OzSTOC
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: Kev Murphy on December 05, 2015, 12:31:36 PM
-
..it's ok, it was planned, I had spare 3 litres in side pannier.
I now have proof that the fuel reserve warning light does not operate. (It DOES flash when ignition is turned on, so that proves it is not the bulb)
-
I believe there is a low level switch on the fuel sender. So I guess that you may need to replaced the fuel sender unit
-
... at one hundred dollars for the unit, plus shipping, I think I will just continue to carry a splash of spare fuel, and guesstimate my mileage.
-
After a refuel, reset the trip meter and run until you have gone 400 Ks or the gauge needle is on the white line next to the red bar. I go about 420 - 450 Ks between fills
-
:thumb I can usually get around 600/620 on the highway, 450 around town
-
I believe there is a low level switch on the fuel sender. So I guess that you may need to replaced the fuel sender unit
Low level fuel sensor is on the fuel pump
http://www.st-riders.net/index.php?PHPSESSID=0c3qo7uhuh4fquh7dpn3arj8h2&topic=976.msg6775#msg6775 (http://www.st-riders.net/index.php?PHPSESSID=0c3qo7uhuh4fquh7dpn3arj8h2&topic=976.msg6775#msg6775)
The one for the gold wing is still available but stocks are low from David Silver Spares. It's not on the 1100 parts list which is why they use the Goldwing or a V-65 Magna (not sure if that came here). If the link fails the part number is at the end of the link.
http://www.davidsilverspares.co.uk/parts/by-part-number/hpart_37810MN5008/ (http://www.davidsilverspares.co.uk/parts/by-part-number/hpart_37810MN5008/)
The only other option is to either buy a new or a used pump or as I do fill the tank before it gets to the white low level mark.
(http://www.imghostr.net/images/2019/05/24/f40f9221906ae66e9cbf04ba070322e3.jpg)
-
:thumb I can usually get around 600/620 on the highway, 450 around town
^
600/620. What sort of fuel use figures is the bike indicating Kev?
-
On the highway with good weather conditions, I get around 22 Km per litre... that's travelling at constant 105/110 kph, traffic regulations permitting
-
I believe there is a low level switch on the fuel sender. So I guess that you may need to replaced the fuel sender unit
Low level fuel sensor is on the fuel pump
[url]http://www.st-riders.net/index.php?PHPSESSID=0c3qo7uhuh4fquh7dpn3arj8h2&topic=976.msg6775#msg6775[/url] ([url]http://www.st-riders.net/index.php?PHPSESSID=0c3qo7uhuh4fquh7dpn3arj8h2&topic=976.msg6775#msg6775[/url])
The one for the gold wing is still available but stocks are low from David Silver Spares. It's not on the 1100 parts list which is why they use the Goldwing or a V-65 Magna (not sure if that came here). If the link fails the part number is at the end of the link.
[url]http://www.davidsilverspares.co.uk/parts/by-part-number/hpart_37810MN5008/[/url] ([url]http://www.davidsilverspares.co.uk/parts/by-part-number/hpart_37810MN5008/[/url])
The only other option is to either buy a new or a used pump or as I do fill the tank before it gets to the white low level mark.
([url]http://www.imghostr.net/images/2019/05/24/f40f9221906ae66e9cbf04ba070322e3.jpg[/url])
I ordered the fuel sensor from David Silver Spares this afternoon plus an aftermarket air filter.
Waiting on email from them as they won't send until I accept the postage charges and an estimated time of delivery
Order information
1 x 17211MT3000P - Air filter (GBP 15.00) - GBP 15.00
1 x 37810MN5008 - FUEL RES SENSOR *Y (GBP 47.71) - GBP 47.71
Total: GBP 62.71
Delivery: GBP 0.00
Total: GBP 62.71
-
On the highway with good weather conditions, I get around 22 Km per litre... that's travelling at constant 105/110 kph, traffic regulations permitting
Wow! I'm with Gatey. 105-110 is not the optimum speed range for best economy. Slow as it is, 80 kph returns the best economy on most vehicles. I wouldn't be selling that bike, it's got the perfect carby, compression, manifold porting etc etc.
-
On the highway with good weather conditions, I get around 22 Km per litre... that's travelling at constant 105/110 kph, traffic regulations permitting
Wow! I'm with Gatey. 105-110 is not the optimum speed range for best economy. Slow as it is, 80 kph returns the best economy on most vehicles. I wouldn't be selling that bike, it's got the perfect carby, compression, manifold porting etc etc.
I get around 380-400 from a tank around town, slightly less on a trip, but then our speed limits are not conducive to economical fuel usage......
-
On the highway with good weather conditions, I get around 22 Km per litre... that's travelling at constant 105/110 kph, traffic regulations permitting
Wow! I'm with Gatey. 105-110 is not the optimum speed range for best economy. Slow as it is, 80 kph returns the best economy on most vehicles. I wouldn't be selling that bike, it's got the perfect carby, compression, manifold porting etc etc.
I find that 90 k/h seems the best speed for best economy for k/l when towing but Heather complains and tells me I'm riding like an old man at that speed......
-
Coming back from Balranald I rode via Naranderra and it was looking tight, so slowed to 80 km/h and that improved fuel efficiency enough to get to West Wyalong with 0.6 litre to spare.
-
Coming back from Balranald I rode via Naranderra and it was looking tight, so slowed to 80 km/h and that improved fuel efficiency enough to get to West Wyalong with 0.6 litre to spare.
That's cutting it extremely fine. I've seen it quit with 1.2 litres on board.
I guess when it gets to tenths of a litre a difference of one millimetre in the pick-up position will be critical.
-
Wow after my first long ride I thought that maybe my st was a little thirsty but after reading everyone's comments on what they get I feel relieved as mine is using the average that you blokes are talking about, cheers for that fellars :runyay :thumbs
cheers
mark
-
I've previously posted these figures elsewhere on the forum, but they are relevant to this discussion. Some year ago while riding across the Barkly Highway, I did some fuel consumption tests. It was a windless day, and the terrain was quite flat. I would ride for around five kilometers at the quoted speed and note what fuel consumption was indicated.
4.4 l/100 km at 80 km/h
4.7 l/100 km at 100 km/h
6.0 l/100 km at 120 km/h
6.4 l/100 km at 140 km/h
-
I've previously posted these figures elsewhere on the forum, but they are relevant to this discussion. Some year ago while riding across the Barkly Highway, I did some fuel consumption tests. It was a windless day, and the terrain was quite flat. I would ride for around five kilometers at the quoted speed and note what fuel consumption was indicated.
4.4 l/100 km at 80 km/h
4.7 l/100 km at 100 km/h
6.0 l/100 km at 120 km/h
6.4 l/100 km at 140 km/h
Pete, those L/100km numbers don't mean much to me and maybe others so:-
4.4 l/100 km at 80 km/h = 22.72 K/L
4.7 l/100 km at 100 km/h = 21.28 K/L
6.0 l/100 km at 120 km/h = 16.67 K/L
6.4 l/100 km at 140 km/h = 15.63 K/L
My overall average since 3rd Jan 2014 is 16.4 K/L (in my signature) and that includes a worst of 13.16 K/L and best 20.57 K/L
-
I want to travel @ 100 kph from ACT to Brisbane, a distance of 1250 kms.
Using Peter's method
There are 12.5 lots of 100 kms in 1,250 kms (do it in your head)
Multiply 12.5 x 4.7 for the number of litres I'll use, 58.7 litres
Using Alan's method
Divide 1250 by 21.28 = 58.7 litres
Having finished my schooling before personal calculators and computers were invented I can use a pen and paper to arrive at an answer using either of the above methods, though I'll admit that I would prefer to multiply than divide.
I tend to set the bike's computer to display litres/100 kms for no particular reason.
I usually get under 6L/100kms. If it's more than that I know I'm riding in the NT or into a headwind.
-
Having finished my schooling before personal calculators and computers were invented I can use a pen and paper to arrive at an answer using either of the above methods, though I'll admit that I would prefer to multiply than divide.
Same here Lionel but I just prefer to use a calculator.
I tend use K/L as a carry over from the old mpg days as it makes sense after all we never used gallons/100 miles did we?
-
Same here Lionel but I just prefer to use a calculator.
I tend use K/L as a carry over from the old mpg days as it makes sense after all we never used gallons/100 miles did we?
The logic is that we are talking about consumption, i.e. litres per km (or 100 km, to make the litres useful, rather than millilitres).
Km per litre is really referencing range.
-
Over the last 6 years, pretty much to the day, I have averaged 16.67 Ks per litre, or 48 MPG, or exactly 6 L per 100 Ks. speeds were around 100 - 120Ks usualy. Average speed is about 85 Ks, though I dont have data for that.
Any one who has studied statistics, will know that the data having been taken over 6 yrs at every fill up (usualy every week) over 118801.50 Ks means that continued sampling, isnt going to change the the average result isnt going to change by any appreciable amount.
so to plan for 1250 Ks , I would expect to use 75 Litres. formula is D(istance to go) x L(iteres per 100) / 100.
(1250*6)/100 = 75 Liters required. Average expected range to reserve (orange light) was about 400 Ks, and to empty about 500 Ks.
So, if we ride to orange light, we can expect to take about 20 liter of fuel, and a 15 liter top up on arrival.
-
Brock, averages are ok as a guide only but individual tank km can be all over the place especially if one use a trailer, going solo, riding two up, or any combination thereof and including the total weight. I'm not going to get the same k/l figure if I tow the trailer compared to riding solo. Looking at my fuel usage with the trailer I'd say 14 k/l is a good average so that 1250 km trip for me would work out to about 90 litres
-
True Allan,
I rarely carry a passenger, and havent towed a trailer, so I dont have the data for that.
I guess 5 tanks 2 up and 5 tanks with a trailer, and 5 2 up and trailer would give reasonable data to predict range for any situation.
-
I can see the benefits of both.
Took me a while to adapt to l/100 km from mpg.
I chose to go with l/100km on the bike because it gave me a good comparison to the cars built in consumption figures.
km/l is handy when you want to work out how far you can go on a tank by just multiplying tank capacity by the consumption.
I also like l/100 km because a smaller number indicates better performance. When trying to be frugal and using less, it seems counterintuitive to chase larger numbers.
-
Then there is of course the speedo error which on a few ST's among others can be found to be reading as high as 8km/h above the actual speed as measured by GPS.
My own bike reads 6.3km/h above actual when travelling at a constant 100km/h
So if the ( example of the OP's ) bikes running at 105km/h its most likely only doing perhaps 98.7km/h hence a good set of figures.
And that little speedo error only grows by a bit as you get faster. Say 130km/h by the dial might feel fast but it's probably not yet touching the 125 mark.
This little issue isn't an ST only error. Its common on all manner of bikes from every mainstream manufacturer we have on the shelves in this country and OS. Which makes you wonder why the car you drive is so accurate at measuring your speed but the bike is not?
-
Car is not that accurate either. This might shed some light on speedo laws http://www.mrasa.asn.au/speedometers.shtml (http://www.mrasa.asn.au/speedometers.shtml)
-
My GPS indicates that my speedo has a 10 KPH error, but I travel at GPS speed. The 620 k distance recorded by the speedo then becomes a true distance of 558 km per tankfull.
I have an upcoming trip in two weeks from Portland, Vic to Morgan, SA, which by google maps is a distance of 632 Km, so it will be interesting to check the actual speedo reading for this trip.
I have never actually done a fuel reading by true distance covered, but I know from previous trips to Morgan that I require an extra 4 litres more than the tank holds to get there. This drops my true economy to 19.75 Km/litre from 22 km/litre as indicated by the odometer.
It also explains why I can ride from here to Adelaide on one tankfull, and still have a splash onboard when I arrive, because the true distance is 533 km, not the odometer reading of 587 km. Still, 19.75 km per litre is pretty good economy for highway speeds.
Hmmm... this also means my bike is younger than I thought, only 150 k on the clock,not the 170 k recorded?
Sheesh!, no wonder the timing belt showed no sign of wear when I changed it, at an indicated 150k?
(http://i1029.photobucket.com/albums/y352/kjm47/Bikes/Image1_zps9c8pefxq.jpg)
Edited to correct typos :p
-
Cars over read as well.
-
Great answer Kev and you make an excelent point about the true age / milage of our bikes too.
And an ST or similar that's producing 19.75 km/l is working well.
Even if your ( the general mobs ) bikes is READING 19.75 km/l that's probably not a bad figure across the board.
-
The speedo is out, but the Odometer is accurate
-
The speedo is out, but the Odometer is accurate
:think1 so... they fit an instrument that is correct in one aspect, and confusing in another. One would expect that if one travels at a constant indicated 100 kph, then 60 minutes later one would be 100 km further on ones journey, not shortchanged by a factor of up to 10%. Where did Honda get this idea from, have they been adapting instruments to this idea from Australian Politics where we are told one thing, and presented with another??
Its known worldwide as 'The Porky Pie Principle', (altho it should be spelled 'Principal', because it invariably causes us to dip our hand into our pockets yet again)
-
Its not just Honda, its every one cars included. Its all to do with the tolerance of the instrument, and the rules (ADRs for example) that state how the instrument must indicate.
The speedo can be made to be accurate on speed and distance ( see police spec bikes), however, changing tyres can change the reading. also tyre pressures can affect the speed indication.
One of the design rules for a speedo is that it must not under read IE, indicate 95 when true speed is 100. The fix is to make the speedo read 100 when doing actual 95. This way, the manufacturer cant be held responsible for you exceeding the speed limit. Digital computer driven speedos are even easier to make over read. The computer will do something like "Speed indicated = true speed +1% true speed +2"
-
The speedo is out, but the Odometer is accurate
No Brock both measures are out hence the corrected distances IBA will endeavour to check.
Between a well kept FJR that I know and travel with compared to my TDM and my ST over thousands of K's together....and similar with HD's, Trumpys and so on the odometers never ever tally with each other ( on that very same trip together) or the actual distance as measured on bike mounted GPS and the various map systems.
Its disappointing realy.
Kev rest assured its not a Honda thing...its in every bike on this planet regardless of colour or creed.
-
It will be interesting to check readings on my upcoming trip in a weeks time, compared to google, just to satisfy my own curiosity. :thumb
-
Just have a real good look at your google route Kev. Roll down to check its not taking you around town to get at the GPO. Mildura is one trap that comes to mind. BUT Those little towns never seem to add that un-expected loop. All Google maps route off the nearest GPO. Examples of that twisted sister are places like Tamworth which has several GPO areas within its boundary,Dubbo another & Mildura as noted, Correct Me if I'm wrong, Mt Gambier too has an east and west GPO. I know it used to.
Port Augusta will post a distance and only once you read through the rout directions will you discover that entry from the Adelaide side for an exit to the north will more often than not want you doing a loope round Bond St, Alexander St and Coonara ( past the LPO to bring you back at the lights you passed through a few moments ago from the right.
Point here is take a bloody good look at your route and adjust accordingly so as not to map extra distance and stuff up your test Kev. Results are often what others are looking for.
-
I don't necessarily follow the GPS directions into towns, but usually just pass straight through them. :like
-
Correct we all do but Google map will sort your route to GPO.
You end up with a Google map route figure then the GPS on your bike then the dash Odo and after that its sort of X-Files to probe the results.
Keep us posted Kev. If you get the opportunity test the corrections over each K in a 5Klm run against the distance markers. Just for the fun of it.
-
Will do.
-
I planned my route for last years Border Ride and Google gave me a 2179 return and odo gave me 2135 km return and GPS gives 2042 return so I think my odo is more accurate than Google compared to my GPS
-
When I'm using Google maps that way, I put in the town's main enroute intersection co-ordinates instead of the town name. That defeats the nonsense Gatey warns about.
Another thing it does that annoys me is add in loops when you drag the route to a different road. You can sometimes defeat that by zooming in close to be precise about where you're dragging the dot to.
-
The map above is direct, point to point, door to door.. no diversions. Be interesting to check my odometer reading when I get there next Friday
-
never trusted fuel gauge or lights, fill up , reset trip. when its gets to 400 fill up simple simple
-
Why should I fill at 400, when I regularly travel well over 500 per tankfull?
-
well Ive had mine along time its a 1990 model 27 litre tank 16k per litre = 432 400 gives me 32 k lee way but thats just me and the way I ride. you get 500 still easy :)
-
Mine is a 98 model, non ABS, and I have ridden it over 80,000 km in the past 4 and a half years, so I am pretty aware of how little fuel it guzzles on trips. Nothing wrong with 16 k per litre, but I consistently get more than that, even when tootling around town.
-
Its actually a 28 liter tank, a couple of times its taken 27.6 ltrs
Once I ran out.....
-
well Ive had mine along time its a 1990 model 27 litre tank 16k per litre = 432 400 gives me 32 k lee way but thats just me and the way I ride. you get 500 still easy :)
Before my fuel reserve light failed I would generally get around 400 km when the light lit up. Refill was generally 24 litres plus/minus 1/2 a litre so I guess average was about 16.7 k/l which is fairly close to my current average in the signature below. I aim to fill up now between 350-400km or about 300-350 km when towing.
Its actually a 28 liter tank, a couple of times its taken 27.6 ltrs
Once I ran out.....
I actually managed a fill of 27.5 litres; once ever for 472 km