Can Am Spyder Forum banner
21 - 40 of 135 Posts
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!)
Image
 
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!)
Image
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.
Image
 
Did you forget to include that free Canadian gas you got at Valcourt when you did your mpg calculations
Image
Congrats on the good milage
Image
Can't seem to get over 30 out of mine and I'm riding it hard, but not that hard.
Image

sabunim5
Image
 
The trip to Valcourt was FAST
I just picked mine up Saturday afternoon. All riding has been at less than full throttle, but not "babying" it. I kept up with traffic (and then some), made a trip up through the mountains, and rode around Colorado Springs, Co. (population 360,000) on errands. I filled up, rode about 75 miles& got 34.06 mpg. Rode another 190 miles, and got 35.1. During that last tankful, I discovered that at 7300 rpm's, I'm going 100 mph. Is there really such a thing as "too much fun"? I hope not!
 
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.
Image
 
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.
Image
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
 
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.
 
21 - 40 of 135 Posts