Should the government promote using Motorbikes?

[DownwardDog]

As regards fuel economy it is only small bikes that are economical. Larger bikes that are sold for their power are invariably no more fuel efficient than a medium sized car.

R1 + Akra race system + Power Commander III = 20-25mpg when I'm "making progress".

 

[weltweit]

R1 + Akra race system + Power Commander III = 20-25mpg when I'm "making progress".

thats awful

On my old GS750 I used to only get 100miles from a full tank !!

 

[agricola]

As regards fuel economy it is only small bikes that are economical. Larger bikes that are sold for their power are invariably no more fuel efficient than a medium sized car.

Well yes, but thats not really a fair comparison is it?

 

[weltweit]

Well yes, but thats not really a fair comparison is it?

How do you mean?

 

[Pingu]

Are larger engined motorbikes better than cars purely from fuel consumption point of view?

not the way I ride no...

 

[DownwardDog]

As regards fuel economy it is only small bikes that are economical. Larger bikes that are sold for their power are invariably no more fuel efficient than a medium sized car.

It's hard to generalise; the BMW 800cc parallel twins (F800, etc.) are very economical (better than 60mpg) due to highly advanced knock sensors and ignition/fuel management.

 

[Pingu]

R1 + Akra race system + Power Commander III = 20-25mpg when I'm "making progress".

on a good day i would get 19 from my RGV (mind you it was fucking fun to ride)

 

[agricola]

How do you mean?

Take DD's R1 for example - for a start, noone ever bought an R1 because they were economical, and secondly such bikes should be compared with sports cars, and not medium sized cars, given the amount of performance.

 

[Pingu]

tbh its a good thing that sports bikes only have a tank range of 110 or so. that way your back and wrists get a chance to recover whilst you refuel.

fuel type does make a difference on a bike too. good fuel (optimax etc) costs more but you get more miles from it

eta

The best motorcycles by MPG (miles per gallon), based on the user data:

KTM 2007 525 EXC-G (Average MPG: city - 115.00)
Kawasaki 2009 KX 85 Monster Energy (Average MPG: city - 100.00 highway - 62.00)
Kawasaki 2008 KLX110 (Average MPG: city - 100.00 highway - 120.00)
Buell 2009 XB12R (Average MPG: city - 100.00 highway - 100.00)
Yamaha 2009 YZF-R6 (Average MPG: city - 100.00 highway - 100.00)
Harley-Davidson 2006 XL 1200C Sportster 1200 Custom (Average MPG: city - 99.00 highway - 99.00)
Kawasaki 2008 KLX140 (Average MPG: city - 87.00 highway - 93.00)
UM 2007 V2C 250T (Average MPG: city - 85.00 highway - 92.00)
BMW 2008 F 800 ST (Average MPG: city - 80.50 highway - 90.25)
Honda 2004 Dream 50R (Average MPG: city - 80.00 highway - 100.00)
Suzuki 2007 GZ-250 (Average MPG: city - 80.00 highway - 65.00)
Yamaha 2009 V Star 1100 Custom (Average MPG: city - 80.00 highway - 80.00)
Yamaha 2008 V Star 250 (Average MPG: city - 78.38 highway - 78.38)
BMW 2009 G 650 X Country (Average MPG: city - 75.00 highway - 100.00)
Suzuki 2008 DR200SE (Average MPG: city - 74.67 highway - 67.67)


though i dont believe the R6s figures. I get 110-130 from a tank on mine and it holds more than a gallon

 

[gentlegreen]

The pushbike idea has a lot of merit but it may be hard for those that need to arrive at work fresh. Easy to get sweaty on a bike.

That is complete and utter bollocks.

There is sweat and there is sweat.

I actually like to arrive drenched in healthy sweat - it's part of my daily ablutions .. 3 minutes in the bathroom with two flannels and some shower gel and I'm fresher than any of my colleagues who have been in the traffic with excess adrenalin that does nothing except shorten their lives.
Quite often all I need to do is put on the clean tee shirt in my bag.

In the summer when I'm in tee shirt and shorts I don't sweat so much ... and I believe there are fancy clothes that help.

My own employer is starting to acknowledge the advantages of encouraging cycling - it's win win win win win ...

 

[agricola]

tbh its a good thing that sports bikes only have a tank range of 110 or so. that way your back and wrists get a chance to recover whilst you refuel.

fuel type does make a difference on a bike too. good fuel (optimax etc) costs more but you get more miles from it

eta

The best motorcycles by MPG (miles per gallon), based on the user data:

KTM 2007 525 EXC-G (Average MPG: city - 115.00)
Kawasaki 2009 KX 85 Monster Energy (Average MPG: city - 100.00 highway - 62.00)
Kawasaki 2008 KLX110 (Average MPG: city - 100.00 highway - 120.00)
Buell 2009 XB12R (Average MPG: city - 100.00 highway - 100.00)
Yamaha 2009 YZF-R6 (Average MPG: city - 100.00 highway - 100.00)
Harley-Davidson 2006 XL 1200C Sportster 1200 Custom (Average MPG: city - 99.00 highway - 99.00)
Kawasaki 2008 KLX140 (Average MPG: city - 87.00 highway - 93.00)
UM 2007 V2C 250T (Average MPG: city - 85.00 highway - 92.00)
BMW 2008 F 800 ST (Average MPG: city - 80.50 highway - 90.25)
Honda 2004 Dream 50R (Average MPG: city - 80.00 highway - 100.00)
Suzuki 2007 GZ-250 (Average MPG: city - 80.00 highway - 65.00)
Yamaha 2009 V Star 1100 Custom (Average MPG: city - 80.00 highway - 80.00)
Yamaha 2008 V Star 250 (Average MPG: city - 78.38 highway - 78.38)
BMW 2009 G 650 X Country (Average MPG: city - 75.00 highway - 100.00)
Suzuki 2008 DR200SE (Average MPG: city - 74.67 highway - 67.67)


though i dont believe the R6s figures. I get 110-130 from a tank on mine and it holds more than a gallon

You sure thats right? I cant believe a Harley of any description would be on that list.

 

[DownwardDog]

Take DD's R1 for example - for a start, noone ever bought an R1 because they were economical, and secondly such bikes should be compared with sports cars, and not medium sized cars, given the amount of performance.

One of the important things about bikes (as contrasted to cars) is that they can't run pre-heated cats so in order to get them through the Euro3 emissions test they have to run some pretty funky ECU maps. This makes them at lot less economical (and CO2 heavy but caring about that is so 2008) than they would otherwise be.

When I first started arsing about with my R1 I threw the catalytic convertor away and replaced the exhaust with Arrow road system, remapping as appropriate and the fuel consumption actually improved. Of course then I went in search of ultimate power...

 

[derf]

That is complete and utter bollocks.

There is sweat and there is sweat.

My own employer is starting to acknowledge the advantages of encouraging cycling - it's win win win win win ...

Depends on what's what. If your ride is 10 miles in a morning a push bike may not be a good idea either in time or the condition you arrive at work.

For short range stuff I agree they have a lot of advantages over any motorised transport.

I was more considering the advantages of small two wheeled transport over four but I didn't really make that very clear.
Still, the pushbike idea is a valid point.

The advantage a motor has over pedals is the fact you can arrive clean and fresh at your destination even after a long ride.

 

[gentlegreen]

The big problem is people having to live too far from where they work.

It would drive me to distraction ... luckily I have never needed to travel more than 5 miles - so I would be stark staring mad to choose any other form of transport.

 

[fogbat]

That is complete and utter bollocks.

There is sweat and there is sweat.

I actually like to arrive drenched in healthy sweat - it's part of my daily ablutions .. 3 minutes in the bathroom with two flannels and some shower gel and I'm fresher than any of my colleagues who have been in the traffic with excess adrenalin that does nothing except shorten their lives.
Quite often all I need to do is put on the clean tee shirt in my bag.

In the summer when I'm in tee shirt and shorts I don't sweat so much ... and I believe there are fancy clothes that help.

My own employer is starting to acknowledge the advantages of encouraging cycling - it's win win win win win ...

Plenty of workplaces with a shower these days, too...

 

[ViolentPanda]

As regards fuel economy it is only small bikes that are economical. Larger bikes that are sold for their power are invariably no more fuel efficient than a medium sized car.

With respect, balls.
Not only do you have better fuel efficency with, say, a 1000cc motorbike than a 1000cc car because of the weight factor, but also because of the bike having less drag, and a better power transmission system.

 

[gentlegreen]

, but also because of the bike having less drag,.

The drag coefficient of an unfaired motorcycle is pretty poor - or is that pro-rata ?

 

[ViolentPanda]

In towns and cities I agree.

A pushbike is still useless for someone like me, who can't actually pedal one due to disability

For people who live further out, a motorcycle could take the place of a car, especially a second car. The problem is creating a strategy that encourages this without encouraging people to switch from pushbikes or PT to motorcycling.

Or, if you keep a "runabout" for doing the shopping, have a motorbike/sidecar combination instead.

 

[ViolentPanda]

The drag coefficient of an unfaired motorcycle is pretty poor - or is that pro-rata ?

Mmmm, I was thinking along the lines that most sales of large bikes are of the "sports bike" type, which are faired, but I take your point. My old Honda CB250N got about an extra 8mpg once I stuck a fairing on it.

 

[editor]

Perhaps, but a 1000cc is probably a lot safer than a 125cc - its more stable, and more able to get away from dangerous situations (albeit its fast enough for the rider to get into a dangerous situation as well, but that can happen on 125s as well)..

I don't want to live in a world where people are encouraged to drive hugely powerful, gas-guzzling 1000cc motorbikes because they're somehow 'safer' than folks pootling along on sustainable little scooters.

Cyclists don't need to have legs capable of reaching 120mph in about 5 seconds to get around safely, so I'm not sure why you reckon motorcyclists do.

 

[Oswaldtwistle]

A pushbike is still useless for someone like me, who can't actually pedal one due to disability

Of course.


Don't answer this if you don't want to, but just out of interest does your disabilty allow you to ride a motorbike? You might want to keep half an eye on electric bicycles, which are coming on in leaps and bounds.

 

[editor]

A pushbike is still useless for someone like me, who can't actually pedal one due to disability

Obviously, but if the government is going to start promoting a mode of transport then it should be cycling because there's millions of able-bodied people out there who are more than capable of sometimes using a bike for short journeys instead of driving.

I certainly don't see any need to promote noisy, dangerous, fuel-guzzling superbikes either.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Of course.


Don't answer this if you don't want to, but just out of interest does your disabilty allow you to ride a motorbike? You might want to keep half an eye on electric bicycles, which are coming on in leaps and bounds.

It did allow me to, but nowadays I won't because of prescription medication (reflexes too slowed!), which wouldn't be fair to other road-users.

I was just trying to make the general point that disabled folk might want to cycle, but that cycling might not be practical for them.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Obviously, but if the government is going to start promoting a mode of transport then it should be cycling because there's millions of able-bodied people out there who are more than capable of sometimes using a bike for short journeys instead of driving.

Yeah, I agree, but there does need to be provision for (and consideration of) the needs of disabled people who might also want to contribute to reducing fuel use etc. That might mean electrically-assisted bikes, or it might mean motorbikes.

I certainly don't see any need to promote noisy, dangerous, fuel-guzzling superbikes either.

Well, no-one has said that "superbikes" per se should be promoted, just that large-engined ones should. Now, while I don't fully agree with that, I'm very much aware of the "horses for course" argument with reference to motorbikes. personally, if I were only going to use a motorbike around town, I'd want something around the 500cc mark, if only because I've a large amount of weight for the engine to deal with. If I were regularly using the motorway system for middle-distance commuting though, I'd want a "large engined" bike, simply because of efficiency and because you'd hammer the bollocks out of a 500cc bike on the motorway, whereas a 750-1000cc bike has more "headroom" to deal with sustained speed.

 

[gentlegreen]

if I were only going to use a motorbike around town, I'd want something around the 500cc mark, if only because I've a large amount of weight for the engine to deal with. .

The most useful motorcycle I ever owned was a Honda 50.

I would suggest that in a context where traffic calming measures are in place, and minor road speed limits corrected to 20mph, nothing bigger than a 125 is needed for general town work - certainly no more than 250cc.

I'm faster as a fat 50 year old riding a pushbike than much of the town traffic I encounter.

 

[spacemonkey]

I wish the scooter was primary mode of transport in my city. Maybe one day in the future when oil prices go through the roof.

I also want to see a massive expansion in those PAYG car schemes. I think that would take millions of people off the road.

 

[Oswaldtwistle]

Yeah, I agree, but there does need to be provision for (and consideration of) the needs of disabled people who might also want to contribute to reducing fuel use etc. That might mean electrically-assisted bikes, or it might mean motorbikes.

.... If I were regularly using the motorway system for middle-distance commuting though, I'd want a "large engined" bike, simply because of efficiency and because you'd hammer the bollocks out of a 500cc bike on the motorway, whereas a 750-1000cc bike has more "headroom" to deal with sustained speed.

The problem is, once you get much above 500cc, you aren't making much contribution to saving fuel. This review http://www.motorcyclecruiser.com/roadtests/honda_shadow_spirit_750/index.html claims* 47 mpg for a Honda 750, a 'classic' long distance bike.

While that's not gas guzzling, several cars will beat that comfortably, including a Fabia Greenline estate which would be very usable on the motorway. http://www.vcacarfueldata.org.uk/information/how-to-use-the-data-tables.asp#diesel

So I understand why people might choose to ride a large engined motorcycle, it doesn't make sense to use taxpayers money to actually promote their use.



* remeber to multiply US MPG by 1.2 to get UK figures. I'm not sure how comparable the MPG tests were

 

[pogofish]

You sure thats right? I cant believe a Harley of any description would be on that list.

Older design twins tend to be inherantly economic (unless tuned to fuck of course). True the quest for ultimate power has impacted on overall economy though. The manufacturers could easily deal with that one though by producing a few more commuter-tuned models that would combine day to day economy but still have a reasonable turn of speed when needed.

My own 650 bike does around 50-65 in town and 80+ MPG on the open road at typical legal speeds. This is one of the things that stops me replacing it just now - There are so few similarly economic machines on the market. Most of the current generation of midrange bikes have little if any economy advantage over a car.

I don't know if the government should be getting into promoting bikes - I'd expect them to fuck that idea-up royally TBH.

However, on a personal level I think that many more folk could be using two wheels and a well-chosen small-midrange machine can indeed be efficent and economic transport.

 

[Pingu]

You sure thats right? I cant believe a Harley of any description would be on that list.

dunno it was on the mcn site.

it does look pretty suspect to me though tbh

 

[Pingu]

to me the promotion would be more along the lines of road awareness etc than any eco grounds

most people i know who ride drive much better as a result because you have to read the road more on a bike and be more aware of your surroundings