• Welcome to the Two Wheeled Texans community! Feel free to hang out and lurk as long as you like. However, we would like to encourage you to register so that you can join the community and use the numerous features on the site. After registering, don't forget to post up an introduction!

$5.00 per gallon gas strategy

Yes, I looked hard at the Fit when I traded my Mazdaspeed 3 for a Mazda 2 last summer. Problem is they advertise 30+ MPG but in Houston traffic with the A/C on and fully loaded with samples on I45 at 70mph they struggle to get 30MPG!! Then the Mazda 3 comes out with a six speed transmission and the Skyactiv 2 liter 4 cylinder and actually gets 39MPG under those driving conditions I described above! The car has 12.9 compression ratio, reduced weight by 300 lbs over old car, direct fuel injection and runs on regular unleaded. I was a Honda fan until they did the CRZ in a hybrid. At that point they lost me. I owned a 91 CRX SI (wish i still did), a 2004 Civic Si, a 2007 4dr SI and then switched to Mazda when Honda went crazy pushing hybrids and stopped making the S2000. Mr. Honda must have rolled over in his grave when the CRZ came out a hybrid.
 
I hear that the Honda Fit is a real buzz bomb on the highway that really has you wishing the transmission had a sixth gear, about 2900 rpm @ 60 mph in fifth gear.

A Toyota Yaris will get 40+ mpg on the highway if you obey speed limits and even it could use a sixth gear but it's not as bad as the Fit in being permanently in a passing gear. I routinely get 42-44 mpg with mine.

Even though the EPA rates these cars nearly identically in gas mileage, in the real world, a lot of people get better than EPA estimates with the Yaris while people struggle to match EPA with the Fit.
 
I drive 5000 miles a month for my work as a sales rep. I am a independent rep so I pay my own expenses for fuel, maintenance, insurance, tires, ect. I bought a 30MPG car last July thinking that would "help me" with rising fuel costs. Then bought a GSX1250FA with the "bag deal" thinking I might use that in my work. Then gas prices "really took off" again in Feb 12 so I traded the 30MPG car for a 40MPG one. None of these are turbo's or Hybrids so I am serious about gas fuel efficiency. So far the 40MPG car is beating the bike because of two reasons. I drive way to fast on the bike (lowering the fuel mileage) and the bike just needed a high dollar rear tire at less than 3K miles. The front is wearing weird and may need replacement soon as well. $5.00 fuel is a "no win" for me with pure electrics too as I drive more than 100-150 miles per day and no pure electric vehicle (affordable one under $20K) can go that far yet. What happened to the 50MPG CRX HF of the late 80's early 90's? Are they rated so differently now that no non hybrid can match that anymore? And please, do not even mention Scooters to me as that is just not an alternative for me to use....

A literbike is the wrong choice if you are attempting to get great fuel economy. Also, if you slow down a bit on the bike and work on your riding style, you don't chew up tires so much, either.

As for what happened to the CRX HF, well, see below.

Someone on this forum restored a VW Rabbit and it looked great. But it would be hard to find an early 80s high mpg car that was not rusted through or bent out of shape.

These are the problems with the above ideas.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRbwTutw-Hk"]vw beetle and golf (rabbit) crash test - YouTube[/ame]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Y4yIjT83kA"]Honda Civic old model crash test (DEATH TRAP) - YouTube[/ame]

Newer small cars are heavier and get worse mileage because of the increased crash safety requirements, as well as the stupid European 'pedestrian safe' mandated higher hoodlines.
 
Liter bike appears to be a bad choice for fuel economy but I have had a CB700SC and a 919 and neither one had enough torque to satisfy my desire to ride with my buddies on Euro V-twins (Duc 1098,1198's). They are both great bikes though. As for the tire issue,
the Mega thread on GSX1250's is pretty clear about low mileage on OEM tires. But I agree both issues could be better if I could just keep my hand out of the throttle (almost 100 ft lbs of torque at 6-7K RPM is fun)! As for the CRX, I knew they did not crash well but the video you included made me glad I never had a wreck in mine (ouch).
 
Liter bike appears to be a bad choice for fuel economy but I have had a CB700SC and a 919 and neither one had enough torque to satisfy my desire to ride with my buddies on Euro V-twins (Duc 1098,1198's). They are both great bikes though. As for the tire issue,
the Mega thread on GSX1250's is pretty clear about low mileage on OEM tires. But I agree both issues could be better if I could just keep my hand out of the throttle (almost 100 ft lbs of torque at 6-7K RPM is fun)! As for the CRX, I knew they did not crash well but the video you included made me glad I never had a wreck in mine (ouch).

If you keep fitting sport-biased tires (not to be confused with bias tires), you are going to continue getting short tire life no matter what you do. 919 guys running tires like Michelin Pilot Powers are getting 3-5K at best. I'm running Avon Storm sport-touring tires on my 919; some people have found them perfectly adequate for track days, so adhesion isn't a problem for them.

I got more than 10K of hard DFW daily commuting out of my last Storm rear before I ran over a nail and I still had a good third to a quarter of the tire's life left. I'm not exactly a timid rider either, as sKatZ here can testify. :D So I wasn't exactly babying my bike or my tires. I fully expect to get the same or more out of the new rear I fitted. They cost a little more than a Michelin Pilot Power, but they last almost four times as long and on the street there's not a lot of a difference in what you can do with them. In fact, I'd go so far to say there was none.

Adapt your riding style to be smoother and more regular on the throttle; both your tire life and fuel economy will increase as a result. Don't go in and out of "boost" mode like so many people do when they first get ahold of a literbike. A friend of mine rode my 919 like that for half a tank and managed to drop its average fuel economy for that tank from the 36-42 I usually average all the way down to 26 just by doing that. It also isn't any faster on average than a steady fast cruise.

If you really want fuel economy in a commuter, go buy one of the new Honda NC700X bikes. Owners are reporting 67mpg out of those things.
 
I have always wondered about people who obsess about how much of a death trap small cars are, ..............yet RIDE MOTORCYCLES!!!!

That's sorta like eating only organic pesticide free food and then lighting up a cigarette.
 
I have always wondered about people who obsess about how much of a death trap small cars are, ..............yet RIDE MOTORCYCLES!!!!

That's sorta like eating only organic pesticide free food and then lighting up a cigarette.

Not exactly.

From a post I made on another forum when we were discussing exactly this sort of thing - cheap older small cars versus motorcycles. Important part bolded for convenience:

Of interest to those like the original poster who are considering older small cars: Back in the 1970s and 1980s, various US government agencies compiled some stats that should be eye opening. -unimportant line snipped- Even so, it was found with alarming regularity that while a motorcyclist was more likely to suffer serious injury should a collision or incident occur, the occupants of contemporary compact or subcompact car were actually far more likely to die than the motorcyclist. This was due in part to the fact that the stricken motorcyclist could be quickly scooped up and spirited off to the ER/casualty ward immediately whereas the compact car driver was trapped in a wadded ball of metal from which they would have to be extracted. Despite the advent of and widespread use of hydraulic extraction tools in this era, it was not unusual for compact car drivers in serious accidents to bleed to death while waiting for extraction.

Motorcycling gear has gotten better. Those ancient compact cars? Not so much. In fact, they've gotten worse due to the proliferation of heavy SUVs. If I was told today to pick between a 1976 Ford Fiesta and a 1976 Honda CB750K for my transport with an eye towards safety, I know what I would choose. And it wouldn't be the Fiesta.
 
Interesting. I wouldn't want to hit a suburban on/in either.
 
I was thinking about the crush factor in a compact car versus being "thrown clear" on a bike also. Having said that, if you took a solid side/head on hit by a Suburban the results would probably include very serious injury. Like someone said, these are motorcycles. And as far as just cruising on a liter-bike that sounds a little "boring" and makes my buns burn to think about. You just got to let those "wild horses run" on a liter-bike sometimes.
Now, onto the NC700 adventure tour topic. For some reason that parallel 700c motor actually sparks my interest. I owned a TDM850 back in the 90's that was a great ride. If the X has great torque and high efficiency it could be a great commuter bike. Especially with bags. I love the Kawa 650 Versus it just does not have enough punch once loaded up. It just could not be my "only bike".
 
Yes, I looked hard at the Fit when I traded my Mazdaspeed 3 for a Mazda 2 last summer. Problem is they advertise 30+ MPG but in Houston traffic with the A/C on and fully loaded with samples on I45 at 70mph they struggle to get 30MPG!!

Can't believe that, I get an easy 37mpg in the summer, full blast A/C cruising 70mph. Mine is a 5 speed and the automatic usually gets tad better mpg on the freeway. Around town I get 32-34mph and if I highway cruise below 65mph I get over 40mpg. I even get 25-29mpg pulling a 800 lb trailer at 60-65mph.

I hear that the Honda Fit is a real buzz bomb on the highway that really has you wishing the transmission had a sixth gear, about 2900 rpm @ 60 mph in fifth gear.

That rpm sounds about right but it does not buzz you any at all. Only slightly increased road/engine noise but not offensive and normal compared to other cars in it's class. I think I'm about 3,300rpm at 75mph and for perspective redline is not until 6,800rpm.

The big difference between the Fit and other small cars is in its versatility. It has truly double the cargo carrying capacity of Yaris, Mazda 2, Mazda 3, Fiesta, etc. and a unique seat/door arrangement to allow it to carry items that wouldn't even fit into a full sized car or SUV.

When I was shopping it came down to either the Fit or a mid sized 4 door pickup. For me any other small car didn't fill my needs. But if I needed only a people hauler or a commuter car the Fit would not be my first choice.

_
 
I was thinking about the crush factor in a compact car versus being "thrown clear" on a bike also. Having said that, if you took a solid side/head on hit by a Suburban the results would probably include very serious injury. Like someone said, these are motorcycles. And as far as just cruising on a liter-bike that sounds a little "boring" and makes my buns burn to think about. You just got to let those "wild horses run" on a liter-bike sometimes.
Now, onto the NC700 adventure tour topic. For some reason that parallel 700c motor actually sparks my interest. I owned a TDM850 back in the 90's that was a great ride. If the X has great torque and high efficiency it could be a great commuter bike. Especially with bags. I love the Kawa 650 Versus it just does not have enough punch once loaded up. It just could not be my "only bike".

Sounds like they need to build the ultimate one person commuter car. Have it open on top with a roll bar and have the driver sit in the center held in by a five point harness. Make the steering wheel detachable so the driver can get out of the car faster and without doors, the frame could be so much more rigid. Four open wheels and an engine right behind the driver and maybe an 8 speed dual clutch transmission thrown in for good measure shifted with paddles on the steering wheel. Lot's of titanium and carbon, keep the weight down to under 1600 lb.

Aw forget it, too hard to put a gun rack in a car like that.
 
The smart is built like a tank. It passes all the intrusion tests, but it's still dangerous because there are no methods of force mitigation, ie crumple zones, on the car. All the momentum gets transfered. Google the crash test videos for a safe car like the accord, then watch the ones for the smart. Same conditions, but the impacts in the smart are much more violent. Like, internal injury violent.
 
Sounds like they need to build the ultimate one person commuter car. Have it open on top with a roll bar and have the driver sit in the center held in by a five point harness. Make the steering wheel detachable so the driver can get out of the car faster and without doors, the frame could be so much more rigid. Four open wheels and an engine right behind the driver and maybe an 8 speed dual clutch transmission thrown in for good measure shifted with paddles on the steering wheel. Lot's of titanium and carbon, keep the weight down to under 1600 lb.

Aw forget it, too hard to put a gun rack in a car like that.

Getting close? peugeot cup 20
peugeot-20cup_side.jpg


Manufacturer Peugeot
Production 2005
Assembly FRA
Engine 1600
Transmission 6-speed manual

Wheelbase 2.31 m (7 ft 6.9 in)
Length 3.63 m (11.9 ft)
Width 1.77 m (5 ft 9.7 in)
Height 1.16 m (3 ft 9.7 in)
Curb weight 500 kg (1,102.3 lb)
 
Last edited:
I have always wondered about people who obsess about how much of a death trap small cars are, ..............yet RIDE MOTORCYCLES!!!!

That's sorta like eating only organic pesticide free food and then lighting up a cigarette.

Exactly! How. About a coworker that is 100 lbs overweight and eats the king sized Butterfingers and washes it down with a Diet Coke to cut calories??!!
 
Getting close? peugeot cup 20
peugeot-20cup_side.jpg


Manufacturer Peugeot
Production 2005
Assembly FRA
Engine 1600
Transmission 6-speed manual

Wheelbase 2.31 m (7 ft 6.9 in)
Length 3.63 m (11.9 ft)
Width 1.77 m (5 ft 9.7 in)
Height 1.16 m (3 ft 9.7 in)
Curb weight 500 kg (1,102.3 lb)

I notice that it is a three wheeler which legally makes it a motorcycle. I think it would be nice if the government exempted tiny one person cars from the regs that have turned sub compacts into 2400 pound cars, allow them to be alternatives to motorcycles.
If it only holds a driver, then you are taking your own risks when you drive it. If the driver sits in the center, like an F1 or Indy car, then you have crush zones all around you. A helmet and a five point harness instead of air bags.
 
It has been tried before, multiple times - and nobody buys them. See the Corbin Sparrow for one of the most recent failures. Yes, that Corbin.

Corbin_Sparrow.jpg


Another failure that looked to be a winner in the beginning was the Carver. Couldn't find any customers.

449px-Carver_one_06011701.jpg


BMW tried it the other way with the C1 scooter - a scooter with a nicely styled crash cage around it and weather protection. Nobody bought it either and it was discontinued without a replacement after only four years.

260px-BMW_C1_FF_200_%28frontale%29.jpg


As for the Peugeot 20Cup, it worked out so well it was never put in producton and was only a concept car.
 
Sounds like they need to build the ultimate one person commuter car. Have it open on top with a roll bar and have the driver sit in the center held in by a five point harness. Make the steering wheel detachable so the driver can get out of the car faster and without doors, the frame could be so much more rigid. Four open wheels and an engine right behind the driver and maybe an 8 speed dual clutch transmission thrown in for good measure shifted with paddles on the steering wheel. Lot's of titanium and carbon, keep the weight down to under 1600 lb.

Aw forget it, too hard to put a gun rack in a car like that.

Sounds like you defined the Aerial Atom except for having an extra seat.
Trade the high output engine for something smaller like a Mazda SkyActiv powerplant and the gas mileage should jump up nicely.
 
I think you guys are thinking too big. Look at a Honda CG125 that they get in Mexico. I think it is called a cargo. These can get 100+ mpg.

Cg125_Motorcycle_spare_parts.jpg
 
Stay off the highway and take the scenic route. I do it all the time on my daily commute now.

These folks have ridden over 20,000 miles since they left Oregon last Year:

http://www.advrider.com/forums/showthread.php?t=716979

That's nice for them. That's also nice for you. Most people don't want to have to leave an hour early (or more) and get home an hour later (or more) because their bike can't do their commute on the highway.

It would actually take me three hours extra per day to do my longest current commute on surface streets.
 
This already was discussed, and mostly just turned into some folks saying that it's not practical or safe to ride these small bikes on the freeway, and some folks calling them liars.
 
This already was discussed, and mostly just turned into some folks saying that it's not practical or safe to ride these small bikes on the freeway, and some folks calling them liars.

Yeah, I tried it for a week when I had a shorter commute and a borrowed CB125S back when there was less traffic in Dallas back in the 90s. It was terrifyingly unsafe then, I can't imagine it's gotten any better since. It's not just a theoretical for me - been there, done that, got the T-shirt, almost got run over by a Mack truck.
 
Back
Top