Victory Motorcycle Forum banner

1 - 20 of 45 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
108 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
48 mpg from calculator after 3 tanks of gas. I didn't expect it. Before that it was between 41-44. Same type of riding, conditions EXCEPT it is hotter, and I wonder if summer gas formulation might increase some? I did not notice any other difference other than maybe a slight decrease in rpm on a given gear/speed. It's a keeper. Thanks to the forum for the posting of that procedure.

maurice
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,071 Posts
48 mpg from calculator after 3 tanks of gas. I didn't expect it. Before that it was between 41-44. Same type of riding, conditions EXCEPT it is hotter, and I wonder if summer gas formulation might increase some? I did not notice any other difference other than maybe a slight decrease in rpm on a given gear/speed. It's a keeper. Thanks to the forum for the posting of that procedure.

maurice
no change noticed.still 44-5. my calculations, not the bikes.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,646 Posts
? I did not notice any other difference other than maybe a slight decrease in rpm on a given gear/speed. It's a keeper.
maurice

UUUMMMMMMM...........Engine speed and wheel speed are affected only by gearing. No matter what is done to an engine control system; a specific speed will be reached at a specific engine RPM
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
554 Posts
What would give the impression of that maurice is that if the fueling improves and the motor is making more power then it requires less throttle to attain a given speed. 65 would still be 2500 (approximately) no matter what but it may take 1/8 less throttle turn to get there.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,632 Posts
48 mpg from calculator after 3 tanks of gas. I didn't expect it. Before that it was between 41-44. Same type of riding, conditions EXCEPT it is hotter, and I wonder if summer gas formulation might increase some? I did not notice any other difference other than maybe a slight decrease in rpm on a given gear/speed. It's a keeper. Thanks to the forum for the posting of that procedure.

maurice
You get better mileage in the heat because the air is less dense and thereby easier to cut through.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
147 Posts
Wow, I'm puzzled why you would do that. The whole point of the o2 sensor is feedback to the controller for fuel/air ratio. Run it too lean and you will start making a mess of your motor. Might take months to trash it, mike take minutes. But yes, your mileage will get better. :crzy:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,632 Posts
Fixed that for you. Lower air density means less fuel needed. Motor makes less power too.
Engine will make less absolute power, but if all else were equal, it would still need X amount of power to propel Y amount of mass at Z speed. All else is not equal however. The less dense air requires less force to move through. The equation is something like F = kv^2 where k is the viscosity of the fluid (in our case air) and v is the velocity.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,181 Posts
Normally O2 sensor fault in a car goes to a RICH fault mode. So you are burning more fuel. Lean burn does not make sense. O2 sensors and cats is to help pollution and global warming. Now you are starting to smell like a stinky Harley. LOL:ltr:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
147 Posts
Engine will make less absolute power, but if all else were equal, it would still need X amount of power to propel Y amount of mass at Z speed. All else is not equal however. The less dense air requires less force to move through. The equation is something like F = kv^2 where k is the viscosity of the fluid (in our case air) and v is the velocity.
Interesting thought and I wonder if the impact is that great.

If the formula for fuel consumed moving a vehicle through the atmosphere was that straight forward, we could all go heavy on the throttle and have no impact on mpg.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,632 Posts
Interesting thought and I wonder if the impact is that great.

If the formula for fuel consumed moving a vehicle through the atmosphere was that straight forward, we could all go heavy on the throttle and have no impact on mpg.
If you rode your bike in a vacuum, you'd get great mileage. How you would get your engine to burn fuel is your problem.:D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
37 Posts
I will be installed Ness Big Honkers...Ness Big Shot and High flow air filter along with removing the strip.

Should I keep the O2's hooked up then?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
108 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
What would give the impression of that maurice is that if the fueling improves and the motor is making more power then it requires less throttle to attain a given speed. 65 would still be 2500 (approximately) no matter what but it may take 1/8 less throttle turn to get there.
That might be it. thanks. Will check again today as I remember before either 70 or 80 it showed exactly 3000 rpm. Not that important to me though.

maurice
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
368 Posts
First full tank, all highway riding 55 - 70 mph with sensor's disconnected was 44.26 mpg.
Since I'd bought it new, same scenario was about 41 mpg with sensors connected.

Another thing I was watching, since I didn't know if the mileage would suffer, was my low fuel light usually starts to blink around 125 miles. I filled up at 135 miles and no sign of the low fuel light.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
520 Posts
Wow, I'm puzzled why you would do that. The whole point of the o2 sensor is feedback to the controller for fuel/air ratio. Run it too lean and you will start making a mess of your motor. Might take months to trash it, mike take minutes. But yes, your mileage will get better. :crzy:
Actually the Vic ECM goes to open loop mode and runs a Richer map, he only thinks he's getting better mileage. If you're getting better mileage, you're simply not twisting the grip as hard.
 
1 - 20 of 45 Posts
Top