Hi everyone. Been looking around but can't quite find a threat that explains a good deal about the fuel meter. I notice my fuel meter showing 4.9 to 5 liters to a 100. I wish that was true but when I calculate it, I come to 5.9 to the 100 km. it used to be more accurate, I did play with the co2 sensor adjustments once, but at the time, did not think it made a difference to my fuel reading. Would disconnecting the battery maybe reset this? Thanks in advance.
Fuel meter out.
- Thread starter Rudolph
- Start date
How is it running otherwise?
For ref, 5 : 100 = 47 mpg US
5.9:100 = 39.9 mpg US
For ref, 5 : 100 = 47 mpg US
5.9:100 = 39.9 mpg US
The bike runs well, Ive always been happy with it. Ive done 20000 km now and it pulls like a train. We are only 200meter above sea level, and my co sensors are on 2. I find it running smooth. It may be idling a little faster on cold for the first 20 or 30 seconds but then smooths right out to a slow idle. Its due now for an oil change and unifilter clean, never removed the fuel tank before....
Don in Lodi
Well-Known Member
Founding Member
2012 Site Supporter
2013 Site Supporter
2014 Site Supporter
Do you reset it every fill up? I've left the average alone for over a year, it's actually gotten pretty accurate. 39-40mpg isn't bad, really. Do they change over to a "winter fuel" ahhhh, "Summer Fuel" in your neighborhood?
The bike's fuel consumption display is hardly a precision instrument, but most of us find that it correlates fairly closely to hand-computed averages. Mine is slightly optimistic - about 3-4% - which seems to be commonplace on these things, for both bikes and cars. ("Optimistic" means it reads a higher number on a miles per gallon basis, or a lower number on a liter per 100KM basis.)
As others are alluding to, you really have to do some averaging over a few tanks to be able to make a statistically-valid comparison. For example, on any individual refueling, you might under or overfill the tank by a half-liter or more, which dramatically alters the hand-computed mileage for that tank. The only way to damp out these variations is to get some long-term averages.
If you've got good data to show the numbers drifting apart, I would think the next question is whether the bike is actually getting worse mileage or it is just an instrument problem.
- Mark
As others are alluding to, you really have to do some averaging over a few tanks to be able to make a statistically-valid comparison. For example, on any individual refueling, you might under or overfill the tank by a half-liter or more, which dramatically alters the hand-computed mileage for that tank. The only way to damp out these variations is to get some long-term averages.
If you've got good data to show the numbers drifting apart, I would think the next question is whether the bike is actually getting worse mileage or it is just an instrument problem.
- Mark