAROUND]

FWIW, I have recently purchased a 2018 F3-T, have put ~1800 miles on it and have yet to get any better than 35MPG. I travel mostly back roads, use my cruise all the time and usually am traveling 55-60MPH. I am unimpressed with the gas mileage I get; will hate to see what it does when I pull my Time Out camping trailer. And I also am short shifting most of the time between 2500-3000RPM then using the cruise to get up to my cruising speed. Like the bike, but don't see how people are getting 40MPG.

Al in Kazoo

 

[IdahoMtnSpyder]

Interestingly, one of the influencing factors is elevation. I've gotten some of my best MPG going over the Rockies on I-70. Some of the worst MPG occurred in Louisiana, just barely above sea level.

 

[2dogs]

Interestingly, one of the influencing factors is elevation. I've gotten some of my best MPG going over the Rockies on I-70. Some of the worst MPG occurred in Louisiana, just barely above sea level.

Hmmm, same here. I thought it was just me. Very good MPG, 2up, at high altitude. Lots of downshifting and tight turns.

 

[Peter Aawen]

Interestingly, one of the influencing factors is elevation. I've gotten some of my best MPG going over the Rockies on I-70. Some of the worst MPG occurred in Louisiana, just barely above sea level.

Hmmm, same here. I thought it was just me. Very good MPG, 2up, at high altitude. Lots of downshifting and tight turns.

I really wonder if it's actually the 'altitude' causing this ^^ or could it possibly be the fuel &/or fuel additive mix instead that's making for that particular fuel economy improvement? :dontknow:

Anyhoo, bear with me for a bit here.... We don't have too many 'high altitude' places here in Oz, but the Snowy Mountains & Victorian High Country do actually top 2000m a little (in places), they see snow each year, and because of that, they get a different fuel/fuel mix, and while it's been a while since I rode/drove over your way, I suspect that you too have 'specific to region/temp/altitude' fuel mixes in your 'higher altitude' regions. I think this 'different fuel mix' could at least be a significant contributor to the fuel economy improvement, certainly here in Oz anyway, cos every time I drive or ryde thru our High Country, my fuel economy improves markedly only if I fill up with the 'Alpine Fuel' that's provided only in those regions - and if I DON'T fill up with the Alpine Fuel stuff around those parts, then there's no measureable fuel economy change, except possibly a slight drop in fuel economy cos of the all the other drivers/vehicles we hafta put up with who just don't know how to drive in the 'Hills' where there might be lotsa those horrendous things called 'corners'!! :gaah:

Most years (cos this year IS proving to be just a bit of an exception! ) the Child Bride & I ryde/drive across the country and thru the mountains so the Child Bride can visit with her family, who come from the Far South East Coast of New South Wales; so we get to travel over/thru what's pretty much the highest section of the Australian Great Dividing Range - which is our version of your Rockies, only ours are worn down to the stubs after a couple more million years of erosion!! :sour: If we time our travels right, or travel the 'Major Highway' route that most use to avoid the bulk of the really twisty & higher altitude bits (that have hills & corners & might get snow!!) we can & sometimes do (if forced to... ) head straight on thru the mountain region via without needing to refill with Alpine Fuel &/or until we hit the lower elevations on the far side... do that and our fuel economy for traversing the High Country bit remains pretty much the same as it does for the other twelve hundred miles or so of that particular trip, or maybe it's just a bit worse due to the previously mentioned impediments to smooth travelling! . BUT, if we instead go via one of the more scenic routes &/or plan the trip to include a refill just as we get into the foothils of the High Country, where they sell 'Alpine Fuel', we ALWAYS get a marked & noticeable improvement in fuel economy that stays with us until we are half way thru the first 'non-Alpine fuel' tank of gas on the far side!! Same thing coming back- we get markedly better fuel economy than usual when & only when running on Alpine Fuel! :shocked:

This was REALLY noticeable in my diesel 4WD back when I was doing a lot of 4WD Touring & travelling for weeks in the High Country, often carrying a few Jerry cans of Alpine Diesel in case one of my punters hadn't worked their fuel usage/range out too well, cos if we didn't need to fill up someone else's vehicle during the trip, I'd use it in my vehicle during the first few weeks after getting home again - and the fuel economy improvement showed up every time we added Alpine Fuel!! These days, we don't get to do that anywhere near as often with our petrol engined Spyder or cars, but the same thing still applies - if we have a spare Jerry can or two of Alpine ULP (95 RON) that we only get to use a few weeks after travelling thru the High Country, we can see the same fuel economy improvement we get in the higher altitude regions!! And it's not just me experiencing this, many others have noticed it & commented on it, and many of the locals or regular travellers in those regions make a practice of planning their 'out of region' travels to minimise their need to fill up with any less economical 'non-Alpine fuel'! hyea:

So maybe that's worth looking into that over there, cos possibly it's the differenes in the available fuel mix that's making for some of the difference in fuel economy rather than it actually being directly (or solely :dontknow: ) attributable to just the higher altitude. Worth looking into, isn't it??

 

[IdahoMtnSpyder]

I really wonder if it's actually the 'altitude' causing this ^^ or could it possibly be the fuel &/or fuel additive mix instead that's making for that particular fuel economy improvement?

It's possible I suppose, but I don't recall any discussion or information about regional changes in fuel except for summer vs. winter blend, and lower octane for high elevation regions. Someone, Lamonster maybe, commented one time that at higher elevations the computer adjusts the fuel/air ratio to compensate for thinner air and that can lead to a higher mpg.

All I really know is that it surprised the heck out of me when I was reviewing my mileage records and saw quite a bit better mpg in Colorado than in Louisiana. I would have expected the reverse.

 

[2dogs]

I really wonder if it's actually the 'altitude' causing this ^^ or could it possibly be the fuel &/or fuel additive mix instead that's making for that particular fuel economy improvement? :dontknow: ....

Here's my take on the subject from my perspective only. Generally, on these higher altitude trips, I'm riding 2up. I live at 4,000 ft, to begin with, so most of the riding we do is from there up to 8,500 ft. which is about the max that we reach. Mostly it varies in the 4k to 6k range and is on all rural paved roads. To start with I'm 2up so I ride conservatively. I do the speed limit or less and I don't press the corners and I'm not passing a lot of cars. Also, I'm not so froggy on the throttle as when I'm riding solo. I believe that's why I get the better MPG in this situation. JMHO

 

[ARtraveler]

RE: Seasonal Blends: When in AK, I did note a mpg difference once I started using the "winter" blend. Come spring, it took a couple tanks to get things back to "normal."

 

[askitee]

Hello, new to the forum so please my apologies if I'm posting in the incorrect section.
I have an issue, but to explain and hopefully give as much information as possible I'll give a little history on my bike:

2015 RT-S SE6
7200 miles when purchased
Owned for two days as of this posting
Dealer purchased, used, no warranty
Stock, minus the shorty antenna

I got a ride from the Sacramento area, to San Diego to purchase this vehicle. I've heard the Spyders' fuel economy can be better, 30-40 MPG. Taking that information into account I decided to purchase one anyone. The dealer kept trying to push purchasing a warranty. When I refused, they kept having to take it to the back for various reasons: 1st being they needed to get the engine number. Shouldn't they have had that already? 2nd was to put air in tires. This one took about 20mins, with the excuse being their gauges were defective so they had to try 3 different inflators. Hmmm....

So I start on the 500 or so mile ride back home after filling the gas tank with 91 octane at the nearby Chevron. I noticed after about 2 hours, I had to fill up. I thought that was odd with a 6.9 gallon tank. So I decided to set my trip meter to give me some MPG readings. Being new to the machine, the trip meter was set to "pause" so at 2nd fill up my recording was incorrect. I fixed the issue, and successfully logged the mileage from 2nd fill up to now my 3rd fill up. 156 miles before the low fuel light came on. 20MPG!!!!

I know there are a ton of factors involved:

Speed - I was cruising, literally in cruise control at 80mph
Terrain - I5 North, relatively smooth with the now and then rough spots. A few hills.
Throttle control - Again, I set the cruise so after highway speed was reached, my hand wasn't engaging the throttle
Traffic - 85% of the trip I was in cruise control
Tire pressure - "Checked" at dealership
Air flow - Dealer's records indicate the air filter was changed as part of the inspection. No record of stock or K&N.
Spark plugs - 7k miles, should be a non factor
Load on machine/weight - minus my rain gear I packed in the trunk, I was solo (260lbs) with a hydration bladder on my back
Wind - there were parts of the trip that were windy, and I had my stock windscreen at full height (I'm 6'2)

I had to fill up a 4th time, FYI:
When I got home, I knew something was wrong. Being tired from the trip, I waited until the morning to check tire pressure. My gauge said the front two were low about 3 psi. I do NOT think this can account for losing about 10mpg.
I have not checked the air filter yet. Again, 5 year old bike with 7k miles. Unless the air filter is dipped in mud, I do not think that would account for 10mpg loss. My next thing is to use some Sea Foam injector cleaner. Long shot but I'll try it as previous owner may have used crap gas. I have not noticed any fuel leaks, smells or anything obvious. I use either Shell or Chevron in all my vehicles. For motorcycles and V6 and above I use premium, whatever that is depending on state (91, 92, 93 octane).
I've read the vacuum hoses sometimes fail. I've also read the ECU needs updating from time to time. I have an appointment with a dealer this week to have the bike checked out. A or 94 ony suggestions? If I can only go about 150 miles between fill ups, with a naked bike, I'm not sure I can continue. I got this bike to two up on long cross state trips. Looking at other posts, I know this performance is not normal. Looking for suggestions as to what this can be.

Interesting observations on your part, I have a 2017 RTL

Bellow 105 km/hr I get approx 400 kms to a tank
Move to 110 km/hr and that drops to 300km range
Sit on 120 and I'll get approx 280 km to a tank

A few questions that may have been asked.

1. Are you sure you are filling it completely - the RT's have some stupid setup where the 1st 16 L will go in quickly and then you have to dribble the rest in the get a full tank.
2. The fuel gauge ignores the top 5-7L of fuel in the tank, if you look at how you refill the tank you may see an improvement.
3. When I my TPMS was telling me "porkies" my tyre front pressures dropped to 9 and 11 PSI in the front and 15 in the rear, it impacted the handling but not consumption.
4. I use 98 Octane in my RTL, with 95 or E10 or less fuel economy suffers I think because I am used the the levels of acceleration and torque the higher octane provides. I notice on 95 or E10 I have to stir the gearbox a lot more for things like "Nip and tuck" when overtaking vehicles.

I would look at a fuel cleaner additive, but make sure you are getting a full tank when filling, dribble it in until the level stops receding if it recedes, add more you will eventually fill it with more than you realise.

 

[Lew L]

Fuel mileage per gallon of fuel REALLY falls off when travelling over 70 MPH. I'm at 5,000 + feet and most of my ryding is around that. 39 to 41 MPG. But at 75 + I'll get 34 or so. The Stage 1 ECU didn't hurt the mileage but it sure does put a smile on my facha.

Lew L

 

[troop]

2019 F3S (89t rear pulley)/Power Vision 3 with custom fuel/timing map:
"Normal" local riding = 35-38mpg
(3) pieces of loaded luggage at 55-70mph = low 30's mpg
(3) pieces of loaded luggage at 75-80mph = 28-30 mpg

 

[Plarimer]

Ever since I got my bike 2000 miles ago I’ve been averaging about 170 miles a tank in town with one tank having 175 miles on it. I haven’t gone on a road trip because of the Covid but will do so in the spring come hell or Highwater. And I get that mileage driving it like I stole it. Is there any other way?

 

[Steve W.]

... I’ve been averaging about 170 miles a tank in town with one tank having 175 miles on it. ...

Nothing wrong with adding fuel every 170-175 miles, but how much fuel do you add? :dontknow:

THEORETICALLY, with these guys that are getting 40mpg and a 6.9 gallon tank, you should be able to (somewhat) safely go about 240 miles per tank.

.