rocker59 Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 So I'm on my Colorado trip and, as usual, the MPG of my Nero Corsa is varying wildly... My running average during ownership has been around 38mpg... It's kind of frustrating because I always stop early, when I'd really like to keep riding. Lowest MPG of the trip has been on I-70 heading to Denver. We were running 80mph with a 20mph headwind and I had the bike loaded with three H+B bags plus camping gear strapped on the pillion... 31mpg on that tankfull !!! Worst I've ever logged on the Nero Corsa... Highest MPG was yesterday running US-50 and US-285 between Gunnison and Denver... Ready for this? 48.5mpg There was lots of 9,000 and 10,000 feet elevation on this tankfull... Unbelievable The bike only took 3.5 gallons to cover 170 miles... During the Colorado Classic, I planned my stops at about 160 miles just to be safe... As it turns out, I really didn't have to because the bike was returning 42mpg to 44mpg during the ride... I could have easily gone 200 miles per tank during the rally... I love it when it gets the good mpg up here in the Rockies... Problem is, I'm so used to it only getting somewhere in the 30s at home that I don't trust it.... I guess an accurate fuel gauge would be a nice thing... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotoguzzi Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 I guess an accurate fuel gauge would be a nice thing... AGREED! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slavomir Musilek (R.I.P.) Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 going slow, tank every 250km going wild, tank every 180km anything between these two is just fine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeBenGuzzi Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 and I got WAYYY better gas mileage when I had stock pipes and ECU, now that I got a PCIII and xover and slipons it dropped at least 5-10 depending on riding, also my new tank is like a half gallon-gallon smaller I used to get about 180 miles on 4 or so gallons of gas, average 40-45 mpg now I get about 120 on 3.5 or so or about 35mpg consistently. performance and noise came at a price but I don't care, its worth it. Average fuel consumption can be said to be 35 without too much argument across the board and like a car the harder of softer you ride it will effect fuel economy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gavo Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 get around 300ks at 120kph around 240 at 140kph good for about 30-40ks after lowfuel light comes on maybe more but don't want to walk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Monkey Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 That silly yellow light is vague indeed. It used to be a worry but I have no trouble rolling another 80 km after it begins it's show. When I first got the bike it had the full FBF treatment, lid off the airbox and a PCM111 utilizing an unknown map. Mileage was terrible! Light came on at 170km! I did a plug reading and found them so clean from unburnt fuel, soot hadn't been able to develop! Bizarre. I grabbed the laptop and took a look at the map. It was extra to the maps supplied by the PCM111 and resembled a dams floodgates during spring runoff right up to 14500rpm! Obviously not designed for the pushrod V-Twin. Mind you with that set up the accelleration surge was impressive above 5500rpm with intake noise like a mating call for Godzilla. All top no midrange. I left the FBF cleanable filter in, put the lid back on the airbox (minus the rubber snorkels), replaced the map with the one from the PCM111 for a stock bike (I'm running stock exhaust), had the TPS set/throttle bodies balanced and with the manual (button) adjustments was easily able to produce healthy readings on my plugs. The FBF big valves and high compression piston are still in but I now have the midrange back and plenty of honk up top (enough anyway, there is naturally a decrease but it's only noticeable above 200km/hr). Good news is now that yellow light doesn't come on till 240-280km and I have attained up to 350km out of a tank. Regularly 325km range sport touring all altitudes typical speed 120-150km/hour. If I am playing about 160-190km/hour then lights on around 210-220km. Experiment with your map or switch it, I have completely uncorked bikes in the past and when ridden mellow should return close to stock consumption rates. Naturally once the pace comes up those upgrades chew up fuel. I am happy to tour at a decent clip without sounding like I want to hump a dinosaur and still have good range and acceptable performance. Hope that helps, cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bocephus Posted June 26, 2009 Share Posted June 26, 2009 I recently swapped out my tires, intake boots and adjusted valves to .006 .010 and the first tank averaged 28 MPG. I had a very tight exhaust valve that apparently the last gent to set them overlooked when wrenching them down. They were previously set to .004 .006 from what I could tell and the performance gain has been significant not to mention the nice tappet sound is consistent finally. Now if I could just keep my hand out of it I'd probably get back to the 35 or so I was seeing before. Then again I didn't have mileage in mind whatsoever when I bought her so if she averages better than my truck I am doing my part for the greenies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GuzziHutch Posted July 1, 2009 Share Posted July 1, 2009 I don't understand why the V11 Lemans gets such bad mileage. My 850 Lemans and 1000S both get 10-15 MPG better and they are carburated bikes. Overall weight is pretty close on all 3 bikes. Sure, the V11 has slightly more displacement but not enough to account for the piss poor mileage. Plus the V11 is fuel injected. I thought fuel injection was supposed to be more efficient, not less. I should add that the V11 is faster, but not by very much. Bottom line is the slight performance advantage the V11 has over the 850 Lemans and the 1000S does not warrant nor explain the significantly poorer mileage the newer bike delivers. Any ideas? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skeeve Posted July 2, 2009 Share Posted July 2, 2009 Bottom line is the slight performance advantage the V11 has over the 850 Lemans and the 1000S does not warrant nor explain the significantly poorer mileage the newer bike delivers. Any ideas? More exhaust overlap on the V11 cam, leading to short-circuiting at low rpm. Getting that last 20% hp increase uses 80% of the fuel of the power already attained. The quotards have more conservative cam timing [for emissions reasons] and get considerably better mileage. Of course, their dual-plugging helps bunches too! You want to play, you have to pay... Anyway, that's my theory. I'm certain adjustments to the fueling could wring out some of that difference, but what's really required is a complete change to the combustion chamber and valve setup. I'm thinking a wedge head would work well in the Guzzi donk, but I don't have the wherewithal to experiment w/ that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GuzziHutch Posted July 2, 2009 Share Posted July 2, 2009 Thanks Skeeve. Now I wonder how the V11 passes emissions with all that valve overlap? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete roper Posted July 2, 2009 Share Posted July 2, 2009 V11 is in a much higher state of tune than the earlier bikes. 850 Lemans 55HP, 1000S (Big valve.) low sixties, V11, Mid seventies. Pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skeeve Posted July 3, 2009 Share Posted July 3, 2009 Thanks Skeeve. Now I wonder how the V11 passes emissions with all that valve overlap? It was homologated before the emissions restrictions got as, well, restrictive as they are today! Don't forget, the V11 got a catcon in the cans in some areas by '03? or so, to help it keep clean. Also, I suspect that Guzzi got cut some slack as a "boutique builder" with output of Seriously, this question of "where are my mpgs?" is derivative of past threads regarding what Guzzi needs to do to keep the old air-cooled ditch pump alive into the new millenium, and well, they did it: it's the new QV motor, and once Piaggio gets past all the bad press from the lifters going kerblooie and gets the parts QC up to snuff, I'm certain that in a few years we'll all be writing threads on 'how come it took them so long?..' Frankly, I don't know why Guzzi never continued w/ the 4v small block bikes either, once they'd finally solved all the teething problems w/ those, but that revisits the whole Ippogrifo thread. And all this talk of derivative threads reminds me of financial derivatives and their part in the GFC... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Field Posted July 3, 2009 Share Posted July 3, 2009 I normallty get 37mpg no matter how gently or violently I ride mine. On the trip to Colorado, I consistently saw 40-42mpg once we'd climbed up to the 5,000-11,000-foot altitudes common east of Idaho. And this held true even on the gas with 10 percent ethanol. Ran perfectly, too, even in the heat, despite having the brass sensor holder and thermal goo. Does that qualify as a miracle? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan M Posted July 3, 2009 Share Posted July 3, 2009 Just got 37 last Sunday on a 220 mile ride. Whole ride with in 600 ft of sea level. In the morning cruised at 70-80 into a stiff headwind. Mid day ran her very hard in the twisties. Afternoon 70-80 with slight tail wind then stop and go in 85F temp. Ran perfectly even with the taboo idea of sensing air temp with an air temp sensor and no lean hiccups at part throttle even though the temp was high and we were in traffic. Another miracle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ratchethack Posted July 3, 2009 Share Posted July 3, 2009 42.4 MPG last weekend on regular Palomar mountain climb loop, from ~500 ft. to 6,126 ft. Hard riding, full workout for throttle, tires, suspension and brakes. Despite limitations of "square wheels" and "bad valves and guides" , and an air temp sensor sensing air in place of the OE coolant temp sensor sensing air/thermo goop -- NO TRACE of former head temp sensor heat-soak hot lean-burn feedback loop symptoms when hauling down to idle FULLY HOT, and yet another ~10% improvement in MPG over OE sensor. Ambient temps from 70-90 F. Will miracles never cease?! The Palomar Mountain Loop ".. the most technical road in Southern California." "This ride has a “Riders’ Rating” of 10 out of 10." http://www.motorcycleroads.com/routes/West...t/CA/CA_6.shtml Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now