Fuel Mileage

I'm getting 60 mpg riding secondary roads, running an average 60-65 mph per gps. I just installed the Safari tank and so far like it big-time, worth every penny to me. I followed ed29 and positioned the fuel sensor a bit lower:

https://wr250rforum.forumotion.com/oh-those-sweet-mods-f5/larger-fuel-tank-t83-80.htm

Sarah

Hey Sarah ....

Just saw in the tank thread -- congrats on the white !

Larry

greer wrote:

I'm getting 60 mpg riding secondary roads, running an average 60-65 mph per gps. I just installed the Safari tank and so far like it big-time, worth every penny to me. I followed ed29 and positioned the fuel sensor a bit lower:

https://wr250rforum.forumotion.com/oh-those-sweet-mods-f5/larger-fuel-tank-t83-80.htm

Sarah

Thank you!!

Sarah

Just thought I'd give my 2 cents....I ride only on the trails and get anywhere between 100-135km to 5.5L (~60-80miles to 1.5gallons). Depending on how hard I am trying to pull a gap on my mates, lol. Most of the riding I do is 2nd-4th gear technical single trail, and for the adrenaline and excitement I get out of riding my WRR I wouldn''t care if it only got 20mpg (absurd economy i know), it's that much damn fun! (When it's going! Threw an engine code 12 last weekend - crank angle sensor. Is in at the dealers now, yet to hear back!) Fuel economy is not much to worry about when this bike is just so much bloody fun to ride IMO, unless you are planning on doing long hikes, in which case we have a support 4WD meet us at pre-determined locations with fuel, food and water for our camelbaks. For me, that works out better than the extra weight of a Safari Tank, and a little easier on th ol' hip pocket too! Just my two cents......Max.

Pulled into the gas station on fumes yesterday. The Safari took 3.63 gallons and the GPS said 228 mi, so 62.7 mpg. A little over halfway through that tank of gas I put new sprockets and chain on, went to 13-48 gearing from 12-44. 50% highway, 10% city, 10% jeep trail, 30% gravel road. It's good to get out.

My WR250R 2010, 235km for now... all stock.

Near freezing point... +4 deg celcius..

On the trail I get 4l per 100km... Fuel light came at 145km, go to 180km and I put 6.8 litres to a 7 litres tank.

Maybe on a hotter day I get near 3.5 l/100km...

Jus gonna chime in - over first 3 tanks ive averaged about 180km till reserve. It is not wholly accurate as only 2 tanks were right on reserve but i was at 540km at reserve on the 3rd tank.

I will point out that is mostly on road and riding like a granny at no more than 85kph with some stop-start traffic - so thats roughly 3l/100km which is like 78mpg us.
Im sure my mpg will start to suck when i start going serious offroad, but for commuting its awesome. :)
Oh btw for comparison my 250 2 smoke averages 11l/100km 21mpg, and i have to pay for synthetic oil too!

This bike is capable of awesome mileage. Best I've had was 83, and that was the fourth day out of the crate.

Krabill wrote:

No, you shouldn't expect to get any better than that. These people getting 70-80mpg must ride it like a moped, downhill, with a tail wind.

Every normal human I know that has a WRR gets in the 50-60 range and always has.

If you want to propose that anyone who gets better mileage than you isn't normal, then I say screw you.

If you want to say everybody who rides like you gets no better than 50-60 mpg, then I'd say you are probably making a very good observation.

I've been getting high 60's and over 70 (which would be around 80 - 85 mpg for those using the Imperial gallon) on occasion on leisurely slab rides ever since I got my WR. It's completely stock except for protective gear, I weigh around 220 ready to ride so I put up a fair amount of wind resistance, and most of my rides are very close to 50/50. I did a short little ride around here today, pretty much 50/50, and in this part of Montana, you might be riding downhill, but you had to climb some pretty good mountains to get that downhill. And if you do have a tailwind, enjoy it, because there's enough turns in the roads around here that half the time any tailwind is going to be a headwind. I don't see how fast I can get from Point A to Point B, but then again I don't "ride it like a moped" either.

I have no idea what anyone should expect out of a modded bike, or once they start riding aggressively most of the time. But it is pretty obvious to me that when a bigger guy my size can regularly get 66/80 mpg (depending on your gallon of choice) riding around here in the mountains of Montana and SE BC, Yamaha's claimed mileage figures of 71/85 mpg are very much in reach for a stock WR250R. If you like to ride like your hair is on fire, then you shouldn't be surprised you get nowhere near that mileage - and I suspect those who ride like that probably really don't care.

Good to hear you are also getting great mileage out of your bike. You must be just about due for some new skins, no?

I just went thru my first couple of tanks of gas after modding my WRR.I did the Q4 full exhaust,K+N airfilter,ais and exup removal,47 tooth rear sprocket, FMF fuel progammer,air box modded.......I'm getting 60 mpg..I'm 6'2" and 250lbs, so I'm happy to get 60mpg.

Hi Jager:

Great post regarding Fuel Economy and especially from a non-modded (wrt the engine) and reasonably clean emitting 250R right off the show room floor… Keep up the great work as I love to see the WR's taking you and others to places where no other non-rider will ever see while consuming the least amount of liquid gold possible.

One addition. Yamaha does not claim 71 mpg, the bike earned it. The non-adjusted 71 mpgUS “is” what the bike achieved on the EPA test cycle while on a dynamometer (Yamaha’s or somebody else’s) when it was being run through its emission certification tests. The bagged emissions were collected and analyzed for CO2 concentration which was then converted back to its actual fuel economy.

Wayne Gerdes – CleanMPG

The First thing I did when I got my wrr (at the time it was otherwise stock) was remove that stupid air thing, i didn't even buy a kit, I cut a piece of sheet metal to make a block off plate. there was a noticeable power increase. Its also a must do if you remove the spark arrester or install aftermarket exhaust. it will eliminate a lot of the popping. I just removed my cylinder to put on the athena kit after 3000 miles (the first thousand with the stock exhaust probebly second thousand with fmf, and the third finaly with the programmer). other then the normal carbon build up, everything looked perfect inside. oh did I mentino that I removed the flapper pretty early on too? don't fiddle around with just removing the little plate ither. Jam a screw driver in there and the whole section of the airbox tht holds the flapper on will break off at the plastic spot welds.

I'm getting 65MPG and have 300 miles now on odometer running on 100% pavement on my WRR. A lot of idling and low gear riding mixed in trying to compensate for high speed passes as I "break-in" this puppy.

best I have gotten out of my '10 model was 62mpg, and that was running 55mph on highways and gravel. That is some fairly gentle riding for this bike. My bike is bone stock, and only has 500 miles on it. Maybe it will improve as it breaks in, maybe not. I average 55mpg overall so far. I don't ride very aggressively. I had an 08 XT250 and got 65-70 mpg. I traded the gas mileage for more power, better suspension, taller seat. Fair enough trade for me, you would have to fight me to get me to trade back.

Krabill wrote:

No, you shouldn't expect to get any better than that. These people getting 70-80mpg must ride it like a moped, downhill, with a tail wind.

Every normal human I know that has a WRR gets in the 50-60 range and always has.

Hell I get 56 on my over the hill XT350, you're telling me that a state of the art LC 250 only gets marginally better fuel mileage? I call bull shit man.

And for the record, my moped gets an average of about 100mpg with normal city riding.

I ride the bike stock. At least until after the warranty.
Just clicked over 1K on the odometer.
My buddy and I ride the same model and our lights come on within minutes of each other.
Mine usually first, causa my fat ass. Can I say that on the radio?

Anyhow, we rode from Madison Wisconsin to Minnesota to do the Thielman trail ride. Couple hundred miles over.
40 Miles of ridiculously great riding and a couple hundred back. That is what the bike is for, no.
(Side note - if you ever get the chance, do this ride. excellent!)

Mileage - around 50 on the trails. Strong winds on the ride home and around 50 on the streets too.
Usually better than that on the streets, but man my butt was killing me. I was praying for stop lights and gas stations.
So here is some praise for the little gas tank.

Is there a cheaper alternative to the airhawk?

Tibarus wrote:

Krabill wrote:

No, you shouldn't expect to get any better than that. These people getting 70-80mpg must ride it like a moped, downhill, with a tail wind.

Every normal human I know that has a WRR gets in the 50-60 range and always has.

Hell I get 56 on my over the hill XT350, you're telling me that a state of the art LC 250 only gets marginally better fuel mileage? I call bull shit man.

And for the record, my moped gets an average of about 100mpg with normal city riding.

I just went for a ride through the Hatchee National Forest today and had the low fuel light come on at 78miles.

Went 3.8 miles on reserve and put 1.53gal in or I wouldn't have made it back home.

That averages out to what, 48.75MPG? lol

I don't know how you people are managing to get worse average MPG than my 15 year old XT... What are you people doing, taking it to the limiter 100% of the time?

Mmmm...cheeseburgers....

SheWolf wrote:

Mmmm...cheeseburgers....

Don't forget the bacon and fried chicken...

So fuel mileage test. If you guys are only getting 45-55 mpg average, you are now officially only getting MARGINALLY better MPG than my 1982 BMW R65LS.

Congrats...

Hi Tibarus:

While BMW’s offer excellent fuel economy for a given engines output (thanks mainly to the high tech FI engines as of late), they are not quite as fun in the tight stuff including heavy traffic congestion. And no, an R80 G/S through the latest G 650 GS/F 800 GS/1200 GS/1200 GS Adventure will not match the WR250’s in the fuel economy department. Closer at higher speeds but not quite the same FE in my limited experience.

BMW’s are all about hitting the open road or groomed trail with a great amount of comfort and minimal amount of rider input… WR’s are all about having fun discovering a new locale with no roads or taking on the worst traffic in anyone’s daily grind with a flick of the wrist and a tap of the shifter.

Both have their strengths and I am a huge BMW GS fan but FE against a WR is not something I would brag about

Wayne

xcel wrote:

Hi Tibarus:

While BMW’s offer excellent fuel economy for a given engines output (thanks mainly to the high tech FI engines as of late), they are not quite as fun in the tight stuff including heavy traffic congestion. And no, an R80 G/S through the latest G 650 GS/F 800 GS/1200 GS/1200 GS Adventure will not match the WR250’s in the fuel economy department. Closer at higher speeds but not quite the same FE in my limited experience.

BMW’s are all about hitting the open road or groomed trail with a great amount of comfort and minimal amount of rider input… WR’s are all about having fun discovering a new locale with no roads or taking on the worst traffic in anyone’s daily grind with a flick of the wrist and a tap of the shifter.

Both have their strengths and I am a huge BMW GS fan but FE against a WR is not something I would brag about

Wayne

Yeah thats what I'm saying, these guys claiming they are only getting 45-55 mpg on their super modern top of the line LC 250 singles is total bunk. I get 46-47 mpg average on my 1982 air cooled boxer 650. and about 56mpg on my 15 year old XT350. SO how are these guys only getting 45-55 mpg?

Tibarus wrote:

xcel wrote:

Hi Tibarus:

While BMW’s offer excellent fuel economy for a given engines output (thanks mainly to the high tech FI engines as of late), they are not quite as fun in the tight stuff including heavy traffic congestion. And no, an R80 G/S through the latest G 650 GS/F 800 GS/1200 GS/1200 GS Adventure will not match the WR250’s in the fuel economy department. Closer at higher speeds but not quite the same FE in my limited experience.

BMW’s are all about hitting the open road or groomed trail with a great amount of comfort and minimal amount of rider input… WR’s are all about having fun discovering a new locale with no roads or taking on the worst traffic in anyone’s daily grind with a flick of the wrist and a tap of the shifter.

Both have their strengths and I am a huge BMW GS fan but FE against a WR is not something I would brag about

Wayne

Yeah thats what I'm saying, these guys claiming they are only getting 45-55 mpg on their super modern top of the line LC 250 singles is total bunk. I get 46-47 mpg average on my 1982 air cooled boxer 650. and about 56mpg on my 15 year old XT350. SO how are these guys only getting 45-55 mpg?

I think way too many people are just dialing in too much fuel with their controllers. Tuning it on a dyno would probably result in much better mileage.

Depends on how you ride the bike.
If you rarely use full throttle while accelerating, you can get super-duper milage.
Myself, I get around 42 mpg, but I can accept that. :)