BMW Luxury Touring Community banner

1 - 20 of 32 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
45 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I've seen reports here and there that the K1200LT gets 50+ mpg. If that is so, I can make a good argument for an LT for me as a commuting vehicle. Since my wife won't ride behind me on either of my current bikes (no back rest on the R80RT or R1100R) it would also encourage her to join me on two wheels. Please share your fuel economy experience with me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
86 Posts
Hey Mark, my '99 LT routinely gets 50-52 mpg and I am 6' 285lbs. Of course your riding style and state of engine tune will greatly affect this. I do not ride mine like it's a crotch rocket and I live in Denver where the altitude is over 5,000ft. My results are slightly higher than what is typical. I've heard most LT's averaging around 45, which is still much better than the GW mileage.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
I commute 38 miles each way with speed limits varying from 25 mph to 55 mph. My 2003 LT averages 46 mpg.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Mark, after reading "Lumpy's" reply I realized I should have included the bike's weight load. I'm 6'6" weighing 275. In Florida all the roads are FLAT. (mostly)
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
588 Posts
I've gotten as low as mid 30's under some extreme riding conditions and as high as 59mpg on a tank, 2 up cruising on back roads on vacation. I'd say 45mpg is pretty typical.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,406 Posts
To put it in perspective, it is basicly this ......

Denser or colder air takes more fuel to get the proper Air/Fuel ratio

Thinner or hotter air takes less fuel to get the proper Air/Fuel ratio

So those bikes running at higher elavation & hotter climates will get better mileage than those running at lower elavations & colder climates.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
45 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
motorhead said:
To put it in perspective, it is basicly this ......

Denser or colder air takes more fuel to get the proper Air/Fuel ratio

Thinner or hotter air takes less fuel to get the proper Air/Fuel ratio

So those bikes running at higher elavation & hotter climates will get better mileage than those running at lower elavations & colder climates.
I'm in Connecticut, I weigh 195 lbs, and my commute is a mostly flat 35 miles with some stop & go traffic on bad days. Is 50 mpg an unreasonable expectation for that environment?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,089 Posts
Riding double, average 43 or so. Have gotten as good as 52 and down below 30 when having some high speed fun.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,305 Posts
I've found the main determinant in MPG to be MPH. Regardless of one or two up, I'll get in the mid-to high- 50's IF I cruise at 65. Hit the slab at 80+ and MPG drops to low- to mid- 40's.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
832 Posts
The only time that my LT ever went over 50 mpg was after a gas fill up/BC computer re-set leaving the gas station easing up thru the gears and not going over 50 mph on flat Illinois backroads. I just wanted to see how high I could get the average mpg up to.

In the real world, I get mid 40's, a little more if you really take it easy.
On a trip, loaded up and truckin' like Jerry Reed, 75-80 on the slab with wind, I've gone down onto the thirties. I don't know how these guys are in the fifties.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
809 Posts
10-miles each way, in-town traffic (traffic lights are timed) I get 42; at 65 mph on the highway, usually 50-52. One-up, 210 lbs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
296 Posts
Mpg

2000 LTC with 75000 miles of two up travel mostly on the back roads. The average MPG for all those miles is 51.2. We don't push the limits since we are retired and have the time to enjoy the trip.

Bob Schrader
Wentzville, Mo.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
938 Posts
Lumpy said:
Hey Mark, my '99 LT routinely gets 50-52 mpg and I am 6' 285lbs. Of course your riding style and state of engine tune will greatly affect this. I do not ride mine like it's a crotch rocket and I live in Denver where the altitude is over 5,000ft. My results are slightly higher than what is typical. I've heard most LT's averaging around 45, which is still much better than the GW mileage.
I concur with Lumpy. I live in the Denver metro area. In the summer I can see mileage as high as 58 - 60 in the mountains when it is warmer (for Colorado). I just filled up my tank in town and have been in stop & go traffic for most of the tank. Gunning it some and winding it up some and having a little fun as well. My figures were just about 48 mpg in 30 - 48 degrees with higher humidity. This is one up and I am over 200 lbs. My bike is an '03LTC.

I routinely get over 50 mpg when I take it easy. But, when I really push it in the twisties, I can see low to mid 40s.. But, averaging 65 on the speedo in standard highway driving well over 50 mpg.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
558 Posts
If your commute riding would be a lot of stop and go riding and or short trips mileage would ge less. I don't use my bikes to commute to work or shopping but on the road my 99LT usually is in the 55-58 range. 67.8 has been it's high tank and it has been under 50 mabe a half dozen times. Most of my riding is in the 60-70 mph range. Going past 70 mileage drops into the low 50's.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
225 Posts
I just got my 2000LT with 40k miles on it. Riding 2up with a combination of US1 50mph to Daytona and I95 running 90mph(and a cpl of 100mph passes) back then to Sanford with the cruise set at 65 I got 46.5 mpg.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
293 Posts
46-48 mpg, mostly commuting 22 miles each way. Combination of open divided road at 55- 65 with stop and go lights here and there. I'm sure I could break 50 without the traffic lights. Always solo riding for those numbers. A little better in summer than in winter.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,886 Posts
Not the LOADED cost!

I get around 45 MPG and that is GREAT, but, if you want to really figure your cost per mile, you must also factor in the cost of replacing tires about every 15,000 miles. Not much better than a cage..... and then how many people can you put into the car X your milage. Face it, we ride because we like to ride. Economics has little to do with it.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,175 Posts
kk610lt said:
The only time that my LT ever went over 50 mpg was after a gas fill up/BC computer re-set leaving the gas station easing up thru the gears and not going over 50 mph on flat Illinois backroads. I just wanted to see how high I could get the average mpg up to.

In the real world, I get mid 40's, a little more if you really take it easy.
On a trip, loaded up and truckin' like Jerry Reed, 75-80 on the slab with wind, I've gone down onto the thirties. I don't know how these guys are in the fifties.
I am with you.

I still cant believe these 50 on up MPG figures.

Maybe I am just jealous?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
72 Posts
On my 2001 stock bike I get 52-54mpg solo weighing 190 running 60-65mph. Two up, it drops down to around 48 +/-. At high altitude last summer in the mountains of Wyoming, I've seen upper 60's, almost 70mpg's and that correlates with what someone else mentioned earlier about thinner air taking less fuel for the optimum fuel/air mixture. I'm not a real fast rider for the most part, 70mph on a four lane is about as fast as I normally ride, so my mileage probably reflects more of how I ride the bike!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
225 Posts
Dan, you are right on about figuring out the "cost" per mile but I know it sure feels better filling up the LT for $15 then it does $70 per tank in the truck. Yes, I do like to ride!
Hip
 
1 - 20 of 32 Posts
Top