What does WMTC stand for?

[kioolt]

On the motorrad website BMW claims that the fuel consumption for the R1200RT per 100 kms at constant 90 km/h is 47 MPG (WMTC). What does WMTC stand for?

[John in VA]

World Motorcycle Test Cycle

[kioolt]

I wonder if these test are done with E10.

[John in VA]

I would guess yes - maybe even E20?

 

http://papers.sae.org/2016-32-0076/

 

[Skywagon]

go here to see some real world mileage. No affiliation

http://www.fuelly.com/

 

[narcosis]

go here to see some real world mileage. No affiliation

http://www.fuelly.com/

 

2014's are averaging 46mpg...in my dreams.

[lkraus]

go here to see some real world mileage. No affiliation

http://www.fuelly.com/

 

2014's are averaging 46mpg...in my dreams.

 

I'd expect folks that bother to track their mileage tend to use the throttle a bit less.

[szurszewski]

go here to see some real world mileage. No affiliation

http://www.fuelly.com/

 

2014's are averaging 46mpg...in my dreams.

 

I'd expect folks that bother to track their mileage tend to use the throttle a bit less.

 

That's the standard, and I think accurate, counterclaim to anything that's supposed to improve your mpg by 10% or thereabouts - that if you are actually trying to improve your mpg, just adjusting driving behavior can usually do that.

 

When Laura and I used to do frequent long road trips in the car/truck, each of us driving about half the time, there was always an easily noticeable difference between our mpg. I don't want to get into trouble, so I'm going to stop here.

Edited June 7, 2017 by szurszewski

[LAF]

Yes the right wrist is what dictates MPG.

 

A 2015 getting 45.1 MPG. I would love to see that.

 

I am right around 38-40 combined MPG. However I have not done a few thousand miles of just slab, with the cruise set, and just eating up miles.

 

I do track every gallon and mile of fuel on my bike since it was new. Only reason is if something goes wrong see it in mileage pretty quick if air/fuel/spark(coil stick)is a issue.

 

Damn I love this bike.

Edited June 7, 2017 by LAF

[92Merc]

Wow, I'm not normal. I don't baby the bike. But I have about 7 miles of highway riding, and about 4 more miles of city riding everyday to my work. I get a consistent 49 mpg. Sometimes I'll crack 50.

 

On the highway and on the back roads, as long as the wind stays down, I'll do 50 mpg fairly easily at 70 mph. I've dropped as low as 41 mpg bucking a 30mph headwind. But on the way back with the same wind, I cracked 60.1 mpg. So I still average 50. That makes 300 mile range on my tank.

 

I haven't done enough Interstate riding yet to give a good number there. I avoid the Interstate.

[PadG]

go here to see some real world mileage. No affiliation

http://www.fuelly.com/

 

2014's are averaging 46mpg...in my dreams.

 

I'd expect folks that bother to track their mileage tend to use the throttle a bit less.

Not for me, but yes the right wrist do control the mpg a great deal with the wetheads! More so than with my prior hexhead. Right now, on my '15 RT, I am averaging 46.29 mpg from new, with the best mpg at 52.73 mpg and worse at 37.14 mpg!

[Paul De]

go here to see some real world mileage. No affiliation

http://www.fuelly.com/

 

2014's are averaging 46mpg...in my dreams.

 

I'd expect folks that bother to track their mileage tend to use the throttle a bit less.

Not for me, but yes the right wrist do control the mpg a great deal with the wetheads! More so than with my prior hexhead. Right now, on my '15 RT, I am averaging 46.29 mpg from new, with the best mpg at 52.73 mpg and worse at 37.14 mpg!

 

 

Horsepower don't come for free, but the fuel consumption of the new waterhead motor has impressed me. My typical mix of commuting (40-70) and fun rides up to 100 MPH for short burst and WFO throttle out of corners from time to time, I am averaging mid forties (haven't checked the Ave MPG screen in a while as I find tire pressure monitor view more valuable). My '99 RT averaged 38 MPG under the same driving conditions. More power & better gas milage, what's not to like about that!

[Bob H.]

MPG on my 14RT ranges anywhere from 42-55 mpg depending on a lot of factors. If I stay around 70mph I get 45-46 mpg , if I go 80mph or over for a period of time it drops to around 42mpg and if I'm 60mph or below I can get 50+mpg easily. Like I said there are lots of factors to consider , on a recent 7,000+ trip in April my average was 45.71mpg mostly interstate from PA,TX,AZ,CO,KY and back home. Total miles of trip divided by total gallons consumed = MPG ,not that hard to figure out.

[WBinDE]

My'16 GSA is at 45.01 over 59,000 miles, covering all kinds of roads from twisties at 30 to I-10 in Texas that's posted at 85. Between the lower final drive and the sucky aerodynamics its mileage will be worse than an RT ridden the same. Best is 50.61, worst of 35.97. I seldom go over 75 but have no hesitation in doing 15 over if the road and traffic permit.

 

I do find the mileage reported by the bike to be optimistic by about 3% compared to the miles ridden divided by gallons used method.

[Dave_zoom_zoom]

My 2006 R1200RT gives me more MPG then I ever expected.

 

But the really big deal is many more "smiles per gallon" then any other bike I've ever owned.

 

Who knows what might happen if I got one of them there wetheads!

 

Dave

[LAF]

As with all MPG discussions I assume everyone is doing the math and not reading the dash?

 

All my MPG are done with old school, nothing fancy, no new age, or new math, just good old basic math using fingers and toes when needed.

[Paul De]

As with all MPG discussions I assume everyone is doing the math and not reading the dash?

 

All my MPG are done with old school, nothing fancy, no new age, or new math, just good old basic math using fingers and toes when needed.

 

Of course on my '99 RT it was many tanks of manual checks, but it was off the display on my '15 RT, which says I average 44.5 MPG. Assuming my onboard computer is 3% optimistic like WBinDE says his bike is compared to old school, I would still be better than my '99 RT by 5 MPG. I'm still in my more power and better mileage happy place

 

I do think that the "old school" way is also prone to some error because of full tank fill variance, only being mitigated, but not eliminated, by numerous checks. So, what's your R square value?

[PadG]

As with all MPG discussions I assume everyone is doing the math and not reading the dash?

 

All my MPG are done with old school, nothing fancy, no new age, or new math, just good old basic math using fingers and toes when needed.

 

Of course on my '99 RT it was many tanks of manual checks, but it was off the display on my '15 RT, which says I average 44.5 MPG. Assuming my onboard computer is 3% optimistic like WBinDE says his bike is compared to old school, I would still be better than my '99 RT by 5 MPG. I'm still in my more power and better mileage happy place

 

I do think that the "old school" way is also prone to some error because of full tank fill variance, only being mitigated, but not eliminated, by numerous checks. So, what's your R square value?

Like Lee, I don't trust the bike's computer, and I also keep record manually. Old habits are sometimes hard to break! Manual method inaccurate because of fill level variations? Only for individual mpg calculation, where you might be a little off if you hadn't fill it to exactly the same level as the last time, BUT that all even out from fill-to-fill such that manual calculation, for averages, are dead accurate!

[Exportman]

Hi and Hello from the other side of the pond.

 

Just been reading this thread you guys are doing well. I have a 2017 model, got it just before Christmas and so far ridden 3K with an average of 47 MPG and that imperial gallons which is around 1.2 US gallon My Best has been 51 and worst 43.

 

I log the mileage and fuel I always fill the tank so these figures are reasonably accurate.

[AndyS]

Yikes! you MUST wring that bike's neck!

How can you be getting an average that bad?

[PadG]

Hi and Hello from the other side of the pond.

 

Just been reading this thread you guys are doing well. I have a 2017 model, got it just before Christmas and so far ridden 3K with an average of 47 MPG and that imperial gallons which is around 1.2 US gallon My Best has been 51 and worst 43.

 

I log the mileage and fuel I always fill the tank so these figures are reasonably accurate.

Not unusual while the bike is new! I track my mpg all the way from when I first picked up the bike, and I can tell you that the worse mpg was the very first tank full (that is, the one that I had filled up myself). It must be the tight engine, since the numbers do get better (IF I manage to control my right wrist) as the engine loosen up.

 

EDITED: OK, here is what my mpg looks like, charted:

 

Edited June 16, 2017 by PadG

[Exportman]

My riding is a mixture of commuting through Manchester and weekend rides as an IAM Observer. I don't often get in to 6th gear.

[mileypop]

Hi and Hello from the other side of the pond.

 

Just been reading this thread you guys are doing well. I have a 2017 model, got it just before Christmas and so far ridden 3K with an average of 47 MPG and that imperial gallons which is around 1.2 US gallon My Best has been 51 and worst 43.

 

I log the mileage and fuel I always fill the tank so these figures are reasonably accurate.

 

Nearly 8000 on my '16 average 48mpg, lowest 40mpg! Best I've had was while on a 2100 mile trip around Europe last month, 50.6 mpg. But a lot of slow riding looking at the scenery. Mine is usually being ridden briskly at home!

[gordiet]

Going through Montana I was down to 36 MPG. It has to do with your right hand.😎🏍

[Paul De]

Hi and Hello from the other side of the pond.

 

Just been reading this thread you guys are doing well. I have a 2017 model, got it just before Christmas and so far ridden 3K with an average of 47 MPG and that imperial gallons which is around 1.2 US gallon My Best has been 51 and worst 43.

 

I log the mileage and fuel I always fill the tank so these figures are reasonably accurate.

Not unusual while the bike is new! I track my mpg all the way from when I first picked up the bike, and I can tell you that the worse mpg was the very first tank full (that is, the one that I had filled up myself). It must be the tight engine, since the numbers do get better (IF I manage to control my right wrist) as the engine loosen up.

 

EDITED: OK, here is what my mpg looks like, charted:

 

 

If on measurements 28 and 38 you were riding the back roads and not stuck in traffic commuting then you are a naughty, naughty boy! And, I wish I was riding with you those days

[PadG]

Most of my rides are country roads, and yep, my mpg depends solely on my moods. The high ones are when I ride most or all the 250+ miles or so quite leisurely, and the others are....well, when I was feeling particularly frisky that day! BTW, high speed doesn't affect the mpg as much as the frisky right wrist, but then I don't usually hold the high speed for long, and those are usually in the lonely parts of an interstate, with the speed limit at 70 mph.

Edited June 22, 2017 by PadG

[Green RT]

I have had an average of 52.5 mpg, 4.58 l/100 km over 20,000 km and one year on my R1200R. The best mileage has been drafting on a truck, 68 mpg or 3.4 l/100km. And the worst has been with headwinds, 39 mpg or 6.0 l/100km.

 

For what it is worth, my average mileage in the US with Ethanol has been 50 mpg or 4.8 l/100km and in Mexico where they do not add Ethanol, it has been 55 mpg or 4.4 l/100km.