Re: [ST] July Rider

["Chris Harwood" <Chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

David

Computer fuel consumption systems have to be taken with a dose of
inside knowledge.  I hope I'm not preaching to the converted, but all
they do is measure the fuel going into the injectors (either by
measuring it out of the tank and measuring the return then subtracting),
or guessing, based on the performance of the injector when it was new. 
You then do the maths with that and the odometer feed from the front
wheel to get mpg or kpl or whatever.

If you always ride with the bike cold (like down to the shops and
back), the average can be abysmal.  If you want to sell the thing, just
reset the average reading before you hit an interstate/motorway when the
engine's hot, then cruise at 56mph on constant throttle and you might
get 60mpg?  Looks good to the buyer.

The most peculiar behaviour on trip computers is with the Range
function.  This tries to tell you how far you can go before you run dry.
 You drive like a nutter normally, then fill up and take your
grandmother up a motorway and the range just grows and grows and grows
until you're sure you're actually making petrol!  It can only calculate
on a PAST average if the reading is not to flash around all over the
place.

Chris Harwood
00 RS that ran dry as it hit the forecourt today

>>> david.funk@xxxxxxxxxxx 08/06/2005 16:42:50 >>>
An average of 36 mpg is very low, even for magazine testers.

I think a good mpg and a good range between gas stops is very important
in a sport touring bike. Good MPG is nice, but good range is required.
Sadly the Sprint ST has been headed the wrong direction for years. First
a smaller gas tank, then lower mpg, and now it sounds like out right bad
mpg.

My '00 ST averages around 47mpg. Even hard riding rarely cause the mpg
to fall below 44. And in the right conditions (leading a CHP parade down
HWY 5) will exceed 50 mpg.

David W. Funk
'00 Sprint ST
Pleasanton, CA


> The July issue of Rider just appeared in my mailbox - There's a full
test of 
> the new ST.  It's even on the cover!  They seem to like the bike and
think 
> it's an improvement over the previous generation.  A couple of
surprising 
> things though - They mention less wind protection then before and
their test 
> unit averaged only 36 mpg.  This is a pretty big difference from my
'01 - my 
> low fuel light usually comes on around 190 - 200 miles, their '05 had
the 
> light coming on 115 and 140 miles.  I guess the bumped up
displacement and 
> horsepower increase can account for some of that, but it still seems
pretty 
> low.
> 
> John in NJ
> '01 BRG ST
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Triumph Sprint ST/RS mailing list
> Send list posts to ST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> Change your list options at www.Triumphnet.com 
_______________________________________________
Triumph Sprint ST/RS mailing list
Send list posts to ST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
Change your list options at www.Triumphnet.com
_______________________________________________
Triumph Sprint ST/RS mailing list
Send list posts to ST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Change your list options at www.Triumphnet.com