Suzuki Burgman USA Forum banner

1 - 20 of 40 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,485 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I'd like ur opinions on how much more gas in mpg does a 650 use compared to a 400. I know there r many factors, but go with ur best estimate - ok? And yes, I know what Suzuki has to say on this subject but I want "real world" opinions. Also, if u want, see if u can guess y I want this info. haha!!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,886 Posts
With the 650 you definitely need to watch/control your right hand because the 650 is not as forgiving as the 400. The best to date I got out of my 650 was 57mpg on the highway at an indicated 73mph, my 400 was able to achieve 67-73mpg on the highway on a regular basis. In the City which is most of my riding I get around 40 to 42mpg vs 40 to 50mpg. IMHO it's worth the mpg hit because the 650 is a much more capable machine, it handles like it is on rails and has ample reserve power for passing even when you're at the 80mph mark. One thing I was personally worried about was the weight but that fear quickly disappeared after my first ride, once the bike is rolling you can hardly notice the weight difference between the 650 & 400 however slow speed maneuvers need to be practiced and adjusted too and when coming to a stop one must make sure she is not leaning over to much too either side as this is when you will notice the weight difference between the 2. One real disappointment is how harsh the suspension is on the 650 especially the front end (which I'm going to tackle in the near future).

Overall I'm extremely happy with my decision to go with the 650.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,204 Posts
When I ride my 400 on rides with my friend with his 650, he gets in the low to mid 50s and I get in the high 60s. That is on curvy mountain roads.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,671 Posts
With the summer gas I am getting around 47-49 mpg with a short Givi windshield and a Givi top box. I am big enough I do not need a passenger. :geek:
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
8,067 Posts
InfernoST said:
One real disappointment is how harsh the suspension is on the 650 especially the front end (which I'm going to tackle in the near future.
Yup, That's why I ride 2up 95%. Much better ride.
I previously had an '03 400, and the mileage difference is about 15 mpg.
Well worth the difference for 2 up riding.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,230 Posts
The 400 is going to beat the 650 by 10 to 15 mpg at legal highway speeds. If you like to run at 80+ expect the margin to be less.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
661 Posts
Over close to 4,000 miles I'm averaging 57.6. My low is @ 53. and my high is around 61. I did a LOT of commuting on 55 to 65 +/- highways.

So you guys are only getting 45 +/- on your 650's?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,230 Posts
I average right at 50 mpg on my 650 and 63 on my 400.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
661 Posts
Buffalo said:
I average right at 50 mpg on my 650 and 63 on my 400.
I was thinking they did better than that. Heck, I've averaged 44. over 13K on my ST1100. Highway riding at 70/75 with a couple of zips included will get me 48-50 (I do a LOT of commuting).
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,230 Posts
The 650 is a heavy bike at 630+ lbs. Takes fuel to move that weight.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,230 Posts
A CVT transmission is more efficient than a conventional transmission. That's why cars like the Prius use them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,933 Posts
I have seen both get 50 MPG on the same ride. The 400 was running and gunning and the 650 was smooth and steady.
Although not typical at all..... the biggest factor may just be in the wrist. :wink:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,230 Posts
Running at higher speeds hurts the 400 worst than the 650. I seldom run my 400 at more than 65 (actual not speedometer indicated) because it starts using way more gas. The 650 does about the same running at 75 as it does at 65. By the time I get up to 85 my 400 is only getting about 3 or 4 mpg more than my 650.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
748 Posts
Buffalo said:
A CVT transmission is more efficient than a conventional transmission. That's why cars like the Prius use them.
I disagree, better then I stick shift? Lots of power is lost through a torque converter in an automatic, and CVTs also, ( I believe) where a Manuel, there is zero loss.
By the way, have you ever driven a car with a CVT? I drove my dads Subaru and it was weird, but nice!

Edit: Did some quick research and it appears that I'm full of it..... :shock:
Bawwwhahahaha :lol:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,485 Posts
Discussion Starter #19
Thanx guys!!!!!!!!! Lots of interesting comments!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! My game plan is to buy a 650 in the future and in the meantime, the savings I am getting on my 400 fuel costs will help finance that. ( At least that is what I will tell my wife - haha!)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,468 Posts
Mike337 said:
Buffalo said:
A CVT transmission is more efficient than a conventional transmission. That's why cars like the Prius use them.
I disagree, better then I stick shift? Lots of power is lost through a torque converter in an automatic, and CVTs also, ( I believe) where a Manuel, there is zero loss.
By the way, have you ever driven a car with a CVT? I drove my dads Subaru and it was weird, but nice!

Edit: Did some quick research and it appears that I'm full of it..... :shock:
Bawwwhahahaha :lol:
The CVT in the Prius is essentially a differential gear set using power into the traction motors to vary the output shaft speed, and is quite efficient. The variable-diameter pulley CVT used in scooters wastes energy because it uses the load on the belt to force the pulley halves apart against the variator rollers/sliders and the contra-spring on the clutch-end pulley to establish the transmission ratio. The Burgman 650's transmission is a bit less inefficient as the drive pulley position is set by a servo rather than a balance between the load on the belt and the force of the rollers. There's still some binding from the contra-spring on the driven pulley, but the total losses are much less than those in a mechanical variator CVT.

The main reasons for the difference in fuel economy are weight and aerodynamic drag. Oh, and a tendency to accelerate a little harder with the 650 just because it can. :)
 
1 - 20 of 40 Posts
Top