Home
Ren's Biking Blog
Fuel Economy For Motorcycles?
Blog Date - 07 September 2011
Recently the gf and myself went on a long trip...in the blooming car...dammit. Amongst all the other issues I have with using a car I was concerned at the extra expense of taking almost a ton of metal with us everywhere we go, rather than one-fifth of a ton of motorcycle. I need not have worried about the additional cost, the gf's car uses less goddam fuel than my 600!
The gf has a 1 litre, 3 piston Vauxhall Corsa. It's built as a car that has good economy, but I was still surprised when around town and country it returned 53mpg and on the motorway at a steady 65mph managed 63mpg! Typically the Fazer 600 returns 55 to 60mpg, but that doesn't keep the gf dry, allow her to carry her entire wardrobe and still leave room for my bodyboard and laptop. This of course makes me ask why the devil a considerably lighter and more aerodynamic motorcycle uses as much fuel as a small car? The gf's car is 8 years old, the latest newest and trickest cars are aiming for 80mph, maybe even 90mpg.
The first thing is that my motorcycle, like most motorcycles, is somewhat quicker than a small economical hatchback. Yet if I ride my bike slowly and carefully I can only achieve maybe 65mpg on a long run and with the wind behind me. I could not hope for 80mpg, that's why I use the 125 that returns 105mpg! I've been recently looking at getting a newer bike, yet even the new fuel injected and computer controlled bikes don't seem to be able to match the modern car's fuel sipping talents. That's because bikes are always made for power and speed, not economy and the environment. Even non-sporty bikes like the Versys I've just tested will only achieve 55 to 60mpg.
What if I were to stick the super economical 3 pistoned motor out of the gf's car into my bike? It'd be a nightmare of wiring due to all the sensors required to ensure the optimum fuel mixture but I'm sure it would be possible. If in a car that motor can do 63mpg, it must surely achieve 100mpg in a bike? It need not be too slow either, a quick look on autotrader suggests the 1 litre 3 pistoned motor produces 60bhp, enough to push a bike around OK. It would have a splendid amount of torque too and wouldn't need to revs it's nuts off to 10,000 rpm. I want one!
Come on Honda and Suzuki, stick the motor out of one of your small economy hatchbacks into a bike and give us a low revving, low fuel consumption, low emissions and high torque bike to transport the masses...
Reader's Comments
Marky M said :-
I have seen car engines put into motorcycle form, my mate did it although the project failed.
Diesel bikes. At a rally one lad reckons his 800cc give him 80mpg all day but while it pulls fine the acceleration is a bit flat. Hes working on a petrol car conversation.
Why is consumption so important to you
11/09/2017 06:59:50 UTC
Ren - The Ed said :-
Hi Marky M. Fuel consumption is important to me primarily because I'm tight.
Most people do 2 - 4 thousand miles a year on bikes. Let us say they cover 3k at 60mpg, that's 50 UK gallons of fuel. At a cost today of roughly £5.20 per gallon that's a spend on fuel per year of £260. If that motorcycle were capable of 100mpg that cost would drop to £156, saving £104 per year. So what, meh, it's only £104 and I want my fast posing machine not some flatulent eco-hippy model.
I cover about 20k per year. At 60mpg that's a cost of £1,733, at 100mpg that drops to £1040. That's a saving of £693. My CB500X returns about 80mpg but my CBF125 returns 130-140mpg.
11/09/2017 09:17:17 UTC
Name
Comment
Add a RELEVANT link (not required)
Upload an image (not required) -
Uploading...
Home
Ren's Biking Blog