skipping gears?

[steppen22]

In the interests of saving petrol, I tend nowadays to skip third gear altogther on my er5.

So, building to 30mph, I: 1, 2-4, 5 (if long straight).

Is this likely to a) actually save petrol? B) to cause any harm to the bike. The bike is not struggling at 30mph in 5th.

I do the same in my car, sometimes 1, 2 - 5.
____________________
no regrets, no retreat, no apology.
I've made mistakes in the past, and I apologise for FUCK ALL.

[Gazz]

This method of gear changing seriously kills off engines.

I hope you have only done this once or twice, cos I predict that your engine will only last about another week or so because you have done this, maybe will last for 2 weeks if it was a very well maintained engine.

Sorry to be the one to break the news to you.

[L4Isoside]

Its actually what they suggested in the theory test, but I could never make sense of it, either way you still need to accelerate to the same speed.

Now the constant RPM once you are at that speed I believe can make a fair difference, a mate drives a Skoda fabia and was trying to save fuel on the way home from some where, it turns out on the roads he was driving it was more economical to actually drive in 4th (The dash has an MPG readout)

Now I think, and it would make sense, this was because it was just being kept at the most economical part of the rev range for the speed's he was doing (I think 60/50/40 limit areas), too lower revs the engine would struggle, too high and its just wasting fuel right?

As an example I usually use 3rd or 4th in 30's on my SV, and 4th in the 30's in my car (1.6)

Usually that's just below the point where it sounds like the engine wants more...if you get me, but still sounds comfterable.

I'm sure the all and powerful Keith will be along to blow me out of the water (or that essay junkie teflon-mike!! )

[ms51ves3]

It's more economical to get up to 40mph in 1st and then change into 5th

[The Tot]

The bike will be labouring. Let it breath and it'll be more efficient! 4-5k is my usual crusing engine speed. I just select a gear that's appropriate.

Much better to do that on the engine than stick it into 5th and only do 2k.

I short shift but that's mainly down to me wanting a smoother ride.
____________________
The Tot 2019 Z1000SX - 2007 R1
Never argue with autism

[blurredman]

Maybe Double clutching into 5th might help
____________________
CBT: 12/06/10, Theory: 22/09/10, Module 1: 09/11/10, Module 2: 19/01/11
Past: 1991 Honda CG125BR-J, 1992 (1980) Honda XL125S, 1996 Kawasaki GPZ500S, 1979 MZ TS150.
Current: 1973 MZ ES250/2 - 18k, 1979 Suzuki TS185ER - 10k, 1981 Honda CX500B - 91k, 1987 MZ ETZ250 (295cc) - 40k, 1989 MZ ETZ251 - 51k.

[dragstaar]

This is something i've been wondering too. Because i sometimes go all the way up to thirty in 2nd, then jump up to 5th. I've been doing this for over 10K miles now though and nothing seems to have hurt it. My bandit has a 6 speed gearbox so theres a lot of shifts involved. And at 2-3000 revs, in 5th seems to suit the engine fine at 30mph. Is that too low? considering that my bike redlines at 11K revs

[pinkyfloyd]

My bike has 6 gears. I can only assume it has 6 for a reason so I tend to follow my assumption and use all 6 of them. Pottling around town I'm rarely out of 3rd but open roads and motorways I'll use all 6.
____________________
illuminateTHEmind wrote: I am just more evolved than most of you guys... this allows me to pick of things quickly which would have normally taken the common man years to master
Hockeystorm65:.well there are childish arguments...there are very childish arguments.....there are really stupid childish arguments and now there are......Pinkfloyd arguments!
Teflon-Mike:I think I agree with just about all Pinky has said.

[johnsmith222]

[Ariel Badger]

Rev the tits off it in all gears or if that offends you catch the bus.
____________________
Bikers make great organ donors, get 115 on your licence today.

[dragstaar]

[pinkyfloyd]

[dodsi]

I have in the passed pulled onto a motorway and gone from 1st to 6th gear.

Powerfull bikes FTW

[Teflon-Mike]

Power = Work Done Per Unit Time
Work Done = Force x Dstance Moved (and is 'energy)
Bit of algebra you get:
Power = Force x Speed
Power = Torque x Revs
And by common sense, if Work-done = 'energy' and that comes from burning fuel, then you get MPG is inversely proportional to Power Used.
From a strictly scientific possition, it makes no odds at all, whether, for a certain speed, you use a log gear, with a lot of revs and a little throttle to go a certain speed, or whether you use a higher gear, less revs and more throttle..... takes the same power, so you use the fame fuel......
Using the higher gear, though will NORMALLY lessen your rate of acceleration, which means you dont go as fast to a certain speed, so for more time you are travelling slower, hence using less power, hence using less fuel.
Now, in the real world......
People will argue '"Ah! But what about 'efficiency'?!"
and start arguing that an engine works most efficiently at a certain rpm and and then all about the wasted energy of redundant cycles and stuff.......
Becouse they have read a book or soemthing, and have an 'idea' about the science, and try to apply it......
BUT, for the most part while theres truth behind a lot of it, there is an anomoly when talking abouyt 'efficiency'.
Peak 'Torque' on an engines power curve normally depicts the engine speed where greatest cylinder pressure is achieved.
That occurs when you have the 'best' COMBUSTION efficiency, and get most power out of teh fuel burned.... but that point doesn't often have much to do with overall SYSTEM efficiency.
As engine speed increases, so the energy losses from reciprocating components increase, and they increase exponentially.
Peak torque tells you where your getting the best bang out of your fuel, but iof its at higher revs, you might be using MORE of that released energy JUST to turn the engine that fast, than you are getting as extra useful work, shoving the bike along.
So, in the REAL real world, it means little.......
And applying the fundemental science, rather than getting lost in the jargon and half understanding of engine efficiencies.....
What works?
Power = Force x Speed.
Faster you go, more power you gonna use, more fuel you gonna use.
Force is the force made by the engine, used to overcome the drag, mainly of wind resistance, and THAT increases exponentially with speed.
SO, if you WANT to get better mpg, go slowly, accelerate gently, DONT waste energy braking hard!
Ride 'predictively', so you dont have to do anything in a hurry, ride smoothly, so you dont accelerate hard, or brake hard, or corner hard, you do everything nice and gently with as LITTLE force as possible, and you'll save fuel......
What GEAR you actually use at any particular moment in time.... and certainly for the few moments of getting to 30mph..... I dount it would make FUCK ALL difference!
Make the motor labour starting in 2nd and block shifting straight to 4th...... you are just making life harder for yourself. Accelerating all the way in 1st, letting the motor rev out, would PROBABLY not use ANY more fuel, or such a miniscule difference as to be negligible, PROVIDED you apply some throttle control and accelerate at the same rate.... ie gently.
Have this debate quite a lot, and EVERY-ONE wants something for nothing, or the magic fix, that will let them go faster AND get better MPG, but the fundementals of teh science essentially forbid it.... you want mpg, go slow, you want speed, you pay for it in extra fuel.
BUT, do take heed of that 'ride smooth' motto.
If you DO adopt a predictive riding style, OFTEN you'll not only get better mpg, but you CAN go faster... at least point to point. Riding like that you can maintain a higher average speed, than riding more reactivelt, and dramatically, using a lot of hard acceleration, braking and cornering.....
and again, in the REAL real world, THAT 'efficiency' gain from riding style is FAR more influential than whats going on inside the engine, to the MPG you get.
Something that used to be a mantra of a lot of advanced riding courses.... dont know if it still is, but maybe something you may like to look into.
____________________
My Webby'Tef's-tQ, loads of stuff about my bikes, my Land-Rovers, and the stuff I do with them!
Current Bikes:'Honda VF1000F' ;'CB750F2N' ;'CB125TD ( 6 3 of em!)'; 'Montesa Cota 248'. Learner FAQ's:= 'U want to Ride a Motorbike! Where Do U start?'

[dragstaar]

[TUG]

If you want to be more fuel efficient, quick shifting is the way.
____________________
Haz ER-5, innit!

[Paxovasa]

[joncwl]

[dragstaar]

[quote="Paxovasa"]

[johnsmith222]

[pinkyfloyd]

[Paxovasa]

[L-Jam]

Basically, Teflon-mike is saying that better MPG = less fun...

the side effect of riding as such is taught by the advanced motorcycle malarky groups though, is that you do indeed become a 'better' rider.
____________________
Journalist, student, egotist.
Click here if you're a young biker, wondering what to do after a moped/125!
Skp 50 --> GS 500 --> CBR600F with custom HRC paint jobby --> GSX-R 750 K7, beautiful!

[Teflon-Mike]

[Black Knight]