fuel economy
 

I can never understand how tests on new motor bikes show such low economy !
eg ,,, mcn t700 = 54 mpg
I usually get 50% more !( 70 mpg + )
so why dont they give us two results ?
1 riding hard
2 riding normal / slow :scooter::scooter:

I usually get around 20-40% more than stated fuel consumption figures and put it down to testers riding flat out, also watch out for US mpg figures, their gallons are smaller than ours.

I usually get about 20% mpg more and 20% mph less than the testers. As they say with 600 singles, they do about 100mph on the test strip and 80mph everywhere else. Mpg is a bit more variable though and does depend on a whole load of factors. My CCM 600 does about 60mpg on a trip but that drops to about 50mpg if its loaded up with panniers etc. My little Suzuki 125 on a trip wanders up and down between 60mpg (loaded up with screen, luggage, me in Michelin Man winter clothing and wet roads) and 110mpg (lightly loaded on a sunny summer day).

How much hard data to give with road tests has been an issue with the press for many years. I get the feeling that most of the journalists would prefer to embellish the sizzle rather than write about the percentage of pork in the sausage. They're not that interested in droning up and down a test track for a day to get a 30mph fuel figure. There were magazines way back that did this (anyone remember Motorcycling Monthly) but the fact they didn't last long suggests nobody was interested in reading it. Motorcycles, for the most part anyway, are a leisure pursuit and who counts what they spend on their passions (except overlanders on a budget).

Also watch out for Irish mpg figures as their miles are longer
bier

When I'm on expenses if I fancy steak or a bottle of wine, hotel/restaurant prices don't worry me. I imagine the same applies to MCN with petrol and tyres.

What surprises me more is that the manufacturers marketing people don't complain.

To be honest I don't usually care about MPG, its range I look for. That said, weight puts me off too, so a MCN sized 300 mile tank won't make me want brand K over brand H either.

2020 CB500X does 68 mpg in my experience. That's 30-45th percentile on the Fuelly websites data chart suggesting their data is the better source than magazines.

Andy

Official fuel economy results are based on a fixed algorithm of testing, a mix of highway and city driving in specific conditions. Rather than giving you the exact number that YOU will get, they are designed to be "close enough" to reality, and then comparable between each other. So the T700 number is meant to give you an idea of what percentage it is of the fuel economy of a CB500X, in equivalent circumstances.

AnTyx is right. There is a set profile for emissions and fuel consumption testing. It may not be 100% realistic but it's close and it's consistent, so you should be able to compare 2 vehicles that have done the same test. How it performs out on the road is up to the rider of course. On my 790 I used to get high 60s mpg but just lately I've been doing "advanced riding" (mainly involving keeping strictly to speed limits) and I'm getting 73.