Quote:
Originally Posted by sendler
|
Great post! Thanks, and congratulations on the Honda with a tail!
Honda engineering much better represented in this ride than the one I attended two years ago where I kicked the other stock mc's tails with my CTX700 by 12 mpg, but none was against any modern,stock Honda in the small to medium range in that ride. Two 250s did really well in stock form. Like to have seen a Forza and a full streamlined Honda, but still impressive and should make a statement about how economical some Honda models are. Wish I could have attended this one to see if I could replicate around 100 mpg like I did in the 2014 event. Have not come close to that since, but that ride brings some high numbers every year, and they did in 2016 as well. If anyone thinks it's not valid, they'd be wrong though, because I carefully recorded and calculated just as I do at home for the 2014 ride, and my calculation put me at 96.9, which was about 14 beyond my best and 14 better than any tank since, yet the ride is round trip; has stop and go, but also some slow highway and higher speed interstate in it. The official results that year took me up to near 102, as they sort of took the median of everyone's trip meter, which I thought was not a good way to determine distance. The big difference for me had to be that I was tucking most of that ride, and if I had come to this one, I'd tuck again, but won't risk it back home commuting.
Electrics are amazing with respect to super-low energy use. So much more of a difference than one sees with comparing compact cars where the difference is more like 2.5 times better for average electric versus average spark ignition, but a typical stock mc around the 650 range might return 50-55, save Honda mcs', and the Zero S should easily return 200 driving equally. All three e-mc's returned over 300 mpg-e; curious about how they didn't finish one, two and three, but I'd have to figure some things out to see how 360 mpg-e would fair with my utility company + road tax. I just looked at my last bill and I'm at $.11 per KW/hr. and my guess is that at the rate I pay, the e-mcs' would have easily won here, though you won't see me go out and spend $16K on a mid-range mc and then thousands more for more batteries and charging power only because I'm impressed with the fuel economy. Have to respect the technology though; strange how the media and public seems not to care that a 100 mph-capable mc can get 300 mpg-e!