39 ~ 40 Mpg. Good or bad?

[ArthurKnowles]

I have an '06 LT. It is getting 39 ~ 41 (best yet on the BC) mpg and when I fill it calculates at right about 40 mpg every time. I usually ride it on the highway at 75 ~ 80 mph. On surface streets, I usually use 3 ~ 4 gear and keep it in the happy zone (4 ~ 5 Krpm). I've tried lower rpms, but tall that does is lug the engine and doesn't affect gas milage (in a positive direction anyway).

I'm just trying to decide if that is as good as I'm going to get or not. Or if buying a stock Bosch O2 sensor, or something else, might help. But I'd really like some feedback from people with the newer models as to what they get for gas milage.

Oh, before I forget. I do live in CA. All the gas out here has 10% ethanol in it. So, that's what I use. Premium w/10% ethanol.

[STARFIGHTER]

Arthur
Mine is an '03 so not relevant but.......
While I was considering changing the sensor I did evaluate others MPG...:
I list only the "05's-06's for ya'..........
05.............43mpg..................Wisconsin
05.............49 mpg.................New York
05..............52mpg.................California
06..............40 mpg................California
06...............50 mpg...............Oklahoma

Of course, windshield height, pillion or not, altitude, temperature, riding style all impinge

[simon]

Mine's a 99. getting a good average of 53mpg (according to the trip computer) with a mixture of town-stop start riding, and motorway cruising at 70-80mph Very happy

[JDW]

My 03 LT gets 36 MPG on the interstate according to the trip meter in Illinois. Out west we got up 45MPG last year.

[yechave]

I was considering a post on this myself today. Seems like I am down nealry 5 mpg after disconnecting the canister on my 99..... but, I also used reg vs high test on the last fill up, not sure what difference that made.

Not wanting to jump to conclusions this quickly, I will need a few more tank fulls to see if it really has changed that much.

I was at 43-48 with two up riding, consistently. BC is showing 40.

It sure ran better on high test, no doubt in my mind about that.

During the last tear down, the only think I changed that could have made any fuel use difference, was the disconnect of the canister. I thought I understood that should either have had no difference, or increased mileage.

I am also still experiencing the occasional stall at the first or second stop sign after leaving the house.........thought all the checked out on the computer testing.

Need to get out the manual to better understand how the BC computes the information vs my miles divided by the gals used.

[motorhead]

I have an '06 LT. It is getting 39 ~ 41 (best yet on the BC) mpg and when I fill it calculates at right about 40 mpg every time. I usually ride it on the highway at 75 ~ 80 mph. On surface streets, I usually use 3 ~ 4 gear and keep it in the happy zone (4 ~ 5 Krpm). I've tried lower rpms, but tall that does is lug the engine and doesn't affect gas milage (in a positive direction anyway).

I'm just trying to decide if that is as good as I'm going to get or not. Or if buying a stock Bosch O2 sensor, or something else, might help. But I'd really like some feedback from people with the newer models as to what they get for gas milage.

Oh, before I forget. I do live in CA. All the gas out here has 10% ethanol in it. So, that's what I use. Premium w/10% ethanol.

Fuel is just CRAP this past year or more, My "00" was getting @ 48/52 mpg.
Last fall and this spring only getting 39/42 MPG.
Bike does not seem to be running rich, runs great actually, mileage just sucks !!

[ArthurKnowles]

Hmm, interesting to see an '06 get 50 mpg. A friend had an '07 and it was consistently getting high 40's. Basically on the same gas everyone else in CA was getting. So, I know some get better gas milage than mine. I guess the big question is why and is there anything I can do about it. At current prices, if an O2 sensor would give better gas milage it would pay for itself pretty quickly (or enough for me to do it anyway).

My engine also runs rich when I start it. You can see the spot on the garage floor from the last time I started it and goosed the throttle a bit. I've not tried that while warm, but may do so just to check and see how it looks.

And Dave, in regard to the cannister and poor fuel economy. You may want to just check your hosr routing and make sure you capped what should be capped and removed what should be removed. On my dughter's motorcycle I capped a nipple on the carburator, but later found it needed to be vented to atmosphere. Ran like a dog until I found and fixed the problem.

[RVB1019]

My 03 in NY is getting 37-38 (as per the BC). I just cut the brown wire and hope to see a difference. FWIW, I have always used the highest octane available.

With 35K on her, it's definitely time to strip the plastic, remove the gas tank and replace the air filter. I've had the bike for 17K and have never replaced it.

[glinm74]

I have an 05. Rode the twisties through the Ozarks a couple of weeks ago, 400 or so miles, a lot of 3rd and 4th gear, averaged 49 mpg on BP premium. This was on two lane roads and seldom above 65 mph. Over 75 the mileage plummets. The best I ever got was on a fill up at a Valero in Red River, NM. Around the Enchanted Circle to Taos, then back over the Taos Pass and headed east. When I bought gas in Enid, OK it had gotten 62 mpg.

[ljjohns]

Is the BC really a better measure of MPG than the manual process of tracking fill-ups and mileage and then doing the arithmetic?

I've never trusted the BC on my Buick Regal; I'm waiting to see how a ScanGuageII works on my new pick-up. But over the long run I've been getting 47-50 using the manual system. I largely ignore that part of the BMW computer; the changes in ambient temperature are more interesting...

[ArthurKnowles]

My BC has been pretty accurate. I always fill it up and then calculate the gas milage as a check of the BC. So far it averages out the same (40 mpg) consistently.

[Diehly]

According to the BC's on my 03 and 05 the number you describe is about 4 less than I am used to. I can't remember the last time that I checked it manually but I fully intend to. I live in NW OH where it is flat and straight and typically don't use the fun rpms till I get to somewhere with twisties. By the same token, I don't use low enough rpms to lug by any means.

[gbob]

My 99LT had a dead O2 sensor ,OE Bosch plugs and OE air filter .Made 3 changes at once I know should have done one at a time . Changed O2 sensor $48 universal Bosch ,NGK ,DCPR7EIX and K&N air filter . Before MPG 34-35 after 50-51 two up 75 MPH (jumpers installed on speedo ) but now after the state Governor jammed us with E10 , 47 MPG mixed surface street /highway today.

BobG
99LT

[Ghost55]

On my 03, before the 6K I got 47-48 mpg consistently, with 51-52 mpg in the mountains. The bike has been maintained meticulously by a dealer. Mileage has been in a steady decline since the 6K. I now get 34-36 mpg on the interstate at 78-80 mph. Running at lower gears at speed is just increasing engine wear. Simple fact, the more times two pieces of metal rub together in a given time, the faster it will wear out.

[ArthurKnowles]

Running at lower gears at speed is just increasing engine wear. Simple fact, the more times two pieces of metal rub together in a given time, the faster it will wear out.

I will happily wear my engine out by running in lower gears and maintaining engine breaking and acceleration capabilities until the day I die or stop riding.

I will not (ever) run my engine in higher gears and lower RPMs and lug the engine or be unable to accelerate quickly. Doing so goes against every safety issue I know of regarding riding a motorcycle (or car for that matter). Furthermore, I suspect that the friction is higher on engines that are run outside of the tourque/powerband and probably wear just as much if not more than running inside the tourque/powerband. But with me, it's definitely a safety issue first.

And Bob, where did you get your Bosh O2 sensor? $48 sounds like it is worth trying just to see what happens? Got a part number for it?

[LTExfisher]

Just got my 02 back from the shop, 48k service, put in the K&N and the NGK's. Was around 36-38 with more frwy than stop n go. Wish I'd thought of the O2 sensor.We'll see after a few tanks I guess!

[NorwoodD]

Brand new 08. Had it three weeks or so. 1300 miles on it. Been getting 41mpg since I've had it, even after the 600 mi svce.

Got about the same or a little better with my 00.

Norwood
08 B Blue
NC

[DLBass]

In the UK the BC reads pesermistic due to our bigger gallon. Mine shows 50 to 51 mpg running 98 RON super, I ride briskly, and nail the cruise on an indicated 75 mph on motorways with the odd excursion upto 3 figures when I want to create some space around me on our congested road system.

Brim to brim filling shows an actual mpg of 55 to 56 mpg, and according to my BC my average road speed over the last couple of thousand miles since I last reset it has been 55.6 mph.

Bike is a 2002 SE. Very happy with mileage, especially as I paid £1.27.9 per litre on the motorway last week. That's £5.81 per imperial gallon which is probably roughly $10 per US gallon :eek:

David

[2000klticon]

My 00 was getting 48-52. My 03 was getting 43-47, but now gets 46-50 since I put my Parabellum windshield from the 00 on it. These are city/hwy miles. On trip I get everything from low 40's to near 60 depending on speed and wind conditions.

I think there is something to the theory about the gasoline. States and the Fed should require gas to meet or exceed btu specifications.

I truly believe the Parabellum windshield gives better mileage, and my S.O. says the pillion ride is better with it.

[Wolfgang]

From day one I have gotten 40mpg -+1 mpg based on the BC. It has varied for the obvious reasons, speed, mountains, load etc. But long term it always levels back out to to 40mpg.

[eaglemike]

Our Calif gas does indeed limit mpg. I've observed a 10% increase when using fuel from elsewhere, Phoenix for example, on a least a couple of different vehicles.

Riding style can often gain or lose 5mpg. It just depends on what you want more...

all the best,

Mike

[JATownsend]

Riding style can often gain or lose 5mpg. It just depends on what you want more...
Mike
Boy, THAT'S THE TRUTH!!

My mileage is only consistent with how I'm riding...

Hop on the slab, go to 75 hit cruise and its 42-45, except out west where it gets better.

Same location, get off the slab and travel the two lanes, mileage drops to 35-40 or lower if I ramp up the RPMs and play.

The biggest factor other than year (FD ratio) and more HP (05s and up) is just how active your right hand is!!

YMMV...how true! ;)

[jers99lt]

Today: 203 miles from fill-up to fill-up and used 4.041 gal., comes out to 50.24 MPG. Surprised the heck out of me!
This spring I did air & gas filters. My ride today was part slab, country roads and some twisties. Temp was a constant 61F, so I had the lower flaps out and the Gerbings turned up just a bit.
I have a '99 with almost 37k on the clock and 6k on the Metz (42/48).

Jer

[Duane_in_Florida]

'06 that has consistantly ranged from 47-50 regardless of what kind of riding...I get that going to work with a mix of stop and go and rural road or on the highway.

Not much ethanol in the mix down here...I guess we are too far from the corn. And I avoid the few brands that do sometimes have it; alcohol belongs in the glass, not the the tank.

[eaglemike]

The local dealership owner is an LT rider. He's mentioned a few times that the '05 and later are geared shorter, and will thus return fewer MPG - other things being equal.

all the best,

Mike

[gunny]

My '03 usually gets around 42 riding double. Have seen it as bad as 28 (Riding across South Dakota @ 100 mph +)

[paalao]

Reading this, I guess I should be happy with me getting 42-43 mpg.
After all I am a big guy so I am almost riding two up when i am alone! :)

(Next year that will change dramtically ;) )

[dkbright]

My 99 LT got 53mpg on the last tank.

[gpolakow]

I own a 2000LTC. My last trip which was about 9 hours of mixed but mostly hwy riding at 75 to 85, I got 44.5. But 40 is probably more the norm for my riding.

[motorhead]

*** UPDATE ***

Previous post read as this: Fuel is just CRAP this past year or more, My "00" was getting @ 48/52 mpg.
Last fall and this spring only getting 39/42 MPG.
Bike does not seem to be running rich, runs great actually, mileage just sucks !!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Wife & I went for a 340 mile ride today that took us into a part of the state that DOES NOT do smog checks at all. ( Are they provided better fuel ? )
We took on fuel in Jackson at @ 1000 ft and then did a 164 mile leg that took us upto 9800 feet over Sonora pass & down to the little town of Walker.
3.14 gallons to top it off .... 52.23 MPG two up and climbing in elavation for @ 130 miles before going off the east slope and back down to @ 4000ft at fill up.

:rolleyes: Fuel quality & blend sure seemed to matter in today case.
Elevation helped, but being most was climbing while 2 up .... interesting :confused:

Nice photo @ 8000' http://img258.imageshack.us/img258/5909/2008mcrides028ku4.th.jpg (http://img258.imageshack.us/my.php?image=2008mcrides028ku4.jpg)

[WildBil]

07 LT - 320 miles on US 66 here in N. to Central Illinois today two-up. BC showed 42 Mpg. Strange day - the place I filled up in Dwight, IL had no premium (92 r+m) gas, so i went with the plus or 89. Bike ran fine. 41-42 seems to be about it for 2-up here in the flatlands. - bill

[rodneyinmaypearltx]

Ethanol seems to be the culprit in my neck of the woods. Before ethanol (about a year ago) I was consistently running 50 mpg on both the LT and the Sportster 1200.

Now they are both getting low 40's mpg.

[Lynn_Keen]

Riding with our local club, a bunch of old farts, typically at about 5 over the posted limit I average 50 to 52 on my '05 LT. On a recent trip to North Carolina pulling an old cargo trailer loaded with camping equipment and running the Interstate around 80 to 85 I averaged about 42. Oh yea, right or wrong, I use 87 octane and have never had a problem on either of my two LT's with a combined total of 147,000 miles.

[STARFIGHTER]

Hey Lynn
Are you running mid-range fuel with the brown wire clipped ?

[Mugszy]

My 06 registered 39 at 80MPH. Droped the speed to 60 and got 62 MPG. I do not think it is your oxe=ygen sensor.

[ArthurKnowles]

Well I do plan to see just what the O2 sensor might do for me as I bought one for $51 delivered. When I get it in and installed I'll post a message on the results.

[BMWprofessor]

Just got back from a 2000 mile trip with two up fully loaded. The big girl (06) got ~48 mpg all the way.

[NascaLT]

My mileage dropped from near 50 mpg to 40 mpg on my '04 LT. I thought it was the oxygen sensor. Went to the dealer, they put it on the computer and found my oxygen sensor was OK but there was a fault code someplace in the throttle settings. They reset the code, back up to about 50 mpg.

[okiebandit1]

06 model, 14000 miles +-. 20/50 non synthetic. 90 octane. 46.8 mpg having fun in the NewMexico mountains and 80 mph in the flats. The worst is 39 rinding into 30-50 mph winds. Best has been in the low 50s.

[Lynn_Keen]

Hey Lynn
Are you running mid-range fuel with the brown wire clipped ?
Nope, not Mid Range. I'm running REGULAR with no modifications to the bike. Have never had a problem even pulling a trailer. Pulled a Kwik Kamp pop up fully loaded all the way from Florida to Oregon riding two up on my '99 and never had an issue.

[Dangerous2]

My 04 has averaged 50 mpg (UK gallons) over the last 20,000 miles, which equates to 41 mpg (US gallons). I have only ever used Shell V-Power 99 octane. Shell V-Power in the US is typically 90-93 octane. When someone says that their LT is averaging over 50 mpg (US gallons) that equates to 60 mpg (UK gallons), which seems extraordinary unless you are riding 1 up doing 60 mph in 5th downhill with a tail wind.

[markc]

My 04 has averaged 50 mpg (UK gallons) over the last 20,000 miles, which equates to 41 mpg (US gallons). I have only ever used Shell V-Power 99 octane. Shell V-Power in the US is typically 90-93 octane. When someone says that their LT is averaging over 50 mpg (US gallons) that equates to 60 mpg (UK gallons), which seems extraordinary unless you are riding 1 up doing 60 mph in 5th downhill with a tail wind.

I regularly get in excess of 50mpg. I do only ride 1 up (we have 2 bikes in our household :) ) and I also use premium gas. Many people have pointed out that operation at altitude (We are at one mile and it is all uphill as you go west) helps by rebalancing the air/fuel mixture some and keeping the tires well inflated helps also. I think you can learn a lot by knowing what bikes people have ridden previously. Many of those who came from riding cruisers tend to upshift earlier so we spend more time in higher gears. Keeping the revs high is going to drop your fuel economy.

[LAF]

For 6000 miles I was stuck at 39-41, then 7000 miles or so I broke the 50.

I had thought all these 45-50+ MPG was BS. Or just a bunch of old guys doing 45 MPH :)

I am not sure why it took so long on my bike to get here. If it truly does take this long mileage wise for these motors to start to get loose I am in awe.

That said our right wrist plays a big part in it.

I am running 140 miles all slab, cruise at 72-75, and have seen 51 MPG.

Maybe I will wait to 18,000 for Synth motor oil, but I digress.

I also have my play runs of 30-40 miles where I can make it drop to 38-39 MPG. Here in PA we are blessed with valley and mountain roads with plenty of twisties.

On the higher RPM, while I agree in some cases it may use more gas, there is a sweet spot in the rpm in each gear that is the most fuel efficient for that gear. When this happens and you find it you can achieve pretty decent gas mileage and still have fun. If you lug this motor you are not only wasting fuel, you are pounding the hell out of your lower end.

These things have taken me 7800 miles to figure out on my first BMW. You can read it here over and over again but until you start to learn the motor on these bikes, reading wont make it so. I very rarely use 5th unless on slab and 4th don't get used much when I am on my play roads.

I do run in the 5-6000 RPM range a lot.

[lstinthot]

I have been getting 45 - 50 on my 03 LT, the manual way, the BC says I am getting between 43-47. 50 on the highway and 45 around town. I run 91 octane. I was told the older bikes get better gas milage.

I live in Green bay so it is colder so I can pack more air in my motor then the warmer climates. Not sure what affect this really has on my gas milage though. I do need to wear more clothes so I guess I am carring more weight, so maybe it is costing me more then I am gaining??

I will pay what ever it takes to keep riding.

[dmatson]

My 05' gets around 33-38 in just city driving. On road trips it never goes below 44 to a high of 53mpg. I don't ride easy and love the fast sweepers and the twistys. I do ride one up and without the top case.

[davemoore]

I was leading a group of 5 LTs to Big Bend in March and noticed my gas was dropping faster than expected at 82 mph, GPS speed (speed limit on I-10 in west Texas is 80). I reset the trip computer several times to get "spot" readings and it was running 34-35 mpg. I had a Beemer Bag on my top case rack (wind load) and my tires run 43/47 psi usually. After a gas stop, I dropped it to 78 mph and the mileage improved to 37-38 mpg. Later on, at 70-75, it improved even further to the low 40's. So the answer has a lot to do with your average speed and wind load factors (and tire pressure and gas mixture and lead foot factor, etc., etc.). I suspect those with Corbin Smugglers or Fort Worth racks instead of a top case do much better.

[Idofotos]

Im getting a pretty standard 40 on my 05, I figure I drive a little hard but not near the 50 I was thinking it might get

[StLHeadake]

Only two mentions of the brown wire....? I have a 99 brown wire cut, my dad has an 02 brown wire uncut. We rode together 2400 miles to Virginia and back through the mountain twisties and interstate. We both ran regular octane fuel for the entire trip. I consistently average 46-48 at 75mph per OBC. Dad averaged 36-low 40s the whole time. He reasoned that it was because he was heavier than me.

I think it is the brown wire! Neither of us is exceptionally easy on the throttle. We pretty much get it up there as fast as possible and hit the cruise. Yet I consistently got/get better mileage.

As I recall the reason for cutting the brown wire is because of a faulty air temp reading messing with the fuel delivery...? It's been a long time since I read about it.

I'd like to know of the previous posts who has their wires clipped and who doesn't? And if there is any correlation to the better mileage?

[ben1364]

Well I do plan to see just what the O2 sensor might do for me as I bought one for $51 delivered. When I get it in and installed I'll post a message on the results.

Keep us posted Arthur, please. That $51. '02 Sensor sounds good. Part #? Vendor? Thanks.

[Montycs]

I ride my 03 almost all year and in Colorado the octane ratings are lower then most places. The oil companies say because of our altitude the octane can be lower. Not sure if that is bunk or not. My bike gets 45-48 in the winter and 46-51 in the summer when there is no ethanol added. I am happy with the milage, but I gave the 24K service coming up, so we shall see

[Lynn_Keen]

When someone says that their LT is averaging over 50 mpg (US gallons) that equates to 60 mpg (UK gallons), which seems extraordinary unless you are riding 1 up doing 60 mph in 5th downhill with a tail wind.

Hey Man, THERE AIN'T NO HILLS IN FLORIDA!! and my claimed 50 MPG, is calculated. The BC actually indicates a higher number. To qualify the conditions; it's 1 up, running mostly 5 over the posted limit in a small group of mostly old farts riding GW's. OH yea, no tail wind either. Our weekly rides are mostly north and south and the prevailing winds in FL are east to west. :) As indicated in an earlier post, running 80 to 85 mph loaded with camping gear that number drops into the mid 40's. It's all about aerodynamics and wind resistance.

[yechave]

Is there anyone that had disconnected the charcoal canister, then later found they had better mileage with the canister hooked up to begin with?

[marko6lt]

i live in colo. and have an 06lt. bought the bike w/3000mi on it and now have 21,000. i run 91 oct and keep the rpms between 3-5k depending on the terrain, i've always gotten 47-53 mpg and have seen it as high as 56 and that was doing a loop from denver, trailridge rd,granby,berthoud pass that takes you from 5,000-12,000ft and back, although your not really haulin ass over that! 42/48 tire psi ,dealer serviced and non-syn oil, every thing stock. i always cross check the Bc with the math and it checks out. very pleased

[ArthurKnowles]

Keep us posted Arthur, please. That $51. '02 Sensor sounds good. Part #? Vendor? Thanks.

It arrived today, so I will put in in tomorrow after reading the manual on how to replace it and assuming the weather cooperates (it's been raining). I bought it on eBay ...

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=013&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWN%3AIT&viewitem=&item=230184273956&rd=1

It was Bosch part number 15719. I'm really curious to see just what it may/may not do for my milage. Since I'm going on a trip on Monday I should find out pretty quick.

[ben1364]

It arrived today, so I will put in in tomorrow after reading the manual on how to replace it and assuming the weather cooperates (it's been raining). I bought it on eBay ...

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=013&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWN%3AIT&viewitem=&item=230184273956&rd=1

It was Bosch part number 15719. I'm really curious to see just what it may/may not do for my mileage. Since I'm going on a trip on Monday I should find out pretty quick.

Thanks for the update, Arthur. I want to try the same thing.

Just curious. Where did you find part numbers for motorcycle applications? As best I can determine, Bosch part # 15719 fits a variety of Ford built vehicles and therefore should be relatively easy to source locally.

Ben

[ArthurKnowles]

I asked someone on the forum that had previously replaced theirs with a Bosch unit for the part number. If I can find the time to remove the plastic today I plan to install it. So, if it is the wrong one I'll know today or tomorrow at the latest.

[Steve_R]

Is there anyone that had disconnected the charcoal canister, then later found they had better mileage with the canister hooked up to begin with?I've been on this list for almost 5 years and never once has anyone said the mileage was better with the cannister conncected or disconnected. As I remember, no one ever disconnected it for mileage, it's always been done to keep from collapsing the fuel tank.

[yechave]

All righty then, I guess I will leave it disconnected.

I know this bike has been down more than a few times, which is one reason I felt it was a good reason to disconnect it.

I had a canister go bad on a low mileage 84 Dodge p/u, and it cost a small fortune to fix the damage caused by all the charcoal that went through the entire vacuum system and carb.

Thanks!

[BillCav]

My two bits worth... I road 300 miles today and was almost empty. That averages out to 55+MPG. It was a rally and the roads were good with quit a few stops and turns.

Cheers, Bill
05 K1200LT

[Steve_R]

Hey Bill, Just wondering what altitude you were riding in. That affects MPG a lot.

[cmabmwriders]

I just completed a 688mi trip this weekend from Olympia, WA (west side) to Waitsburg, WA (east side). This was over the Cascade mountains and averaged 45 MPG, running at 75 indicated, towing a trailer, 2 up. I removed the canister due to missing etc. I have had a high of 62 and a low of 38 under varying weather and altitude conditions. It is frustrating traveling with my friend's Venture or GW stopping for gas.

Be blessed!!

[ben1364]

It arrived today, so I will put in in tomorrow after reading the manual on how to replace it and assuming the weather cooperates (it's been raining). I bought it on eBay ...

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ih=013&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWN%3AIT&viewitem=&item=230184273956&rd=1

It was Bosch part number 15719. I'm really curious to see just what it may/may not do for my milage. Since I'm going on a trip on Monday I should find out pretty quick.

I talked with a Bosch rep today. He confirmed that part # 15719 is for certain Ford built engines. He further offered that Bosch offers a universal 'O2 sensor # 15729 that might work. He made no promises about the resistance values.

If you have replaced your '02 sensor and still pave the package it came in, please look for the Bosch part # and let us know.

Thanks much.

[ArthurKnowles]

I bought the 15719 as that is what I was told I was needed. Gueess I'll need to check on the 15729 as well.

I found it on ebay for $48 delivered, so ordered one. It is a 4 wire sensor. My manual does show a 4 wire plug & I do recall I was supposed to order the universal model, but when I was given the part number I just ordered it without verification. The 15719 is also a two wire model. Ah well maybe I can use it on my Ford Escape Hybrid. :)

[ben1364]

I bought the 15719 as that is what I was told I was needed. Gueess I'll need to check on the 15729 as well.

Arthur. I have no idea which, if either is the correct part! This is just another random bit of gossip until someone verifies it.

If part # 15729 will do the job, it should save some effort as it appears that the wires can be cut and spliced in the manner of the Sensor offered by Beemer Boneyard. This would save some time and effort, not yo mention some money.

[ArthurKnowles]

Just as an FYI, Bosch does not recommend splicing. They provide ties to hold the excess.

BTW: a 4wire plug has a preheater in the sensor. I didn't think abought that when I looked at the 2 wire 15729 model.

But since I will have both I'll see which works best.

[ben1364]

Just as an FYI, Bosch does not recommend splicing. They provide ties to hold the excess.

BTW: a 4wire plug has a preheater in the sensor. I didn't think abought that when I looked at the 2 wire 15729 model.

But since I will have both I'll see which works best.

You have obviously looked into this far more than I have but I 'understood' the Bosch guy to say the wiring on #15729 was intended to be spliced. Here's another bit that adds to the confusion from the Beemer Boneyard web site.

"Universal O2 Sensor For All BMW Models

New in the box Bosch O2 sensor to fit all BMW models equipped with an O2 sensor. Includes a posi-lock connector to splice into your stock connector. Cost effective way to replace your O2 sensor. Also elimnates the need to remove the tank to access the connector plug."

I am wondering if the Beemer Boneyard sensor could be a Bosch #15729? Hopefully someone will chime in.

[lstinthot]

Just something to think about. I did a test on my Honda Accord (6 cylinder mild sporty engine), I ran regular gas and I was getting 25 to 27 MPG. I switched to high test and I am consistently getting 27 to 30 MPG. With the cost of gas going up the difference between low grade and high is becoming less as a percentage around here. I am typically paying 5% more for high test and I am getting 8 - 10% better gas mileage. A friend of mine tried the test on a 4 cylinder low HP car. He did not see any better gas mileage. I have not run this test on the bike as I typically run high test due to the engine being a higher performance engine. If any of you guys that are die-hard 87 octane users try the switch I think with these engines you will see better gas mileage. If I remember I will try to run low grade for the next couple of tanks. I am sure Sally will not like me for it, but it is for the good of many!!

[ArthurKnowles]

Well when I get the 15729 I will check the installation sheet. The one for the 15719 (or did I read it elsewhere - I need to check when I get home) mentioned it used the wire isuulation as a O2 reference for comparision and that soldering the wire maybe difficult. That would not affect crimping, however.

As for low grade, I can't use it all as my engine pings badly with it. I'm going to try some midgrade though and see how that works.

[ben1364]

Well when I get the 15729 I will check the installation sheet. The one for the 15719 (or did I read it elsewhere - I need to check when I get home) mentioned it used the wire isuulation as a O2 reference for comparision and that soldering the wire maybe difficult. That would not affect crimping, however.

As for low grade, I can't use it all as my engine pings badly with it. I'm going to try some midgrade though and see how that works.

I do wish someone who knows about the resistance values of the stock sensor and that of #15719 and #15729 could share with us.

[ArthurKnowles]

I agree that it would be nice to know the the numbers, but the universal sensor has been used previously. A search on O2 or oxygen sensor can turn up some useful information.

[STARFIGHTER]

I used the Bosch Universal sensor from beemer Boneyard for $79.
(less discount because I ordered quick disconnects at the same time)
came with splicing instructions and splicing kit...............
recycled the box so the number is gone.......................

[ben1364]

I used the Bosch Universal sensor from beemer Boneyard for $79.
(less discount because I ordered quick disconnects at the same time)
came with splicing instructions and splicing kit...............
recycled the box so the number is gone.......................

Did the sensor from Beemer Boneyard happen to have a Bosch part # affixed or on the package? I have a sneaking suspicion that it could be #15729. TIA.
Ben

[RVB1019]

Does this help?

Click Here for photo (http://www.bmwlt.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=18062)

Click Here for link to Beemerboneyard (http://www.beemerboneyard.com/11781464492n.html)

[ArthurKnowles]

The beemerboneyard universal looks like a two wire (no preheater) model. More like the 15719 than the 15729.

When I get mine I will measure the resistance of the stock and both Bosch models and post the results. I'll also be able to verify the connector type (2 or 4 wire).

[MTGMAN]

I just made a round trip from Modesto, CA to Boise, ID. Only got 34 going and 36 mpg on the way home. I rarely get over 38 MPG! I use Chevron premium, run 2 up and 42psi front 48 psi rear, on a 05 LT. I've maintained the bike on regular schedules from the dealer. The only variable is I have a C-Bailey 2+ windshield with wings. Do you think this could be the big difference over everyone else's mileage?

[ArthurKnowles]

I doubt your shield is the sole cause of poor gas milage, but it can make a differrence. I've t ought of buying a Parabellum shield because it can increase aerodynamic effeciency and gas milage accoording to them anyway. :)

I'm looking at more mechanical issues like the O2 sensor, valve adjustment, electronic ignition, spark plugs, air filter, fuel filter, etc. Just starting with what I think might be a high probability.

[ben1364]

Does this help?

Click Here for photo (http://www.bmwlt.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=18062)

Click Here for link to Beemerboneyard (http://www.beemerboneyard.com/11781464492n.html)

Thanks Rob but it doesn't help me, at least. Now, if the box in the picture had a Bosch part #...

Arthur plans to post the resistance values of both the 15719 and the 15729 sensors. Hopefully someone will be able to then tell us if either is a satisfactory less costly and more widely available alternative to the original equipment sensor. If I understood the Bosch rep, part # 15676 is the o.e. replacement.

Thanks again.

[STARFIGHTER]

The universal from Beemer Boneyard is a four wire.....
The instructions want you to cut the OEM wires, then cut the universals wires to the exact length removed from the OEM. They include a splicing kit the size of a cell phone. I did cut the wires off the OEM with a hack saw blade to facilitate removal, then cut the new wires to the exact length and installed the sensor. No room for their splicing kit so I just soldered the wires.
The length of wires you cut/keep is important as it will determine where you have to reach to make connection. Next time I'll remove more tupperware and leave myself room to work.

[MTGMAN]

OK Thanks for the O2 sensor tip. I'm almost due for the 24K maintenance. I'll look into it.

[Steve_R]

I actually need more info before answering. I see that the CB is #2 with wings. What you don't say is if it is if it is +/- in height, how high you had the windsheild when running and how fast you were running two up.

[MTGMAN]

The CB is a #2 +2 and I run it a couple of inches from the top. We averaged 60 according to the BC, but really we ran 83 mph +/- in Nevada, and 75 +/- through Oregon. Not too much head wind on this trip. But it was cooler so we had the flaps opened up all the way too. But this is common for our winter rides. We ride about 85% 2 up. Even in the summer in Central California with the flaps closed (90+ degrees) I have the windshield close to the top at speed and only drop it when going through slower zones.

[ArthurKnowles]

Well I'm back home, but have been unable to measure the resistence fo the O2 sensors. I'll try again this weekend. I did find out that both the 15719 & 15729 are both 4 wire sensors. So both have a heater in them. The universal sensor looks just like the one by BeemerBoneyard.Com with the precut wire, 4 posilocks, and the case to enclose them. Of course, Ic an't tell you if they are the same since BB does not supply the part number on the box.

I'm going for a ride with the wife tomorrow, but when I get back will start taking off the plastic and see what I can do wtih measuring the resistance of the sensors before I do any replacements.

PS: Well after a bit moe research it is not likely I will be able to measure the resistance except when in operation or when heated with a propane torch. So, I guess it'll be a case of just repalcing it and seeing what happens.

[ben1364]

Well I'm back home, but have been unable to measure the resistence fo the O2 sensors. I'll try again this weekend. I did find out that both the 15719 & 15729 are both 4 wire sensors. So both have a heater in them. The universal sensor looks just like the one by BeemerBoneyard.Com with the precut wire, 4 posilocks, and the case to enclose them. Of course, Ic an't tell you if they are the same since BB does not supply the part number on the box.

I'm going for a ride with the wife tomorrow, but when I get back will start taking off the plastic and see what I can do wtih measuring the resistance of the sensors before I do any replacements.

PS: Well after a bit moe research it is not likely I will be able to measure the resistance except when in operation or when heated with a propane torch. So, I guess it'll be a case of just repalcing it and seeing what happens.

Thanks for all that you are doing Arthur. Your observations confirmed my suspicions with respect to the Universal 02 sensor. Re: measuring resistance values, do you know what the stock/new reading should be?

At this point I would bet a nickel that the # 15729 will do the trick.

[Steve_R]

The CB is a #2 +2 and I run it a couple of inches from the top. We averaged 60 according to the BC, but really we ran 83 mph +/- in Nevada, and 75 +/- through Oregon. Not too much head wind on this trip. But it was cooler so we had the flaps opened up all the way too. But this is common for our winter rides. We ride about 85% 2 up. Even in the summer in Central California with the flaps closed (90+ degrees) I have the windshield close to the top at speed and only drop it when going through slower zones. Speed much over 65 MPH is going to affect your gas mileage on this beast. The +2 with wings all the way up at +75 is going to be another major factor. That is one huge air dam you putting up and that WILL affect your mileage also, big time in my opinion.

You say you never get better than 38 MPG generally, have you followed the procedure to reset the Throttle Position Sensor (TPS)? On the LTs up to '05, you pull fuse #4 in the right most fuse box under the seat for an hour or so (I usually do it over night), this allows settings in the Motronic for the TPS get lost. That would be the right most fuse box when you sit on the bike. Replace the fuse and turn the bike fully on, but don't start it. Crank the throttle wide open and closed twice. Turn the bike off without starting it. When you start riding next time, the bike will relearn. It's just like pulling the battery on car and having the engine management system relearn how you drive. I don't know which fuse you pull for the '05s or newer.

I generally do the TPS reset everytime I service the bike, which is about every 6K miles for me. If I think the fuel economy is starting to drop off before then, well I pull the fuse earlier and let is set overnight. I've seen my mileage come back up as much as 6 MPG on a reset, that is until I put the newer throttle cables on my '00 and then it never was never that good again. :D

I hope this helps some.

[ben1364]

Speed much over 65 MPH is going to affect your gas mileage on this beast. The +2 with wings all the way up at +75 is going to be another major factor. That is one huge air dam you putting up and that WILL affect your mileage also, big time in my opinion.

You say you never get better than 38 MPG generally, have you followed the procedure to reset the Throttle Position Sensor (TPS)? On the LTs up to '05, you pull fuse #4 in the right most fuse box under the seat for an hour or so (I usually do it over night), this allows settings in the Motronic for the TPS get lost. That would be the right most fuse box when you sit on the bike. Replace the fuse and turn the bike fully on, but don't start it. Crank the throttle wide open and closed twice. Turn the bike off without starting it. When you start riding next time, the bike will relearn. It's just like pulling the battery on car and having the engine management system relearn how you drive. I don't know which fuse you pull for the '05s or newer.

I generally do the TPS reset everytime I service the bike, which is about every 6K miles for me. If I think the fuel economy is starting to drop off before then, well I pull the fuse earlier and let is set overnight. I've seen my mileage come back up as much as 6 MPG on a reset, that is until I put the newer throttle cables on my '00 and then it never was never that good again. :D

I hope this helps some.

Thanks for the tip, Steve. You noted that the TPS reset procedure is for LTs "up to 2005." Does this include 2005 models? Thanks again.
Ben

[Steve_R]

If I remember correctly, the 05 and up only have 2 fuse boxes under the seat and I don't remember anyone chiming in which fuse you pull on the newer LTs. I would have posted the info if I had known what it was. Sorry.

[ben1364]

If I remember correctly, the 05 and up only have 2 fuse boxes under the seat and I don't remember anyone chiming in which fuse you pull on the newer LTs. I would have posted the info if I had known what it was. Sorry.

Thanks Steve. I would bet a nickel that someone will chime in....
Ben

[MTGMAN]

Thanks Steve I'll look into it and give it a try.

[Voyager]

I have an '06 LT. It is getting 39 ~ 41 (best yet on the BC) mpg and when I fill it calculates at right about 40 mpg every time. I usually ride it on the highway at 75 ~ 80 mph. On surface streets, I usually use 3 ~ 4 gear and keep it in the happy zone (4 ~ 5 Krpm). I've tried lower rpms, but tall that does is lug the engine and doesn't affect gas milage (in a positive direction anyway).

I'm just trying to decide if that is as good as I'm going to get or not. Or if buying a stock Bosch O2 sensor, or something else, might help. But I'd really like some feedback from people with the newer models as to what they get for gas milage.

Oh, before I forget. I do live in CA. All the gas out here has 10% ethanol in it. So, that's what I use. Premium w/10% ethanol.

Probably not bad for the conditions you describe. My 2007 has averaged 47.8 for the nearly 5,000 miles I've ridden it. This is at speeds typically around 60 indicated (probably 54-55 actual) in the hills of northern PA. I think my overall high was about 53 MPG and my low was one of the first tanks when new and I think it was 38 or something in that neighborhood. I calculate each tank and it matches the BC within 1 MPG usually. If I run at 80 on the interstate, the BC drops to 42-44 MPG and I'm guessing that is about right. If I ride 50 on the back roads I'll indicate 52-56 which I also believe is pretty accurate.

[ArthurKnowles]

Thanks for all that you are doing Arthur. Your observations confirmed my suspicions with respect to the Universal 02 sensor. Re: measuring resistance values, do you know what the stock/new reading should be?

At this point I would bet a nickel that the # 15729 will do the trick.

Sorry, I was unable to find any specifications on any O2 sensor. And since you can't measure tehm except when in use or heated with a torch, it's not likely I'll be able to either.

I'm just going to replace it and go with the flow and see what happens. I'll keep the original just in case I need to reuse it.

[ben1364]

Sorry, I was unable to find any specifications on any O2 sensor. And since you can't measure tehm except when in use or heated with a torch, it's not likely I'll be able to either.

I'm just going to replace it and go with the flow and see what happens. I'll keep the original just in case I need to reuse it.

Sounds like a good plan. Please keep us posted.

Ben

[UKTzero]

Nope, not Mid Range. I'm running REGULAR with no modifications to the bike. Have never had a problem even pulling a trailer. Pulled a Kwik Kamp pop up fully loaded all the way from Florida to Oregon riding two up on my '99 and never had an issue.

2000LTC w/102k miles and no mods and gets 40.3-47.8 with a mix of highway and town driving

an interesting and disturbing side note ... 55mph gets around 48-54mpg compared to 75mpg getting 37-41 on my LT! - is the extra 15MPH really worth the gas sucking? not for me, so sometimes I'll be the one in the slow lane with the cruise set to 55-60 - lots of cars have started driving 55 in a 75 zone for the same reason

besides, why should any of us be looking for the shortest or fastest way to end our ride? ... that's not why I bought a bike - the longer it takes me to reach my destination, the better :)





I also usually run 87 reg. with both my LT and my FLHS ... every once in a while I'll put in 92 octane, but I never notice a difference in any way when I do it

the only 'picky' bike I own is a '05 Hayabusa that NEEDS 92+ or else it sounds like complete crap and acts like a baby about it (I put a tank of 87 in it once by mistake and drained it after about 15 mins of riding)

from my experience, 87 octane works great in my LT ... and I don't even know what the 'brown wire' does ... explain?

[Tom1200]

Any update on this????? Thinking I need to replace my o2 because I am burning rich.

[ArthurKnowles]

Yes, I'd posted a new thread but should have here too I guess. After the new O2 sensor I'm getting 3 ~ 5 mpg better. That's with the half tank I ran on it. It really needs a better run and a couple of tanks of gas to see where it is going to settle out, but it steadily performed better at the same speeds I was running on the highway. I usually average 75 mph (80 on the speedomer, but 75 on the GPS). I only use premium gas, but it also has 10% ethanol in it. You may do a whole lot better than me on gas without ethanol in it.

I've actually put the LT away for a bit as my wife is going to be busy for a while and I want to try out the RT for some more sportier rides. But in a couple of weeks, or sooner possibly, I'll take it out on some longer distance rides and see hwat it gets. I know I can help improve the performance by changing windshields too. I'm thining of a parabellum model. But as much for a better ride for the wife as milage. The stocker adds a lot of drag at full extension and that's what I use on the highway too.