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
·
1,931 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
·
1,670 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
·
20,108 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
·
14,417 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.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,417 Posts
A CVT transmission is more efficient than a conventional transmission. That's why cars like the Prius use them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,931 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
·
14,417 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
·
747 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
·
2,585 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
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top