MPG test on FJR

[pickax]

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!

 

[pickax]

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!

OK, enjoy that.

 

[NightShine]

Conditions:Bike 2006 FJR AE

Temp 77f

Wind calm

Fuel 78 ron

Tires BT020

Rear 42psi

Front 39psi

Rider 225lbs

Hi, Flyguy!

One testing condition that can be an important impact on mileage is elevation, which you didn't indicate. Was all your testing at sea level?

 

[mcatrophy]

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.

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

What benefit? One of the biggest complaints of motorists here in the UK is that all motoring taxes, fuel, annual "road fund" tax, new vehicle tax (on top of the general VAT) and much of the speed camera revenue, simply goes into general taxation. I have seen a figure, but can't confirm its authenticity, that something like one tenth of the motorists' taxes goes into maintaining the road network. The motorist is seen by the government as just another source of revenue.

Potholes abound, it is rare for congested roads to be updated. The general policy is to squeeze the motorist both in taxation and congestion, with little return.

And, to add to the potholes, speed bumps abound. These cause more noise as vehicles brake and accelerate, increase fuel usage and CO[SIZE=8pt]2[/SIZE], cause significant damage to vehicles, and encourage the use of large 4x4s so increasing fuel consumption, CO[SIZE=8pt]2[/SIZE] emissions and congestion.

There! I feel better now! Thanks for the opportunity to get that lot out!

The reality is I would not be using my bike for commuting except that it saves me 10 to 20 minutes in my 3-mile journey. (It adds 10 minutes dressing and un-dressing, but that's much less frustrating!)

Oh, how I'm looking forward to my Scotland trip, only 25 days to go ...

 

[Flyguy]

NightShine posted:

One testing condition that can be an important impact on mileage is elevation, which you didn't indicate. Was all your testing at sea level?

Good point. Yes, it was essentially at sea level. I did not record it but approximately 25 - 30 ft. Thanks

 

[Shane Stump]

I am averaging 41.2 MPG with my 2006 FJR1300AE.

This includes the hit I took when pulling my Bushtec back last week.

Pulling the trailer on the FJR hit the MPG from mid 40s to mid / upper 30's.

Here is my complete fuel log with running average:

FJR1300 Fuel Log

Best Regards,

Shane

 

[turbodave_98]

I am averaging 41.2 MPG with my 2006 FJR1300AE.
This includes the hit I took when pulling my Bushtec back last week.

Pulling the trailer on the FJR hit the MPG from mid 40s to mid / upper 30's.

Here is my complete fuel log with running average:

FJR1300 Fuel Log

Best Regards,

Shane

on my 06 AE, I have about 14k miles on the clock. My mileage per gal is very similiar to yours, around 42. Must admit, I do not have the same complete data as you. FYI, I am enjoying my AE much more now that I have it fitted to me with HeliBar/risers, Bill Mayer custom saddle, AudioVox CC, MCL driver peg lowers, and G2 throttle control.

 

[Shane Stump]

I am averaging 41.2 MPG with my 2006 FJR1300AE.
This includes the hit I took when pulling my Bushtec back last week.

Pulling the trailer on the FJR hit the MPG from mid 40s to mid / upper 30's.

Here is my complete fuel log with running average:

FJR1300 Fuel Log

Best Regards,

Shane

on my 06 AE, I have about 14k miles on the clock. My mileage per gal is very similiar to yours, around 42. Must admit, I do not have the same complete data as you. FYI, I am enjoying my AE much more now that I have it fitted to me with HeliBar/risers, Bill Mayer custom saddle, AudioVox CC, MCL driver peg lowers, and G2 throttle control.

I, too, have finally configured my AE to my liking:

Corbin seat + Smuggler

CalSci Windshield

Audiovox CC

Garmin 2730 GPS

H&B Topcase

Bushtec Hitch

Bushtec Quantum Trailer

PIIA 1100x Lights

I keep a COMPLETE log of ALL my usage with my bikes because I ride to client locations @ times and if I ever get audited, I can show a complete history of Personal versus Business use via DL.

Best Regards,

Shane

 

[818Guy]

ummm.... this thread is about MPG and the PCIII...

getting a bit off topic... :dribble:

 

[Flyguy]

TD 98,

TNX

 

[warsw]

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.

This should be a really good test. It may not show what kind of mileage you can typically get during normal driving but should show a good comparison between the b/4 and after PC111. I’m interested.

 

[UweRoss]

This should be a really good test. It may not show what kind of mileage you can typically get during normal driving but should show a good comparison between the b/4 and after PC111.

I hate to rain on anyone's parade but.. The bike's computer can only calculate fuel flow one way: Based on how long it keeps the injectors open. Now how does a PC-III work? It' sits between the computer and the fuel injectors and changes the opening time of the injectors -- without the bike's computer knowing about it. Hence the MPG readings from the computer become meaningless once the PC-III is installed.

-Uwe-

 

[warsw]

This should be a really good test. It may not show what kind of mileage you can typically get during normal driving but should show a good comparison between the b/4 and after PC111.

I hate to rain on anyone's parade but.. The bike's computer can only calculate fuel flow one way: Based on how long it keeps the injectors open. Now how does a PC-III work? It' sits between the computer and the fuel injectors and changes the opening time of the injectors -- without the bike's computer knowing about it. Hence the MPG readings from the computer become meaningless once the PC-III is installed.

-Uwe-

Damn, maybe it won't be so good after all. :dntknw:

 

[Knifemaker]

I never really keep track of how much gas I use, but I will say I am getting about

45 smiles per gallon...

KM

 

[BlueMoto]

I have a bone stock 05 with a Givi trunk. I just got back from a 3200 mile trip to Big Bend, TX. and the mountains of NM and AZ. I got a low of about 45 MPG around Ft. Davis, TX riding the twisties. Most of my milage was in the low 50 mpg range with a high of 62 mpg. The 62 mpg ride was a steady speed ride from AZ back into NM.

Smiles per gallon was very high.

Bob

 

[jestal]

This should be a really good test. It may not show what kind of mileage you can typically get during normal driving but should show a good comparison between the b/4 and after PC111.

I hate to rain on anyone's parade but.. The bike's computer can only calculate fuel flow one way: Based on how long it keeps the injectors open. Now how does a PC-III work? It' sits between the computer and the fuel injectors and changes the opening time of the injectors -- without the bike's computer knowing about it. Hence the MPG readings from the computer become meaningless once the PC-III is installed.

-Uwe-

This is true. The PCIII installation will pretty much neuter the accuracy of the onboard electronic MPG readout. It will still correlate to real world fuel economy to some extent but you will have to establish the correlation yourself.

 

[airboss]

Those results look good, I did a trip from Sikeston,Mo. to Peoria, IL. All interstate with cruise control set, I only stopped for fuel. Averaged 50.4 MPG for the trip with a GPS average speed of 72 MPH. The only mods I've done that could effect miles per gallion is the BJM at +7.

 

[Flyguy]

Apparently, many of the AE owners are reporting increased milage. This has to do with either the elimination of the SUBSTANTIAL parasitic drag from the clutch lever being removed or that that version attracts the more ecologically oriented and socially responsible riders (read weenies). Being an AE owner with no intention of ever switching, I favor the aerodynamic explanation.

 

[mmay0944]

I was interested in reading your data about mpg on your FJR. There is one other variable that I didn't see any mention of and that is elevation above sea level. I have noticed a significant improvement in mpg on both my 01 GL1800 and my 05 FJR when riding at higher elevation. I am no engineer, but I assume this is due to the computer cutting back on the amount of fuel delivered in order to maintain the proper fuel: air ratio as the air thins with elevation. Perhaps others would have other thoughts on this.

 

[Slow Ride]

Quick note here my mileage for the last week (1200) miles has been a low of 45 (with the wife and a new VStream)

and a high of 52 mpg. All in the mountains and no super slab. Most of the time wind screen is up.

Chuck