Kawasaki starts promoting its bikes' MPG ratings - best = 70 mpg

[MetroMPG]

I had a Ninja 250. Should have gotten a Rebel though. Much more comfy looking. :P

[extragoode]

Why does the enduro get better mileage than the sport bike? Gearing? If so, why not get the better aero and regear? Were do you buy these 250s you guys are talking about? I was in the market for a bike for 6 months and couldn't a single 250 that was street legal, they were all dirt racers.

There's a bike in the garage where I park for work sometimes that has a small sport bike that looks a lot like the kawi 250R, but I've looked ALL over it and all it says on it is the roman numeral 3(III), the number 200 and an emblem that kinda looks like mistubishi, but not. I think it's some chinese brand. It's got a kick start and small engine, so I'm guessing it's 200cc I'm EXTREMELY curious what he gets for mpg.

[slipstreamer97]

250s are really hard to get right now, i called every honda and motorcycle dealer in the Sac area and was told they couldn't produce them fast enough to keep up with demands from the price of gas.

i found mine on craigslist from a guy who got a 40 mpg harley. been looking for more but people are realizing their value and asking ridiculous prices

[ldjessee00]

Hello,

The more motorcycle manufacturers doing this, the better in my opinion.

I have even seen some newer motorcycles that display the MPG. That is pretty cool.

LDJ

[Formula413]

I got my first bike a month and a half ago, it's a '92 Kawasaki Vulcan. 750cc V twin, and I am averaging 58 mpg driving mostly back roads at 40-50 mph. Has great power too. A friend of mine has a Honda CBR600 (crotch rocket) and gets about 40 mpg. I think the sport bikes are cammed to make power at high revs, which hurts their FE. Mine redlines at 8500 rpm, the CBR is more like 15K.

[MetroMPG]

The baby Ninja redlined @ 14k and I could get 70 mpg @ 50 mph. But much smaller motor of course, even though it was probably turning around 5-6k (?) at those speeds.

[Crono]

With the relative weight and comparative engine size of motorbikes (and especially scooters) you'd think we could see much much better numbers that these. I guess you can chalk most of it up to aerodynamics, from what I understand. I can't help but wonder what mileage my C3 would get with optimized aero. (In practical driving I get about 112mpg metric, or about 92mpg imperial, I believe.) Another thing my C3 could really use is "neutral". (IE I can't coast effectively as it is)

[MetroMPG]

What's 112mpg 'metric'?

[beatr911]

There are alot of factors with bikes not getting the numbers that it seems they should. Crono has it right that aero is not designed in, the bodywork is for looks and a little weather protection more than for slipperiness. Rumor is that the FIA (motorcycle racing rulemakers) will be relaxing the aerodynamic restrictions on race bikes so hopefully we'll see some trickledown to the mass marketing image and see sleeker bikes in the future.

Also engine design to target a broad, minimum BSFC is not the current desire for American market motorcycles. "We" want high power or high torque depending on if it's a sport bike or cruiser, better mileage than the SUV is only a side benefit.

Standardized fuel economy ratings for motorcycles is a start in the right direction. Making this number present in the buying decision will help the buyers make an informed decision.

We want an engine design/engine management/transmission/slippery body that is optimized for efficiency in real world driving. Oh and it has to look cool and have a certain practicality.

[Compaq888]

My buddy bought a Ninja 250 recently. He gets 50mpg driving on streets only.