Curious what owners are experiencing.

 

this machine like to drink. good lord does it drink. lol

 

You didn't REALLY buy this machine for it's fuel economy, did you? MY VTX 1300 gets 45-50 mpg, same weight, but quite a lot less hp... and it doesn't do 0-60 in less than 5 seconds either. The expected gas mileage for the Spyder should not be of real concern, (unless there is a major discrepancy due, perhaps, to a mechanical problem.) I too, however, like to know what I should expect for the average mileage.

 

Actually my husband and I did buy our Spyder's partially for the mpg. We plan on using these as our primary vehicles at least 6 months out of the year. Longer if the weather cooperates. The best our cars get is 20mpg in town and 28-30 on the highway. So we were hoping for a little better than what we are hearing but with careful driving we should still do better than what we are driving now. Yes we could have gotten a couple of bikes and gotten even better mileage but these are safer than two wheels and more visible. Don't get me wrong, we plan on having fun and enjoying the toy aspect as well just not exclusively.

 

I understand completely. I bought the Spyder because of the anticipated enjoyment, and the safety aspect as well. I will use it to commute as often as I can to the school where I teach. Although my car, a Honda Fit, actually gets better gas mileage (38-40 mpg), I won't mind spending a few extra dollars for a much more enjoyable commute!

 

I still haven't emptied my first tank since I first filled it, but it sounds like I'll be getting at least double, maybe triple what my Trans Am gets. And the Spyder's much cooler, more fun, and not falling apart...

 

I see you like vehicles that end in Am

 

First I believe it was you MARC that posted this site. THANKS!-- THANKS ! And dltang DITTO; we will also being doing the same.

 

My Subaru weighs over 3,000 lbs full time 4-wheel dr. 165hp. And averages 29mpg. Sometimes as high as 32 mpg. So I know what you are saying.

 

My excursion gets 10 mpg on a good day going down hill, I think the spyder is a real economy machine.

 

for you anything is good. lol
compared to 10 mpg a corvett is economy so is a suberban. lol

 

all my riding buddies thought itwas impossible to get less than 40-45 MPG on it as they get 55-60 on thier bikes, even my buds goldwing, (very close in weight) and has the 1800 engine, gets better mpg than I do..

My conversion van gets 11 though, so Ill be driving the spyder everywhere.

 

Guess it's safe to say everyone is getting between 26 and 35, with most getting over 30.

 

Here is an option for those concerned with the gas mileage

http://editorial.autos.msn.com/article.asp...1&GT1=10867

Even the delivery schedule is much more optimistic than the Spyder delivery of "we will ship you one when we darn feel like it" or "you may get one or you may not"

 

How about a selection of "Don't know, Don't care" for those that bought this thing for fun instead of a large moped??

 

How about don't read post about fuel mileage!!! lol

 

I bought it for TOURING. And believe it or not there are places were gas is not available for long distances. My old BMW save my but just last year because of this. And it's got a 7.2 gallon tank & gets 48 to 50 mpg. average. riding double at 70mph; with saddle bags & back box loaded. And I believe the Spyder is classified as Sport Touring, same as my BMW. So to go where i was last year I would have to carry a spare tank along. So on a 6 thousand mile trip I don't think a large moped would do.

 

But you *could* strap a moped on the front of the Spyder and then use that to go get gas when your Spyder runs out !

 

What can I say you got me there.

 

37-38 mpg everything stock

 

bump for new members

 

13 mpg in my Durango. The Spyder's a dream.

 

30 around town... 38-40 on the highway if you can keep the speed down. But... if you like to cruise at 80, milage drops down to near 30. Not great compared to many readily available cars, but way more fun than an econobox!
(It's still better than the 11 I get on the Tahoe!)

 

30 around town... 38-40 on the highway if you can keep the speed down. But... if you like to cruise at 80, milage drops down to near 30. Not great compared to many readily available cars, but way more fun than an econobox!
(It's still better than the 11 I get on the Tahoe!)

Loaded up with all 3 Givi bags over full , a huge rear seat bag and the front trunk way overfull, my fat 250 pound butt got 37 mpg coming home from Lake George after Valcourt.

 

Did you forget to include that free Canadian gas you got at Valcourt when you did your mpg calculations

Congrats on the good milage

Can't seem to get over 30 out of mine and I'm riding it hard, but not that hard.

sabunim5

 

I never got over 30 mpg until after my first service at about 700 miles. Now I get as high as 38. I'm driving it the same or harder. Maybe it has something to do with the break-in procedure

 

*bump*

 

It would be interesting to see how they do with mileage on them. It is true that MOST vehicles get better mileage as the engine breaks in. I would not base what the spyder can get for gas mileage on one with under a few thousand miles one it. I would like to know what someone with lets say 5k on theirs is gettign for gas mileage.....but again....wrong vehicle to buy if you want great gas mileage.....I would rather not give up the performance aspects for something like gas mileage.....just like I would not buy a corvette is fuel cost were my concern.

I look at it this way.....it gets better mileage than say for instance that mustang GT you just passed!

 

Here is what i got so far for gas milage.
1. 29.6---First tank when I took delivery
2. 32.4
3. 33.6
4. 35.39
5. 38.8
6. 34.1
7. 32.9
8. 36.0
9. 36.7
10. 33.5
11. 42.5 must of been a tail wind
12. 35.6
13. 34.9
14. 35.8
15. 35.0
16. 35.5
17. 36.7
18. 36.0
19. 33.8
20. 35.7
Thats it so far. Does seem to get a little better with a few miles on it. Thats filling it up till it's at top of filler hole.

 

I'm at 1400 miles and so far always get between 27 and 28. I have yet to take any long highway trips more than 40-50 miles. Sounds like I need to figure out what you guys are doing to get such good mileage.

BTW The last tank was first full tank with the Hindle and I got 26.8...worse yet.

 

I have a theory; it's all about speed and drag...

I wonder if folks might post their mileage along with the average altitude and speed they're driving -- if I'm right, those getting the best mileage drive slower and/or live at higher elevations. Here's why:

The Spyder is pretty wide across the front with a lot of things sticking out in the wind creating aerodynamic drag -- a force that acts in opposition to the engine trying to push you faster. This is called parasitic drag. The faster you drive, the more parasitic drag your engine must overcome. The amount of drag increase is not linear; it is proportional to the square of speed. All other things being equal, increasing your speed ten percent results in a twenty percent increase in drag. That means to overcome the parasitic drag your engine must produce ever increasing horsepower as your speed increases. The amount of horsepower required is different for each vehicle and is largely based on the overall level of parastic drag created.

Keep that in mind for a second while we talk about fuel/air mixture...

Internal combustion engines burn a mixture of fuel (gasoline) and oxygen. For your engine to run optimally, the ratio between the fuel and oxygen must be within certain parameters -- the engine control computer takes care of this for you automatically. How does this relate to altitude? Well, as the ambient air pressure drops with altitude, the number of oxygen molecules drops as well. The computer senses the reduction in available oxygen and cuts back on the amount of fuel going to the engine to keep the fuel/air mixture at the appropriate ratio. As you increase altitude, the computer is continually cutting back the amount of fuel to account for the reduced oxygen levels. That means the amount of horsepower your engine is producing at a given throttle setting drops with altitude. In other words, to make 50 horsepower requires more throttle at 6000' elevation than at sea level. Additionally, that means the maximum horsepower available also drops with altitude -- the throttle opens only so far...

"So what?" you say, "It takes X horsepower to go 80 mph, and it takes X amount of fuel to produce X horsepower. If I want to go 80 mph at 6000' elevation compared to sea level, I'll just have to open the throttle more to make the requisite horsepower; where's the fuel savings?"

Ahhhhh, not so fast Spyder breath! Let's go back to drag for a moment.

Our Spyders are not the most aerodynamic vehicles out there. Its designers didn't wrap everything up in nice, smoothly flowing sheet metal (like a car) to reduce drag -- where's the fun in that!??!! Auto manufacturers have come to realize over the years that because parasitic drag increases exponentially with speed, the best way to avoid the higher drag penalty of higher speed is to reduce the level of parasitic drag created to begin with. That's why the basic aerodynamic shape of many of today's cars is very similar; form follows function.

As I noted earlier, our Spyders don't start "clean," so to speak. They have wide front ends, with lots of drag-producing stuff hanging out in the wind. Spyders must push a LOT of air out of their way, and provide NO means of allowing the disturbed air to flow smoothly back together behind them. So what does this have to do with altitude?

There's a little-known fact airplane designers have been taking advantage of for years. The same thinner air at altitude which robs us of horsepower also creates LESS drag, and for the same reason: Because there are fewer air molecules. Fewer to burn, and fewer to push out of the way! In fact, drag reduction at altitude is one of the primary factors allowing airliners, which climb into the REALLY thin air, to achieve ground speeds in excess of 500 mph.

For us ground-bound unfortunates, parasitic drag reductions at higher altitudes means our Spyders need to produce LESS horsepower to go the same speed.

Now, keeping all that in mind, here's my theory.

Because our Spyders are so aerodynamically "dirty," I'm betting any reduction in parasitic drag -- by either slowing down or going to a higher elevation -- will have a much more significant effect on mileage than it would for, say, the average Honda Accord.

I'll start:

We average around 31 mpg. Altitude around here averages around 400' to 700' above sea level. We usually drive around 65 - 75 mph on the highway.

Regards,

Mark

 

Most of my riding is HWY. And I raised the air pressure in the tires. I have 20 psi. in the front and 29 psi in the rear. Also try not to accelerate too hard on take offs most of the time.

And almost all of my riding is with the wife along. About 90% of the time.

 

So if your at higher altitude there is also less drag on the spyder as well as anything else. So less drag less Hp needed this is your theory. So it kinda equals out according to what you say. Did you know that a city bus has better arrow dynamics than a motorcycle? And by Quite a bit too.

Did you ever think about being a writer sure looks like you would like to be. Just my thought.

 

Did you ever think about being a writer sure looks like you would like to be. Just my thought.

Putt-putt, are you poking fun at me because I take the time to check my spelling and punctuation? It won't work you know, I don't respond to beer pressure. I vow to continue chekcing my speeling -- and pukntuacion -- if yu dont lik it you can stop reeding!

Regards,

Mark

 

I am in Central Florida so most of the time barely above sea level. Most of my driving is between 40 and 60 some stretches 60-75.

I've tried to vary the shift points and cruisng RPMs. I read somewhere that allowing this engine to rev higher it gets better MPG. Nothing seems to make a difference.

BTW Ethanol level will also affect the MPG...maybe our gas is high??

 

My Spyder so far was 34MPG. Short rides etc. Went on a cruise Saturday, winds at 30-50MPH mileage went to 25. This was expected...Note I just have the small issue windshield. Im sitting like a sail for resistance..Our gas is 10% ethenal. I believe that doesnt help. Overall I dont get excited about the mileage. I just enjoy the ride.

So there ....!! I spoke my piece... :

Charliebrown

 

Looks like he got worse mileage in lower elevation (Ill.)

 

Yeah, there's a difference, but I don't know if it's enough to be meaningful. I think we'll need more complete data to make a factual conclusion. If Art can provide us with speeds and an estimate of the winds, in addition to economy data for rides near his home at the higher elevations we might be able to do something.

Additionally, data from MORE forum members would add to the stats and give any conclusions much more weight.

Here's the breakdown of what we got from Art:

NOTES:

• I assumed the data from Higginsville, MO to be tainted and discarded it
• The two highlighted entries represent the greatest deviation from the average
• There is nearly eight MPG difference between the two entries with the greatest deviation
• The two entries with the greatest deviation occurred at similar altitudes
• The two entries with the greatest deviation were concurrent
• Economy at the highest elevation is not significantly different from the overall average

Because of these incongruities I must assume either:

1. We don't have enough data to prove or disprove my hypothesis.
2. My hypothesis is wrong.

I'm going with number one for now, but we need more data.

Art, if you can give us an estimate of your average speed and wind data (i.e. light/moderate/heavy, head/tail/cross, etc.) for each of these data points it would help tremendously.

Regards,

Mark