| Author | Message | ||
     Rotorhead |
You may notice the LD riders that hold a constant throttle for long distances get better economy. I think it has to do with the AFV learning it sets the optimum air fuel ratio 14.7:1 to throttle position and we stay at that setting for a long time (throttle locks). Maybe there is a AFV curve that is not quite the same in the 08's? 08's have a different TSP if I'm not mistaken(I probably am). | ||
| Peregrine |
Even with more '08 samples there appears to be compelling evidence that the '06 was vastly superior in terms of gas mileage and hence, efficiency. I agree with Etennuly that more mileage is not going to make a significant difference. In addition, seems that the '06 was a less finicky motor demanding less resets and user intervention for the fuel delivery system. '08 owners may have been fooled into believing that the more sophisticated FI system would outperform earlier models, but seems what we have here is a classic case of simpler is better. Now my question is whether we can get enough '08 owners to raise the topic with their dealers so that Buell takes up the issue at a central engineering level. I'd much prefer a company fix to fiddling with the mapping of the bike in my garage (paying all due respect to the hardcore fiddlers out there!) | ||
| Mark_weiss |
Do all Ulys share the same gearing? Both primary and final drive ratios? If '08s have quicker gearing it would account for an across-the-board shift in fuel consumption. Mark in arizona | ||
| Mark_weiss |
Upon checking the data I note that almost all of the '08 reports are from only two users. These two seem to experience consumption that, for one reason or another, is significantly poorer (more than 15%) than all other reporters. This issue skews the data. Mark in Arizona | ||
| 08uly |
Hi Mark, All Ulys are same ratio from the factory. You are correct; it is or will be skewed unless we get data that are more complete. I think part of the problem is not everyone keeps tabs on their MPG data so it's not readily available. Because of this, I think we are seeing an artificial elevation of the 2006 & 2007 numbers. After all, who really wants to post poor MPG stats? My gut feeling is that there is a difference but I'm not convinced it's as great as the current numbers make it appear due to the lack of more data from 2006 & 2007 Ulys. David (Message edited by 08Uly on April 23, 2008) | ||
| Froggy |
All XB12 bikes have the same gearing | ||
| Mark_weiss |
My '08 has been showing gradual improvement with each frame-full. The first several times that I refueled I was in the mid to upper 30's range, and have been in the low 40s ever since. Generally, I see 40 to 42 with my relatively short commute. I could see if I have old fuel receipts in my jacket pocket (pretty likely) and post several more mileage figures, but I don't think that that type of information will really give a good overall picture. I don't really track fuel consumption to carefully, but do make a quick check at each fill-up. In the past, I've found that the practice helps me to spot running problems. Mark in Arizona | ||
| Mark_weiss |
It could also be useful to be able to compare dyno curves (stock eqpt) from each year. It is possible that '08s are stronger in the midrange than earlier years. This could account for increased fuel consumption without an increase in peak horsepower. Mark | ||
| 08uly |
I created a separate web page for this to make it easier to maintain for those that want to keep it going. Use & Bookmark this Link Thanks to all the contributors! David (08Uly) | ||
| Chopped58 |
I have data from three IronButt rides totaling about 3700 miles, and my bike is an 06 if your interested.... | ||
| 08uly |
sent you a PM chopped... | ||
| Darrell_ks |
I am starting to feel a bit better about my mileage now. I have gotten as low as 36, and as high as 46, but for the most part am very stable at 42 to 43 mpg. I commute 82 miles round trip, so I fill up each night on my way home. I typically run 75 mph most of the way. Given that I live in Kansas, I occasionally have head/tail winds up to 30 mph, with normal winds in the 15 mph range. The wind does seem to make a significant difference at times. Running late to work and pushing 80 mph makes a very big difference. | ||
| Etennuly |
It might be interesting if posters indicated with maybe an "A" if they are running gas with alcohol, or a "G" for straight gas. This is something that I have tested and found to be detrimental to gas mileage. My results of testing in two vehicles over a year and a half period proved that 10% alcohol mix resulted in 8% less fuel mileage. My personal story on the latest 'rape of the American Public'. | ||
| Electraglider_1997 |
Just a thought. Each year of the ULY has has stronger oil pumps. Yes, the 07' has an a different set of oil impellers than the 06'. 08', as you all know, has a stronger oil pump that has to push oil through a larger oil cooler. Maybe they should of just finned the swingarm as it is quite an oil cooler itself. | ||
| Bobr |
Cdale, X vs. XT mileage: in addition to drag from the bags the XT weighs more. I'm riding an XT and get about 45mpg average. Bob | ||
| Etennuly |
Bobr, My '06 Uly has the bags on all of the time, usually with 40 lbs of crap in them. I did remove my BAW yesterday though. | ||
| Bigkuri |
OK, for Uly riders we should define riding, as that's a major point of fuel consumption. I'm a safe smooth rider (if I say so myself...) and have absolutely no chicken strips on any of my tyres. Most days I commute at 90mph, and take it to redline every "third" gear change (if you know what I mean - every third start I hoon). Riding is in town 10% and on B-Roads 70%. The rest of 20% is on motorways. Others? | ||
| Buellinabq |
Is it just me, I can't get the View Data link to show me anything. The Enter your data form shows up though. I'm thinking commuting at 90mph is also killing your MPG. | ||
| Bobr |
Etennuly, How was the mileage without the BAW? | ||
| 08uly |
Hmmm... You may need a Google account (free) to view the spreadsheet itself but you can view the page I made to see the results... Results Page 08Uly | ||
| Etennuly |
BAW usually costs me about 1 mpg on average. It really doesn't have too much larger of a profile than me and it is a lot smoother and angled better than I am. | ||
| Rwcfrank |
I wonder how much fuel is being dumped while the Uly is sitting warming up for 2 minutes? | ||
| Wademan |
Quote: "Upon checking the data I note that almost all of the '08 reports are from only two users. These two seem to experience consumption that, for one reason or another, is significantly poorer (more than 15%) than all other reporters. This issue skews the data." This is very true. Two bikes are throwing these numbers WAY off. Posting your gas mileage for every tank is not a fair comparison for the 06 and 07 owners just posting their regular typical MPG. | ||
| Maximum |
Maybe the mileage can be averaged for each rider first...then that number can be used to create an average of all bikes per model year. | ||
| 08uly |
Quote: "This is very true. Two bikes are throwing these numbers WAY off. Posting your gas mileage for every tank is not a fair comparison for the 06 and 07 owners just posting their regular typical MPG." I'd have to disagree, posting the data from every tank will lead to the most accurate results. The lack of an equal amount of data from '06 & '07 will create an imbalance but it surely is not throwing the numbers way off. The average is what it is. It would not matter if I entered one sample that represented an average of all my tanks or if I entered all my miles/gallons data. The end result will be the same. It will just not be as clear how you arrived at the result with fewer samples/data. The more samples, the better, the more accurate the comparison will be. One thing that might be beneficial would be throwing out the highest & lowest samples for each user but I'd have to look into the logic of that to see if it makes sense statistically. David | ||
| Wademan |
Uh... where do I start. You are wrong. The average is related to the sample size. Take all of the values add them up and divide by the number of entries. If 4 08' uly owners post their average fuel economy number once, to represent what they have typically been getting, and one guy with an 08' Uly has been posting his mpg for each and every tank of gas the average on that spreadsheet will be pulled strongly toward the guy posting mpg for every tank full. It is not an accurate representation for the average mpg on 08' bikes. Edited to add: If you are simply averaging the values from the column labeled "2008 Average MPG" from this page http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pxw__95-FqgChLG3iacTONw&gid=1 I stand by my statement. If you are using some Excel magic to average each users mpg before figuring the 08' average than I stand corrected. (Message edited by wademan on April 25, 2008) | ||
| Bobr |
"BAW usually costs me about 1 mpg on average. It really doesn't have too much larger of a profile than me and it is a lot smoother and angled better than I am." Ha, ha. Sounds like a bargain. | ||
| 08uly |
Wademan, you are correct for the average within the sample range, I was wrong. What I’m getting at is we need more actual data (not less) to make the comparison more valid. If I were to say I get about 40 mpg (because that’s what I got last weekend) and enter that into the sheet as opposed to entering real data (miles/gallons) then we can’t really trust the data because I know my real average is closer to 35 mpg. I still wouldn’t say it’s throwing the numbers WAY off (maybe off by 5 to 10 percent). Granted, it’s not 100% accurate but with this kind of reporting method, it’s about as close as you’re going to get. I’d say it’s still a valid comparison. I think we need Buell to give us 10 of each bike so we can do a thorough testing of this for a year or so. How does that sound...  | ||
| California |
For me, this is not actually about "miles per gallon" but more a question of "miles per tank"! I find it totally unacceptable that a modern motorcycle touted as a touring capable vehicle would have a range of only 135 to 150 miles. Is there some sort of " acceptable" standard the industry aims for? I would like to be able to do 4 plus hours between stops, and with current highway speeds, that is 200 - 240 miles. At my current mileage, I need a 5.2 to 6.3 gallons. Am I alone in this? are we really unhappy with the mileage, or the range? | ||
| 08uly |
I'll take a look at reworking it to average each users data before calculating the model year average. David |
