MPG OR GPM?

[BIG LEE]

I rode my Valk from Virginia down to Houston and back.  Interstates the entire way at 75+ mph.  Got only 28 MPG.  Damn near ran out of gas twice !  Anyone think this is normal for a Valk, or do I need to take it to a dyno ?

[jer0177]

These beasts drink fuel at an alarming rate as the speed increases.  You're probably OK - do some less spirited riding and see how she fares.

[JC]

Sounds normal to me.

I've got 38 slow jets, and 45MPH gives me slightly better that 40MPG, but interstate speeds and above I do good to get 30MPG.

[Ricky-D]

Headwind!!!!!!!

Probably could have gone 5 mph faster at the same mpg rate.

***

[old2soon]

6 carbs 100 H P and yes the right hand determines your fuel consumption. Next time you're at that speed grab a handful and see how well the fat lady responds!! These machines are a lot like life-ya wanna play ya gots ta pay. RIDE SAFE.

[Hef]

On the interstate highway at 70+ MPH, 28 mpg sounds pretty good to me for these machines. Any owner will tell you she does suck the petro at those speeds. Its the price we choose to pay for that kind of speed and power.

[tank_post142]

i get about 21 mpg at 85mph

[9Ball]

At that speed, you're right in the rpm sweet spot for that typical mileage.

If you run into strong headwinds you can expect lower.  Hit reserve at 86 miles one time in Kansas...that was my worst tank and definitely adds to the pucker factor when it's 100+ degrees out in the middle of "no cell phone service" Kansas.

[sandy]

My highway MPG at 65-70 is 38+. Ease up 5 MPH and you'll see a big difference.

[Tundra]

If I can keep my tach. @ or below 3000 I can get 38-40mpg

[PhredValk]

The out leg of this trip I kept all my receipts. Best was 38.7 (nice tail wind) at mostly 70MPH, 3000RPM; worst was 33.6 at 75MPH, 3300RPM. 99 IS, mostly stock.
Fred.

[O-B-1]

Yes! The "Fat Lady" will pass everything BUT a gas station!

My '99 Standard w/saddlebags & windscreen gets about 35MPG on average.

Keep in mind the difference in mileage one gets with the ethanol added and no ethanol added gas. That can drop it nearly 10%.

I get Conoco or 76 gasoline here. No ethanol in it.

[Tropic traveler]

Sounds about right for 70+ mph into a headwind.
I have gotten my best & worst mpg while riding to the Keys. Got an unbelievable 41 mpg on a flat, 50 mph no traffic lights leg of a Keys trip from Naples to Dade Corners on the Tamiami Trail {US41} through the Everglades.
A year later taking a different route to the Keys down US27 from South Bay to Homestead we got 26 mpg. I was on my Rocket & Kim was riding my '97 Valk. We were hauling a$$ and there was a nasty headwind blowing against us straight from the south. Even the R3 with a 2.3L engine was over 32 mpg on that same leg. Fuel injection does make a big difference. After that one leg of the trip the mpg returned to the usual.
The '97 consistantly does the worst mpg of all our Valks, usually 30-32 mpg under more normal riding conditions. The other two are in the 35-38 range.
Not so stellar mpg is just what you have to sacrifice to enjoy the rest of the charms of the world's finest cruiser/tourer.  

[MP]

Keep in mind the difference in mileage one gets with the ethanol added and no ethanol added gas. That can drop it nearly 10%.

I get Conoco or 76 gasoline here. No ethanol in it.

I use ethanol a lot.  I have tried regular non ethanol, and have NOT been able to see a difference.  Ethanol has 10% less energy in it.  So, a blend of 10% ethanol with 10% less energy, would have a net of 1% less energy.  So, should have max of 1% less mileage.  I cannot tell that little difference.

MP

[justintyper]

Keep in mind the difference in mileage one gets with the ethanol added and no ethanol added gas. That can drop it nearly 10%.

I get Conoco or 76 gasoline here. No ethanol in it.

I use ethanol a lot.  I have tried regular non ethanol, and have NOT been able to see a difference.  Ethanol has 10% less energy in it.  So, a blend of 10% ethanol with 10% less energy, would have a net of 1% less energy.  So, should have max of 1% less mileage.  I cannot tell that little difference.

MP

actually ethanol burns roughly twice as fast as gasoline (as seen here in this chart) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gasoline_gallon_equivalent  also has half the energy(funny how that works) thankfully we have a couple gas stations here in upstate ny that recently started selling non ethanol fuels for carbureted engines. so far im up a couple mpg around town and the gurl seems to like it alot better.

[Gryphon]

I have to agree with some of the rabble here.  I moved to Missouri from Oklahoma and I can tell the difference between straight gasoline and 10% ethanol.  It makes about 2 mpg difference on my bike.  I can't say what it does on yours or anyone elses, but on mine in makes a difference.  10% ethanol is required here, so it is what it is.  As for eshelman getting 28 mpg@ 75 mph, that sounds pretty normal to me.  Most of my driving is in the 70 - 80 mph range so the tach lives above 3K unless I'm driving in town.  It's a thirsty beast.  I now have a belly tank.  There's lots of open in Oklahoma, Kansas, and parts of Missouri.

[R J]

Keep in mind the difference in mileage one gets with the ethanol added and no ethanol added gas. That can drop it nearly 10%.

I get Conoco or 76 gasoline here. No ethanol in it.

I use ethanol a lot.  I have tried regular non ethanol, and have NOT been able to see a difference.  Ethanol has 10% less energy in it.  So, a blend of 10% ethanol with 10% less energy, would have a net of 1% less energy.  So, should have max of 1% less mileage.  I cannot tell that little difference.

MP

I agree on the ethanol/non ethanol 100%.

The difference is not enough to worry about MPG, but the less cost figures in nice in the pocket book.

MGM has gotten his snot filled with ethanol for 90% of his 242K+ miles.   Have a complete record of fuel usage and my overall usage since August 96 to date is 34 MPG.    Best was 42 and worst was 19.    That was in the $$$ mark and above pulling a trailer into a headwind.