Author |
Message |
Hagxb12s
| Posted on Monday, September 12, 2005 - 05:03 pm: |
|
I was out riding with the altitude riders this past sunday and got 185 miles on my 12s tank. When i filled up i put 3.2 gallons in it! Normally i can only get about 150 or so no a tank. I'm not sure if it was just the altitude, or something up with my bike.... Anyone else gone that far on a tank? |
Nevar
| Posted on Monday, September 12, 2005 - 06:47 pm: |
|
Haven't emtied a tank yet on a single ride but I routinely get about 50 MPG on my 03 XB9S. I run premium, the bike is completely stock with 7K miles, and I ride it pretty easy. Tim |
Buellin_ri
| Posted on Monday, September 12, 2005 - 07:00 pm: |
|
get about 48mph ride it pretty throttle heavy. |
Sped214
| Posted on Monday, September 12, 2005 - 08:47 pm: |
|
I generally get about 54-56 mpg on mine, and i ride far from conservative. Most of my miles are highway though. |
Shawn_9r
| Posted on Monday, September 12, 2005 - 10:27 pm: |
|
Damn my light comes on at 100 miles... Shawn |
Hagxb12s
| Posted on Monday, September 12, 2005 - 10:38 pm: |
|
mine does usually too.....thats why i thought it was so weird....my light didn't come on until about 160 miles....the guys up here in colorado seemed to think that it was because the altitude....i have the factory buell race kit on my bike....i don't know! too weird for me! |
Cajunrph
| Posted on Tuesday, September 13, 2005 - 07:38 am: |
|
Just had mine for about 2 weeks and I got 42-43 mpg on the first few tanks. Light comes on from 110 to 120 miles. I know I can go 35.6 miles on reserve (guess how I know that ) I hope the mpg will get better as I get more miles on the bike. The tank size is too small unless you get over 50 mpg. I may still be too small for others at 50 mpg. My bike has around 600 miles on it now. It seems to me the tank size would hinder sport touring on the bike without 50+ mpg |
Wyckedflesh
| Posted on Tuesday, September 13, 2005 - 08:32 am: |
|
I know I can go 35.6 miles on reserve (guess how I know that ; )) I hope the mpg will get better as I get more miles on the bike. Be careful about that range. It will go down in cold weather because of how the trigger for the low fuel light works. Its a heated wire system. The one time I ran out of fuel I got 29 miles on reserve but still had about 155miles on the tank. In another instance I got 39 miles on reserve, still hit just over 150 mile mark before I hit a station. Bike took 3.4 gallons that time. When I ran it out, it took 3.6 39 miles was at an ambiant air temp of 95F and the 29 miles was an ambiant air temp of 40F. Otherwise my bike averages between 50-55mpg depending on if I keep it below 90. I have gotten as high as 60 when I was stuck doing roughly 60-65 for an entire tank on the freeway. |
Truk
| Posted on Tuesday, September 13, 2005 - 10:18 am: |
|
My 03 XB9R completely stock averages 48-52 MPG and I tend to be heavy handed on the throttle. Light comes on about 120-130+. I have about 9,200 miles on it. Got it used in Feb with 1,800 and appears I am getting better gas mileage now then when I first got it |
Typeone
| Posted on Tuesday, September 13, 2005 - 10:55 am: |
|
~4500miles on bike, with my mods I see an average of 47mpg, mix of heavy throttled back-roads and 70mph highway cruising. you guys are daring with the ~30miles on reserve. i start to freek when the reserve gauge is reading like 15miles |
Jcbikes
| Posted on Tuesday, September 13, 2005 - 11:01 am: |
|
I live in colorado and consistently get 60+ miles per gallon on my 2004 xb12s, so I do not know if altitude helps or not. Light comes on between 150 and as far as 180 one time. I short shift the bike using the lowend torque but do not bogg it, shift between 2,500 and 3,500 and the bike is stock. |
Choldy
| Posted on Tuesday, September 13, 2005 - 11:53 am: |
|
Sunday afternoon, 'spirited' riding, light on at 83 miles, U need to try harder |
Dtx
| Posted on Tuesday, September 13, 2005 - 01:13 pm: |
|
In Kansas I get about 130 miles per tank. When I went riding in Colorado I got 160+ miles per tank. I think it is a combo of altitude and long down hill runs. |
Wyckedflesh
| Posted on Tuesday, September 13, 2005 - 03:47 pm: |
|
you guys are daring with the ~30miles on reserve. i start to freek when the reserve gauge is reading like 15miles Sometimes your so far out of civilization you think your in another country...and then there are the times YOU ARE in another country... |
Pwnzor
| Posted on Tuesday, September 13, 2005 - 04:50 pm: |
|
I get an easy 40 on my reserve and I've never put in more than 3.1gal. mpg anywhere from 48-56. |
Kevinfromwebb
| Posted on Thursday, September 15, 2005 - 11:13 am: |
|
I normally get around 52-54 mpg down here in Texas. When I was up in Colorado for the Brag ride a few weeks ago we were getting in the mid 60's for mileage. And we weren't bashful with the throttles. I believe the altitude does alter the mileage for the better... Kevin |
Blackxb9
| Posted on Thursday, September 15, 2005 - 02:12 pm: |
|
03 XB9S, 4,500 miles bone stock. 120 miles the light comes on. |
Perry
| Posted on Thursday, September 15, 2005 - 05:15 pm: |
|
Correct me if I am wrong...reviewing physics The EFI system senses the temp. and pressure of air going in, and restricts the fuel to keep the right air/fuel ratio. At altitude, the air is thinner (less pressure) and so there are fewer oxygen molecules in a given volume. The EFI system knows this and puts less fuel in as well, since it doesn't want the mixture to get too rich. The on-line calculators I have found show that I am down about 23% on horsepower versus sea level. That sucks for us at 5500 ft. But I also get over 50 mpg in town ('05 XB12 Scg)despite riding it like a demon... or at least trying to with 23% less power There is also the issue of lower wind resistance from thinner air - you would think this is negligible, but during the salt lake city olympics they talked at length about how it was the "fastest ice" ever because of this - and all the world records were beaten easily. I suspect it is still only a 1% difference or so from wind resistance, but interesting. But the thinner air really does mean less oxygen in the chamber, and in a big way. (Message edited by perry on September 15, 2005) |