• Welcome, Guest! We hope you enjoy the excellent technical knowledge, event information and discussions that the BMW MOA forum provides. Some forum content will be hidden from you if you remain logged out. If you want to view all content, please click the 'Log in' button above and enter your BMW MOA username and password.

    If you are not an MOA member, why not take the time to join the club, so you can enjoy posting on the forum, the BMW Owners News magazine, and all of the discounts and benefits the BMW MOA offers?

MPG's and BMW?

Mine will do 45+ mpg @ 90 mph. At 70, I can do 50+

But much of our highway has a 75 mph speed limit. If I use any, 85-90 is the norm.
 
There is a lot of science in all this. Modern cars are developed specifically to get good gas mileage. They have transmissions that allow the engine to operate in the ideal efficiency zone of 2200 rpm, variable valve timing, direct fuel injection, turbochargers, and better aerodynamics. If motorcycles used similar technology they would be getting almost double the fuel mileage, just like today's cars compared to those 15 years ago. Motorcycles are still designed for performance not mileage. From what I read, Honda is preparing to break through with some bikes specifically designed for fuel economy in the "near" future with a full touring bike getting 70 mpg.

BMW already beats every other manufacturer on fuel economy with a comparable bike.
 
I normally get 50+ on trips, 2-up with luggage and wide range of speeds, mountains to freeway. Cold weather short trips to the store, high 40s. I would assume that if my bike had the new styles of tuperware, it would do much better, as my windshield must act much like a sail.
 
H-Ds get awesome mileage...bikerfish

I rented a 96 inch LowRider for a trip into the Kootenays a few years ago. I didn't have a chance to check the mileage, but I noticed it could comfortably run as low as 2,000 rpm in sixth, where owners are probably getting those good fuel numbers.

Do I look like I have the attitude? :D

Copy-of-november-08-077-M.jpg
 
Last edited:
It's sad that my Prius gets better mileage than my '03 RT.

I always used to ride the bike to save gas, but now it's the reverse.

One problem is engine braking on bikes is fairly strong. The Prius is made to coast and captures energy while coasting or braking.

To BMW's credit, the newer RT's get better mpg's than the older ones while giving more HP.

Why won't BMW make a diesel touring bike?

Harry
 
It's sad that my Prius gets better mileage than my '03 RT.

I always used to ride the bike to save gas, but now it's the reverse.

One problem is engine braking on bikes is fairly strong. The Prius is made to coast and captures energy while coasting or braking.

To BMW's credit, the newer RT's get better mpg's than the older ones while giving more HP.

Why won't BMW make a diesel touring bike?

Harry

The technology on the Prius is pretty impressive.........regenerative systems, a low drag coefficient (Cd) of ~0.25 (recent BMW 3-series Cd ~ 0.33) and an interior space larger than my 1989 525i. It covers miles quietly around town and on the highway.

Do I have a "desire" to drive it? Probably not. However, for most of my "required" driving, that doesn't require the truck, it's the vehicle of choice (when my wife lets me drive her car).
 
"Come on, motorcycling is just a fun hobby" - that's baloney for some of us. My Beemers have always served the purpose of basic transportation and urban commuting. When the weekend comes, it gets parked, as I've had enough of riding all week. They've never been a toy to me - they've been a useful tool. I get 48 average in winter, and 50 in the summer.
 
My BMWs both get in the 40s to 50s, good enough for me. In the past, I had a 23 mile rural commute to work and I rode my bike as much as possible, even on very many lousy weather days. Sure it saved me gas, but it simply felt good to ride.

Now, if the US bike market were good enough to support high mileage/lower power motorcycles, we'd have a wide variety of bikes getting 60 mpg and much higher even. Heck, a F800 BMW easily gets over 60mpg and it has great performance. If it were tuned for fuel economy I bet it would exceed 70 mpg.

But,....fuel efficient motorcycles don't sell in this country of cheap gas and wide expanses. Don't blame BMW for simply building what the majority of the market wants, recreational power!
 
Cars are adopting things like phased valve timing and direct injection, both of which can increase torque and HP while increasing MPG. They have also gone to more transmission gears + higher final gearing and some very lean mixtures at cruise. As an example, I have an '07 Corvette Z06 with 505 HP that gets 28 mpg on the highway. A 1967 Corvette 427 c.i. would be lucky to get half that or about 14 mpg on the same highway trip. Autos have made a lot of progress in 40 years.

Motorcycle efficiency hasn't improved as much since the 1960s like cars have. I think motorcycles eventually will adopt technologies that will increase the MPGs without sacrificing performance.
 
Last edited:
My BMWs both get in the 40s to 50s, good enough for me. In the past, I had a 23 mile rural commute to work and I rode my bike as much as possible, even on very many lousy weather days. Sure it saved me gas, but it simply felt good to ride.

Now, if the US bike market were good enough to support high mileage/lower power motorcycles, we'd have a wide variety of bikes getting 60 mpg and much higher even. Heck, a F800 BMW easily gets over 60mpg and it has great performance. If it were tuned for fuel economy I bet it would exceed 70 mpg.

But,....fuel efficient motorcycles don't sell in this country of cheap gas and wide expanses. Don't blame BMW for simply building what the majority of the market wants, recreational power!

A GS or the new tourer don't exactly scream aerodynamic or compact.......do they? Relative to power, we're well beyond what is needed for the job.
 
All hood, BUT!

My original statements stand! Why can't the biikes do better than soooooo many cars now. Answered in many ways here, I know. Got it:). Still looks bad in general, too many cars, even suvs do better than too many bikes??? Throw HP and everything else out, still looks bad a bike takes MORE gas than all these new fangled cages:(. I won't get over it easy...I really LIKE my 1200GSA, won't sell it for a few more years, but I can wish for a BIG BIKE gas sipper:)....Maybe downsizing will be my only option F650-800 class beemers! Randy:usa
 
My RT could use a 7th gear to lower highway RPMs by several hundred. That'd help a little.

Randy, I agree with what you're saying. It'll happen, someday, but it hasn't happened yet because the m/cycle industry isn't being pushed by customers or by the EPA for better mileage ... yet.
 
54 mpg avg (commuting, joy riding, etc) on my F8GS. have seen over 70, (across several tanks, measured by consumption/replacement, not OBC) by doing the speed limit (75mph) on the I-state. And that was fighting the ever-present winds of Wyoming.
me likey.
 
Here's the answer

My RT could use a 7th gear to lower highway RPMs by several hundred. That'd help a little.

Randy, I agree with what you're saying. It'll happen, someday, but it hasn't happened yet because the m/cycle industry isn't being pushed by customers or by the EPA for better mileage ... yet.

I get about 40 to 50 depending on speed...if I had to getting better mpg...I would just get a scooter. Getting over 70 on big cc bike won't happen in my life time.
 
It is too bad I cannot get 93 RON gas. On 91 RON my bike shorts fuel economy 5-10 mpg over that alone.
 
It is too bad I cannot get 93 RON gas. On 91 RON my bike shorts fuel economy 5-10 mpg over that alone.

These days the path to higher octane is more ethanol. THAT will hurt your mileage for sure. And, methinks you've wildly overestimated the mileage hit.
 
Cars are adopting things like phased valve timing and direct injection, both of which can increase torque and HP while increasing MPG. They have also gone to more transmission gears + higher final gearing and some very lean mixtures at cruise. As an example, I have an '07 Corvette Z06 with 505 HP that gets 28 mpg on the highway. A 1967 Corvette 427 c.i. would be lucky to get half that or about 14 mpg on the same highway trip. Autos have made a lot of progress in 40 years.

Motorcycle efficiency hasn't improved as much since the 1960s like cars have. I think motorcycles eventually will adopt technologies that will increase the MPGs without sacrificing performance.

But motorcycles have also been increasing size during the time along with power. Look even just at BMW. The "big" motor 40 years ago was 750cc. Now we have 1600cc. Nowadays the smallest we have is 650cc.

In cars, typically the reverse has happened. More cars today are smaller size engines than before. It stands to reason that fuel economy is improved as a result.

Total Motorcycle reports the 1972 R75/5 as 49.5 average MPG with a 50HP engine. I get about 46MPG from my R1200R, which is a much larger engine with 109HP. Considering it has double the power & an extra 30 pounds of weight, the "modern" R1200R is pretty good in economy considering. Looking at a power-equivalent bike, perhaps a G650GS, fuel economy on that is much better than the 49.5 from the 72 /5. I've seen many reports of 60-70MPG.

I think we have much better fuel economy in modern bikes, but our appetite for power makes it feel like we haven't seen much progress as most manufacturers are targeting the power market vs the economy market. Look at scooters & you'll see the reverse.
 
These days the path to higher octane is more ethanol. THAT will hurt your mileage for sure. And, methinks you've wildly overestimated the mileage hit.

Not estimated. I saw it all through Texas, and a few other states going from AZ to Tn in 2009. Using 93, I get much better fuel economy. My range is 250-300 miles not the 200 that I get on 91.
 
Back
Top