GSXS 1000 Forum banner

I did the impossible so you don't have to (hyper mileage thread).

1859 Views 24 Replies 11 Participants Last post by  LanghamP
Since I have a daily very regular route sans traffic, I decided to burn through two tanks of gas with the utmost fuel efficiency.
--2016 GSXS1000F.
--Clean and waxed bike and helmet.
--No going above 62 mph (indicated) highway.
--I estimate about 40 mph on twisties, no brakes, tiny amount of throttle, 6th gear.
--Granny starts from lights.
--Engine off at long lights.
--I weight roughly 250 pounds with equipment, tank bag, tail bag, Aerostich suit, boots, gloves, etc...
--Used Google Maps to go exactly from one destination to another every day. Hence, this estimation is the worst (ie shortest) possible.

Result: about 58 mpg, so just missed 60 mpg.

It's pretty funny having a long line of cars backed up behind me because I was going exactly the speed limit, and having every single driver beat me from stoplights. On the last day I even had a full-rig Harley follow me before passing me with a WTF gesture. Of course, I was scrunched up behind the windshield, so yes I looked ridiculous.

58 mpg is not very efficient for a motorcycle under the best case driving but I don't think this would surprise anyone. 1000cc engines will never be particularly efficient engines.

Some notes: to my surprise, the GSXS is quite difficult to ride at such low throttle openings with low rpms. I think the bike stalled in 6th gear @40 mph not just a few times but many times. Every Japanese bike, including this one, I get the impression the engines are imperturbable sewing machines but apparently low rpms at tiny throttle openings seems pure misery for the engine. I'm wondering if those cut-offs and stumblings might have negatively impacted fuel economy.

Interestingly, I next got about 48-52 mpg riding "normally", or doing about 70 mph on the highway and between 40 to 100+ mph on twisties, and relatively high rpms with fairly large throttle openings out of turns. But still not "sport bike riding".

What does all this mean? I'm not absolutely sure, but it seems you have to go way slower with way less acceleration to eek out just 15% more fuel efficiency. Or maybe sport bike engines are just really efficient at high rpms. Or maybe there's some hard line in fuel efficiency whereby when the bike is turned on then it will use a minimal amount of fuel.

Regardless, riding a sport bike as a granny bike is quite painful. I do this all the time with my car and it's just fine to get ludicrous gas mileage but trundling along on a bike at or below the speed limit is quite boring. And also, the aforementioned throttle issues made it surprisingly difficult and challenging to do. So you're going slow but it requires a lot of concentration to keep the bike at a precise speed.
See less See more
  • Like
Reactions: 2
1 - 5 of 25 Posts
The 120 miles to a tank that you're reporting is pretty bad, IMO. I think the MT-10 has a 4.5 gallon tank and I doubt you're bone dry when you fill up each time, so you get 120 miles using about four gallons of gas. That means you were getting roughly 30 miles per gallon, which is pretty terrible.

My GSX-S has a five gallon tank. I typically refuel after riding about 180 miles and it normally takes about four gallons to refill the tank, meaning I still had a gallon left. Using four gallons of gas to go 180 miles equals 45 miles per gallon, which is 50% better than your MT-10. That's a huge difference considering they're very similar bikes with the same sized 1000cc engine.
This link says about 30 mph. 2022 Yamaha MT-10 | First Ride Review | Rider Magazine
A slightly taller rear sprocket (42 teeth vs. 43 before) contributes to smoother response at small throttle openings and better fuel economy, which Yamaha says has increased from a dismal 30 mpg to a more palatable 36 mpg.
while this Yamaha MT-10 MPG - Actual MPG from 7 Yamaha MT-10 owners for a 2016 says under 30 mpg but mid 30 mpg for post 2016 MT10.

Meanwhile, the GSXS1000 trundles along in 38 to 42 mpg in all its forms but if you drive the bike instead of ride the bike, it gets substantially better gas mileage.
  • Like
Reactions: 1
Not sure I believe dropping just one tooth on the rear sprocket increased fuel economy by 6 MPG. When you're only getting 30 MPG, gaining 6 MPG is a huge percentage increase and its going to take more than that to do it. Either way, it seems like Yamaha was acknowledging that high fuel consumption was an issue and it needed to be addressed, even if it was half-heartedly done.
Getting 30 mpg for a motorcycle regardless of size seems really bad efficiency. I mean, once we into the mid 30's mpg we're already getting double the average automobiles in the US (light trucks dominate in the US).

It could also be these are mostly non-stock motorcycles. If we're messing with those emissions and sensors then who knows what mileage or power we're really getting.

I did recently price a gsxs1000 stock muffler; it's $1100. I don't think that even included the catalytic converter. Like if you crashed a GSXS and magically damaged only the headers and pipe, you'd be looking at more than $2000...
All bikes are made with a very defined purpose of use in mind.
If you really want to save gasoline either do not ride a vehicle at all or ride a Honda Grom 125 cc 137 MPG or a Honda CB150R 125 MPG.

When I ride my GSXS1000 hard I get like 19 MPG but I get to 60 mph in no more than 3.0 sec.
My 2018 Grom did like 15 sec from 0-60. Top speed about 62 mph.
Ah, but the GSXS1000F, in my opinion, does very well indeed for other uses in mind outside sport-touring. And sometimes if you're low on gas you do have the ability to extend the remaining gas mileage considerably. If you have only two gallons of gas then you can choose to burn it up in 38 miles or you can extend it to well beyond 100 miles.

I suppose I could get a Honda Grom as a 2nd bike...but $3000 buys an awful lot of gas, insurance, tires, and depreciation.
That's true but since your whole point is to save gas, you can sell your GSXS1000 for $6K and buy a Grom for $3K and have $3K extra for all the life of the Grom.
That was my original intent, except replace Grom with Burgman 650. So you are indeed correct. My particular bike was practically a rescue bike and so very very cheap.
1 - 5 of 25 Posts