Yamaha Starbike Forum banner

1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,620 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I know we've all spent time talking about how many MPG our bikes get...but i have been looking at a comparison (that i don't find in the threads). I'm at:

http://www.starmotorcycles.com/star/products/modelspeccompare/598/1958/0/0/compare.aspx

I see the Raod Star at 102ci and the Roadliner at 113ci and under the same sircumstances the RL gets 42mpg and the RS gets 36mpg? WTF?

Would the difference in compression make that much of a difference?

I'm hoping to do some test riding soon, and if all works out well for me i may be parking another bike next to V-Star 1100:D
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,741 Posts
RL gets 42mpg and the RS gets 36mpg? WTF?
I suspect the Black Cherry Liners' aluminum frame and better engine design result in a more efficient power-to-weight ratio, even though the Liners are about 50lb heavier overall. The 113 cu gets the mass rolling more quickly than the 102 cu.

(Disclaimer: blue/black/gray liners perform more on a par with the diminutive 102cu bikes--or even mopeds...:D)

But the real secret is the aerodynamically designed Liner taillights...;)
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,088 Posts
The 102cu.in. in the 620 pound road star warrior was impressive but I was getting slightly less MPG than the 113 c.i. Strato. I'd be interested if I could catch the warrior in a 1/4 mile sprint, I'm pretty certain the strato would be in the lead beyond that. I think the warrior's MPG was hurt a little bit due to the BAK and bumping up the fuel mixture above the lean factory settings.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,620 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Are the transmissions/gear ratios the same? I'm sure compression has something to do with it (as fulltilt1 mentioned in another thread) I just didn't think it we be that pronounced.

...But the real secret is the aerodynamically designed Liner taillights... ?

Would that be along the same lines as blue bikes make you a better snipe hunter?:eek:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
451 Posts
I think i have been lied to. I thought the roadliner got like 29mpg and the 1300 star got about 49. I think i just decided what i will upgrade to later on :)
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,741 Posts
...But the real secret is the aerodynamically designed Liner taillights... ?

Would that be along the same lines as blue bikes make you a better snipe hunter?:eek:

Dunno. My experience with blue glaciers is limited; you'd have to ask Wart about that:)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16 Posts
Without knowing what conditions the bikes were tested under I've always taken manufacturer's MPG claims with a grain of salt. My Road Star (2009 EFI) has been getting 45-48mpg consistently which is actually a bit better than my previous V-Star 1100 (43mpg after pipes and jets). From comments I've read on the Road Star Clinic these numbers seem to be pretty common, not sure how Yamaha came up with 36mpg.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
626 Posts
More power engine works less. I was out ridding with a buddy today he has a KLR650 I filled up my Vstar it took 13 bux his took 20 to go the same distance as me. When I owned the R1 and another buddy had the R6 same scenario.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
79 Posts
Just to put another point on the subject of "power = poor fuel mileage"....

I have a 1969 Ford F100 'Ranger' truck. It's a swb with a 4sp toploader transmission (non over-drive). Under the hood hides a mildly overbuilt 428. The truck get's 21 in town and nearly 29 on the highway (If I act my age).

That's quite a bit better than these trucks got stock, even with a 240 six and 3sp + OD.

HOW???

She's built for torque! She (was, this was before the rear gear swap) put 578 HP down at the rear wheel on the dyno..... but 767 ftlbs of torque.

So how do you get mileage outta that???

If it's built for torque, gear it for torque! It's now got a 2.0:1 rear gear and the skinny pedal is for goofing off. I don't need to come close to revs to drive, just to play and well, I don't do that so much on the open road as I once did.

On the other hand, if I had an engine built for HP and low Tq, I'd have to run a taller gear set (lower ratio) to reach the useful "power band" of the engine for standard driving.

Sorry for the lecture, just can't believe how much common knowledge is lost to younger generations these days.

Another myth? ETOH runs fine and produces plenty of power (just turn the timing up to take advantage of it). LOL guess what line of "work" I come from. [DON'T GO RUINING YOUR CARBS, IT'S A 'JOKE']
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
44 Posts
Dead horse Thumping... Well i see you guys talking but what confuzzles me is that yall don't mention alot of other factors. Like; wind, gasoline vs. ethanhol, the rider them selves, but hey i am just the new kid on the block and are still wet and green behind my ears. But this is my story and i am sticking to it.
1 month into riding and i have accumulated 1200 miles, i ride every day to work 40 mile trip. When i first got my bike, a pearl white 1300 Vstar 2009(which are the fastest) i got close to 39/40 mpg. But hey i was just jamming gears, now that i am getting more fond to riding and are learning when and how to ease the bike into gears, i find i am getting 45 mpg. Also learning to take routes with less redlights seems to help also. Highest speed on average is about 50 mph and i can put it into 5 gear and it lopes right along. But one week we had heavy winds and i could feel the bikes windshield catching wind and pushing wind and my mileage dropped to 42. I also find that running real gas i get better mileage, i pay 3.70 for real gas and get 45 mpg or pay 3.50 for corn squezzings and get 40. I stick to the real gas for the bike and fill my flask with the corn squezzings. But I honestly feel i can and will get 49 mpg, stock under ideal circumstances and once i become a pro rider like the senior members here... LOL
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21 Posts
Widow Maker - you forgot elevation.

Just for the record I have an 1100 Classic with slip-ons being the only modification. I consistently get just under 50 mpg riding two lane roads at about 60 mph.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
58 Posts
Fuel mileage

The wifes new 950T has been getting some impressive mileage numbers. With 900 miles on it, the worst tank was 56mpg and the best has been over 62. Running the 2 lanes and cruising at 55-60mph, it will consistantly get better than 60 ( 3 trips of 200+ miles). Our last trip up to Wisconsin, we got stuck in some nasty road construction. Creeping thru 5 miles of tar and what Wisconsin calls "chip" ( looked more like obsidian with incredibly sharp edges) really put the whammy on us, but still got 56mpg average for that run! So far I'm impressed so we'll have to see what we get tomorrow when we run down to New Salem..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,620 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
Widow Maker most of my riding is between sea level and 1000 feet where i'm at in western Washington State with a lot of up-n-down hills. I read somebody else's 1100 @ 3000+ feet (i think in Colorado) was getting mpg in the upper forties, close to 50mpg.

As far as my riding 'style' i usually like to just cruise along at a moderate stride. Once in a while i may twist my wrist a little to get past someone or get away from some cagers that forgot their meds that morning....or maybe i forgot my meds that morning....whatever.

Life moves on....
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top