Modern Vespa

What a rip, I may as well just get a Honda Civic...


I filled the tank up until the damn thing was close to the cap, and the fuel gauge was all the way at full. I just rode ~40 miles and I'm under half according to the tank.

I guesstimate another 40 miles and I'll be completely empty.

Thats 80/2.2 gallon tank, thats only 36mpg.


What a rip.

Is your assertion that you've used half a tank based solely on the gas gauge? If so, that's a very poor indicator of how much gas you actually have left.

You must run it until you fill up a few times before you can determine fuel mileage. It will certainly fall between 65 and 75 mpg, depending on your riding style.

I have been recording of my mileage since mile 3, from the dealer:

http://www.fuelly.com/driver/andruschak/lx150-ie

Fillups 3 & 4 were claiming that the tank was empty after just 80 miles. But just 1.1 - 1.2 gallons. So I carried a gas can with exactly 0.4 gallons. Gauge said I was empty, but I kept riding. The gas light flickering, but I kept riding. The light stayed solid, but I kept riding. Finally it sputter off/on/off/on/off and stopped. Added the 0.4 gallons, drove the 100 yards to the gas station (I was circling the block) and now know that I have a 2.13 gallon tank.

I'd had the same concerns. I've only gassed up a couple of times, which at least gives you the volume used. Unfortunately, I'd stupidly not written down that figure at the pump, so I'm just stuck with a couple of receipts to tell me how much I'd spent Once I actually start doing the math, I'm expecting better news.

I just bought a 150 S 2009 with 156 miles: so like NIB. Anyhow still considering break-in and just the second half fill up, the fuel gauge pretty much just indicates the first half of the tank, I ran it down to a little less than 1/4 tank indicated and filled it up but it took almost exactly one gallon... so maybe the OP and I have the same minor problem.... This weekend I'm planning on running it all the way down. Even with break-in etc. I'm sure I can expect 55-60 mpg city riding, absolute worst case.

I'm confident that the last quarter tank, indicated will represent the second half of the tank in volume.

Happy T-day

I fill it until the pump shuts off, then note the mileage and the gallonage (literage?). A bit o' maths on a spreadsheet and, viola, the mpg is music to my ears. Well, 59 to 62 or thereabouts.

The pump shut-off is fairly consistent at a given gas station and pump. Better than the gas gauge on the scooter.

If you want to be real anal about keeping track of the scooter (or any vehicle) mileage, Fuelly is very useful and easy.

It takes several fill-ups to get an accurate reading because the tank is so small that slight variations in the fill level will vary the mileage reading.

I'm positive I'm getting exactly 44 miles per gallon.

I filled up the vespa exactly 1.8 gallons until it was to the very tip.

I drove exactly 80 miles (because I only made 2 trips in equal distance of 20 miles, there and back).

I had to filled up the tank again, and I filled up exactly 1.8 gallons until it was to the very tip.

80 miles / 1.8 is 44mpg


I'm at full throttle @ 65mph about 95% of the time during the entire duration of both trips. (in fact it may be closer to 99% because I'm either usually either full throttle or braking, this is due to gigantic socal san diego roads and fast drivers)


For extra stats I have ~11,000 miles on the vesp, it is either on 06 or 07.

I agree... Fuelly +1 look at mine --------------->

It sounds like the mileage on that tankful was very low. I still feel that you should run through multiple tanks before getting a very accurate reading, but being that low might indicate an engine problem. Possibly needs to have the valves adjusted.

Driving full throttle for the entire distance indicates to me that you may have purchased a scooter that is not suited to your needs.

I can run all day at 65 mph and get 60 to 70 mpg on either of my GT's.

Like others have said, on my '09 150S, when I'm showing a quarter of a tank, I've actually only used half a tank. If I'm easy on the throttle I can almost get 75 mpg, but If I'm not easy on it, the mileage is closer to 65. My S has 21,000 miles on it.

I may be missing something here, but if you are flogging an LX by riding WOT 99% of the time, we're you really expecting optimum mileage? If you need to ride at 65 all day, you'd be better served by a GTS, mileage-wise.

wasn't expecting optimum mileage but 44mpg is just ridiculous.

Better off in a car.

But I do agree I probably need a 250 or 300.

You'll likely get around 70 with a GTS at that speed.

Also, there is a huge difference in the early LX motor and the later, fuel injected version. My ET4 with the 150 motor never really got more than 45-50mpg. The fuel injected 150 should get 65-70. My carbureted GT200 gets way better mileage than my ET ever did, and the GTS250 was better yet.

Having said all that, if the bottom line for you really is the bottom line, a Corolla or a Civic probably is cheaper over the long run than a scooter when you take everything into account.

Sell the scoot and buy that Civic. Problem solved.

I reliably get well over 60mpg from my carbureted 2007 LX, even though I've kitted it to a 190, have a performance variator with relatively light weights, weigh over 225 lbs., and ride it pretty much like a bat out of hell.

If you get less than 60mpg out of a stock ET or LX, something's wrong with it.

I've heard this before, but never personally got that mileage, nor did any of my friends who owned the same ET range scooters. Vespa reported the scooter as getting 42mpg on their original literature, but there are people with Fuelly apps reporting low 50's to low 60's. There are one or two reporting 90 mpg's which I highly doubt.

While it's not uncommon for the early 150 motor to get in the 50's, I think it is uncommon for them to get in the 60's, though it may happen. But if you're riding it WOT it most certainly will not be optimum for fuel consumption.

YMMV, literally.

Keep in mind the ET4's getting lower mileage I was talking about are all in SoCal, and as I recall we had some sort of emissions stuff on our scoots, just wondering Silver Streak...did your scoot come with the evap stuff?

This reminds me of the episode of Top Gear when Jeremy Clarkson 'proved' that a BMW M3 has better fuel economy than a Toyota Prius. hey flogged the Prius around a race track as fast as possible and matched its speed in the M3. Lo and behold, the Prius used a lot more fuel than the Beemer.

For continuous high-speed riding, a GTS is the Vespa you need.

Yes. And as Gogogordy pointed out to me, the kitted 190 is more like the GT200 than the ET4, in that the ET4 has to work harder to make the same power. So it would seem to make sense that Silver Streak's kitted ET4 gets better mileage than a stock one, especially with the smaller carb than the GT200. Yet it's still not as efficient as the GT200.

I hit approximately 70 mpg riding at 55 mph on a trip last year, on my GT200. In town riding isn't as good, since there is more stop and start. I had a GT250 for a while, and as I recall the GTS got better mileage than my GT200...somewhere around 5mpg better?

And if you flog a GTS 250/300 at WFO, you'll get about 50mpg. Okay, you'll be going faster than the LX, but the key point is that mileage is pretty crappy at WFO throttle.

Bingo.

Carburated cars have something called a power valve. I is activated only when the throttle is wide open. It dumps fuel into the intake manifold to help keep ith valves cool. I would not be surprised if modern fuel injection ran extra rich at WOT.

I've been told (but cannot confirm) that at full throttle, the GTS ECU goes into "open loop" mode, disregarding any input from the oxygen sensor and just dumping fuel according to the baseline fuel map.

Again, don't know if it's true, but it's reasonably plausible.

Well, I also have an injected LXV150 -- bone stock -- and it gets 65 - 70 mpg, closer to 70 most of the time, although I tend not to ride it as hard.

On the LX190, most of my riding is suburban with typically WOT starts, and I'm seldom riding at close to top speed due to traffic. Stock main jet; upsized idle jet.

On my trip to Colorado and back on the kitted LX two years ago, I averaged 58.5 mpg cruising at +/- 65 mph indicated most of the time, with saddlebags and 75 lbs. of spare parts and luggage. I do have the upgear kit installed, which probably helps a little.

BTW, Fuelly does nothing in the way of improving the accuracy of mileage calculations. It's just a crutch for those too lazy to do arithmetic.

What a statement. I guess using computers in general is for people too lazy to use a typewriter. And this forum is for those too lazy to use a telephone and letters to communicate.

Fuelly does a better job of the simple task of keeping track if mileage. Just like the numerous other improvements brought about through technology.

I would say the fuel gauge is pretty accurate.

It always is in the same position after the respective commutes to work and always hits the bottom line of red at 125 miles. It still has over a litre left in at this point. And always takes 7.6 litres to fill.

So id say its pretty accurate.

I wouldnt say it is required though. An orange warning light alone would have sufficed.


Fuelly.com is very useful.

I'm responding to the claims I've heard over and over again that using Fuelly somehow makes mileage calculations unimpeachable. Fuelly doesn't do anything magical... it does arithmetic.

I guess if you are into such anal exercises as doing long-term graphs of fuel economy trends, it may offer some ease of doing so... but beyond that, I just don't see any "magic" there.

As to convenience... how is opening and entering your refueling data into an app on your mobile phone any more convenient than the "Amish" method I employ?: take the little pad and pencil stub out of the glovebox, enter the current odo reading and the amount of fuel added.

I am happy to use technology where I think it offers me real advantages (like the ability to simultaneously communicate with many others over great distances), but for many other applications, Stone Age implements work just as well. I suppose using an online dictionary makes it much easier to do a crossword puzzle, but it sure doesn't help you exercise your synapses.

I am delighted to see that Silver Streak is arguing with someone besides me, for a change.

/ducks

I'm not arguing, Jess... I'm just defending the good state of tune of my scoots and my standing as the resident Luddite.

He is arguing an indefensible position.

Carbureted or injected, it does not matter much with regard to wide-open air fuel (A/F) ratios. The engineer responsible will decide the A/F ratio desired based on several factors such as performance, exhaust and piston temps, and catalyst temps if so equipped (typical WOT A/F are in the range of 11-13:1). Fuel injection is more precise than carburetion but the net result can be nearly the same. Closed-loop systems run at A/F of 14.7:1 under most conditions, but will run rich open-loop during cold start and high throttle openings. Carbs have a choke for the rich cold start and a power valve for the rich heavy throttle operation. There are electronic carbs that can run in closed loop systems although the recent carbureted Vespas do not use this method.
The above are generalities. There are all sorts of variations employed where an engine may run rich with an air pump, or lean without a catalyst under normal light throttle operation.

As to the Lx150 gas mileage issue, I'd wager that if one were to get less than 60 mpg something is seriously amiss!

My wife and I had 2 new ET-4's (carbureted) purchased on the same date from new ,identically maintenanced, and ridden elbow to elbow for 6 years with resulting nearly identical mileage at date of sale, and we NEVER achieved better than 46 mpg on either machine.

Conversely, our GT200L and GTS250ie both get 68 to 73 mpg.

Ditto on my '01 and '04 ET4's. And they ran flawlessly.

My et2 gets about the same mileage as a Harley. I have had it since new and about 50 is as good as it ever gets and it only goes 45 mph or so. I figure it is because I have to drive wot always.
I guessed if it was kitted the mileage would go up, (less wot)
Actually this is why I quit using it and ride the p200, it is better in every way even though 25 years older.