If you drive standard Yamaha, on a straight pavement road. Who would get farest (if they all have the same size of tank?)

How would the list look if you drive at say 40 mph?

If you tow lets say a 1000 lbs wagoon, would the list look the same?

If you drive the exact same on a moderate mud trail, at the same speed and same tires etc. Would the list still be as above?

Why I am asking this, is because no manufacturer presents their fuel milage on their quads! Why? I know people on these forums says:

-well, it depends on how you run your atv, and it will differs more than driving a car. Impossible to say.

But is it really that impossible, to make 3 tests? One on straight pavement, one when towing a certain amount, and one when doing trails? The car industry managed to make comparments between auto/manuals and it is listed for every make and model of the entire industry!

It would be really nice to see which maker made the most efficient ATV models compared to CC's. Wouldn't you thinkt that? I mean here in Sweden the gas is very expensive now, and I think it will only get more and more expensive, even in the US.

Is Honda the most easy on gas? They have their clutching system. Or is a manual AC 500 the best when shifted right? Or is the Suzuki KQ 450 the best?

Just want to start a discussion about this, if you are interested. I have posted this on multiple forum threads, I hope that it is OK.

Thanks

 

i understand what you are saying. but i think in this sport, gas is apart of the cost if you cannot afford it then you should not own a bike. i am trying not to sound cold. but gas prices are rising in every country, sad to say it will only continue to rise. i have a 660 i went through a tank of gas in 3-4 hours and i had a tank last all day. i think the makers cannot rate gas milage cause no one has a standardized condition and habits which they all agree on. in addition, i dont think very many of us will adhere to these conditions. i know i will not.

 

How would you be able to rate fuel consumption for a vehicle that travels on such varying terrain. Since they are not legal for the roads, you can't give them a hwy/city type rating like a car or truck. The throttle on a recreational product is seldom used sparingly and the drivers' weight is a factor, whereas it is quite insignificant in a car/truck.

I am sure some ATV's would have better fuel consumption numbers than others but that's not what sells quads. If fuel consumption was important then more people would buy 300-500cc quads and 700-1000cc quads would be collecting dust.

I understand what your thinking but the fact of the matter is you have to pay to play. Drive a sled in the winter and use the happy lever a lot and you will understand high fuel consumption.

 

You can measure it if the "organisation" / "team work of brands" uses the same trail test, same road( yes in europe legal! and maybe some states in US?)!, same weight on driver etc. If i drive my 400 AC thrue different test one day. I think I will get about the same result next day and next day on... and you would likely get the same values from day to day on your kodiak 450.
Then comes the nice thing... you and I can compare our atvs by these tests. Of course these test have to be carefully picked by this organisation, and be somewhat relevant. But in this way you and I can compare our mpg with a AC 950 H1 and maybe see that it sucks on gas? Over time maybe we can see that AC have understood the problem and making more and more fuel efficient 950 H1. The buyer can see that AC is constantly getting better and better mpg / year.... and the buyer then thinks... aha... AC is really working on their atvs comparing to Polaris who had have about the same low mpg every year in and out.... REMEMBER JUST AN EXAMPLE! NO OFFENSE:

 

I fully agree with you but most ATV buyers will look at the performance specs and articles about their abilities on the trail and in the mud.

The funny thing about lots of ATV buyers is that they seem to be mostly males and lots of them seem to liken the size and power of their quad to ***** size. There are however probably many that would look at fuel consumption as a important indicator of a companies commitment to building high performance, high tech. equipment.

The others are probably not concerned about the fuel mileage of a recreational product.

It would be nice though to brag to a buddy that your machine with the same displacement can not only perform better on the trails but also does it using less fuel.

 

Thank you Freud...I mean headpressure

Performance specs? What performance specs? The major atv manufacturers hardly ever release performance figures (hp/tq) so all you have to go on is engine displacement and design.

Yes it'd be great to have some kind of rough idea where the fuel consumption figured lie for these atvs. The automotive industry has them as a result of government mandate, and you see them on some dual sport bikes as an advertisement to lure customers with high economy figures. However without some third party to standardize these measurements I fear that they would be too inconsistent to be comparable.