| Author | Message | ||
     Xb12burner |
With all the talk in the news about gas prices and what the Prez is going to do about it, I was a little perturbed to see that he is talking about more tax breaks for purchasers of Hybrid type vehicles. I wonder why we as Buell owners can't get in on a tax break considering that our bikes meet or exceed the mileage rates of most hybrids. I know that there is always a new discussion on here regarding fuel mileage, but the fact is that these bikes get incredible mileage. Even when my bike has been neglected (necessary maintenance)it still averages better than 42mpg. Shouldn't we get a tax break for helping to conserve fuel? Would we have to prove that we use it as a commuter and not just fun? What do you guys think? | ||
| Buellistic |
"RIGHT ON !!!" | ||
| Slaughter |
Face it - mileage on ANY sportbike sucks and just gets worse when you run it hard. My SV barely got 15 on the track. I can't believe how bad the mileage is on a motorcycle compared to a car. A 500 pound bike only getting the same mileage as a 5 passenger car? I don't think we'll be getting much in the way of tax breaks unless we start zooting around town on 125's | ||
| Rafartist |
Yeah and those inflated mpg numbers the manufacturers give on those hybrids is BS most of the time. Those numbers are running down hill drafting a tractor trailer with a strong tailwind. There have been numerous reports of misleadings by the major manufacturers. Hell one of those smart cars doesn't do much better either and they are impractical for anything other than around town. I too believe we should get tax breaks too if your MC is listed as you primary form of transportation. | ||
| Buellistic |
If you take the "THING" on the INTERSTATE, both the electric motor and engine are running to get it down the hiway, so where did the economy go ??? | ||
| Sheldonesbe |
do know Seattle is talking about taxing people with hybrids because they will be paying less for gas tax... Seattle is funny like that! I had to pay an extra $650 for a monorail tax sticker on my tabs...then they stopped planning to build it and kept everybody’s monorail $$$... | ||
| Buellshyter |
At highway speeds they act just like a gasoline only powered vehicle. The savings in gas mileage is in the fact that hybrids typically are lightweight, designed with a low COD and have small displacement engines. | ||
| Signguy |
"Yeah and those inflated mpg numbers the manufacturers give on those hybrids is BS most of the time." -Rafartist Those numbers are assigned by EPA, NOT the manufacturer. If you'd like to learn more about this... http://www.epa.gov/fueleconomy/basicinformation.htm (Message edited by signguy on April 26, 2006) | ||
| Brineusaf |
Do you's know that generally motorcycles produce more "pollution" than an SUV?  | ||
| Diablobrian |
don't believe the hype. they really twist the numbers around to come to that conclusion. | ||
| Diablobrian |
The EPA's test method "The city and highway tests are currently performed under mild climate conditions (75 degrees F) and use acceleration rates and driving speeds that EPA believes are generally lower than those experienced by drivers in the real world. Neither test is run with the use of accessories, such as air conditioning. The highway test has a top speed of 60 miles per hour, and an average speed of only 48 miles per hour. " Not terribly realistic. They are trying to get the test protocol changed | ||
| Alanshouse |
Is your bike fun, is it attractive to look at? Forget a tax break. | ||
| Mb182 |
"Do you's know that generally motorcycles produce more "pollution" than an SUV?" Those numbers come from a study in the EU.. It references the output of 2 stroke bikes.. MB | ||
| Brineusaf |
EPA revs up motorcycle pollution plan December 23, 2003: Environmental Protection Agency administrator Mike Leavitt signed off on a regulation that will, for the first time in 25 years, address air pollution from motorcycles. The rule requires manufacturers to cut emissions of hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides from motorcycle exhaust by about 54,000 tons per year -- or by 50 percent from today's levels -- between 2006 and 2010. A typical motorcycle emits 18 to 24 times the smog-forming pollution as today's passenger cars, according to the EPA. In addition to the roughly 5 million motorcycles on U.S. roads today, the rule affects previously unregulated small scooters and mopeds. "The new rule will significantly reduce smog at a cost of less than $50 per motorcycle, but that price increase will be partially offset by fuel savings," said NRDC senior attorney Rich Kassel. Advanced engine technology will save 12 million gallons of fuel annually, according to the EPA. Will find the comparison later... | ||
| Brineusaf |
Here is an article.... }Do Bikes Pollute More than Cars? Well, yes. We thought everyone knew that. The EPA says that under 2004 emissions standards, a typical new SUVs makes about 95 percent less hydrocarbons than a "typical motorcycle." In a specific example from the EPA, a 2002 Honda VTX1800C emits precisely 10 times as much hydrocarbons per mile (when both are traveling at the same speed) as a 2002 Subaru Forester and just over three times as much as a 2002 4WD Ford Expedition. The emissions regulations, even the new-for-2006 EPA standards (already in effect in California for the past two years) are not as nearly stringent for bikes as for cars. However, studies conducted on dynamometers, such as that conducted by the Swiss Federal Laboratories for Materials Testing and Research don't show the entire picture. Motorcycles typically spend less time balked in traffic (particularly in countries other than the U.S. where lane splitting is much more widely practiced) and therefore spend significantly less time standing still with the engine running. They are also more efficient in terms of parking and other situations. In addition, motorcycles require significantly less energy and pollution to build. There are also cleaner motorcycle standards, similar to the 2006 EPA rule, going into effect in the near future around the world, and some bikes already meet them. Though this Swiss lab report makes it seem worse than it really is, motorcycles (especially two-strokes, which were part of the study group but not sold for road use in the U.S.) do pollute more than the car that is driving down the road next to them at the same speed. Reuters Yubanet, CA 2006 EPA Standards The important thing to remember is that I am not condoning the pollution rate of motorcycles, in fact I don't really care, just stating a relatively unknown fact.  } | ||
| Earwig |
One guess is, they know many people ride their bikes for pleasure so there is much more un-necessary riding done, maybe not who knows. With gas prices so high I don't think people really go joy riding anymore. | ||
| Brineusaf |
Not too worried about a tax break, with my luck I'd forget about it come next years tax time.. | ||
| Xb12burner |
I think that the issue of motorcycle mpg's versus car mpg (or maybe it was v-twin vs inline-4)has been discussed on here before and I think that "anon" even gave us some in-depth info, but I can't seem to find it. Does anyone remember where it was at. I realize that for engine size and vehicle weight motorcycles are less fuel efficient than automobiles, but 50 mpg is 50 mpg regardless of what you're driving. Can anyone explain why motorcycles get less mpg than autos? A co-worker and I are discussing this issue. The Hayabusa has a 1300cc engine, and so does a Samurai. The busa weighs what 400-500lbs? The samurai weighs 2400lbs? A samurai will get around 30mpg and when a busa is ridden normally it will get 30-40mpg. Is the main difference the rpm range? Someone please shed some light on this!!! | ||
| Brineusaf |
Burner, if you were referring to my post we were speaking of pollution not mpg. As far as your comparison goes I have my theories but they are not rock solid as of yet, sorry. | ||
| Xb12burner |
I was going way back up to Slaughter's post. He has a point. I just want to know what may be the largest contributors. Talking about emissions would be very relative to the mpg issue I think. .02 | ||
| Brineusaf |
Oh, alright. polution/emissions would have a very minor effect on the mpg issue, that is based off of RPM's... | ||
| Socalbueller |
XB12burner, I think the Hayabusa makes a little more power than the 54 hp Samurai. It is unfair to compare a sport bike to an econo car. Ferraris are light small cars but get mileage in the teens. Compare sport bikes to sports cars and econo cars to econo bikes. If you are looking to save gas get a Ninja 250 or something else with under 500cc. More than one gets over 70 mpg, which is quite a bit more than any hybrid. As for the emissions go, since a motorcycle is a much tighter package than a car it is harder to add more pollution controls. Also the fuel injection in bikes are pretty primitive compared to cars. My 88 Mustang has a more advance FI than any bike I have seen. I was surprised on how much more bikes pollute compared to cars, pre 2003. If you took the converter off a car of the same vintage I think the bike and car would be pretty close on emissions. | ||
| Diablobrian |
Our Buells are meeting all of the emissions standards they current;y have in place (up to 2010 I think) and this is without a catalytic converter. If/when emissions tighten up they still have room to improve by adding a cat inside the muffler. The XB motor is in a better position exhaust emissions wise than the water cooled bikes that are already at, or near their limits. Noise emissions are however tougher on an air cooled bike. so there are + and - factors. | ||
| Brineusaf |
Right, I agree. | ||
| Xb12burner |
I'm not looking to save gas, I think that with the performance that the XB's produce and the mileage that they get it is the best of both worlds. What I was wanting was a more indepth answer to why an engine of almost the same dimensions would produce around the same mileage when there are factors such as the samurai's weight involved. It's 54hp pulling a 2500lb vehicle vs 150ish? pulling a 500lb vehicle. The formula doesn't add up. I just want to know what is so different. Is it the rpms, amount of fuel supplied by the Busa, what makes the biggest difference? Just a question  | ||
| Brineusaf |
}It's 54hp pulling a 2500lb vehicle vs 150ish I think you meant 54/500 vs 150/2500? I think the difference Trend is - OEM engine mfgs to go to longer stroke and/or less over square (bore numerically higher than stroke) may be a function of L/R. Being that at slower engine speeds the effect of a short rod on Intake causes few problems. Compression/Power Stroke should produce different emissions than a long rod. Short rod Exhaust Stroke may create more reversion--EGR on a street engine. power is a funtion of air flow and air flow should be roughly constant for the same instantaneous piston speed, the power may not be the same because of the lever arm effect between the crank radius and the connecting rod. My thoughts is the samari, bless the little thing, has longer rods ect, and the more refined hayabusa has technologically advanced far beyond it, which is obvious. In short, engine building techniques have changed over the years, the samari is just "outdated". | ||
| Xb12burner |
I think I was saying that the 54hp sammy engine was pulling 2500lbs and the 150(ish) hp busa engine was pulling 500lbs. So the outdated Samurai is getting 30 something mpg while the technologically advanced busa is getting 30 something mpg also. Do you see what I'm saying? Where does all the extra gas go? Is it spent on cooling the piston bores, is it burnt making the extra hp? Can you drastically detune a hayabusa engine and get 150mpg? Does anyone really care? Nope... | ||
| Diablobrian |
burned making the hp. The hyabusa revs higher and therefore pumps more air through it. More fuel is required to keep up with the demand. What does the samurai rev to? 7-8k? Where the Busa revs to 11-12k. that is half again more demand on the fuel system. | ||
| Xb12burner |
Thanks for that. I had an assumption that the rpms had a something to do with it along with the extra fuel needed to make the hp. | ||
| Brineusaf |
Sorry I was comparing 54hp to a samari.. i didn't even notice the number was 54, that would make a very slow busa. hahaha |
