I think I found the best way to improve gas mileage. Slow down. Obvious, I know.

I have a 50 mile (each way) commute and originally took a route that included 10 miles of interstate. After getting my GPS wired up I've been experimenting with some alternate routes and I've managed to eliminate all the interstate riding without extending the distance. The fastest speed limits on the new route are 55mpg and I rarely go over 60 on them. It's a more pleasant ride, which is the real reason I take it.

I've only gone through one tank of gas using the new route but on today's fill up I went 180 miles on 3.1 gallons. Hopefully it's not a fluke.

Wow, that's pretty good. On a related note, what is your(or anyones) usual milage once your last bar on your fuel gauge starts blinking? The best I've had was 160. I don't know how much further I want to push it, but have always been curious to know just how much further I could go before running out.

I learned (I think from Honda Silver) ... that your first bar should go away when your odometer gets to your MPG.... your last bar will remind you that you have that same mileage before having to put the thumb in the air. Works pretty close....

I carefully fill all the way up to the top (just before spilling),, then the first bar disappearing closely measures the MPG.

The SWing has 4.2 gallons (may be more with my fill to brim ).

Honda says when the last bar disappears there is suppose to be 0.9 reserve, which you can then approximately calculate using the first bar MPG.

Wow, cool. I'll have to now pay attention to that theory after my next fill-up. I always thought that after you filled up it took forever to get that first bar to disappear, but then once that one was gone the gauge started dropping the rest of the bars alot quicker. So that would support the theory that the first bar counts a complete gallon, but the remaining bars are not complete gallons.

First and Last are gonna be close. Filling up to the neck like Bill does maybe increase the miles for the first bar, but it is going to be awfully close to your mpg and that last blinking bar is too. You may get 5 or 10 miles more or less on that last one, but for 50 mpg .1gal is 5 miles... the difference in 1 gal and .9 gals will be close to 5 miles range. Unless you get 100 mpg which will get you a difference of 10 miles. 30 MPG is only 3 miles. I have used Bills suggestion for a long time. BTW you are right about the bars in between, they melt pretty quickly. You can learn the pattern for them if you really pay attention..... but that last one is the guy that you had better pay close attention to.

Another fill up today, and I got 178 miles and filled up 3.15 gal. 56.5 MPG but I pretty much only go over 5k RPM to pass.

OK, so I tried this experiment with the first bar on the gas gauge tonight. Topped the gas right to the rim, zeroed the odometer and rode 2-up with the girlfriend to a car show/cruise night 3 towns over. Rode the highway non-stop 60 mph all the way over, then rode scenic country back roads 45ish all the way back. First bar disappeared at 46.3 miles, so I have to think that it is pretty close to the truth, especially being 2-up and with the J-Costa. Thanks for the insight. When I topped off to start I put in 3.1 gallons and the odometer read 156miles while blinking the last bar, and that was from solo only riding. which works out to 50 mpg, so I believe the first bar theory.

When I was traveling at 6500-7500rpm (roughly 75-80mph) thru some fast highways in TN, fully loaded with giant saddlebags, seatbag, and large Givi, I got 28mpg. Going 5500-6500 (about 70-75mph) netted me about 32mpg. Granted, this was with a deteriorating belt and some worn stock rollers, but I was shocked. I'm switching to 26g sliders and a new belt and am wondering what I'll get without any bags.

Oddly enough the mileage between my 1800cc Goldwing and my 600cc Silverwing isn't very different. The SW gets me around 46mpg while my GW tends to run an average of 40mpg. Part of the reason I suspect is that I tend to use the SW for in town errands more than the GW which tends to be used for longer trips. Not to mention it's very hard for me to resist twisting the SW's right grip when the light goes green.

Exavid,

I agree that the mileage difference between a GWing and SWing isn't as much as one might think. I routinely got 45 to 48MPG on the GWing. On the SWing for the first 1700 miles my worst has been 58, and my best 64mpg. Back country riding most of the time with very little stop and go. Keep in mind that I ride in pretty hot weather at this time of year, and both bikes seem to get better mileage in the heat. It will be interesting to see what happens when things cool down a bit. I have a very light hand on the throttle. Like some others here, I am a pilot (inactive... Medical) and strive to be smooth.

I have been riding in some pretty extreme heat lately, I snapped this pic on the way home on Tuesday:



So if heat gives better mileage that could be affecting my results too.

Dugglebogey,

104 in Tennessee feels a lot hotter than 104 in Arizona because of the humidity difference. How do I know... I'm from Chattanooga! Tennessee is a WONDERFUL state to ride in. That's where I learned to ride, and I go back to the Smokey Mountain area when I can. Last trip was in May, but unfortunately in the car.

Forecast in AZ today... 111

Stay cool!

Okay... here comes a first for me... I am on my first fill up for me. When I bought my Swing a week ago, the fellow had filled it up in Dallas and I guess again getting to Texarkana. It had almost a full tank when I got it, but not sure how many miles were on that tank, so I just rode it until I got the blinker a few days ago. Filled it up and have been watching the gauge ever since. It is so hot here that I have only ridden it a few miles each morning. Today when I rode it to town the first bar went away at 44.3. I filed that in my head for future reference. Had some Red Cross business to take care of at the office, so, I parked out front and was there for a little over an hour. Got back on, cranked her up and started home. I noticed the first bar had reignited... wow, this new swing creates gas. .. might have gotten a little help from the heat . I drove home and the bar went off this time at 47.5. I have never noticed this happening before. I know the heat is responsible. I don't remember the coefficient of expansion for gasoline, but this does seem like a significant amount.
found coefficient.... : 0.000528/ºF

4.2gals X 0.000528 X rise in temperature F= increase in volume.
If temp went up 20 degrees and assuming 3.2 gals of fuel left in tank.... 3.2X0.000528X20= 0.033792 gals.

0.033792gals X 47.5= 1.6 extra mile me getting an extra 3 miles is twice calculated expected.

Have any of you heard of any studies or research on the fuels with or with ethenol? I know in my pick up there is a significant difference. I would almost bet that mileage is better in areas without the ethenol in the fuel.

Gary,

I have heard that 'real' gas vs. oxygenated fuels (ethenol) equates to a roughly 10% difference in mileage. I have no science to back that up, but that seems about right. And yes, I rarely buy fuel in Maricopa county (Phoenix) where they require Ethenol blended fuel. As far as I know, the rest of Arizona can use unblended fuel. That is likely a factor in why my mileage is higher than most reported here.

I know of NO unblended fuel available around here. I did see an independent retailer in Murfreesboro Arkansas with a big sign that was advertising "No Ethenol in Our Fuel". The pumps here have the notice that the fuel may have up to 10% Ethenol. I guess that means that some many have less or none.

If you take a look at fueleconomy.gov you can find trucks that can run on ethanol (flex-fuel vehicles - like my F150). A quick glance shows about a 30% drop in miles per gallon when run on ethanol. Since even that flex fuel is only 85% ethanol, that equates to a 35% drop in mpg if it were a 100% ethanol fuel.

The crap they sell us without telling us (no labels are required in NC) is only 10% ethanol, which would correspond with a 3.5% drop in fuel economy. If you get 50 mpg on gasoline, you would lose about 1.8 mpg with 10% ethanol.

So, if I had the choice between 10% ethanol and 0% ethanol for the same price, I would effectively be paying a 3.5% premium (about 10 cents per gallon at $2.69 per gallon) for crap that will rot my fuel lines. Add in the 45 cents per gallon paid for by our taxes in subsidies and you would have to get the ethanol blend for 55 cents per gallon cheaper just to pay the same per mile of travel. No wonder they have to make it a law to sell the stuff to us!

I just checked my mileage. Evenly split between heavy urban city traffic and country backroads at 45 mph, I averaged 45 mpg. That's 2-up( 340 lbs ) with saddlebags, GIVI Airflow, J. Costa, and never more than half throttle. I'm OK with that kind of mileage.

My mileage seems poor -- I get high 30s to very low 40s going highway speeds (i.e. 69 to 83mph actual) though this was with a large Givi shield. Today, riding in city traffic and going 25 to 45mph with a stock shield, I got low 50s. Then again, I haven't checked my spark plugs yet -- I just picked up a spark plug gap gauge and have to figure out how exactly it works.

Just tried it again, this time running solo though. Went to 50.2 before the bar disappeared. So 4 mpg better riding by myself. I could go an extra 16 miles without the girlfriend weighing me down.

I normally get about 50 mpg with or without the wife riding with me. We were riding in North Carolina and stopped to fill up at a station and noticed a sign as we pulled in saying, 100% gasoline, No ethanol! I didn't give it much thought, just filled up and continued our trip. I was amazed to say the least. I got close to 65 mpg for that fillup! What is the ethanol actually saving, and who is getting the savings?



Jim

Is the Ethenol mixture unique to North America?

I think I was in Iowa where I saw that the Premium 92 Octane was actually cheaper than the Regular 87 Octane. I thought it was a misprint and asked the clerk -- apparently in Iowa, the Regular has no ethanol, whereas the Premium has 10% ethanol, and so the regular was actually more expensive, but probably would have netted much better mileage.

Although, I've had my SW just three weeks, I've put 1200 miles on it, a combination of very steep mountain roads and flat desert highways. Probably 20%mountain and 80% reasonably flat. I get 55-59 mpg, using 10% ethanol regular. As I read the comments of others, I'm thinking it really is a matter of how one rides. I do 55-70mph and ride the twisties at a brisk, but moderate rate to get the mileage that I get. My scooter is stock. Hawk

Hawk,

Really? A matter of how one rides? Do you expect that anyone will fall for that reasonable explanation?

You are of course entirely correct, but that will account for little. My own experience has shown me it is possible to get low 30's mpg and low to mid 60's mpg on the same bike by driving it with radically different styles. I never buy gas greater than 87 octane and do realize that ethanol will have an effect, but my riding style has a greater effect.

The SilverWing drive train seems to be terribly inefficient at high speeds. So, if you drive it fast it will not get very good gas mileage.

And, oddly enough this entire thread began with that premise.

Good morning Dale... can you please define "fast"...?
I only do recreational riding. No commute to work or weight lifting training. Is there a speed at which mileage starts to suffer? I almost always do the speed limit. Although I am only doing VERY limited driving before I get the Trinity kit conversion.
Is there any actual data on this subject? Surely someone has done a controled study for this engine.

I'll define fast when you are able to describe how high is up...

Actual data? What's that?

MPG is such a subjective thing and is dependent on a plethora of variables: Rider weight, frontal area, tire age, tire tread life, tire inflation, tire composition, road surface type, road surface resistance, traffic, speed, load, etc. I've just scratched the surface.

I have heard that the chartreuse colored SilverWings are the most efficient.

Dale, you made reference to the SW's variator being inefficient at higher speeds. Do you know why that is so, and would the replacement J. Corti make any differences? Also, someone else here suggested that the Corti might deliver less mpg in exchange for more spritely response. What are your thought on that? Hawk