MPG test on FJR

With gas slipping over $3.00/gal and installation of a PCIII days away, I was interested in finding out how what MPG penalty speed caused. I wanted a comparative "before" and "after" so now was the time. I tried to make the test as emphiracal as possible and I believe it is, at least in relative terms.

Method:

I used a running start at the chosen speed. The "average mpg" was reset at the start and recorded at the finish. The test run was 8 miles of very level road that formed a "U" shape thereby negating any wind effect. The throttle lock was tensioned before hitting the reset and there was about a mile runup prior to the startline to settle on the speed.

Conditions:

Bike 2006 FJR AE

Temp 77f

Wind calm

Fuel 78 ron

Tires BT020

Rear 42psi

Front 39psi

Rider 225lbs

Results:

MPH - MPG

50 - 59.0

55 - 57.8

60 - 56.5

65 - 54.8

70 - 52.2

75 - 50.0

80 - 48.6

85 - 46.1

90 - 43.4

After the PCIII installation I will rerun the test and post it here.

I have observed that in checking the actual fuel used in a tank vs the MPG computer that there is a variance that typically exists of 1.5 - 1.8 mpg less.

Well, you can't really top the fuel off right before you hit the reset button with that warm up mile. Interesting, I must whack my throttle too much. I don't get near that gas mileage. Is there a significant difference between the '05 and '06 mileage?

OrangevaleFJR said:

Well, you can't really top the fuel off right before you hit the reset button with that warm up mile. Interesting, I must whack my throttle too much. I don't get near that gas mileage. Is there a significant difference between the '05 and '06 mileage?

Click to expand...

I don't get near that mileage either, but for this test he used a constant throttle position and that's probably the difference. In a typical tank, you spend a lot of time accelerating. Man, do you spend a lot of time accelerating.

I average 38 over many tanks :huh: I must be going faster than I thought

Double post

That's commuting milage too btw B)

The results only go to 90mph.

Seriously, good info. thanks.

Appearantly, the '06-'07 bikes are leaned out for the '08 EPA & European requirments. It's supposedly part of why they have throttle smoothness issues on the newer bikes below 5k and why I'm going to a power commander next week. The tank measurments are immaterial as I was strictly using the onboard computer readings for data. The average milage was reset at the start. Remember this was done on board flat (+or- 7 ft according to the GPS) very smooth pavement. Even small amounts of throttle twist really cut the milage which is why I used the tensioner. Try it if you have the MPG indicator set to instantaneous readout. It's amazing to see what happens when you put the windshield up (-2or3) or draft an SUV (+ 3-5!). That little indicator is worth its weight in gold, in relative terms - not absolute. Wouldn't be without it now.

Flyguy said:

Appearantly, the '06-'07 bikes are leaned out for the '08 EPA & European requirments. It's supposedly part of why they have throttle smoothness issues on the newer bikes below 5k and why I'm going to a power commander next week. The tank measurments are immaterial as I was strictly using the onboard computer readings for data. The average milage was reset at the start. Remember this was done on board flat (+or- 7 ft according to the GPS) very smooth pavement. Even small amounts of throttle twist really cut the milage which is why I used the tensioner. Try it if you have the MPG indicator set to instantaneous readout. It's amazing to see what happens when you put the windshield up (-2or3) or draft an SUV (+ 3-5!). That little indicator is worth its weight in gold, in relative terms - not absolute. Wouldn't be without it now.

Click to expand...

Do you have a stock screen? I know the barn door on my bike impacts mpg.

With a 40 mile daily commute all light to light city, hitting a few 1 min stretches to 70, mostly 0-45 stop and go, I get just over 42 indicated.

Yes, the screen was stock and in the down position although I was not fully "in the bubble".

If you are riding for sport, have at it but when you are not there are many techniques that you can use to decrease fuel consumption. You may get more interested in them when gas goes up another 25%. They include but are not limited to - 1. Ride slower 2. screen down. 3 body "in the bubble" 4. Bags off 5. Draft - safely 6. Accelerate downhill & decelerate uphill. 7. use throttle lock on level land. Some of the savings can be remakable! It may seem strange to talk about fuel economy on a 1300cc torque monster but I prefer to thinking of it as having your cake and eating it too!

Erm, ah, um... Huh? :dntknw:

I know my mileage went from 46 to 38 pre and post PClll.

my pre commuting mpg was somewhere around 32mpg(28avg Lowest), and once I started commuting to work on the bike now it's around 42-43mpg avg.

know my mileage went from 46 to 38 pre and post PClll.

Click to expand...

Which map did you use and did you check the map with a CO2 meter. What year is your FJR? I would assume by the 46 (pre PCIII) it is an '06 or '07. Mine on average for a tank gets 43 - 48. I better not see sub 40's or we go back to stock mapping. Should be able to set it up much more economical that you have it, at least I would hope since you can change it to be fully stock overly rich or anywhere in between. At least that is my understanding.

More knowledgable riders than myself will hopefully chime in here.

Mine was an 03 model, and I think I had Wally's smoothness map in last. I tried A carb simulator map that Liquidsilver came up with for his bike, first. It was real nice but dropped the mileagfe down to 32.

I now have 10500 miles on my '06. Due to "throttle" problems on the '06 I have tried everything to eliminate the twitchy throttle. I have largely succeeded. Knowing what I know now I would first raise the idle, then put the ErGo "FJR Tamer" on (last thing I did this last weekend) and do a TBS. Then, if needed I would add the PCIII (one of the first things I did). Of course taking the slack out of throttle, etc is a given.

My milage when I first put the PCIII in was in the low 30's. The bike really wasn't broken in. Now, 10500 miles later I am averaging 38-41 mpg using the map that came with the PCIII. I am totally satisfied and happy with my FJR now and am proceeding to "farkle" the heck out of her! She's a keeper!!!!! Part of the improvement is the operator not "twisting" the throttle as often or as hard, I'm sure. I ride with the Yamaha top case on most of the time and with the windshield up. Both these reduce M.P.G. from my observations.

LC B)

My mpg is dreadful, but it's because almost all my mileage is a very short (3 miles) commute through very heavy traffic. So far I have averaged just under 37mpg, and that's using real UK Imperial gallons (works out at about 30.5 miles per US gallon). (My full mpg here Clicky.)

Hopefully it will improve when I start doing "proper" trips. A trip to Scotland is planned end of May. We'll see ...

By the way, I've seen US prices are about $3 per gallon. I am paying about £0.94 per litre. That works out as about $7 per US gallon.

mcatrophy said:

By the way, I've seen US prices are about $3 per gallon. I am paying about £0.94 per litre. That works out as about $7 per US gallon.

Click to expand...

$3.57 a US gal. at the cheap station down the street. The difference between your cost and ours is, you get benifits from your higher gas prices. We get potholes.

hmmm, I must be lucky. With my PCIII and additional fuel (19%) to the zero throttle position my fuel economy has gone up.

I was getting about 43ish pre PCIII. Since my install I'm around 44-45.

Most of my riding is to and from work, about 25 miles each way. But of that 22 is freeway speeds, usually around 70-75 mph.

I have a 2006 AE with approximately 6,000 miles. PCIII has been about 500 miles of that.