Posted by saddlebag on June 6, 2009, 4:21 pm
Just thought I'd let you know I checked out the FJR mileage. Mine is
running PCIII stock map with a few low throttle opening changes of my
doing, without the 02 sensor. Ran 144 miles and needed 3 gallons.
This yields an average of 48 mpg. Meter reading was 50.1. Using the
ratio as a calibration factor, I was still getting near 54 mpg when I
saw 56 mpg avg. Not entirely shabby IMHO...
Posted by Mark Olson on June 6, 2009, 5:16 pm
saddlebag wrote:
> Just thought I'd let you know I checked out the FJR mileage. Mine is
> running PCIII stock map with a few low throttle opening changes of my
> doing, without the 02 sensor. Ran 144 miles and needed 3 gallons.
> This yields an average of 48 mpg. Meter reading was 50.1. Using the
> ratio as a calibration factor, I was still getting near 54 mpg when I
> saw 56 mpg avg. Not entirely shabby IMHO...
That's quite good.
I wouldn't expect with a PC III that there is a single ratio of
displayed vs. actual mpg which always applies, it is going to vary
depending on what areas of the PC III map you are operating in.
If you spent 99% of your time in an area where the map is 5%
richer your consumption would by 5% greater than the computer
displays, etc. Of course the trip computer isn't 100% correct
in the first place, but before I installed the PC III it was
pretty close and tracked well from really hard riding to gentle
bimbling.
XML Sitemap
> running PCIII stock map with a few low throttle opening changes of my
> doing, without the 02 sensor. Ran 144 miles and needed 3 gallons.
> This yields an average of 48 mpg. Meter reading was 50.1. Using the
> ratio as a calibration factor, I was still getting near 54 mpg when I
> saw 56 mpg avg. Not entirely shabby IMHO...