Motorcycles economical?

[R.I.D.E.]

My 65 Honda Super CUB did 170 mpg. To beat my Mirage takes a bike under 500 CC. I quit riding bikes after a couple of close calls. Don't feel like getting killed by a distracted clueless Moron.
Rode a bicycle almost 400 miles since 5/5/16.

[trollbait]

I took a quick look at scooters for commuting. Since part of my trip is on a highway, it needed to be able to do 70mph. Those that could do it got lower fuel economy, of course. On premium fuel, they didn't seem to do much better than the 2005 Prius I ended up getting.

[Draigflag]

It's far too much of a compromise if you ask me, if a car can offer 5 seats, comfort, practicality, entertainment and keep you safe, warm and dry and still get good fuel economy, the only reason I think to choose a bike over a car is that you can zip through stationary traffic and get where you're going slightly quicker.

[14Corolla]

Looking at the bikes on here. Gee.... I get about the same as a Harley Hog. Only thing I don't get...knowing I have a larger penis while riding a Hog.

[gregsfc]

Originally Posted by 14Corolla

Looking at the bikes on here. Gee.... I get about the same as a Harley Hog. Only thing I don't get...knowing I have a larger penis while riding a Hog.

Yes but there are some exceptions and this lends itself to the fact that when properly engineered, an mc can be at least fuel economical even when it's big and powerful enough to be stable on the highway. Below are some.

Honda CTX700N, CTX700, NC700X, NC700S (particularly the standard shift models) all have riders on this very site exceeding 70 mpg. Not hypermiling. Regular riders who just are not riding for sport or do not have these bikes loaded up with accessories (mostly commuters), because it's very hard to modify mc's or hypermile with all that drag with success unless one streamlines a bike, which is a huge commitment, but when an mc is streamlined, it can almost double mpg on the highway . The statistical mode for both the NC700X and CTX700 is 69, and considering the drag versus a car and considering this 670 cc mc versus most the average 650-800 cc bike, this is really good and proves that it can be done and sold under $7000.

BMW F650GS and other BMW variants with 650 cc. Full -size, mid-range bike some with statistical modes at or about 60.

BMW F800GS. ninety horsepower, 450 pound bike with a statistical mode in the mid fifties.

Virtually all manufacturers have a 250 cc, usually twin cylinder, that is state highway capable, that will get from 70-90 mpg as per Fuelly.

And then most impressively, the Zero model electrics, very high-performing, listed at 200+ mpg on the highway.

I also saw that recently someone entered a Suzuki Bergman 400 scooter in an mpg contest and came in 1st place for a stock vehicle in the contest at 80 mpg. No tricks allowed for the Vetter Challenges, so this is a real-world ride around 150 miles round trip.

Zero electric models. Even though I can't find them on here, they are listed at well over 200 mpg-e, highway, which means, if true, they can get six times the mpg of a comparable, average, gas-powered bike whereas a typical e-car might be listed at slightly more than double a comparable gas-powered car.

And of course there are the streamlined 250 cc's that can get from 125-170 mpg on a given day, round trip, proving that they can be at least fuel economical, and just because so many brands and models suck doesn't mean they have to if consumers demanded fuel efficiency as they do in autos and now even in pickups.

Now I have learned the hard way about the cost of ownership, as I did not research this in the beginning. Of particular concern is mc tires. It works like this... if you own a lighter bike that can actually save fuel, you can't put touring tires on it, because the bike is so light that those tires won't stick to the pavement for curves or braking. So the best one can get is sport touring, providing at most 9000 miles for the rear costing $180 and $100 to mount and balance; and 15000 miles for the front, costing $150 plus $100 to mount and balance. You can get cheaper tires, but then you wear them out quicker, or handling is sacrificed. If you have a heavy bike, then you can get touring tires lasting 20K or more, but then you're likely at 30 mpg. The good news is that from what I read technology is making these sport touring tires better all the time, so if someone had an experience on a lighter bike fifteen years ago, tires now stick better and take longer to wear out nowadays if the rider is diligent maintaining air pressure. Some bikes, like mine, have few other service worries. Just a valve clearance check every 16000. My oil filter is the same that is used in Honda cars for $6.

I know there is a motorcycle forum and I could have posted there, but I just wondered if folks knew there was this huge discrepancy between fuel-economical mc's (of which there are few choices) and all the rest, which are thirsty, and that there are ways to engineer economical motorcycles up to at least 800 cc with decent mileage on the highway even w/o streamlining, and that the reason we don't have them is that so few riders care . And if a manufacturer ever took up the project of streamlining, there would be little debate about how mc's and/or scooters could sip on fuel.