200cc consumes absurd amounts of gas

[OneLeggedRider]

BogieBoy for the win! As far as the OP, does this joker really expect us to believe that outdated Chinese technology should get better gas mileage than Jap? This whole thread is just a waste, (Frank drops microphone and exits stage left).

[Rozkrwawiacz]

Wild Dog

All those chinese engines are not chinese but clones or licensed copies of Japanese engine

Of course. But they're clones of honda cb and honda cg engines (so street bikes), no xr's nor wr's.

And guess what, here's fuelly for cb250:
http://www.fuelly.com/motorcycle/honda/cb250_nighthawk

and cb450:
http://www.fuelly.com/motorcycle/honda/cb450_nighthawk

Let me remind you that my bike has 50-55mpg (not 60 as bogieboy implied) and let me as y'all: which of these two have closer fuel economy at average?

@OneLeggedRider

As far as the OP, does this joker really expect us to believe that outdated Chinese technology should get better gas mileage than Jap? This whole thread is just a waste, (Frank drops microphone and exits stage left).

Yes, but no.
I don't care what you believe, because I didn't came here to discuss what is proper fuel economy for specific bikes, I just wanted help with finding more unorthodox reasons for increased fuel consumption including complex mechanical errors not just carb tuning.
And yes, all the post arguing for and against my expectations being based on reality (which is stupid since some of you clearly stated that your similar biked burned more what I expect than what I get) are seemingly waste, although it's not me who constantly try to change topic from finding what can be broken in my bike to state of global fuel economy of motorcycles from different manufacturers.

It is like somebody start a thread "Help me my handlebars are bent!" and you would start to convincing him, that since even Suzuki bike can get it bent after drop he should just accept it and ride with bent handlebars.


On that note, let's stop talking about average fuel consumption and continue on topic.

From now on I will ignore post regarding fuel economy expectations since they're essentially OFFTOPIC.
If you don't want to help solve the problem, because you don't brlieve that there's a problem that's fine, just don't post in this thread, please.

[Rozkrwawiacz]

Originally Posted by franque

I can't say about viscosity, but it could be that you have excessive blowby (like the rings aren't sealing properly),

But then it would be burning oil, wouldn't it?

Like I said, I'd do a compression and leakdown test.

Problem with those engines is that there's no proper manual so I wouldn't now proper values for tests.

Originally Posted by JerryHawk250

If you are running a low geared set of sprockets you will be turning higher rpms at 55 mph which means you will be burning more fuel to do the same speeds if you were geared higher.

That is a good point (obviously).
I'm not sure how higher in gearing I am willing to get since I do occasionally ride off the pavement.
Although in urban areas I get to cruise at 4-4,5k rpm.

[pete]

just ride the thing... enjoy it for what it is...

if you can't afford to run it... get a 50cc 4t scooter or a new pair of
shoes and walk...


...

[bogieboy]

Originally Posted by Rozkrwawiacz

@boogieboy
May I ask why you bring fuel consumption of Japanese bikes while we are talking about Chinese bikes that, as was clearly stated before, doesn't have specific dual-sport engines?
Also why asking of specifically dual-sport 450cc bike, when it was you who allegorical evidence that actually supported point that style of frame and wheels doesn't matter much in fuel economy department?

If you wanna talk empirical evidence show me averages of engines from Chinese line. It would be 163fml for 200cc and 167fmm for 250cc.

WE ALL HAVE GIVEN YOU EMPERICAL EVIDENCE BUT YOU HAVE IGNORED US!!!!


By the way, Fuelly.com is not popular with chinese motorcycles owners, it seems. Found one owner of LF200GY-6 though (it's a 200 dual-sport with ohv version of engine as mine).
http://www.fuelly.com/motorcycle/lifan/lf200gy-6

i gave those references BECAUSE THEY ARE THE CLOSEST MAINSTREAM BIKE TO WHAT WE RIDE, aand what we are asking about.... i know mileage varies greatly.... bottom line is it does not matter where the motor is made, it is an air pump. air and fuel in, bang, air and burnt fuel out. it does not matter what brand it is, certain size motors (regardless of what they are in) will consume similar amounts of fuel. just because one person has a 200gy that got 80mpg does not mean that you will... they probably dont go over 35mph...

I just wanted help with finding more unorthodox reasons for increased fuel consumption including complex mechanical errors not just carb tuning.

JUST STOP..... you do not have unothodox complex mechanical errors. everyone has told you multiple times that your bike is performing like everyone elses on here. your bike has AVERAGE fuel consumption. just FREAKING STOP ALREADY



YOU WANT TO PISS PEOPLE OFF, ASK THEM FOR THEIR OPINION AND THEN TELL THEM THEY CANT BE RIGHT BECAUSE YOU THINK THERES SOMETHING ELSE.

[bogieboy]

Originally Posted by Rozkrwawiacz

Wild Dog

Of course. But they're clones of honda cb and honda cg engines (so street bikes), no xr's nor wr's.

And guess what, here's fuelly for cb250:
http://www.fuelly.com/motorcycle/honda/cb250_nighthawk

and cb450:
http://www.fuelly.com/motorcycle/honda/cb450_nighthawk

Let me remind you that my bike has 50-55mpg (not 60 as bogieboy implied) and let me as y'all: which of these two have closer fuel economy at average?

@OneLeggedRider

Yes, but no.
I don't care what you believe, because I didn't came here to discuss what is proper fuel economy for specific bikes, I just wanted help with finding more unorthodox reasons for increased fuel consumption including complex mechanical errors not just carb tuning.
And yes, all the post arguing for and against my expectations being based on reality (which is stupid since some of you clearly stated that your similar biked burned more what I expect than what I get) are seemingly waste, although it's not me who constantly try to change topic from finding what can be broken in my bike to state of global fuel economy of motorcycles from different manufacturers.

It is like somebody start a thread "Help me my handlebars are bent!" and you would start to convincing him, that since even Suzuki bike can get it bent after drop he should just accept it and ride with bent handlebars.


On that note, let's stop talking about average fuel consumption and continue on topic.

From now on I will ignore post regarding fuel economy expectations since they're essentially OFFTOPIC.
If you don't want to help solve the problem, because you don't brlieve that there's a problem that's fine, just don't post in this thread, please.

GO AHEAD AND IGNORE THE FUEL ECONOMY POSTS... they are NOT offtopic, as you were asking in the FIRST POST about fuel economy, yet continue to disregard what everyone else tells you is NORMAL...

Originally Posted by Rozkrwawiacz

Hi. I own 2006 Skyteam ST200. It's a Chinese dual-sport with 163FML OHC engine.
My biggest problem with it is it's thirst for petrol. It's average is about [B]55 mpg.
**SNIP**

fuel consumption equates to volumetric law. i can have the opinion that gravity does not exist, but that does not change that the laws of gravity are real. each revolution the motor pumps X amount of air. to run correctly you need Y amount of fuel mixed in that air to cumbust properly to create Z=power.

X+Y ALWAYS equals Z. you can not substitute opinion in scientific law...

[quadz]

Keep it friendly and respectful guys, I don't want to see this going in the wrong direction. That's not how we do things here at CR.

Opening the thread back up for now, but please keep it civil.

Back on topic..

[Blackhawk45]

Good! This is too good of a thread to die.
I would like to say that the CG engine is not "outdated Chinese technology." In fact it started out as a Honda SL/XL/CB/CL 125, which was a modern overhead cam engine that was ubiquitous and probably the best engine Honda made. Honda then bored and stroked it to 185 and then 200cc for the XR and XL 185 and one of the most popular bikes of all time, the XR200. By the time they did that, they had updated it to cdi ignition.


In about 1974 a Honda engineer visited southeast Asia and saw their little 125s being used as combination family transportation and farm trucks while receiving virtually no maintenance. Aghast, he sketched a design modification while in his hotel room and/or on the plane back to Tokyo, and showed it to the CEO when he got home. CEO put it before the other engineers and they hashed out a design that used most of the existing SL/XL/CB/CL 125 engine, but changed to a single-lobe cam and moved the cam down into the engine case where it runs cooler and can receive splash oiling. This also eliminated a major failure point: the timing chain. Thus was the cg engine born.


This is one of the best motorcycle engines ever built from a durability standpoint. And yes; properly tuned and operated it can indeed surpass a modern Japanese bike in fuel economy.

[Megadan]

To be fair, the CG engine is very old engine technology, but that doesn't mean it is irrelevant. There were some trade offs in efficiency and performance for simplicity and the durability that comes with it.

To call it Chinese technology is a misnomer, but not entirely inaccurate either. Honda developed the CG125 engine and then from there some Chinese manufacturers expanded on the engine design to create larger/more powerful engines for better utility/performance. Our engines are a Chinese modification/expansion of an old Japanese design.

To go back to the original topic of fuel economy, there are a ton of factors at play. Having gone through a multitude of variations of gearing, tires, tire pressures, carburetors, jetting, etc. I am able to report that the fuel economy on these bikes can range anywhere from the low 50mpg range to the mid 70mpgs.

The best economy I have ever achieved on my Hawks was my original bike with Shinko 705 tires (very road friendly with a harder compound) at 32psi front and 40psi rear, 17 front and 43 rear sprockets, basic bolt ons, and a VM26 clone carburetor. I had the carb tuning on the main a bit on the fat side, but intentionally tuned the pilot jet, idle, and needle settings to be on the safe side of lean. Because of this my RPM's at 45-55mph where right in the sweet spot of the torque curve (where VE is the highest) and I was right in the middle of the throttle range (where the carb tune was on the leaner side) and I could achieve 70-75mpg while cruising. If I were to spend more time at 60mph or above my economy dropped into the mid 60's due to having to use more throttle and the engine turning higher RPM.

Contrast that to my current Hawk, with shorter gearing, a larger carb tuned on the rich side to go with the higher compression and port work, and more off road oriented tires running at lower pressure (28 front and 33 rear) and my average economy is in the high 50 to low 60mpg range while cruising at those same speeds.


All of that said, riding technique will play a role as well. A common habit of people that ride small engine bikes is to nail the throttle everywhere to accelerate. If you can get past the more snail-like performance of moderate throttle use during acceleration you will see quite an improvement in economy.

[Wild Dog]

Originally Posted by Blackhawk45

Good! This is too good of a thread to die.
I would like to say that the CG engine is not "outdated Chinese technology." In fact it started out as a Honda SL/XL/CB/CL 125, which was a modern overhead cam engine that was ubiquitous and probably the best engine Honda made. Honda then bored and stroked it to 185 and then 200cc for the XR and XL 185 and one of the most popular bikes of all time, the XR200. By the time they did that, they had updated it to cdi ignition.

I love the CG engines as much as i love the Toyota 3L 2.8 diesel engine. But both of them are outdated tech. Even if can still use them and have a lot of fun with them.

On the topic sense, i do think the OP is also making a big argument about the millage..

Originally Posted by Megadan

All of that said, riding technique will play a role as well. A common habit of people that ride small engine bikes is to nail the throttle everywhere to accelerate. If you can get past the more snail-like performance of moderate throttle use during acceleration you will see quite an improvement in economy.

This.

Sometimes i get very poor millage, due my driving style. Over rev and get as soon as possible to the next traffic light. So the only one to blame is myself

[OneLeggedRider]

Thanks Blackhawk, I needed that, it's been a long stressful day.

Not only is it outdated jap technology, it's a very poor copy of outdated jap technology with substandard electronics. Trust me my '94 FourTrax 200D that's still running the factory spark plug is twice the machine as far as reliability.

These low compression push rod motors with poor ignition and charging systems are on par with Briggs and Stratton lawnmower engines with less reliability. Just read my thread about the TBR7 coil. Also they're assembled by the equivalent of fast food employees who are getting paid piece work.

The OP is posting for the sake of argument, we have 2 of these outdated bikes and both are getting 55mpg or less, and I paid several thousand dollars for my MMI certification and specialized in high performance so I really doubt we're getting poor mileage from my carb tuning. I've spent many hours tuning on the dyno and I'd love to have an in depth conversation about Z factor and valance electron theory. I know all the high performance equations (all motors are just math) and can build you a better performing motor with just a pen and paper.

That being said, why would you even care about the fuel economy of one of these tiny little motors? I can easily buy 12 of these bikes a year and still live quite comfortably, so fuel economy never even crossed my mind. I'm actually looking at a Chinese quad right now just to see how it performs.

[Wild Dog]

Originally Posted by OneLeggedRider

That being said, why would you even care about the fuel economy of one of these tiny little motors? I can easily buy 12 of these bikes a year and still live quite comfortably, so fuel economy never even crossed my mind. I'm actually looking at a Chinese quad right now just to see how it performs.

These chinese motorcycles being sold in the US is a collateral benefit. Biggest market for the chinese, are the "developing countries". So there is a concern in saving money. Most of these motorcycles are used for delivery jobs and cheap means of transportation.


Just to give you an idea about salaries and so.

I have few cisco certifications, few from MS, been working on the IT area for a years... Been deployings servers for enterprises, YET here in my country, i'm making less than 750. My job position in a country with a better economy i could make a lot more......
When i was living the Netherlands, i was working in a delivery company, just moving boxes, that was the most basic job i ever did, yet they Dutch where paying me 1800 euros per month final....

A delivery boy/girl in a developing countries and some poor european countries earn like 250 to 350 usd per month
So for them owning a small cc motorcycle that use the least amount of fuel is not a trival matter, is very important, even more when you take notice that the fuel price usually is around 1 usd 1 liter. That means that with they WHOLE salary the can only buy 250 to 350 liters per month....
If the OP was worried about millage, he got the wrong engine size, if you want to go truly economic you need to get a 125cc or 150cc,that fined tuned can get about 85 mpg.




These bikes are meant to be abuse and if they are lucky taken care. That's why i find it funny when people here pamper these motorcycles.

[Megadan]

Originally Posted by Wild Dog

If the OP was worried about millage, he got the wrong engine size, if you want to go truly economic you need to get a 125cc or 150cc,that fined tuned can get about 85 mpg.

And with fuel injection they can get 100mpg (Grom, Z125)

I can understand where he is coming from if you just look at it from a displacement point of view. Considering there are bikes with 3 times the displacement making 4 times the power that can get 60mpg (with efi obviously) it isn't difficult for people to assume that a smaller engine would get better economy. For those of us with the engineering, mechanical, and other knowledge on engines, efficiency, etc we understand the actual truth of it - especially in the vast number of variables involved. There is a level of diminishing returns with smaller engine displacements. In theory a small engine should be more efficient, but if that small engine has to be run harder all of the time, the actual return on economy is minimal. That bigger and more powerful motor barely needs any throttle to do the exact same level of work, and thus the gains of the smaller motor are reduced somewhat. Obviously, if you rode that bigger bike as hard as we do our little 200's and 250's, you would negate that and get much worse economy, and probably be in jail, but that's a bit moot lol.

The biggest variables for an Enduro is the size of the wheels, the type of tires, the frontal area of the bike combined with very poor aerodynamics, and gearing more suited for off road use. Even the much more powerful, efficient, high tech CRF250L with its lean Honda EFI tuning struggles to get above the mid 60mpg mark. Compare that to its cousin, the CBR250R, which has a much easier time reaching the mid 70mpg range - thanks in large part to its better aerodynamics, smaller lighter wheels and tires, and more road oriented gearing.

In my opinion, if you are getting in the high 50's to low 60mpg figures out of a carbureted chinese made, air cooled pushrod enduro, you are right about where you should be. With some tweaking, careful setup, and planning it is possible to achieve more, I have done it, but it does come at a cost. In that bikes case, it's off road ability as greatly reduced in the name of being a better road bike, namely tires and the the sprocket ratio was carefully selected to put the motor in it's happy place at the speeds it was most often ridden at.

For a fun comparison of diminshing returns we can look at my VFR1200F just to throw in something way on the extreme end of the spectrum compared to my Hawk.

My VFR with a full tank and aftermarket exhaust weighs in at 576lbs and has a 1200cc liquid cooled motor making right around 190hp at the crank (164whp). That is almost 5 times the displacement, and 10 times the power with twice the weight. At 65mph in 6th gear crusing along it will usually get 45mpg, only about 10 less than my Hawk would at the same speed in the same conditions.

Where they differ would be if I rode them the same way. If I ride my VFR aggressively, it can easily dip below 30mpg (holding 2nd gear, lots of throttle out of corners etc) were my Hawk will pretty much get exactly the same mileage as it always does lol.

Inversely, if I rode my Hawk like I do my VFR (low throttle input, because I like to avoid jail) I would never get above say 40 to 45mph, but I would probably get the best possible economy.

[Sochin]

My Chonda only get about 55Mpg (US) if I commute my 50 mile roundtrip to work, and it is mostly 65Mph highway. If I put on trails and forest service roads I EASY get 70Mpg.......but all balls to the walls. It get the same mileage as my 1100 and 1200 class bikes.

[OneLeggedRider]

Originally Posted by Wild Dog

These chinese motorcycles being sold in the US is a collateral benefit. Biggest market for the chinese, are the "developing countries". So there is a concern in saving money. Most of these motorcycles are used for delivery jobs and cheap means of transportation.


Just to give you an idea about salaries and so.

I have few cisco certifications, few from MS, been working on the IT area for a years... Been deployings servers for enterprises, YET here in my country, i'm making less than 750. My job position in a country with a better economy i could make a lot more......
When i was living the Netherlands, i was working in a delivery company, just moving boxes, that was the most basic job i ever did, yet they Dutch where paying me 1800 euros per month final....

A delivery boy/girl in a developing countries and some poor european countries earn like 250 to 350 usd per month
So for them owning a small cc motorcycle that use the least amount of fuel is not a trival matter, is very important, even more when you take notice that the fuel price usually is around 1 usd 1 liter. That means that with they WHOLE salary the can only buy 250 to 350 liters per month....
If the OP was worried about millage, he got the wrong engine size, if you want to go truly economic you need to get a 125cc or 150cc,that fined tuned can get about 85 mpg.




These bikes are meant to be abuse and if they are lucky taken care. That's why i find it funny when people here pamper these motorcycles.

Ehh, I'm living in Appalachia (broke and poor Hillbillies that thought the coal mines would always be there for them) and the standard of living here is poor to say the least. But I decided I was not gonna be poor, and would do whatever it took to not be. And I firmly believe you can do that in any country if you're willing to go far enough.

If I could only make $250 a month as a delivery driver I'd be on a 50cc scooter and provide women drugs and booze to my clientele to pad my income. I live like a king and always have a grand in my wallet let alone my bank account, but I'm not making payments on any vehicles or my house. I'd rather be a rich poor man than a broke rich man.