The questions we often get about the scoots: How fast will those things go? What kind of mileage do they get? How much do they cost? I think that last question comes from people remembering the total cheap-ass Chinese scooters that Pep Boys used to advertise. Don't see much of that anymore, since most of those Chinese scooters can't meet EPA and DOT requirements for importing. And, China doesn't allow them any more because of their emission requirements; they seem to be all about the electric conveyances now.
In the past, I have posted about the significant difference in fuel
mileage we get while riding the scoots in the Black Hills. At home in
south Texas, I have been seeing mid-60s to low 70s mpg on the new Vespa; non-ethanol not
available. As stated in the Vespa manuel, I do run premium in it. Two
fill-ups now in the Black Hills, and my best has been 90.9 mpg.
Non-ethanol premium is available in some stations here. On the tank I
ran through yesterday, we ran speeds from highway (60 - 65 mph) to some
twisty roads with speed limits from 35 to 45 mph. Higher elevation here
(3,500 to 4,500 yesterday) compared to sea level at home.
No, we didn't buy scooters for the fuel economy. 
At some point, it becomes another "competition" for us. Joan always wins, since her Xmax gets better mileage than my Vespa and
runs on regular rather than premium. She often tops off with what I
put in the Vespa - being the gentleman I am, I let her go first... and
she gets that ethanol laced regular grade out of the hose before I top
off. Plus, the gas tank in her bike is bigger than the one in mine - she doesn't have to fuel up as often.
4 comments:
With the new cameras, we often get the "Smiles Per Gallon" treatment. Thanks. Bob J.
Nice of you to say, Bob... I'm certainly getting the smiles in since we've been here! ;-)
Plus one on the "smiles per gallon" comment! Bikes will do that.....
Speaking of non-ethanol gas, we have a station just a half mile from our house and exclusively use pure gasoline in all our vehicles. We filled up and used "good fuel" on the trip to Vancouver, getting 37 mpg. But in WA state the only choice was ethanol gas. Running the same route, same weather, same load, and same posted speed limits, we got barely 33 mpg on the return trip with the inferior blended fuel - an 11% loss in MPG. As a mechanical engineer, I was taught that ethanol does not have the same BTU content per gallon as gasoline, so it is a false economy to dilute gasoline with ethanol. Plus it takes more energy to farm the corn and then distill it into ethanol than it could possibly save when used in autos. You might use fewer gallons of gas in total but it takes more gallons of the blended fuel to go the same distance. No net savings.... [steps down from soapbox now]
PS: We passed by the tiny town of Rufus, OR today. It sits between The Dalles and Hermiston, along the Columbia River. Lots of tug boats pushing grain barges to/from the port. He's a good boy.....
Hi Earl - I've used all those same arguments against ethanol; I think it was an experiment that didn't work.
As far as Rufus, OR - we have stayed in an RV park there. Of course it was before we had Rufus, but Izzy was with us. That's a pretty drive along the Columbia River. Hope the temps have moderated for you.
Post a Comment