www.boxertrix.com

67mpg?!

Jesus.

I never get over 40mpg from the Boxer, and the Pan is high 30s right now.

That's not caning it everywhere, but it's not riding like a nun, either.

Even so... if we take bike emissions and apply current car rates, then we'll at least double what we currently pay.

And I really wouldn't want bikes to have to employ all the emissions controls cars currently have.

BMW may be better than the Japs - but you're never going to get 200bhp / litre for under 99g/km.

Most e-petitions are ill thought out...luckily nobody takes any notice of them.

Regards to all,

I don't know much about this, but surely the figures derived for cars will be under certain test conditions. Will the bikes be tested under the same conditions? If the speed is relatively low bikes should return a good mpg.

I thought the vfr has v Tec?

I won't be signing the petition either way.

Unless things have changed, cars are tested on a rolling road.

This is bad news for bikes as far as I can see? How would that show a bikes strengths? Narrow frontal area (so low drag at normal road speeds) Low rolling resistance. Fantastic power to weight ratio.

It's a joke.

Twinspark wrote:Are you all bloody stupid?

No, but for me? on occasions maybe

I actually think we have it lucky. Ok, so bikes are not free, or very cheap, like some small cars, but £78 for even the biggest bikes is not bad in comparison to some!

I have a friend with a Cosworth, it comes out a handful of times for very limited miles, and even though he only taxes it for 6 months it still costs a bomb. Ok, it might be a gas guzzler, but it's not guzzling gas when it's not moving.

The only fair way is to get rid of it and put the duty on fuel. That way, if you use it, you pay for it. (The amount of duty we pay on fuel is a whole different argument).

Twinspark wrote:67mpg?!

Jesus.

I never get over 40mpg from the Boxer, and the Pan is high 30s right now.

That's not caning it everywhere, but it's not riding like a nun, either.

Even so... if we take bike emissions and apply current car rates, then we'll at least double what we currently pay.

And I really wouldn't want bikes to have to employ all the emissions controls cars currently have.

BMW may be better than the Japs - but you're never going to get 200bhp / litre for under 99g/km.

Honda have been particularly poor at MPG over the last few years, from tests I've read the VTR1000 and it's stablemate the Varadero have a hideous reputation for mileage, add in increasingly smaller fuel tanks on some and the usefullness, from my point of view is poor.

The 67 mpg was simply running the K at the legal limit on the cruise control on the motorway, that particular day I got near enough 300 miles from the tank

Suprised your R11S is only getting 40, I thought the general average is 45 plus from previous discussions here.

I seem to recall my mate Andy reckoning on high mileages >65 mpg from his F800ST

one thing I do know ... I never say never When you see the performance (speed and mileage) levels we have nowadays who knows what will happen in the future?

Herb wrote:I actually think we have it lucky. Ok, so bikes are not free, or very cheap, like some small cars, but £78 for even the biggest bikes is not bad in comparison to some!
...........

The only fair way is to get rid of it and put the duty on fuel. That way, if you use it, you pay for it. (The amount of duty we pay on fuel is a whole different argument).

Agree

And

Agree

Hang on a mo, I did do a little keyboard reserch just as everybody else has on here, so maybe I'm still stupid but......

Have a look here: http://www.spritmonitor.de/en/detail/252523.html

Our beloved R1100S will fall into the £30 per year tax band according to this German site.

The VFR would still cost over a hundred sovs, but hey, its a Honda

And the same goes for them gas guzzling K1200GT's
http://www.spritmonitor.de/en/detail/142480.html

However, these figures, just like most on the internet are proberbly inaccurate and made up. Heres where I suspect the guy who raised the pertion got his from:

http://www.bikez.com/motorcycles/Honda_vfr_800_1999.php

I suspect the manufactures will eventually have to provide accurate details.

Although I'm sure it counts for squat when the Govt/EU decide all these emission testing rules, but the 'carbon footprint' should maybe consider the actual manufacturing and shipping to destination costs.

Deleted.

fatnfast wrote:?..................However, these figures, just like most on the internet are proberbly inaccurate and made up. Heres where I suspect the guy who raised the pertion got his from:

http://www.bikez.com/motorcycles/Honda_vfr_800_1999.php

.

The bikez fuel consumption figures are all over the place. Pinch of salt?

I'm not finding it very funny.

Volunteering for more control.

Harry Lime wrote:

Twinspark wrote:Are you all bloody stupid?

Did any of you bother to check the facts before signing?

Well said. But expecting people to read the frikkin' small print or consider the consequences is usually too much to ask.

Looks good, so I'll sign it. Phwooerr, I can save a couple of bob 'ere!

That petition could easily have been put up by someone who hates loud, i.e. aftermarket exhaust, motorcycles.

Glad I've got my "cat" bubble wrapped in the attic.

Bye bye Laser

H.

What does a "cat" do?

Corvus wrote:

Harry Lime wrote:

Twinspark wrote:Are you all bloody stupid?

Did any of you bother to check the facts before signing?

Well said. But expecting people to read the frikkin' small print or consider the consequences is usually too much to ask.

Looks good, so I'll sign it. Phwooerr, I can save a couple of bob 'ere!

That petition could easily have been put up by someone who hates loud, i.e. aftermarket exhaust, motorcycles.

Glad I've got my "cat" bubble wrapped in the attic.

Bye bye Laser

H.

What does a "cat" do?

A cat will actually increase CO2 emissions. Part of its function is to convert the harmful to us CO into CO2. Removes other toxic stuff as well though. For maxiumum benefits vehicles therefore also need to be as economical as possible.

fatnfast wrote:

Corvus wrote:

Harry Lime wrote: Well said. But expecting people to read the frikkin' small print or consider the consequences is usually too much to ask.

Looks good, so I'll sign it. Phwooerr, I can save a couple of bob 'ere!

That petition could easily have been put up by someone who hates loud, i.e. aftermarket exhaust, motorcycles.

Glad I've got my "cat" bubble wrapped in the attic.

Bye bye Laser

H.

What does a "cat" do?

A cat will actually increase CO2 emissions. Part of its function is to convert the harmful to us CO into CO2. Removes other toxic stuff as well though. For maxiumum benefits vehicles therefore also need to be as economical as possible.

I'm sensing a degree of irony here.

Couldn't they have decided to convert the stuff into something useful? Like beer.

Done