Wildguzzi.com
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: DonTom on November 15, 2016, 08:49:39 AM
-
About how far can a 2016 Stelvio go on a tank of gas? Is the entire 8.5 gallons in the tank usable? Around what MPG does it average?
And what Octane (USA) is required?
I am seriously thinking about buying one. I would appreciate any other info. on this bike as well.
-Don- Reno, NV
-
I do 500 km on o e tank. And then there is still some left 95 octane in Europe
Verstuurd vanaf mijn mobiel
-
DonTom, in the US the 2016 Stelvio has a 8.5 gallon tank. That 5.5 gallon tank was prior to the '12 model in the USA. I can tell you that the 8.5 gallons are all available. 300 mile range is not out of the question. I have done 250 miles many times before stopping for gas. Your fuel mileage will vary depending on the map you have installed, ambient temp, head wind, and rain (which cools the engine so much that the ECU sends more fuel to be burned). Some people report mid 40s mpg, I plan on 35 mpg.
In other markets you can buy a Stelvio with either the large or small tank.
Peter Y.
-
35-40 mpg is widely reported, so 280-320 miles range if you use 8-gallons.
-
DonTom, in the US the 2016 Stelvio has a 8.5 gallon tank. That 5.5 gallon tank was prior to the '12 model in the USA. I can tell you that the 8.5 gallons are all available. 300 mile range is not out of the question. I have done 250 miles many times before stopping for gas. Your fuel mileage will vary depending on the map you have installed, ambient temp, head wind, and rain (which cools the engine so much that the ECU sends more fuel to be burned). Some people report mid 40s mpg, I plan on 35 mpg.
In other markets you can buy a Stelvio with either the large or small tank.
Peter Y.
Early models were 4.78 gallons.
-
My 2012 Stelvio (8.5 gal) will do at least 250 miles when the tank shows empty on the gauge. I then have at least 1.6 gallons left, maybe 2, so, another 35 miles at least on the reserve. 280-320 miles on a full tank.
-
On my '12 (8.5Ga) I would generally run 130/150 miles, get off and walk around (I'm old and my legs need the exercise), get back on and run another 130/150 miles, stop and refill the tank (again take a short walk around). That would give me 270 miles on the tank before fill-up. I seldom put in more than 7/7.5 Ga.
The yellow warning light would light at 230/235 miles and if I stopped almost right then it would take 6.0/6.2 Ga.
My typical mileage for a complete trip would be 38/39.5 MPG. I travel 5-7 MPH over the posted limit, frequently in cruise control.
All the above is in the past tense. My Stelvio now lives up near Cleveland with Mark Elliott. My current ride is an '07 R1200R with a 4.7 Ga tank. My riding habits have not changed -- I still do the 150 miles or so and get off for a walk around. Now, however, I also have to fill the tank at the same time. :sad:
-
My 13 varies greatly by how I ride it. Typically about 300 miles to a tank but never taking more than about 7 1/2 gals at that point. On a recent trip to Utah with my friends who all road Harleys and and kept a very slow pace while visiting all the natural parks and such my range increased substantially. One day we did a 277mile loop and I was still showing 2 bars out of 6 and the bikes computer showed 58mpg for the day, I know its reads high but still pretty impressive. The guys called it the super tanker.
-
Thanks for all the replies. I am a bit surprised the MPG is rather poor for a newer bike. My 1971 BMW R75/5 has about the same MPG as reported here for the Stelvio.
I now own 5 motorcycles, the Stelvio will be my sixth.
I was hoping the Stelvio could do 400 miles average on a tank.
My 2013 Triumph Trophy SE averages around 52 MPG. Has a 6.6 gallon tank in the USA (6.9 gal in most other countries). I have gotten as high as 61 MPG, as low as 46. 1215 CC, 3 cylinder. I would have expected the Stelvio to be close to that . And my TTSE also runs on 87 octane. 343 mile range.
So it looks like the Stelvio has about the same range as my TTSE, even though the Stelvio has nearly two gallons more in fuel capacity.
-Don- Reno, NV
-
My 13 varies greatly by how I ride it. Typically about 300 miles to a tank but never taking more than about 7 1/2 gals at that point. On a recent trip to Utah with my friends who all road Harleys and and kept a very slow pace while visiting all the natural parks and such my range increased substantially. One day we did a 277mile loop and I was still showing 2 bars out of 6 and the bikes computer showed 58mpg for the day, I know its reads high but still pretty impressive. The guys called it the super tanker.
If you can do 300 miles and still have a gallon left than means your total range must be close to 340 miles or about the same as my TTSE on 6.6 gallons. That's usually more than enough range anyway.
Fuel range is important to me and for good reasons. For an example, around six weeks ago, I filled up my TTSE fuel tank in LakeView, OR. I then rode the bike to Denio, NV where the ONLY gas station for countless miles was closed for maintenance repairs. So then I had to ride to Winnamecca, NV to get my next gas. Was more than 250 miles between gas stations.
But I was hoping the range on the Stelvio would be even more than my TTSE. And I also noticed a spec that it requires 94 octane. Is that by the USA method? He in NV, about the higehst octane I ever see is 92. My TTSE is fine on 87. How about the Stelvio?
-Don- Reno, NV
-
I ran 89 octane in mine without problems.
-
And I also noticed a spec that it requires 94 octane. Is that by the USA method? He in NV, about the higehst octane I ever see is 92. My TTSE is fine on 87. How about the Stelvio?
-Don- Reno, NV
The octane requirement (US fuel, measured as RON+MON divided by 2) is nominally 90 - so premium in most locations. This applies to virtually all fuel injected Moto Guzzis in North America (i.e., I've never ever seen one where the manual or tank sticker said different).
The spec for 94 octane is likely the RON only, as listed in Europe and some other areas. This number is generally higher for the same fuel than the R+M/2 value.
Many Guzzi owners report having no problems running mid-grade (usually 89) octane or even 87 octane regular fuel. Others are absolute devotees of premium, no-ethanol premium, or even low-octane avgas mixed in (usually 100 octane or higher). Many threads on this forum and others have given their lives to the topic of proper fuel selection, second only to 'what's the best oil'?
My own Norge (similar engine, very minor differences) is quite happy with 89-91 octane and doesn't seem to care about standard levels of ethanol. When I buy a Stelvio it will likely have a diet of the same. And I am also in Nevada.
-
Why does my Norge computer say I get 50mpg? Is the Stelvio really that much of a pig?
-
Why does my Norge computer say I get 50mpg? Is the Stelvio really that much of a pig?
The Norge computers are wildly inaccurate. Some read high, most read low, few if any read near reality.
The Stelvio often eats more fuel than the Norge, due to a number of factors including wind resistance (i.e., barn door at speed), different mapping, and so on. It isn't always down at the 30-32mpg area, but it is often worse than other 1200 MGs.
-
The Norge computers are wildly inaccurate. Some read high, most read low, few if any read near reality.
The Stelvio often eats more fuel than the Norge, due to a number of factors including wind resistance (i.e., barn door at speed), different mapping, and so on. It isn't always down at the 30-32mpg area, but it is often worse than other 1200 MGs.
Yikes, sounds almost like the old Honda Valkyrie?
-
:Beating_A_Dead_Hors e_by_liviu
Well I would get better MPG if my right hand was not in love with what happens when you TWIST it....
My 09 got upper 30's mpg 80% of the time ....in the mountains it got better and if I was on a secondary road with low speed limit it got in the mid 40's in both terrains . I frankly do not care what my 13 NTX gets (mid 30's MPG) because of aforementioned wrist twisting problem and I don't care because of that marvelous big tank keeps me going for 225 230 miles before the light comes on for low fuel and it still gives me at least 2+ gallons to empty. YMMV
-
I wouldn't brag about poor fuel mileage. The old Hayabusa would get over 50 mpg on the road.
The old 1st gen FJR1300 would easily pull 45 mpg.
-
Yikes, sounds almost like the old Honda Valkyrie?
Not really - the Valk had carbs and wasn't tuned for economy. The Stelvio has a big set of wind-catching bags hanging on it, often has a taller than stock windshield or the factory one is raised up, and so on. The wind resistance is a big thing, since the faster you go the exponentially faster the drag increases. Riders with stout right wrists will need the big tank; riders with a gentle touch will go forever.
As for the mapping, it all depends on what you do. The factory mapping on my Norge let me get as high as 45 mpg even in the desert and 48 mpg at altitude, but was prone to pinging and created a lot of heat from running lean. The current mapping gets me about 42 mpg (including losing at least 1 to the taller shield), buts drops to about 39-40 if I'm running 85 mph on the Interstate out here where that's (almost) legal, especially if I have any headwind. Much the same can be said of the Stelvio's response to mapping choices, riding styles, and conditions.
-
I've done a GPS calculated 306 miles and added 8.2 gallons of fuel.
So at least 8.2 gallons is usable. :thumb:
-
I've done a GPS calculated 306 miles and added 8.2 gallons of fuel.
So at least 8.2 gallons is usable. :thumb:
Which is only 37.3 MPG. That means the Stelvio is the worse MPG of all the bikes I own. It also means my TTSE has a longer range on a 6.6 gallon tank than the Stelvio with its 8.5 gallons.
My approximate average MPG (figured with a GPS also--all with 87 octane with 10% ethanol):
1971 BMW R75/5 (750cc) =41 MPG
1984 Yamaha Venture(1200 cc) =43 MPG
2002 Suzuki DR200SE(200 cc) =80 MPG
2013 Triumph Trophy SE(1215 cc) =52 MPG
2016 Kaw Versy 650 LT(650 cc) = 51 MPG
The Stelvio is a bit disappointing to me as far as the MPG mentioned here. But I will probably buy it anyway, just to have something different.
I already took a short test ride on one. Another issue is that it seemed to ride a bit like a Harley-with the vibrations and all. It was very noticeable just after coming off my very smooth TTSE. But the reason I have so many bikes is that I like the different feel of each. Every time I switch bikes it feels like I am riding a new bike and I enjoy them all for different reasons.
-Don-
-
Don, your Harley reference brings something to my mind. The Stelvio runs best above 3500 rpm, 4K even better. If you ride around at less than 3500 you are going to get vibration and, quite frankly, you are lugging the engine. I find that 6th gear is only useful at 70 mph or higher. Gas mileage won't be much different between being in 5th or 6th in the 55-70 mph range because the torque curve gets fat at about 4500 (68 ft lb) and stays above 70 ft lb until 7K rpm. You really need that torque to overcome wind resistance. The Stelvio has the aerodynamics of a billboard. What I'm saying is it is best to spin this engine faster than a Harley if you want good performance and decent fuel mileage. Plodding along at 2500 in 6th is not a good idea.
Peter Y.
-
My NTX has had a reflash and is still running the o2 sensors. Since the reflash I can run her down to 3k RPM without vibration and snatchiness. Before the reflash the lowest running RPM was 3500 and it was vibey till over 4k. It also got better much fuel mileage prior to the reflash. :coffee:
-
Don, your Harley reference brings something to my mind. The Stelvio runs best above 3500 rpm, 4K even better. If you ride around at less than 3500 you are going to get vibration and, quite frankly, you are lugging the engine. I find that 6th gear is only useful at 70 mph or higher. Gas mileage won't be much different between being in 5th or 6th in the 55-70 mph range because the torque curve gets fat at about 4500 (68 ft lb) and stays above 70 ft lb until 7K rpm. You really need that torque to overcome wind resistance. The Stelvio has the aerodynamics of a billboard. What I'm saying is it is best to spin this engine faster than a Harley if you want good performance and decent fuel mileage. Plodding along at 2500 in 6th is not a good idea.
Peter Y.
I assume the "billboard aerodynamics" is why the poor MPG. My short test ride also seemed the Stelvio had the low end torque of a Harley, but I see now I should have kept the RPMs up a lot higher than I did.
-Don-
-
I consistently ran about 42 mpg on the '12 I had. 300 miles was easy. Several times I felt I could have gotten another 100. Depends on everything.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
I consistently ran about 42 mpg on the '12 I had. 300 miles was easy. Several times I felt I could have gotten another 100. Depends on everything.
Yes, I have been riding enough bikes for along enough to realize there are countless variables that change the MPG all over, but I was only asking for an average.
Wind seems to be the biggest factor. I get much better MPG going up hill for countless miles than I do on level ground into a head wind on cycles. But cars are the reverse.
I used to go from SSF, CA to Reno or Lake Tahoe a lot. I always got my best MPG in the cycles when going east (more uphill, but usually with the wind) . But MPG was always best in the cars going west (more downhill, mostly into the wind). I used to check the MPG every time.
-Don-
-
35-40 mpg is widely reported, so 280-320 miles range if you use 8-gallons.
Agreed. I have a 2016 Stelvio I bought new in April this year. Mileage seemed to increase the more miles it had on it. Lately I see in the 240 mile range before the idiot light comes on. Coming back from the IDBDR, 1,000 miles of slab and averaging around 85-95 mph, I actually had it go to the high 260's mile mark a couple times before seeing the idiot light.
The bike is bone stock, I run premium exclusively, and it now has 11,000 + miles on it.
And it is true, the more miles, and the motor actually does smooth out!
-
Agreed. I have a 2016 Stelvio I bought new in April this year. Mileage seemed to increase the more miles it had on it. Lately I see in the 240 mile range before the idiot light comes on. Coming back from the IDBDR, 1,000 miles of slab and averaging around 85-95 mph, I actually had it go to the high 260's mile mark a couple times before seeing the idiot light.
The bike is bone stock, I run premium exclusively, and it now has 11,000 + miles on it.
And it is true, the more miles, and the motor actually does smooth out!
Most bikes start to get their very best MPG at around what you have now, just above 10K. It will probably stay about the same for the rest of the life of the bike.
If you can get 40 MPG at ~90 MPH, that is a lot better than I expected. But what MPG does it get at more "normal" speeds such as 70 MPG steady?
-Don-
-
Most bikes start to get their very best MPG at around what you have now, just above 10K. It will probably stay about the same for the rest of the life of the bike.
If you can get 40 MPG at ~90 MPH, that is a lot better than I expected. But what MPG does it get at more "normal" speeds such as 70 MPG steady?
-Don-
I really don't know. Usually I spend my commute doing a combination freeway/in town.
I usually don't run at 85-90 mph but let's face it, southern Idaho into Nevada is pretty bleak and pretty damn flat for the most part.
Something I notice with some people is that they get off their bike and fill on the side stand, I don't, I stay on and tend to squeeze as much as I can into the tank. So I fill up after the "rest" period. Don't really know if that little difference matters as to how much I get out of a tank, as I would write down the amount pumped and the trip odometer before I reset. The MPG on the instrument cluster, as I suspect you have figured, out is wildly overstated...
-
My mileage in Miles per US gallon (blue), Imperial Gallon (red), and liters per 100km (yellow)
(http://thumb.ibb.co/k3kU3v/Stel_milage.png) (http://ibb.co/k3kU3v)