Quote:
Originally Posted by sendler
The CTX700 and the CBR500R both show about the same fuel economy on fuelly. Although I would have to expect the 500R's have a larger number of people that ride more aggressively. The NC700 has a large sample size and shows a nice curve at around 65 mpgUS.
|
Since you brought up speculation on aggressive riding, just a couple of points and this is just speculation based on my perception of things.
#1 I don't have a perception on the profile of the typical 500 cc rider, but I don't see how it could be worse than the average CTX owner. From what I can tell there are hardly any CTX700 owners, at least the one's on the forum, that do anything close to conservative riding or have any interest in the great potential of that power train or their machines have at achieving great mpg. Over at that discussion board, there are all sorts of performance threads; riders discussing how they don't like to use the top gear; how they wish it had more top-end performance; how it performs best at or about 5000 RPM; how they're going to get a more sporty bike to supplement their CTXs; subjects I know nothing about, as I ride mine like a typical commuter would drive a car. If I start a thread over there about anything having to do with practicality, there will be no discussion, or there will be negative responses. Most don't want the CTX700 to be an economical bike.
Moreover, there is even a bigger group on that forum who are wealthier, older, often handicapped, and usually big bodies and they often ride 2 up. Lots of talk about all kinds of fuel-draining farkle and conveniences. These are usually those who owned big touring bikes when they were younger and they treat these bikes like they're big luxury bikes, at least as much as possible.
#2 Most CTX700s out there are automatic. I think that 65 mode is reflected in that number. Honda rates the DCT at 61 and 64 for the standard. I think they are both underrated, but that the straight shift may have more than a 3 mpg advantage. Nothing else explains my high numbers.
I got 75 or 76 commuting with the original tires. Now I'm at 77 and that's putting a little cold-weather riding in the average. I do not hypermile. Do not lug. Accelerate with traffic. I do not tuck. This is from tank-to-tank; not hwy only calculated. It is odometer corrected miles shown x .978. I'm using regular E10 gas. The bike is basically stock. The Madstad screen did not increase mpg. I'm smaller and lighter than the average man, and my speed is only slightly slower, but not below the speed limit. I achieved 96.9 by my own records at the AMA tucking, starting with a warm engine, and I've often achieved 81-85 on similar trips of my own only not tucking and starting cold. I don't see a 500 achieving that number in any variety on such a ride. A stock, standard CTX700 should get at least 73 when ridden within the law and ridden with FE in mind by the averaged sized person in warm weather, but hardly anyone owns one of these without saddle boxes, and I'd say near 80% is DCT. I can't know for sure, but I don't think that if I owned a CB500F, R, or X, I'd be getting the same mpg riding the same way and routes I'm riding now. If I owned a 250 or 300, I'd likely be achieving near 90 based on your early numbers, and the fact that my commute is slower than yours. I'm from 59-65 mph on state highways, five traffic lights, one small town, very rural. But I think the 670 cc in stock, standard transmission form is #2 in the current HPS list for both the CTX and likely the NCX as well. City mostly riding may flip them, but for alot of highway riding, those higher consistent revs wouldn't make up for the .99 cc advantage by my way of thinking.