Factual mileage

[RoadKill]

I would truly like to drop a grand to buy a Garmin Zumo 550 for more accurate readings, but if I can't afford one to prevent me from getting lost, then I can't afford one to make my mpg readings more accurate. The source of my figures was mentioned to provide a point of reference. I will happily accept a donation of a Zumo for my bike so that y'all won't be further bothered with my base and common inaccuracies -- and next time I'll be able to find that Boy Scout Service Center in Greenville, too! =)

 

Sorry if I stepped on your toes, really didn't mean to. Just wanted to be clear when we make these MPG comparisons. As far as the Zumo I don't have one and wouldn't pay for one. I use a refurbished Garmin Nuvi 650, that I got on ebay for 199 shipped. Only thing you have to do is not leave it in the rain.

 

Again sorry.

[ahoutzer]

Sorry if I stepped on your toes

 

No problem.

 

I still want a Zumo. Maybe some day. Until then, the only way I could report mpg is by the bike's own readings.

[V7Goose]

I believe that the majority of the reported MPG numbers are done with the indicated speed and mileage numbers from the stock bike. While a few people do have devices to correct the speedometer, and some do use GPS systems, I'd bet those are in the minority. To me, this means that reporting the numbers based on the indicated miles is probably the most valuable for comparison to most people. HOWEVER, the most critical issue is that we should always clarify how measured - that is the only way to be sure we have apples to apples comparison.

 

BTW, my limited testing of 4 different RSVs has shown that all of them were off by exactly the same amount in speed. This makes sense to me, as I believe all the units are manufactured identically. Despite this, I have seen very different comments about the percentage the stock bike is off. Likewise, my initial testing showed the stock odometer was much closer to actual than the speedometer is, but others claim that both are off by the same amount. I'm just pointing out how much you CANNOT trust the "facts" that are so quickly thrown around! My "facts" may be right or wrong, but since they are different than other members' "facts," the one thing we know for sure is that at least one of us is wrong (and maybe both) anytime they do not match.

 

Oh, one more note - despite the statement I made above that I thought all stock RSVs are probably off by the same percentage in speed and miles, I'm really not so sure about this any more. When my brother and I tour together (him on his 07 RSV and me on either my 05 or 07), our indicated mileage is never exactly the same when we fill up, even though we usually take very close to the same amount of gas! Our speeds DO indicate the same, but very slight variations in speed would be impossible to accurately see on the speedometers, and that WOULD add up to a different mileage reading over many miles. I have never tried measuring actual tire diameters (to account for different brands and wear) and then calculating that out to see if it would account for the differences, and I doubt if I ever will - just too much trouble!

Goose

[Naked Rider]

i checked mine this weekend again and doing 50 to 60 on highways 2up i got 50mpg and the next day when i checked i was getting 44mpg but i was riding in the hills that day.

[OlRusty]

Last weekend from My house, combination city, town, 2 lane roads to Harrisonburg va, 2 up , thru the mountians driving around the city of harrisonburg va, I checked milage at 48 mpg.

Going to work at 70 mpr+ on I95, I'm getiing 45mpg.

[yamahamer]

BEST 2-UP AVERAGE SPEED 65 THROUGH MOUNTAINS 52 mpg

WORST EVER 40 mpg

EVERYDAY AVERAGE 1-UP HARD THROTTLE AND HIT REV LIMIT HERE AND THERE 45 mpg

K&N's BUBS SLEEPERS AND CARBS SET IN SINC WORKS FOR ME.

[V7Goose]

BEST 2-UP AVERAGE SPEED 65 THROUGH MOUNTAINS 52 mpg

WORST EVER 40 mpg

EVERYDAY AVERAGE 1-UP HARD THROTTLE AND HIT REV LIMIT HERE AND THERE 45 mpg

K&N's BUBS SLEEPERS AND CARBS SET IN SINC WORKS FOR ME.

Now ya see, this is an example of someone I really wish I could ride side-by-side with and compare actual miles and gas pumped, then do a lot of testing on the bikes to find what is different if we can actually verify the drastically different reported MPG - just WAY too far off to be normal variation. Without actually seeing it, I just cannot imagine those numbers as being realistic for the RSV (no offense meant). That kind of testing and eventually finding a real cause for the difference would be very valuable for our members!

Goose

[Redneck]

I get 32 to 34 straight flat roads at an indicated 70-75 I have seen 40 a couple of times low speed cruising with groups. I have seen the difference of two or three tenths when we all filled up at the same time so I am very skeptical when I hear these big mileage claims.

[yamahamer]

now Ya See, This Is An Example Of Someone I Really Wish I Could Ride Side-by-side With And Compare Actual Miles And Gas Pumped, Then Do A Lot Of Testing On The Bikes To Find What Is Different If We Can Actually Verify The Drastically Different Reported Mpg - Just Way Too Far Off To Be Normal Variation. Without Actually Seeing It, I Just Cannot Imagine Those Numbers As Being Realistic For The Rsv (no Offense Meant). That Kind Of Testing And Eventually Finding A Real Cause For The Difference Would Be Very Valuable For Our Members!

Goose

I Commute To Work On My Bike 112 Miles A Day. I Can Ride Two Days Without Haveing To Get Gas. I Buy My Gas At The Same Station Every Two Days And Have Never Put More Than 5 Gallons In The Bike And Only Fill To The Filler Neck. I'm Very Anull About My Maintence And Run A Few Caps Of Seefoam At Each Oil Change "in Fuel" I Owen A 05 Rstd Before My Venture And Got Around The Same From It. Guess I'm One Of The lucky Ones.

[az1103]

Now ya see, this is an example of someone I really wish I could ride side-by-side with and compare actual miles and gas pumped, then do a lot of testing on the bikes to find what is different if we can actually verify the drastically different reported MPG - just WAY too far off to be normal variation. Without actually seeing it, I just cannot imagine those numbers as being realistic for the RSV (no offense meant). That kind of testing and eventually finding a real cause for the difference would be very valuable for our members!

Goose

 

Exactly!!!!!!!!!! That's why I posed the question in the first place. I am realy not concerned about the figure itself but if you know what's a good average and watch your everyday performance you can usually tell when things are going sour before they become serious.

When you are dealing with a twin even small problems will become obvious at idle and under heavy acceleration. But a V4 is a pretty smooth running affair that covers up minor problems by it's natural smoothness. So if you are always way up on mpg and running ethyl, I would be carefull with ethanol or regular because you are probably running lean and may be subject to preignition. On the other hand if your mpg is consistently low without a heavy hand on the throttle then you are probably running a bit rich and are subject to totally different issues such as fast carbon build-up.