StromTrooper banner

1 - 20 of 155 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,856 Posts
That's really cool, but for some weird reason my '09 is not on the list, and Ive got 163 fill-ups tracked on fuelly....

Wee-Strom (Suzuki VStrom DL650) | Fuelly

I'm right n the median at 51MPG total overall. I thought I had the most fillups but I see someone with over 200...nice! :thumbup:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,929 Posts
I just returned from a three day trip which consisted of 80 mph highway running to twisty mountain roads. One tank I only got 40.2 mpg and one I got 60 mpg! What a wide range!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
413 Posts
Yeah wide range is what I get also. I tend to hover around 49-52mpg. But I do take long 900+ mile trips. If I'm on the highway running indicated 80-85 I get waaaay down around 40-42. I was visiting my brother and we ended up cruising around these very cool almost one lane roads a couple days and never went over 55mph and I ended up getting 62mpg!!!! My brother (on a harley) had stopped a second time for gas. The only reason I put gas in mine was because I thought my gas gauge was broke. So yeah, High speed hwy runs = 40ish, average driving = 50ish and slow cruising = super high 60ish!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,163 Posts
Mountains

I've averaged 62 mpg for my first 8000 miles. The bike computer for this entire period estimates 58 mpg for this entire period. That's for mostly rural roads at 55-60 mph and very little urban or interstate time.

Then earlier this month my wife and I rode both bikes 1200 miles through Colorado. Twisty mountain roads slowed us down to as slow as 25 mph at times due to switchbacks, dirt roads, etc, but there were also some 65 mph highway stretches. We generally followed the speed limits. Over those 1200 miles we averaged 70.0 mpg and the bikes estimated 63.7 mpg. Something odd happened there. Maybe wind resistance dominates the Glee mileage?

A friend riding his Road King (2-up) got about 32 mpg. It's a 1999 carburated model. He was looking for gas every 120 miles. We could go almost 3 times as far on a tank.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
702 Posts
I bought a used '07 wee with 14K. I have not done any engine maintenance on it yet.
With hard bags, trunk, & a full load it got 38 mpg going 70 with a bit of head wind. Normal I guess, but unimpressive.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,282 Posts
better numbers

Lifetime numbers for mine.

http://www.flyingjoke.org/motorcycles/dl650/fuel-consumption.html

n.b.: Most people seem to not realize that one tank tells you nothing useful about fuel consumption. The tank is so small that minor variations in fill level will significantly change your calculated consumption. You need to average over several tanks to get anything meaningful.

There's no doubt that wind resistance is the biggest detriment to fuel economy on these bikes. Over 60mph, fuel consumption increases markedly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,282 Posts
and another thing ...

I think that because our speedos are so inaccurate (they nearly always read high), it's likely that the fuel economy on these bikes is worse than it looks, and that this likely accounts for some of the variation. Mine currently reads about 10% high, at my present state of tire wear and load; I've seen it as low as 5% with new tires.

(I realize there are those who say that the odometer is accurate and only the speedo is not, but I do not see how that can be true, since they both receive the same input from the same source, and the accuracy of that source varies widely based on many factors.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,163 Posts
(I realize there are those who say that the odometer is accurate and only the speedo is not, but I do not see how that can be true, since they both receive the same input from the same source, and the accuracy of that source varies widely based on many factors.)
It's quite possible for speedo error to be high w/o affecting odometer error. Both do use the same pickup (counting revolutions), but then they're "processed" via software, possibly independently. Otherwise the gages would read revolutions and revolutions per hour. If Suzuki deliberately makes speed conservative for some misguided product liability reasons, it's done via that algorithm. That would not necessarily result in a higher odometer reading.


Sent from Motorcycle.com Free App
 

·
FORUM GODFATHER.....R.I.P. PAT
Joined
·
38,103 Posts
The speedometer is made about 8% high and the odometer about 2% high. The law says the the speedo can be as much as 10% high and cannot read low under any circumstances. The odo has a different standard.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,282 Posts
It's quite possible for speedo error to be high w/o affecting odometer error. Both do use the same pickup (counting revolutions), but then they're "processed" via software, possibly independently.
Ok. I forgot that the gauge isn't mechanical.

Otherwise the gages would read revolutions and revolutions per hour.
That obviously wasn't true in the old days of purely mechanical odos and speedos, so I don't think that follows.

If Suzuki deliberately makes speed conservative for some misguided product liability reasons, it's done via that algorithm. That would not necessarily result in a higher odometer reading.
That seems logical. The value that matters for the odo is average over time, so it can vary between high and low over the life of the tires. The value that matters for the speedo is the absolute max at any point in time, so it can never read low.

In that case, then, I will agree with you that average fuel economy calculations probably aren't affected over time by odometer error.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,282 Posts
side cases

Apparently, I'm thinking out loud today ...

Just thought I'd throw in that, despite what you might think, my Touratech panniers have had apparently no significant effect on fuel economy, even at high speed. I haven't seen much difference over time. I think my legs serve as deflectors in front of them -- as evidenced by the relatively narrow band of dead bugs on the outer edges of the bags.

Just for fun, I went through my records and calculated the average fuel economy for a trip in 2008 from Snowville, UT, to Seattle, with no panniers and the stock windshield in its highest position; and for a trip in 2013 from Pocatello, ID, to Seattle, with Touratech panniers and a CalSci medium windshield in the most aerodynamic position (low and back). This is very close to the same route at close to the same time of year.

2008:
total distance: 772 miles
total fuel: 19.7 gallons
efficiency: 39.2 mpg

2013:
total distance: 791 miles
total fuel: 19.1 gallons
efficiency: 41.3 mpg

Maybe the windshield matters more than the bags?

Not scientific, just casual observation.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
17,516 Posts
MPG means little to nothing for me, the obsession by some is a bit strange. :yikes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,282 Posts
TCO for the Wee is extremely low for what it will do IMHO.
Yes, but higher than a reliable compact car, which surprises a lot of people who think bikes look cheap to run, but are only looking at fuel cost.

The average cager's eyes bug out when I tell them what normal tire life looks like on a bike ... :mrgreen:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
39 Posts
While riding, I don't think about stats. I have been riding almost a year now, and I love it. I'm having a good time and enjoying life. But, when I am not riding, stats feel like part of the experience.

MPG figures are for '07 DL650 with 56K miles. App called RoadTrip has been excellent for tracking maintenance and providing stats.

Took a a 200 mile trip on Saturday. Wife asked whether I had to fill up. Nah, it got 56MPG. Average is 50MPG, which is in the sweet spot according to fuelly.com.

When people say they save money riding a bike, that would be true if you didn't have a car. And also, I have this habit of taking the long way home or taking the bike out just because. So, there's no real savings going on.

Since we're talking numbers, total cost per mile including insurance is $.07/mile.
 
1 - 20 of 155 Posts
Top