More on mpg

[v11F]

Hi guys,

 

Last Sunday in the Black Forest, 100% in the wet (max speeds say 70 mph ++ sometimes ...) : 4.9 L / 100 km (according to the computer which is probably "optimistic" but still) over a distance of 240km, that's 58mpg (imperial ...) by my accounts. In the company a R1200R, an RT and a Varadero. There weren't many other bikes out (morning + wet = stay in the warm), but we had a great time.

 

See yer

[pete roper]

Dave, I have to agree with you that the fuel ecconomy is crap. this is more of a problem for you 'cos your gas is so damn expensive in the UK. Over here its just tedious that you can't go very far without filling up and there are many stretches of road where that low a range can be a real pain, not to mention a hazard!

 

Mine is *slightly* better than that but not much I'm averaging about 7 litres per hundred but I just checked the dash and my last trip, (ie from last fill up.) it says I averaged a shocking 8.4 L per 100 but there again it also said my max speed on that trip was 212KPH so I *was* having a bit of fun!!!!

 

Now the weather is warming up I'm having a few *issues* with the Fat Duc as well. You know how I said that it seemed to be very effected by ambient temperature and I was having to fiddle with it on an almost daily basis? well now it has started throwing up the 'Service' warning if I adjust it outside certain limited parameters. As the ambient temp gets above 27*C it is also getting uncomfortably lean at idle, so much so that occasionally it will chuff back through the TB's at traffic lights and such. Partly that is the Guzzitech pipe which seriously exacerbates the idle lean condition, so much so that I'm going to change it, not because of that issue mind but simply because it is so hideously, ear-bleedingly loud. I know some people like that level of racket but I'm not among them. I've got a Mistral Ti, Hi-Pipe for the Chatanooga Choo-Choo but at the moment I'm tossing up whether to get another of those or the factory 'aftermarket' one, Probably the latter. The crazy thing is its cheaper for me to buy it from Greg than it is to order it at dealer cost from the Oz importer!

 

Hopefully I'll soon be able to start playing with the PCV and/or the Rapidbike systems as well, but neither of these will improve the fuel ecconomy much. The map is far too rich at the top end but most of the way through, especially in the midrange, it is very lean. Sorting the fueling will probably just make it thirstier. If they could of twin plugged it it would almost certainly of been easier to get good FE. My Mana sips fuel in comparison.

 

Pete

 

PS. While my TPS was spot on ex factory it doesn't mean they all are. Good God! Re-setting the TPS takes about 15 seconds. why won't he do it? Is he scared of the tool? Does he think that if he presses the wrong button he'll kill the ECU or something? Can't happen! @#!#$# me drunk! no wonder you're frustrated!

[Paul Minnaert]

well I manage 6 liter on 100km , If you change the dash reading, you can see what it does on yours. But that is with country touring, when I do short drives or long high speed drives it gets worse.

[Kid Thunder]

Here in the states & yes that mileage is NORMAL!! I get anywhere between 92-102 miles before the lite comes on! Poor I would say but with anew map & pipe or PCV from Guzzi tech I think it will get much better. It just doesn't run right with the stock map. It goes from really lean to unbelievably rich.

Don-M

[pete roper]

Part of Dave's, and many other 8V owners problems are related to the bike not having been set-up properly or ever tuned once it left the factory. The 8V IS a thirsty pig, but it can be a lot less thirsty if well set up, with the #68 map and the right exhaust. I know, I've done it. Mileage is still pitifull if you cane it, (And they do respond well to caning!) but If I ride half way sensibly and sort-of obey the speed limit I can get 20Km to the litre.

 

Pete

[belfastguzzi]

Here in the states & yes that mileage is NORMAL!! I get anywhere between 92-102 miles before the lite comes on! Poor I would say but with anew map & pipe or PCV from Guzzi tech I think it will get much better. It just doesn't run right with the stock map. It goes from really lean to unbelievably rich.

Don-M

Don, are you still around here?

Interested to hear how you're getting on and if you fitted the PCV?

I'm not about to do it, but it would be useful to have some experience written up on this wee sub-forum.

DB

[moscowphil]

This is no help at all I know, but it seems to me that all bike manufacturers, including Guzzi, just don't care about fuel consumption. Maybe it's the bike press that's to blame, being totally obsessed with speed at the expense of everything else. The efficiency of bike engines is really no better than it was in the 60s, which is crap. As it happens, I was just reading about a new big twin that pushes out 84 bhp and averages 70 mpg, which seems a lot more like it. Only problem is, it's a car - fiat 500

[Skeeve]

This is no help at all I know, but it seems to me that all bike manufacturers, including Guzzi, just don't care about fuel consumption.

 

I don't know that that's the problem. What has been noted before with carb'd bikes is that the govt.-imposed smog restrictions led the manufacturers to make the bikes run very, very lean in the rev range that the motors were tested. To compensate, [esp. on air-cooled motors], the manufacturers made them run very rich on top, since if they had the engine good'n'hot from running lean down low & someone wound it on hard, it would be easy to seize up or otherwise overheat if they didn't apply a little "fuel-cooling" to the system.

 

Now, initially, the advent of FI allowed the manufacturers to keep their smog output within the proscribed limits, but now that it's 10 years on and the smog limits have been continually reduced, perhaps we're back where we began vis-a-vis A/C motors? Perhaps our only option, as responsible owners, it to pay the $$$ for PCIII/Vs, etc. so that we can adjust the fuel mix to something that is correct across the board? After all, burning less fuel in the long run is the way to cut smog...