More On Mileage

[JRO]

For those of you who have kept track of the 'Awesome Mileage' thread, and those who haven't, AND those 'water-in-the-boot' people (who can't figure how to get it out), this:



I do humbly apologize to Patrick the Scott, for calling into question his methodology for obtaining miles per gallon usage of a Triumph Tiger motorcycle, and for scoffing at his results.  Furthermore, I testify to both his accuracy and veracity in reporting said results, and hereby salute him as a Gentleman and a Scholar.



I was let out of the house, today. I went to my son's place, to help repair an agricultural sprayer.



Filled tank with 89octane gasoline.  Traveled West 23miles on State hiway @60-70mph. Changed to B.A. Expressway, traveled Northwest 21miles @70-80mph.  Exited freeway, traveled due West 2miles @60mph, stopped and refueled.



Conditions were sunny, 83F; wind from the South-Southwest @10-12mph, with gusts up to 18mph. Traffic not a factor. I stopped at one stupid stoplight, which the town of Fort Gibson is allowed to have on the hiway, to facilitate trucking to/from a canning factory.



Miles Traveled     :   46.4

Fuel Consumed    :   0.925 gallons (U.S.)

Miles Per Gallon  :   50.1621...



That's right, folks.  I, my own self, got 50+mpg under moderately windy conditions, riding at hiway speeds.  I have a Cee Bailey's +8 #2 windscreen, side panniers, and a Triumph top box.  I weigh 217lbs, and had an extra jacket in the top case.  My bike is totally stock, and has 6,800+ miles on it.



My error in judgment concerning Tiger fuel economy is simple:  I haven't had a brand-new motorcycle in over 8 years, and I haven't checked fuel consumption for some time; since before my 6,000-mile oil change.  Possibly, for as long as 8 weeks (2,000+ miles).  Having previously checked mpg, and obtained somewhat disappointing results (35-38mpg), and reading others' similar reports, I had prematurely filed those figures away as fact.  Patrick the Scott reminded me that you can't expect optimum fuel economy from a motorcycle, until it is well broken-in.



I have currently reached these conclusions about you 'Low Mileage Getters' (LMG's).



1. LMG's usually face 65mph headwinds.

2. They may make mathematical errors when calculating mpg.

3. Depression over the price of gas may influence them to underestimate mpg.

4. They report accurate, factual results, but this has no bearing on real-world riding.

5. The low-mileage feature of the Triumph Tiger seems to only be available to certain idiots.

6. They're actually riding a Gold Wing, with 'Triumph' painted on the side.

7. They're calculating mpg using liters, instead of gallons, because they're riding a metric motorcycle.

8. For low-mileage figures, you should try using liters, instead of gallons.

9. They have no idea what the hell they are talking about.

10.They lack the patience required to wait until their bikes are completely broke-in, before blathering assumptions as facts.



For you LMG's out there - you need to start riding those bikes.  If your Triumph is in the garage, instead of on the road, then you should have bought a BMW!  You'll have to put 6 to 10 thousand miles on that thing, for your Tiger to realize it's fuel-economy potential.  Now, if you're forced to live in some vast metro area, where you're drifting in-and-out between millions of cars and stop-n-going through traffic lights and jams, don't claim fuel mileage, unless it's 'city', until you've put in some real, open-hiway miles, because there's no comparison.  And letÌs all take the time to obtain scientific, accurate figures, before stating facts.



Oh, and I came home after dark, and only saw one deer.



It did not attack.

[greg]

I have noticed that my 04 definitely picked up on both power and mpg after 6000, quite noticeably particularly the power, mpg now 45-50 no problem.

[greg]

I have noticed that my 04 definitely picked up on both power and mpg after 6000, quite noticeably particularly the power, mpg now 45-50 no problem.

[wasions]

Whoa!  Deja vu.



Or are the greg's living parallel lives?



 :D

[Patrick the Scot]

JRO:



50 MPG is more like it for the open road! Congrats on cracking the half century mark.  Like you said "City" mileage is always lower, but it is nice to know that, out in the high desert, on a warm day, with a full moon, the Triumph Tiger is capable of way over 300 miles per tank. I guess I'm sensitive to this as it gives me one more point and counter-point to all my fellow two-wheeled brethren here in Lubbock who are stuck to their eletist BMW's.



Now will you come on up to Durango?



and no need to apologize, but thanks...all in good fun.

[stanegoli]

JRO I always enyoy your posts, although I must admit it was more fun when your bike was brand new and you were far more obnoxious!!



Our bikes were bought at same time and we have same mileage.



Only comment I have in response to your post is that I use 87 octane, not 89.

I constantly average 45mpg and get as much as 50 on open road.

[JRO]

Well, Patrick... Handsome is as handsome does.  I may be a prima-dona, but I am too pretty not to admit when I am wrong about facts, where facts matter.  The vice of an upbringing of science and ethics.  I am happy to admit I am wrong, and at least I can tell my wife how cheap my bike is to ride.



I don't know if I can come to Durango, despite my improved mileage. I have 4 kids still living at home (at least until they're 30), 2 nieces threatening to move in, and I rarely know, from day-to-day, what I am allowed to do.  #2 boy has had his rotation to foreign parts moved up, so I might could go. I might even meet you on your way North.



I still have BMW acquaintances, so I can sympathize with you. Just smile, and pity them - maybe they will learn. Some of them are nice people, but experience and recent information has convinced me that BMW only employs white-slave sex workers (part-time, 5 days a month) to manufacture motorcycles from outsourced, Haitian and Angolan parts.  They do still use German polycarbonates for their windsheilds, however.  That's why you can't see through the things.



I just can't support a product built by a company which won't give girls full-time employment.



Strangoli, have no fear.  I will continue to be obnoxious, either when I am right about something, or just don't give a hoot.  I sometimes have to use 87octane, also.  89 isn't always handy.  I haven't noticed any real difference between the two, except price. There may not be any.

[nkovatzis]

hello everybody



I m a (so far) happy owner of a 06 tiger for 2 months.

I ve already done some 6000+ km (including a trip to to north greece fm athens).

I ve always been keeping record of the consuption on all my bikes.

i ve read some spectacular low figs on this thread!

here are my numbers - all as  lt/100 km



max 8.15 (doing 160kmh on highway)



low 4.9 - very easy going on the mountains avg 60kmh (2 up riding)



in the city avg 6.2 lt (when trying hard to keep it low...)



in the city again 7.2 (not trying as hard ..)



5.5 normal driving (!) weekend trip with no or very little traffic, no highways.

nik

[nkovatzis]

a forgot to post my question:

is this 24lt tank fig not accurate?



On my last trip the bike died (fortunately 500 m away fm the gas station) but I filled her up with 23.1 lt only!`

does this mean there is some more fuel that cannot be used, maybe on purpose so the dirt stayes there?

has any one else measured the true capacity of the tank?

does it vary fm bike to bike?



i ve seen that the tank actually splits in two going down, and there are actually 2 pipes conecting it with the engine.

does that mean that if one part gets empty 1st -for some strange reason!- then the left over on the other half cannot be used as there is air been sucked fm the empty part???



rgrds