How far have you gone on a 3.1G tank?

What kind of range are people getting with their 3.1 IMS tanks out there?

150-200 miles, depending on how hard im flogging it and if I was able to get 100% gas or ethanol blend crap. All hwy miles towards the low end, back roads and trails where it stays under 55-60mph the high end.

With real gas and backroad putting in florida two weeks ago, the light came on at 172 miles. Earlier today with e10 and 65+ it came on at 120 miles.

I would like to interject with a question relevent to this topic:

Approximately how much US gallons is still sloshing around in an IMS 3.1 when the bingo light first comes on?

From reading this Forum I gather that the stock tank has approx. 0.5 US gallons left at bingo.

I installed IMS 3.1s on our two WRRs today. The shape of these aftermarket tanks suggest that the capacity is larger all the way through the range, especially down in the "low on fuel" zone.

Thanks! David and Diane

I have put in 2.5 U.S. gallons shortly after the light has come on several times. So, .5 to .6 left is pretty close.

233. Canadian gas, which is blended. Always used premium, sometimes boat gas, just dyed premium.

ddvorak wrote:

I have put in 2.5 U.S. gallons shortly after the light has come on several times. So, .5 to .6 left is pretty close.

Thanks ddvorak! That is valuable info for us. Especially since you have done this several times.

SheWolf wrote:

233. Canadian gas, which is blended. Always used premium, sometimes boat gas, just dyed premium.

We sure need to get your kind of range SheWolf! A typical day for us involves 150 to 200 back country miles to the next town, which is also usually the destination for the night. NO gas inbetween towns typical for northern Nevada and eastern California, USA.

I think we will get the range we need. These days we don't back it in to every corner and roost out. Nor do we spend much time giving the front wheel a free ride. Been there, done that:

Gotta love those old skool IT trials bikes, eh?

My fuel light consistently comes on at 2.4 gallons.

SheWolf gets better mileage than just about anyone else with her WRR, I don't know how or why but she does. Maybe super gas up there in BC?

Traveling, commuting, and trail riding with my WR250R, I know my fuel consumption trends like the back of my hand and can usually predict how far I can get on any given tank. I don't write it down, but I have tracked my gas mileage after every fill up since I've owned a WRR, spanning two-plus years and ~40,000 miles with two bikes.

I base my planned fuel range on 50mpg, which is about as bad as I can normally expect with a spirited backroad or slower divided highway pace of 60-65mph. Range is dead on at 150 miles before being damn near empty (filled at 3.1xx gallons with 150 miles of highway and spirited back roads). Light comes on at 125-130miles.

If I'm going through lots of dirt roads or even smaller paved back roads where the terrain isn't as technical and the speeds are in the low 50mph range and less, then I can safely assume 60-65mpg if not higher. The light will come on at around 150 miles, depending on terrain particularly hill, giving me a theoretical range of 190-200ish miles, I'd say a comfortable 170 miles.

My point is simple, with the 3.1 IMS find a way to bring at least a half gallon (20-35 miles) of gas with you, just in case you get lost, have to reroute, etc for the area you are riding in to have a comfortable 200 miles. Unless of course you find that you also have the knack for making the bike sip fuel... Pushing a bike 10 miles over hill and over dale would suck... I typically carry 2 30oz MSR bottles (~1/2 gallon) for longer rides.

Also consider this, and be very aware of it. You WILL get significantly worse gas mileage with ethanol blended gas, which is unfortunately the most prevalent as well. I lose 7-8mpg consistently with ethanol gas and love it when I can get off the coast and get the real stuff.

Thanks skierd!

Yes, for the segments that will exceed "a buck and a quarter" we will pack (what I call) sig bottle(s). We also refer to 30-32 oz fuel bottles as 15 mile torpedos.

I need to have a buffer. Sometimes conditions require me to ride ahead, check out the route and backtrack back to the group.

(I'm really into planning and logistics and we employ other solutuions. Often we cache gas at critical locations a week or more in advance. We clean and recycle plastic, 1.5 gallon Tide liqued laundry soap bottles. These bottles pour without the need of a funnel and, upon being emptyed, burn without any telltale smoke at all. Burning the trash at your remote gas cache is not something that can, or should be done everywhere. But where we ride it is perfectly legit.)

I'm familiar with the concept of cacheing supplies at remote locales, done it a few times backpacking, but that only works when you already know where you're going. ;) Most of my wanderings are less planned, though far more populated of an area, and my schedule really doesn't permit me to race out a few hundred to a few thousand miles in advance to drop fuel n' goodies. I'm also more in the 'fuck it, figure it out when we get out there' group then the planning and logistics crew.

Are tide bottles stable with gasoline inside for longish storage? I'm guessing you've been using them for a while, but I'd be concerned personally.

skierd wrote:

I'm familiar with the concept of cacheing supplies at remote locales, done it a few times backpacking, but that only works when you already know where you're going. ;) Most of my wanderings are less planned, though far more populated of an area, and my schedule really doesn't permit me to race out a few hundred to a few thousand miles in advance to drop fuel n' goodies. I'm also more in the 'fuck it, figure it out when we get out there' group then the planning and logistics crew.

Are tide bottles stable with gasoline inside for longish storage? I'm guessing you've been using them for a while, but I'd be concerned personally.

Yes, we have been doing this for years. The orange colored, plastic Tide bottles we get here in Nevada are remarkabley stable in holding 91 octane for an indefinate period of time. We do, however, place them in cardboard boxes and como-up, shade-up with some brush because the ultraviolet light, here in Nevada, is far more destructive than the gasoline.

We do the occasional total wing-it rides too! Both methods are fun in their own way!

I won't bore you with the details but cacheing gas at crtical points is not difficult when one plans ahead and has loads of far flung friends that are GPS users.

skierd wrote:

SheWolf gets better mileage than just about anyone else with her WRR, I don't know how or why but she does. Maybe super gas up there in BC?

I doubt the gas in BC is the factor in SheWolf's consistantly high mileage claims. Last summer I rode my oilhead through BC on the way to Fairbanks, AK and back. I got normal to slightly less range on the high test.

There are probably many contributing machine and terrain factors to SheWolf's claims. But the greatest one has got to be the rider. SheWolf is most likely a very smooth operator. I suspect she gets very good economy from every fossil fuel burnning vehicle and machine she drives or operates.

We consistantly got MPGs of near 60 and near 50 from our '97 Honda XRs, 250 and 400 respectively, when we needed to. So I will be shocked and disappointed if we don't do well on the new WRRs.

Hope to read some more replies from WRR riders with 3.1 tanks! Kudos to Sproat Sport for starting this thread!

Well...let's see. 2004 VW Golf TDI, 63 mpg. 2009 GMC 2500 HD 4x4, 32 mpg. 1994 Chev 1500 4x4, 26 mpg. I think the only thing I own that gets shitty fuel mileage is my 1977 Honda XL250. It's in need of a carb job and possibly rings. Even my quad gets good mileage.

SheWolf wrote:

Well...let's see. 2004 VW Golf TDI, 63 mpg. 2009 GMC 2500 HD 4x4, 32 mpg. 1994 Chev 1500 4x4, 26 mpg. I think the only thing I own that gets shitty fuel mileage is my 1977 Honda XL250. It's in need of a carb job and possibly rings. Even my quad gets good mileage.

Im assumning Shewolf is using the "canadian gallon" or "imperial gallon" which is larger than the US gallon.

Us gallon is 3.785 litres
Candian is 4.546 litres

Hence the reason she might be reporting much higher MPG than what we are seeing.

Indeed. I hate using metric it sucks.

And I grew up using Imperial measures and love metric.

I'd rather multiply and divide by ten than eight, twelve, sixteen, thirty-two, sixty-four, 1760, 5280, etc.

Quote :

Im assumning Shewolf is using the "canadian gallon" or "imperial gallon" which is larger than the US gallon.

Us gallon is 3.785 litres
Candian is 4.546 litres

Hence the reason she might be reporting much higher MPG than what we are seeing.

Quote :

Indeed. I hate using metric it sucks.

So you ARE using Canadian/imperial gallons??? That means all your mileages are 20% too high, as compared to US gallons!

I use Canuck liters when I fill up (we don't get the gallon things on our pumps) but I back calculated in US units.

SheWolf wrote:

I use Canuck liters when I fill up (we don't get the gallon things on our pumps) but I back calculated in US units.

Im not calling you a liar, but getting 32mpg in a 2500HD pickup aint happening unless your idling down a hill for 400 miles.

What conversion are you using?

Well, I've got an aftermarket ECM which eliminated the DPF/pollution crap (that DPF was horrid for fuel economy...damned regen was like opening up the fuel line and just letting that shit run out onto the pavement ), and a speedbrake which eliminated most of the braking pedal use. Free flow exhaust, aftermarket air filter. 32 mpg on the straight stretch coming home, doing 50 mph. Calculation's done by my other half, who is an anal number cruncher. I could care less what the fuel economy is on pretty much everything I ride/drive, so he's the one who does the conversions...probably why I let him do the stock crap with the brokers. If I forget to put the mileage/fuel added on tank up in the log book he goes sideways. So technically HE does the calculating. He does the number shit, I fix what he breaks. He pretty much takes what I put in the tank, against what my GPS calls out, which is in US units.

I think it would be helpful if people could mention actual distances (kms or miles either to fuel light or empty or both) with their 3.1 tank...even though it's rough as there are many contributing factors. I think it'd be useful to paint a picture of the range of the bigger tanks.

I don't understand why some people don't like metric system beside the fact the learned imperial or u.s. first.

Like Jäger says metric is easier to learn and to use. It's a decimal system just like the mathematical base we use. Even for someone that uses it's fingers to count it's easier.

Dancamp wrote:

I don't understand why some people don't like metric system beside the fact the learned imperial or u.s. first.

Like Jäger says metric is easier to learn and to use. It's a decimal system just like the mathematical base we use. Even for someone that uses it's fingers to count it's easier.

My teachers in elementary school always told us that someday the US would be converting to the metric system so we had to learn it. I'm still waiting.........

trav72 wrote:

Dancamp wrote:

I don't understand why some people don't like metric system beside the fact the learned imperial or u.s. first.

Like Jäger says metric is easier to learn and to use. It's a decimal system just like the mathematical base we use. Even for someone that uses it's fingers to count it's easier.

My teachers in elementary school always told us that someday the US would be converting to the metric system so we had to learn it. I'm still waiting.........

++1 Same here and I"m 71 !