R1200GS Adventure MPG

It's Saturday, so let's see if we can bring some order into the OP's life and answer his question from the assorted replies.

48 to 55 (we'll call that 51)

50 to 55 (we'll call that 52)

52 (we'll ignore the Hilltop mapping figure)

50 (For the purposes of this exercise, we'll ignore the enthusiastic 42 but hats off, all the same)

52

47

54.2 (we'll ignore the decimal but thanks for sharing) 54

49.9 (see comment above) 50

50

44 to 46 (the man's a regular rocket) 45

49.5 (50 will do) 50

Between 49 and 52. We'll settle on 51, thanks.

47 to 48. Let's say 48, mate.

48 to 51 to 53. Blimey, people make it really hard, let's say 51

This lot gives:

51, 48, 51, 50, 45, 50, 50, 54, 47, 52, 50, 52, 52, 51

Now, if I had payed more attention in maths lessons at school I would remember more about modes, means, medians and ranges, enabling a proper, thorough statistical analysis of the excellent data. But (shame on me) I didn't, so let's go for the old and trusted, lick of the finger and hold it in the air method...... And go for..... Big roll on the drums......

50 mpg, but sort of 51 to 52'ish with the odd occasional excursion into the higher end of the 40's.

I hope that is of help to the OP and to anyone else who wonders about these things to decimal points.

It does though indicate that the 10 miles per litre rule of thumb law fails, as 50 mpg is 13 (and a touch) miles per litre. I can maybe explain this away by suggesting that bods who collect such data (to the decimal point) are very sloooooooooow......but maybe they are smoooooooth, too?
 
Excellent post Wapping. 10 miles per liter has never let me down once I figured that I will average that give or take depending on the mood. 300 miles on a tank before I look to fill the bike with fresh happy juice. I recon that if you are careful with the throttle you can ride from Caen via Calais to Bedford on one tankful. 346 miles if you go via the A1 from the Ibis to my front door.
 
Stick with 10 miles per litre, you'll never go too far wrong....

But many bods have no idea how large their tank is, though they'll know their MPG, with eye watering accuracy. Feck all good if they don't know their bike's tank's capacity in gallons or for that matter litres.
 
But many bods have no idea how large their tank is, though they'll know their MPG, with eye watering accuracy. Feck all good if they don't know their bike's tank's capacity in gallons or for that matter litres.

That's me that is.
 
Just to throw a spanner in the works, I recently completed a 5000m trek around eastern europe with my buddy. He was on a 2008 standard gs and me on my 2012 adv remapped at hilltop. Both loaded to the hilt. His overall average - 63. Mine 61 .;)
 
It's Saturday, so let's see if we can bring some order into the OP's life and answer his question from the assorted replies.

48 to 55 (we'll call that 51)

50 to 55 (we'll call that 52)

52 (we'll ignore the Hilltop mapping figure)

50 (For the purposes of this exercise, we'll ignore the enthusiastic 42 but hats off, all the same)

52

47

54.2 (we'll ignore the decimal but thanks for sharing) 54

49.9 (see comment above) 50

50

44 to 46 (the man's a regular rocket) 45

49.5 (50 will do) 50

Between 49 and 52. We'll settle on 51, thanks.

47 to 48. Let's say 48, mate.

48 to 51 to 53. Blimey, people make it really hard, let's say 51

This lot gives:

51, 48, 51, 50, 45, 50, 50, 54, 47, 52, 50, 52, 52, 51

Now, if I had payed more attention in maths lessons at school I would remember more about modes, means, medians and ranges, enabling a proper, thorough statistical analysis of the excellent data. But (shame on me) I didn't, so let's go for the old and trusted, lick of the finger and hold it in the air method...... And go for..... Big roll on the drums......

50 mpg, but sort of 51 to 52'ish with the odd occasional excursion into the higher end of the 40's.

I hope that is of help to the OP and to anyone else who wonders about these things to decimal points.

It does though indicate that the 10 miles per litre rule of thumb law fails, as 50 mpg is 13 (and a touch) miles per litre. I can maybe explain this away by suggesting that bods who collect such data (to the decimal point) are very sloooooooooow......but maybe they are smoooooooth, too?

Nice report - I too assume 10miles per litre when I've filled up and work on the trip meter - dare I say as yet I've not had to push the old girl!!

Oh dear - what have I just said..
 
I factor on 10miles per ltr on both of my Buells as well as the GS but like wapping says you need to know the amount of fuel you started with :-)
 
Stick with 10 miles per litre, you'll never go too far wrong....

But many bods have no idea how large their tank is, though they'll know their MPG, with eye watering accuracy. Feck all good if they don't know their bike's tank's capacity in gallons or for that matter litres.

I think I see where you are coming from, but at the end of the day the only thing that is really relevant is how many miles you can get from a tank.

My reserve light has never come on, but 32 litres will give me, on average, 320 miles.
That is with the pooter saying about 50mpg.
I don't really care if the maths adds up, or not, so long as I know when to fill up :)

So, at 300 miles I start thinking of filling up.
 
I think I see where you are coming from, but at the end of the day the only thing that is really relevant is how many miles you can get from a tank.

My reserve light has never come on, but 32 litres will give me, on average, 320 miles.
That is with the pooter saying about 50mpg.
I don't really care if the maths adds up, or not, so long as I know when to fill up :)

So, at 300 miles I start thinking of filling up.

...and your figures should tell you that your 320 mile average for 32 litres equates to 10 litres/mile .... which is what Wapping said. :nenau
 
...and your figures should tell you that your 320 mile average for 32 litres equates to 10 litres/mile .... which is what Wapping said. :nenau

Sorry, was referring to his last sentence.
Should have trimmed the quote :)
 
Just remember to click on the UK button otherwise the readings is in US gallons.
 
My apologies for asking this question as I'm sure it's been covered before but my search function doesn't seem to be working :mad:

I'm looking for some user feedback regarding how many miles per gallon your getting from your R1200GSA's

I currently own an F800GS and I'm interested to see how big the difference is between the two.

Thanks in advance.

Hi, I went from a F800Gs at average 54mpg over approx 2k miles used on a mixture of roads, ie; town, country & motorway..
Changed to at 2011 twin cam GSA & over similar route & similar pace was getting 47mpg average. (Over 52mpg if nursed)
So, 7mpg difference if budgeting for fuel used. (It's so nice to see over 50mpg on these f800 twins)
 
My apologies for asking this question as I'm sure it's been covered before but my search function doesn't seem to be working :mad:

I'm looking for some user feedback regarding how many miles per gallon your getting from your R1200GSA's

I currently own an F800GS and I'm interested to see how big the difference is between the two.

Thanks in advance.

The 1200 gsa will happily return over 500 miles to a tank. Mine's an 08 with 60,000 on it and that is commuting Leeds to Harrogate on a variety of roads. Your mpg will mostly be affected by your riding style. If you give it big handfulls of throttle everywhere you will get a lot less before you need to refill.
I had an F800 on test a few weeks back and it was thirstier than the 1200 for the same degree of progress, something like 5 - 10 mpg.

The benefit of the big engine is you don't need to work it anything like as hard as the 800.

HTH.
 
Your mpg will mostly be affected by your riding style. If you give it big handfulls of throttle everywhere you will get a lot less before you need to refill.
I had an F800 on test a few weeks back and it was thirstier than the 1200 for the same degree of progress, something like 5 - 10 mpg.

The benefit of the big engine is you don't need to work it anything like as hard as the 800.

HTH.[/QUOTE]

Post this in the 800 twin section or to anyone who's had one & I think they will disagree with you..
I would recall a very spirited ride, (flat out) headwind with full set of extended panniers two up & still got 48mpg.
Now.. I don't know how u ride your GSA but if I cane mine I can get it down to 40mpg (Germany officer.!)
Never would I say the f800 could ever be thirstier than the 1200GSA
 
Post this in the 800 twin section or to anyone who's had one & I think they will disagree with you..
I would recall a very spirited ride, (flat out) headwind with full set of extended panniers two up & still got 48mpg.
Now.. I don't know how u ride your GSA but if I cane mine I can get it down to 40mpg (Germany officer.!)
Never would I say the f800 could ever be thirstier than the 1200GSA

You can't really compare our posts. I have simply said that my riding style which is consistent across both bikes returned the figures given. Subjective perhaps, but the 800 was decidedly buzzy compared to the relaxed delivery of the 1200.

Seriously, I would like to see that.

You got a couple of weeks off you are more than welcome to follow me to work and back ( 22 miles each way ). Alternatively you could just adapt your riding style to deliver it for yourself.

:beerjug:
 
The 1200 gsa will happily return over 500 miles to a tank.

Really? Have you got your clock set to kilometres by any chance?

The 800 is for sure more economic than the 1200 as is the LC 1200.
 


Back
Top Bottom