My 998 averaging 44 MPG vs my wife's 600 I-4 @ 39 MPG..What gives?

[kam1996]

I have been riding both bikes a lot lately, 95% to and from work.
I ride my 998 on weekends also and usually get on it pretty hard, on the other hand I ride my wife's 600RR to and from work, I ride it like an old man (no offense "older" people) and am still averaging much worse fuel mileage.
The 998 has 9000 miles and the 600 is at 5800 miles.
Any ideas why? Is it the way the Twin makes/delivers power?

[desmo11]

The Honda is probably rich...

[DukeDesmo]

There is one thing about Ducati ownership that is low-cost, the fuel consumption - I'm sure the 600 get's it's 'own back' come servicing time......

[996f1]

........a big old honkin' engine, with gobs of torque, does not require that you twist the wrist as much. I learned this when my making the engine on my 850cc LM engine bigger and bigger over time. As I did all the "wrong" things, like bigger carbs, and bigger valves, and bigger pistons, and more radical cam, the gas mileage kept going up---to 48-52 MPG from 40-44 at the start. No one believed it, but that was the way it was.

You use fewer gears, and fewer revs.

[Shazaam!]

Good answer. The best fuel economy depends more on how you ride it than on engine power.

I point to a recent UK Top Gear TV program where they drove a Prius hybrid HARD around a track and had a BMW M3 follow at the same pace. The M3 got 19 mpg, the Prius 17 mpg.

[sburns2421]

I was going to add that the revs of the 600 at highway speeds are probably 50% more than the Ducati (say 4300 rpm vs 6500 rpm). So the two engines are pumping about the same amount of air.

You would think then that assuming both have similar efficiency they would use the same amount of fuel. This however isn't the case as the smaller bike needs more throttle when any load (such as a hill) is encountered. On the highway the twin is barely breathing and the throttle is just cracked off the stop, the 600 throttle is going to be open more in basically any situation.

For 2009 Buell has published fuel consumption for their bikes. IIRC the air-cooled 1200s are mid-fifties. If I'm just cruising (45-65 mph on back roads), my 999 will get 50 mpg. On the interstate it is more like 44 mpg.

Taken to the extreme, this is also how a Z06 Corvette with 7 liters and over 500 hp, not to mention several times the weight and frontal area of a bike, can achieve high 20's in mpg if driven carefully.

[kam1996]

Originally Posted by sburns2421

Taken to the extreme, this is also how a Z06 Corvette with 7 liters and over 500 hp, not to mention several times the weight and frontal area of a bike, can achieve high 20's in mpg if driven carefully.

You are right about the Corvette, my 62 yr old coworker who has a C6 vette, drives 52 miles each way, all hwy, to and from work. he swears that he gets 28 MPG..Thats 28 MPG from a 400 hp sports car.

[sburns2421]

I have heard stories of them getting even 30 mpg if the road is flat, the driver never shifts out of sixth, and keeps the cruise at 70. Not much fun, but who would have ever thought of a vette as an economy car.

For reference, my little POS Honda Del Sol I usually use to commute (rode the Duck today), gets only 32-34 mpg. This is with a 1.6L, 125 hp engine. But it is also over 3000 rpm on the interstate.

[BC999S]

Originally Posted by kam1996

Any ideas why? Is it the way the Twin makes/delivers power?

Fewer moving parts, no valve springs, riding it like an old man. It all adds up!

[bruce19]

My '02 998 got over 50 mpg on the highway and about 43 mpg in town. My '07 FZ1 gets about 45 mpg (on a good day) and high 30's in town. Both my Ducati SS/SP's did over 50 mpg on the highway and well into the 40's in town.

[toxic]

Originally Posted by Shazaam!

Good answer. The best fuel economy depends more on how you ride it than on engine power.

I point to a recent UK Top Gear TV program where they drove a Prius hybrid HARD around a track and had a BMW M3 follow at the same pace. The M3 got 19 mpg, the Prius 17 mpg.

YouTube Video

[toxic]

The most worthless car is the "Smart". It only gets about 35mpg.

A car that is only slightly bigger than a roller skate should do much better than that.

[bruce19]

Originally Posted by toxic

The most worthless car is the "Smart". It only gets about 35mpg.

A car that is only slightly bigger than a roller skate should do much better than that.

My '95 BMW 318TI gets 28-30 mpg around town when driven "normally." If I really try I can get 32 mpg around town. I don't see much progress in that regard with the newer cars.

[Old Fart]

Newer cars get poorer mileage than cars from the 80-90's. Tighter emissions that require them to run richer so the cat converter works well and to reduce NOX from a lean condition. Add the absolutely stupid alcohol in the gas and fuel consumption is up.

I had a 84 Toyota Celica that would crack 35 on the highway. My brother had a Olds Cutlass 3.8 and that thing would do 33. Then I had a 92 Maxima with the 3.0L 4 cam that would do 31. Now a 3L Lexus that might hit 25 on a good day.

On the other hand I just bought my wife a FJ Cruiser and that thing will hit 23 on the highway.

Isn't progress wonderful?

[Old Fart]

Originally Posted by toxic

The most worthless car is the "Smart". It only gets about 35mpg.

A car that is only slightly bigger than a roller skate should do much better than that.

Didn't know that breadbox only gets 35. Talk about useless.
*How'd you like to get sandwiched between two F250's in that thing.

I drove one in Italy a couple years ago. I had to resist the childish urge to just roll it for fun. Or put 400 pounds in the back to see if it would wheelie.

[sburns2421]

Ford, VW, and Mini among others have diesel versions of their cars which get fuel mileage above 50 mpg easily. But you won't see the Focus D, or the VW Polo in the US. The concensus seems to be Americans won't buy these versions at $2000 more than a gas version. In some cases the reasons are legitimate as the cars are not designed for US crash standards, and would be too expensive to redesign until the next generation.

All it would take is temporary legislation to allow these vehicles (maybe with the stipualtion that you can't sue the carmakers due to injury).

Meanwhile cars like the diesel Jettas are on backorder, and Toytota hybrids simply cannot be found on dealer lots. Honda has record profits selling cars the Big 3 won't make or at even sell in this country.

My little POS Del Sol I commute in regularly gets a combined 30 mpg, even with high revs practically trying to blow the thing up. You would be hard pressed to find that today in a gas-only new car. But you will have 250 horsepower though! Pretty sad.

[sburns2421]

BTW I thought I would add that this switch to motorcycles for some people will only be temporary even if gas prices stay high. Once they have to start paying to maintain the bikes vs. car, a little fuel-efficient cheap car will be much more desirable to non-motorcyclists. Even getting 50 mpg on a bike would probably cost more overall than 30 mpg in a car.

Even with gas at $4, does a bike make sense?

[BC999S]

Originally Posted by Old Fart

Now a 3L Lexus that might hit 25 on a good day.

My 3.5L Lexus has a lifetime average fuel mileage of 9.7L/100 km or 24.8 mpg. This includes much more city than highway driving. My '03 Infiniti 3.5L did 12.5L/100 km or about 25% worse over the same routes. I'd call that huge progress considering the Lexus makes about 30 more HP.

My

[Realmanken]

V-twins get better gas mileage then I-4's because I-4's have a higher RPM operating speed then V-twins. Higher revs equals more gas burned.

I get about 38 mpg on my Ducati 748R in town and my 748R has a higher RPM operating speed then your 996 so even within twins this idea proves to make perfect logical sense. But then again a bigger motor is supposed to burn more gas too so perhaps the extra rpms more then makes up for the smaller combustion chamber. Just throwin some thoughts out there.

[acruhl]

There are a lot of wrong answers here...

Why hasn't anyone turned this into a torque vs. horsepower discussion, or an efficiency discusison? Because this is really what the answer is.

It doesn't have as much to do with engine size as it does efficiency at a given engine speed and how it's being operated.

The guy who was talking about "pumping up" his bike and getting better mileage has the real answer.