BMW Luxury Touring Community banner

1 - 20 of 34 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
199 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I just purchased a 2003 LTE with 10K miles.

Fuel mileage is significantly lower than I ever got on my 2000 LTC, which now has 120K on ODO.

2000 routinely got 47 - 50 mpg when running a true 70 mph. 2003 is getting only 38-41. Bike has had complete 12K service.

Is there something that can be done to boost fuel performance?

Were there any mileage problems with 2003 LT's?

What could be done to get fuel mileage up where the 2000 model performed?

Love the '03 brakes, rack, intercom, gps, smoothness/quietness of transmission. Just hate to give up the great mileage I am used to.

Any ideas?
 

·
Cat Herder
Joined
·
1,469 Posts
I feel your pain

I have a '02 LTE and it get about 38 or so MPG in the winter (today) and about 40 - 42 in the summer months. I run about 75 and above all the time and the only way I can get high milage is to run 60 and under. So I feel your pain about mileage, it should be much higher.

I am taking it in very soon for the 12k mile check up and I am going to see if they can disconnect the charcoal canister and get bet get air flow to the motor and the gas tank(to much vacuum when I take the cap off)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,905 Posts
Are you aware of the difference in the 5th gear ratios between the 2 bikes? Also...have you checked the actual mileage, or are you and have you been using only the BC? Perhaps the BC on the newer LT needs calibrated?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
558 Posts
Gas mileage will vary from bike to bike. If all things are the same they should be very close. The early LT's had a higher gear ratio in high gear that gave a bit better gas mileage. Judging from my LT's mileage at speed I doubt that just gearing would make that much of a difference but then I haven't ridden one of the newer versions.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,561 Posts
Mileage on my '03 is 35-37 at 65 mph......................
(45-50 degree weather)
I have a lot of carbon in the tail pipe, could it be running too rich ?
I usually shift above 4500 and try to keep it in that area while cruising.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
199 Posts
John

Not sure this will help you, but my 03 gets lower mileage than my 00. Not sure what it is, but my 00 got around 48 at 65-75 true and my 03 gets around 40 .

Jim in GA
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
192 Posts
I'm the same as tlb160 on my 2000. Usually run 48+ at actual 70-75 figured with a pencil (I don't have a BC). I knew the newer bikes had slightly revised gearing but a 20% drop in mileage is a lot.

Check a couple of tanks with a calculator and see it matches the BC.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,905 Posts
Fountain said:
I'm the same as tlb160 on my 2000. Usually run 48+ at actual 70-75 figured with a pencil (I don't have a BC).
OK! Give it up! What's this "pencil" farkle you speak of?!?! We want pics! You got a link?! :D



Fountain said:
I knew the newer bikes had slightly revised gearing but a 20% drop in mileage is a lot.
If those morons put a true OD gear in the LT (read: 6 speed), we wouldn't be having this discussion.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
192 Posts
messenger13 said:
OK! Give it up! What's this "pencil" farkle you speak of?!?! We want pics! You got a link?! :D

I'm ashamed to say that I've had my bike 5 1/2 years and it's pretty much "farkel-less". I've added a GPS and change the windshield between the Euro version and a Cee Bailey depending on the weather, but other than that it's still pretty much the way it was born.

If those morons put a true OD gear in the LT (read: 6 speed), we wouldn't be having this discussion.
I would love a 6 speed with the same top gear but closer ratios between 3 & 6 like the RS/GT. (First thru third are the same on the GT and LT). I understand they had to take a gear out of the LT trans to make room for the reverse.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,905 Posts
Fountain said:
I would love a 6 speed with the same top gear but closer ratios between 3 & 6 like the RS/GT. (First thru third are the same on the GT and LT). I understand they had to take a gear out of the LT trans to make room for the reverse.
I wouldn't mind a little closer ratio...but I want 6th to be a real desert dog gear. Cruising at 75mph (actual) at about 2800RPMs. That would be sweet!

As for making room for reverse...um...are you sure? I don't think so. The LT uses Neutral, then the starter motor to drive the tranny in reverse direction. There is no "reverse" gear, per se. I could be wrong...but I don't think so.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,565 Posts
My guess is there are two things contributing to this -

  1. The infamous "brown wire" was cut on your 03 LT, which moves it to the full rich fual mapping at all times. This eradicates the low rom hesitation that caused a few tipovers in low speed tight turns, but the tradeoff is lower gas mileage.
  2. The 5th gear ratio on the 00 LT was an overdrive; on the 02 and newer they went to a closer ratio 5th gear to 4th gear to resolve complaints of hard up/downshifts and the big power dropoff on upshifts between those two gears. Nicer shifting but the engine turns 4-500 rpms more in top gear, thus using more fuel.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,424 Posts
messenger13 said:
If those morons put a true OD gear in the LT (read: 6 speed), we wouldn't be having this discussion.
Now where's that whipping a dead horse emoticon you like to use on Ken Meese. ;) :p
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
68 Posts
How are you calculating your mileage??

My '03 that was new in 8/04 has averaged 44.5 mpg over it's 9300 miles. This comes from actual fill records.

The On-board Computer usually calculates and displays somewhere between 35 to 40 mpg.

Unfortunately, most of my miles have been around-town type driving. with a fair bit of that being in cool temps down to around 25F. I've only been able to get it on short road trips (200-300 miles) a few of times. On those, I've gotten close to 50 mpg with the OB reading 40-45 mpg most of the time and around 50 mpg.

So, if you are getting your mpg from the OB, don't be to confident of the information.

Harv
 

·
IBR# 366
Joined
·
16,560 Posts
If they put in a larger 5th or 6th, they'd have to up the power significantly. The current 5th gives up too much grunt as it is. Or is that just over 100 mph? :)

And there still needs to be a gear in there somewhere for reverse. Otherwise the starter motor would make the bike go forward. :eek:

messenger13 said:
I could be wrong...
'Nuf said. ;)
 

·
IBR# 366
Joined
·
16,560 Posts
There is a procedure to recalculate the on-Board Computer. There is a multiplication factor that can be adjusted to make the readout closer to your calculations.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
199 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
Thanks for all your input

Thanks to everyone who responded to my post.

Sounds like my mileage is typical for an 03. I suspected a lower gear ratio in 5th because I could swear the rpm are a bit higher than I remembered on my 2000. Plus, it has much more acceleration in a 5th gear roll-on. So, that would completely explain the drop in mileage.

By the way, its okay with me to give up some mileage to get better performance. The range on my tank today was still over 280 miles running 65-70mph. That's still much better than my buddy's 97 Gold Wing.

Thanks again.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
49 Posts
Farkels?

Pencil and sticky notes on the windshield.
I HAVE to do that for the next meeting.
Everyone else has $10,000 worth of electronics on the handle bars.
I can come in with my little suction cup stuck to the windshield with a coiled plastic line with a pencil dangling on the end, with yellow stickies all over the windshield!

man, they'd make me go park in the back lot for sure.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
938 Posts
I have an '03 LTC with around 17.5K on it in Colorado and I am getting between 50 - 52 MPG on average and have been since I bought it last year. Of course we are at 5700 feet elevation. I also have mostly been using regular gas most of the time. That figure is combined highway and city driving with highway speeds of no less then 65 mph (speedo measured)..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,406 Posts
Recalibrating TPS .... ???

My Y2K LT is getting worse than normal mileage this season :(

Did my 24K service over the winter ( Nothing mechical changed ) and have gone from 45 / 55 mpg years past to @ 38/40 so far this spring ( @ 2K so far )

I read someplace that if battery or motronic fuse is disconnected for a few hours (It was) ... That you need to Reset TPS (Throttle Position Sensor) by rotateing throttle grip from idle to full several times without starting engine, but with key on ? :think:

I never did this after having battery OUT of bike for a few weeks.
Just reassembled bike, installed battery, started her up & went riding :eek:

Could THIS be a cause for consern & something to redo ?

Scott
 
1 - 20 of 34 Posts
Top