Author Topic: Actual mileage versus dash indicated  (Read 1345 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Brooke_Benfield_OR

  • Moped
  • **
  • Posts: 242
  • AREA: Northwest Area
  • COG#: 2185
  • Membership Level: Active
Re: Actual mileage versus dash indicated
« Reply #25 on: July 05, 2018, 03:21:48 pm »
I have kept a log book of every tank of fuel run through my Hyundai Sonata Hybrid showing what the computer claimed my fuel economy was and what I calculate from the odometer reading and gallons put into the tank. The dash computer routinely reports 6 - 8% MPG better than than the calculated value.

I usually fill up at the same pump and in Oregon, you are not allowed to pump your own gas into cars/pickups/etc nor can the attendant put more gas in after it clicks off. The state government is trying to prevent raw gas from spilling on the ground and polluting our beautiful place. I guess every little bit helps.

I would consider the consistency and accuracy of the fuel consumption numbers I get with my car to be about as good as can be gotten.

Oregon does allow motorcyclists and owners of pleasure craft (jet skis, boats) to pump their own gas. I try to cram as much fuel into the tank as I can but that takes a lot of time and patience to wait for the gas to settle down in out of the filler neck before you give her another short squirt.

So consider the scenario where you might get a really good fill followed by a not so good fill and you have reset the average fuel mileage number and trip meter after each fill. Under those circumstances the computer might give you more accurate results than what you would work out with a calculator.

Getting meaningful fuel economy numbers requires consistent fillups and keeping a log over multiple tanks of fuel. After gathering all the data then crunch the numbers for an average result to null out the tank to tank variances. I don't bother logging/calculating with my FJR but I do know the Hybrid typically gets better fuel economy around town than it does.

In case anybody wants to know:

Worst calculated = 32.96 MPG (winter with snow & ice on roads)
Best calculated = 48.58 MPG
Brooke Benfield  2013 FJR1300  COG #2185

Offline turbojoe78_MA

  • Street Cruiser
  • ****
  • Posts: 892
  • AREA: Northeast Area
  • COG#: 8645
  • Membership Level: Active
Re: Actual mileage versus dash indicated
« Reply #26 on: July 06, 2018, 11:25:19 am »
I have tracked every fill up on my bike from 0 miles out of the dealers lot, to the last fill up yesterday morning, at that time it was 18,248 miles.

I have reset my miles and mpg with every fill and track them on so I know exactly how many gallons I have used, and how many miles I have gone.

In the comments section I list how many miles I got till the low fuel warning came on, whether I made any changes to the bike or fuel used, and what the bike said at the time of fill up it had gotten for MPG's.

What I've noticed is when I get around 40 mpg (riding hard or in the cold weather) the bike will show anywhere from 42 to 45 mpg.  When I get 44 to 46 mpg, the bike shows 45 to 47 mpg.  When I'm up around 48 mpg the dash display shows 48 mpg.

My lowest mpg was riding in Jan / Feb of 2016 with 1612 miles on the bike, I got 31.64 mpg.
Best was riding in June of 2016 in N.H. and home to Mass with 5262 miles on bike, I got 50.68 mpg.

The number you see in my Fuelly badge bellow is an average of every mile tracked so far.  Last 3 months average is 45.3 mpg
1968 Honda 160 Scrambler,  Sold / 1979 Kawasaki SR 650, Traded in for next one,  1978 Kawasaki KZ 1000 Z1R Turbo Sold / 1986 Kawasaki ZX 1000R Ninja Sold / 1999 Kawasaki Concours Sold / 2014 Kawasaki Concours

Offline JDSCO

  • Road Bike
  • ***
  • Posts: 336
  • 2016 C14
  • AREA: Southwest Area
  • COG#: Forum
  • Membership Level: Forum Subscriber
Re: Actual mileage versus dash indicated
« Reply #27 on: July 10, 2018, 10:25:26 pm »
2016 C14, Full Syn, MR Flash, Delkevic 18", full suspension mod, new air filter, Mich PR4's, MRA Vario short and BK44 additive semi-annually.
One up only.
This is data I've collected since April, 2018.
This is something to compare.
I live at 9000' msl and tend to travel +-3000' from that.
As the outside air temp increases, the mileage improves.
I typically fuel up in the morning when oat is cool. Always RESET "AVERAGE MPG".
Fuel is more dense when its cold. This temp/density tends to slightly skew CALC averages.
My highest CALC average is 58.5mpg (91oct), one year ago, before I began comparing CALC to ECU average.
Lowest CALC Average is 40.5mpg, one year ago as well. Next nearest sample is 44.0mpg
Performance between 91 and 87 octane is negligible. However, Decel "popping" is apparent with 87oct, non existent with 91 oct.

TRIP    GAL     Calc    ECU             FUEL
160.0   3.438   46.54   48.30      NO ETHANOL 91oct
206.9   4.578   45.19   48.70      NO ETHANOL 91oct
121.0   2.687   45.03   49.30      NO ETHANOL 91oct
146.9   2.656   55.31   53.90      NO ETHANOL 91oct
192.9   4.063   47.48   51.00      NO ETHANOL 91oct
203.1   4.295   47.29   50.00      NO ETHANOL 91oct
177.0   2.974   59.52   54.40      91oct
180.6   4.000   45.15   50.30      91oct
182.5   3.288   55.50   55.50      91oct
248.2   4.312   57.56   55.60      91oct
194.7   4.064   47.91   53.20      87oct
215.6   3.633   59.34   56.80           87oct
252.7   4.969   50.86   53.20      NO ETHANOL 91oct
245.0   4.849   50.53   49.30      87oct LOW FUEL WARNING 240.2
246.5   4.445   55.46   55.30      NO ETHANOL 91oct
247.9   5.000   49.58   54.1         87oct LOW FUEL WARNING 248.0 3oz. BK44
222.6   4.073   54.65   56.2         87oct
« Last Edit: July 23, 2018, 09:44:13 pm by JDSCO »
"Always carry a knife with you, just in case there's cheesecake or you need to stab someone in the throat."
Gen James Mattis