Count
Registered user
Only an LC owner would have that on each post
I have to have this, on another thread Fanum went into one about how me not bothering to change the setting made me a C.u.n.t.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
LC Fuel Economy
- Thread starter Roberto
- Start date
I have to have this, on another thread Fanum went into one about how me not bothering to change the setting made me a C.u.n.t.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
Count
Registered user
All the LC usage right now is honing around, demos, running in and so on. I'd like to see things settle down a bit before I ignore MPG threads.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
phooey
Registered user
No one buys a new LC for the MPG it is bought because it has more HP and electronic suspension and LCD lights and cruise control and handles better and has radial calipers and you can fit sticky tyres on it. You tried one but can't afford it. So what is your point
As I said, I thought there were some improvements. I like the headlight arrangement, cruise control is in my opinion a plus.
My 1200adv has ESA which I find useful. I'm not knocking the more sophisticated system on the LC, after all I haven't ridden one ( or implied I have ).
I don't require more HP to enjoy my riding, I'm not on a racetrack and both my GSA's handle adequately for road use.
My dual purpose tyres are sticky enough already and the brakes work just fine.
My point is in the original post.
Sooty09
Registered user
[QUOTEIt's Yorkshire for fuck sakes. You would need GPS software to plan a 200 mile trip without passing a pump. ][/QUOTE]
Sorry Callard, over the last few years I have tried not to make derogatory comments about other members but this is such a stupid statement.
I live here , I ride here in Yorkshire. I have ridden in many remote areas and fuel is an issue, Stick to the main through routes and your OK if you fill up every opportunity, drive an alternative route like your BMW is supposed to be ridden and you are looking for fuel at about 180m (fuel light on) If you do not know the few stations available tough, you will run out or at very least spoil your day on a massive detour. Supermarkets have destroyed the local fuel stops and they are now few and fare between on a Sunday.
Sorry Callard, over the last few years I have tried not to make derogatory comments about other members but this is such a stupid statement.
I live here , I ride here in Yorkshire. I have ridden in many remote areas and fuel is an issue, Stick to the main through routes and your OK if you fill up every opportunity, drive an alternative route like your BMW is supposed to be ridden and you are looking for fuel at about 180m (fuel light on) If you do not know the few stations available tough, you will run out or at very least spoil your day on a massive detour. Supermarkets have destroyed the local fuel stops and they are now few and fare between on a Sunday.
I went to the launch at Jeffries in Shipley - just for a look as I can't afford one. I thought there were some improvements, practical and aesthetic over my '08 1200adv. There was no infoon whether mpg was any better on the new model and yes, I did ask. Like Sooty I do relatively high mileage, I don't have wads of cash so fuel economy matters to me. The 1200 gives significantly better MPG than the 1150 as well as more power. In this simplified but to me important comparison, the new bike seems to be a backward step ?
In fairness if I wanted a powerful bike I wouldn't be riding a GS, the 1150 makes quite enough horses for my needs, the 1200 if I'm in a sporty mood.
I'm not wishing to knock GS's of any vintage, I think they are great bikes. I don't see an improvement in the most fundamental areas that matter to me.
I believe that BMW's LC press info stated better fuel economy at lower speeds than the outgoing 1200 and the same at higher speeds.
As an aside for a totally pointless discussion, shouldn't the abbreviation be "WC"?
I'm not for one moment doubting that they're liquid cooled but last time I looked, oil was also a liquid.
I'm not for one moment doubting that they're liquid cooled but last time I looked, oil was also a liquid.
Let's give pointlessness a scale. Let's say it is out of ten, zero being pointless, ten being incredibly meaningful. This discussion may well merit only a 3 or a 4. On the other hand, your LC/WC contribution to it would be into minus several million territory on that particular scale.
phooey
Registered user
Next time I'm in Jeffries I'll remind them to adequately prepare their staff with the technical information on the new bike they are launching.
I appreciate mpg is user specific but looking at the posts on here it seems a fair bit thirstier than my 1150 or 1200. If I want the answer I'll have to ride one.
The point is your "like it is supposed to be ridden". How is a GS supposed to be ridden. If not being able to ride at least 200 miles without going near a fuel stop on a Sunday is your thing then great. I doubt that the inability to achieve that will slow sales of the LC. More important still to LC riders is can you get a good free trade Latte and Smoked Salmon Bagel for breakfast at any of the stops in Yorkshire
Bang on .. who gives a fu-k about miles to the gallon ... twist hard and wait for the light to come on ..put some more in .
Oh and before we get the "I buy a motorbike and don't think of the fuel economy, after all I'd have a Toyota Yaris if I needed to think of that..."
Ii don't know but it doesn't matter as long as you compare like with like.Is that like Audi's claimed fuel economy - measured on a rolling road?
Is that like Audi's claimed fuel economy - measured on a rolling road?
All economy figures for cars are measured on a rolling road.
NorthernBoy
Registered user
All economy figures for cars are measured on a rolling road.
That's not true, I measured mine out on the streets.
I'm probably not the only person who does it that way either...
Similar threads
