I get around 70 mpg on the NC700X.

70 miles per US gallon??

This bike has been achieving excellent MPG figures in road tests published in motorcycle magazines here in the UK; from memory, the NC700 just beat the BMW G650GS (single cyl, 650 cc) with a MPG figure of about 78 MPUKG (miles per UK gallon) for a range of types of road riding (in one particular mag).

I think it is of interest that the engine design is a parallel twin, which is growing in use by various manufacturers, particularly compared with the other main option for 2 cylinders, the V twin.
Honda have taken the 1400cc 4 cylinder "Jazz" (that's what it is called in the UK) car engine, "cut it in half", and used that for this bike.

Having said that, there is not much interest within these fora for very modern bikes; I've just looked back in the posts here in Honda tech for the past year.

__________________
Dave

Yes 70 mpg U.S. gallons.While I understand the NC700X is not a true "Adventure Bike" and certainly not meant for hardcore off-road use.I think it is more of a modern standard motorcycle,more along lines of the Triumph Bonneville and the Honda CB750.A bike that you can use for most anything.

The so-called "adventure bike" has not been too well defined - that's probably just as well against the day that the fad wanes and there are loads of them stacked up in the motorcycle dealerships (as is tending to happen now with sports/race replica bikes if you can believe what some folks in the trade are saying).
The twin cyl parallel has had renewed interest for a while with a few bike manufacturers (Kawa versys, Triumph x various models, BMW x various models) - much simpler in the design and cheaper to manufacture than a V twin.

__________________
Dave

Biggest problem i see is that you have to lift up the rear seat to fill up , which would become a pain if you carried your gear in a tailpack or similiar . the Mpg on it is nearer 80 mpg (uk) according to some mags .

I was despatching on one for about 5 months until last week when I've moved courier company. This was the 'S' model though. Work was quiet all last year, so I only racked up a fairly low mileage on the bike in that time, 16,000miles.

The fuel economy is good, but not the 'game changer' that various people and magazines have reckoned. This S model has a relatively small 14litre tank, and believe it's the same for the 'X' model. The most I could ever get out of that was 220miles. 200 miles would be a more realistic regular tank mileage.


The bike is slow. I think I read somewhere less than 60bhp. It also has a very low redline, equivalent to single cylinder trailbike, but without such overwhelming low end grunt. Riding into a headwind or slight hill, you will struggle to get it to 100mph, and when riding on the motorway it has no power to accelerate when overtaking, cruising at 70mph you would have to drop to 5th gear to speed up and it still is sluggish, definitely slower than an average family car.

As a utility bike it fares well, and the fake petrol tank storage thing would be real useful when commuting or using it as a run around. But if you're planning on using it for going on holiday (which is what 'touring' is, really?), I think you'd find the engine really disappointing. One of the least 'fun' engines I ever experienced.

__________________
UK to Mongolia 2009, on a DR350

I've owned my X model from new for 7 months and done 4,000 miles on it.
It has a 14 litre tank and I'm getting around 68 mpg in the uk and on a trip to S France I saw between 73 and 75 mpg.
Despite a lack of horsepower it more than keeps up with the traffic, cruises at 80/90mph, handles very well and has excellent brakes. Service intervals every 8,000 miles so makes a great touring/travel bike so long as your not hoping to do too much off road; it will handle gravel tracks and any road where a car can go but for anything more you'll wish you had a KLR
The only downside is it can be uncomfortable after 3 or 4 hours and struggles in top gear going uphill at 80mph

I noticed that feature as well; it is very pillion-unfriendly for a splash and dash refuel stop and a real PITA for anyone carrying luggage strapped across the pillion seat.
It's maybe not so bad if you want to encourage the wifey to get off the back of the bike and pay for the fuel

I surmise that you had no problems with Honda quality in that 16K miles.

A lot of the modern design of bikes are installing smaller fuel tanks against the fact that the engines are far more fuel efficient.
So, a 200 mile range is good enough for most circumstances/people.

I wouldn't use the word "slow" to summarise the characteristics of this bike that you list; it is different from some other bikes but, as an example, the Kawa Versys has a similar maximum power output with a very similar size of engine.
Perhaps a remap of the ECU would sort it for more sporting performance??

__________________
Dave