Fuel economy is terrible!!

Replace your airfilter with a normal filter.
You have a K&N filter?
It is a delicate work to clean and reoil the filter. To much oil and it is clogged.
 
Mileage is very much dependent on the amount of speeding up/slowing down that you do (and also, it appears, whether or not the screen is up high)

I get my best mileage on motorways at motorway speeds. On good flowing runs I will get between 9.8 and 10.0 m / litre. Thats about 44/45 mpg (UK gallons)

But lots of stops and starts or lots of bends and steep hills, lots of slowing down and then overtaking - it will drop below 9m/litre.
 
Last edited:
Sorry, but that is not good.
I ride almost always with my wife. So 170 kg togheter on the Pan.
Even here now on my holiday in Germany. Lots of mountains and start stops. And i ride not slow. I get 18 km out of 1 liter gasoline.
 
I changed the thermostat, gained what appears to be 3-4mpg. When I took the air filter cover off I don't recall disconnecting the IAT sensor plug. It's on my list for tomorrow to check that out. PO has a S ton of wiring to be cleaned up and I'm hoping I can find perhaps a loose/broken IAT wire.

From my time with dirt bikes I'd like to think my cleaning/oiling procedure is well enough to not saturate the filter. I don't suspect that to be a problem at this time.
 
Tire pressure is also important. I never run under 42 psi, measure when cold.
For the metric group on here, I get
14 kms/l city
18/kms/l highway

I ride with the wind screen fully extended
 
I'll admit to following this thread, initially and primarily for education and enlightenment, but now for curiosity and entertainment.

Although I'm an analytical, and record my gas and mileage at every fill-up (and always fill completely), I no longer chase after the very most miles I can squeeze from every drop of fuel.

After a handful of years of ownership, I consistently get 42mpg, and while not a hooligan, I usually ride toward the more "sport" side of sport touring.

With twice the mpgs i get in my car, and 17 to 25 times the smiles per mile, I'll just continue with scheduled maintenance and... enjoy the ride.
 
I hear you @Sadlsor , Being a new to me bike, and my first ST, I like to find "easy" issues before they become potentially more difficult. Fuel mileage is one of my first line defenses against potential issues in my experience. I'm not "chasing" the fuel mileage, but simply looking for problems that the previous PO may have overlooked or had became comfortable with.

and I'm running 42psi. I'm doing my best to bring my baseline mpg up above the 35 I'm seeing now. I also believe the cruise control may be affecting overall efficiencies also.
 
Yeah, I would be disappointed in 35mpg.

I've only got that low very rarely, like when hauling a trailer while hauling a$$.
 
On good flowing runs I will get between 9.8 and 10.0 km / litre. Thats about 44/45 mpg (UK gallons)
That is 45 Km per imperial gallon, not miles per gallon
After converting kilometres to miles you end up with 28 miles per imperial gallon, or about 23 miles per US gallon.
I wouldn't consider that very good for an ST1300 under any conditions.
 
That is 45 Km per imperial gallon, not miles per gallon
After converting kilometres to miles you end up with 28 miles per imperial gallon, or about 23 miles per US gallon.
I wouldn't consider that very good for an ST1300 under any conditions.
My readout is 9.8 - 10.0 m/litre not km/litre. So it is about 44/45 mpg. Thanks for pointing that out. My error.

I'll go back and correct that error in my post above. UK ST1300s can select to display miles or km - but that wasn't my error. I'd just been reading km. I thought miles. I typed km.
 
I can appreciate that when money matters fuel economy might be a concern but, on the flip side, I used to drive a 71 Challenger with a 383 mag which gratefully, I survived wrapping. Anyway, where was I going with all of that, oh yeah... 38 vs 42 mpg on a motorcycle that does about 13.5 seconds in the quarter mile. Who cares what the gas milage of the nearly 800 lb bike gets while it rips up to 100 plus miles an hour, Geronimo, eventually, maybe not today, but probably tomorrow a nice little Nissan Leaf, but for Fox Creek...maybe it's just me
 
Thanks mate... The thermostat and coolant temperature gauge seem to be fully and correctly functional. Coolant pump does not run when starting until warm, then I can hear it cut in and out as needed. Once it's up to three bars it stays there rock steady.
My temp gauge functioned well too, but while addressing a coolant leak (t-stat housing o-ring) I found the thermostat was stuck open (cold).
The only way to know for sure is to remove it for inspection and testing in a pot of hot water on the stove.
After replacing my bike now warms up quicker and returns good mpg numbers.
 
Who cares what the gas milage ......
Being aware of fuel consumption serves a purpose beyond financial. It is a good indication of the condition of the vehicle.
i.e. Suffering significantly higher fuel consumption than the average for that type of vehicle indicates a potential problem.

Monitoring fuel consumption and spotting changes is an early warning of a symptom that might otherwise go unnoticed until the problem becomes more serious.
 
My readout is 9.8 - 10.0 m/litre not km/litre. So it is about 44/45 mpg. Thanks for pointing that out. My error.

I'll go back and correct that error in my post above. UK ST1300s can select to display miles or km - but that wasn't my error. I'd just been reading km. I thought miles. I typed km.
The dash readout isn't very accurate but you know that. Carefully recording fuel use to mileage is the only reliable method and even then a few tanks is a minimum sample. There are apps for it or a good old fashioned notebook.
 
The dash readout isn't very accurate but you know that. Carefully recording fuel use to mileage is the only reliable method and even then a few tanks is a minimum sample. There are apps for it or a good old fashioned notebook.
Yeah - I don't make a permanent record, but I do reset the trip every time I fill up. So I can see from the fuel pump how many litres have gone in and from the trip what mileage that represents. A bit of approximate mental arithmetic - and the calculated value is always more than the displayed m/l values on the dash. Like - I could have got another 20 miles out of that tank. Which is good, 'cos if its getting marginal, there's a bit more left sloshing around the bottom of the tank that I haven't taken into account. If I start to average about 9.7 regularly - calculated at refill time - then its time to do the starter valves again.

It's worth mentioning here that there is a water drainage tube that takes rain water from around the filler cap, and routes it to an open rubber tube strapped behind the sump near the gear lever. Worth mentioning because that hole can attract muck - grits and smaller road debris, not to mention torrential downpours containing sand. It can get clogged part way down and it stays damp. And it rusts. The only metal bit of that tube is the bit that passes through the fuel - inside th tank. It emerges at the underside of the tank at the rear. Lift up the tank look backwards underneath, you will see three rubber tubes. One of them is the for the water drainage. The tube alwasy has water flowing down it when it rains. But when it stops, it will dry out. But not if there is a blockage. I frequently blast out any accumulated debris from that tube, plug the end and fill it with ACF 50 and let it stand for a while. Then drain it out.

If that tube rusts, it allows water to leak into the tank - but more crucially it allows fuel to seep into the rubber tube and escape more or less un-noticed.
 
Yeah - I don't make a permanent record, but I do reset the trip every time I fill up. So I can see from the fuel pump how many litres have gone in and from the trip what mileage that represents. A bit of approximate mental arithmetic - and the calculated value is always more than the displayed m/l values on the dash. Like - I could have got another 20 miles out of that tank. Which is good, 'cos if its getting marginal, there's a bit more left sloshing around the bottom of the tank that I haven't taken into account. If I start to average about 9.7 regularly - calculated at refill time - then its time to do the starter valves again.

It's worth mentioning here that there is a water drainage tube that takes rain water from around the filler cap, and routes it to an open rubber tube strapped behind the sump near the gear lever. Worth mentioning because that hole can attract muck - grits and smaller road debris, not to mention torrential downpours containing sand. It can get clogged part way down and it stays damp. And it rusts. The only metal bit of that tube is the bit that passes through the fuel - inside th tank. It emerges at the underside of the tank at the rear. Lift up the tank look backwards underneath, you will see three rubber tubes. One of them is the for the water drainage. The tube alwasy has water flowing down it when it rains. But when it stops, it will dry out. But not if there is a blockage. I frequently blast out any accumulated debris from that tube, plug the end and fill it with ACF 50 and let it stand for a while. Then drain it out.

If that tube rusts, it allows water to leak into the tank - but more crucially it allows fuel to seep into the rubber tube and escape more or less un-noticed.
How would a starter valve synch affect fuel mileage? It only meaningfully affects idle mixtures. As soon as the butterflies open off idle intake vacuum pulls a hundred fold more mixture past the tiny starter valve passages.
 
The dash readout isn't very accurate but you know that. Carefully recording fuel use to mileage is the only reliable method and even then a few tanks is a minimum sample. There are apps for it or a good old fashioned notebook.
I have often read that on this site but that has not been my experience. I have always found the on-board average fuel consumption read-out to be very accurate.

I bought my ST1300 new and have tracked every single tank of gas that it has burned since Km 0. At every fill up I record the fuel consumed and the distance ridden, and I do the math to calculate the actual fuel efficiency. Every spring when I put my ST1300 back on the road I zero the average fuel consumption meter reading so that I am starting fresh for that riding season. I never reset it again until I put the motorcycle away in the fall so that the average that it displays is the average fuel consumption for the entire distance ridden during that riding season. My display is in Km/L. The calculated fuel consumption of my ST1300 from day one, Km 0, has averaged 19.7 Km/L, which equates to 55.5 miles per imperial gallon and 46.2 miles per US gallon. My ST1300's on-board fuel consumption meter always displays an average of 19.X Km/L. It is usually within 0.5 Km/L or so of the calculated result. It is usually displays less than the calculated result but is close nonetheless.
 
I have often read that on this site but that has not been my experience. I have always found the on-board average fuel consumption read-out to be very accurate.

I bought my ST1300 new and have tracked every single tank of gas that it has burned since Km 0. At every fill up I record the fuel consumed and the distance ridden, and I do the math to calculate the actual fuel efficiency. Every spring when I put my ST1300 back on the road I zero the average fuel consumption meter reading so that I am starting fresh for that riding season. I never reset it again until I put the motorcycle away in the fall so that the average that it displays is the average fuel consumption for the entire distance ridden during that riding season. My display is in Km/L. The calculated fuel consumption of my ST1300 from day one, Km 0, has averaged 19.7 Km/L, which equates to 55.5 miles per imperial gallon and 46.2 miles per US gallon. My ST1300's on-board fuel consumption meter always displays an average of 19.X Km/L. It is usually within 0.5 Km/L or so of the calculated result. It is usually displays less than the calculated result but is close nonetheless.
I did not reset my mpg AVG on a regular basis, there’s no seasonal use for me, and my 2005 always showed 2-4 mpg difference between bike display and calculated fuel mpg. I constantly monitor actual miles ridden to odometer miles recorded and depending on the tire my ST’s odometers were about 1.8 miles - 2 miles optimistic over life of the tire. (Indicating 100 miles was actually 98.2 miles) I corrected this for actual distances for calculating mpg. I tracked my ST 15,xxx miles on the app Fuelly.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_4631.png
    IMG_4631.png
    332.8 KB · Views: 5
Combined with changing the thermostat which gave me a short term average gain of about 3mpg, I also put in the stock (cross referenced champion) plugs of appropriate heat range and gained what appears to be another 2mpg. I have a "longer" trip this weekend of about 1000 miles. I'll find out just how awesome I am at gaining some fuel efficiencies.

For reference, the PO had CR9EIX installed when I bought the bike. I'm thinking a sync could be some good PM since no service records came with the bike.
 
Back
Top Bottom