old - Fazer Owners Club - old
Bikes, Hints'n'Tips => FZS600 Fazer => Topic started by: dcurzon on 22 January 2014, 08:55:49 am
-
I replaced my air filter recently, to a K&N. Primarily because i'm quite lazy and dont want to have to keep changing filters every 6000 miles or whatever the interval should be... it was £32 give or take. an OEM filter is somewhere in the region of a tenner, so assuming i do 12,000 miles a year, it would take me 18 months to recoup the cost of the filter.
But my MPG has gone up, from 54mpg to 57mpg. Again, assuming 12,000 miles per year and fuel at 129.9, that's a saving of £69.07 in 12 months... Or, across the same period of 18 months, £104.
So a £32 outlay for me over an 18month period saves £104 (18 months fuel, break-even on the filter)
50,000 miles (4 years) before the K&N needs servicing, in that mileage, i should save £287.78 in fuel, plus 8 air filter changes.
So if anyone is undecided wether to fit a K&N or not, hopefully the figures would suggest that it is worth the initial cost.
* i also replaced my tyres, which may also contribute to the mpg increase
-
new tyres generally decrease MPG........So I read the other day.......
Have you checked your plugs to see if you'e running lean?
-
People on here say that the fazer runs rich so putting in a more free flowing k&N sorts that out, which you have shown in your MPG
What I want to know is why did they tune it to run rich, there must of been a good reason, so by fitting a K&N are you not "braking" what the factory made.
Ive only just changed my filter at 16,000 miles to another OEM one, and didnt notice any difference in performance, do not know if the MPG was affected or not, as have not checked.
Not sure wher you got the 6000 change filter from I always thought it was 12000
-
Why would new tyres decrease mpg?
-
Why would new tyres decrease mpg?
When the tread is deep the rubber blocks will have slightly more movement so will dissipate more energy.
Also the diameter of the tyre is larger so the odometer will read slightly lower giving an apparent reduction in mileage.
-
The second bit makes some sense.
The first one though, I put winter tyres on the cage, which have blocks so soft you can move them with a single finger pressure, and get no difference in mileage between winter and summer (always filling the tank, and recording mileage at each fill), so am struggling to believe that one, especially as the blocks on most bike tyres are so large...
Thanks for answering :-)
-
The first one though, I put winter tyres on the cage, which have blocks so soft you can move them with a single finger pressure, and get no difference in mileage between winter and summer
Could this be that your winter driving is different,slower, softer acceleration, due to ice ect. And so that compensates for the extra fuel the winter tyres take, also do you have air con in the summer and then not in the winter.
-
Never switch the aircon on, so not that. Suppose driving style may change slightly - but the winter tyres are on from (roughly) mid Nov to mid march, and there's only ice as such on a fraction of that time. Roads are of course generally greasier though, so maybe. (and when it is properly icy/snowy, I am often guilty of enjoyment - rear wheel drive is great fun, at the expense of fuel :-))
-
There's less bike tyre touching the road when new than when squared off so they should be more efficient when new if inflated correctly!
-
People on here say that the fazer runs rich so putting in a more free flowing k&N sorts that out, which you have shown in your MPG
What I want to know is why did they tune it to run rich, there must of been a good reason, so by fitting a K&N are you not "braking" what the factory made.
Ive only just changed my filter at 16,000 miles to another OEM one, and didnt notice any difference in performance, do not know if the MPG was affected or not, as have not checked.
Not sure wher you got the 6000 change filter from I always thought it was 12000
i was guessing the filter change service life... i have no idea what it should be
-
Does everyone who has fitted a K&N filter notice an improvement in long-term fuel economy?
It may be freer-flowing, but should that make a difference?
The mixture is regulated by the carbs themselves according to the velocity and density of the air passing through, the throttle doesn't spit in a set quantity of fuel dependent on how far you twist the grip.
MPG is dependent on so many things: rider behaviour, road conditions, how fresh the oil is, temperature, tyres etc., that it is hard to point a finger at a particular item and say it's responsible for an increase in economy unless all the other factors can be eliminated.
-
Does everyone who has fitted a K&N filter notice an improvement in long-term fuel economy?
It may be freer-flowing, but should that make a difference?
The mixture is regulated by the carbs themselves according to the velocity and density of the air passing through, the throttle doesn't spit in a set quantity of fuel dependent on how far you twist the grip.
MPG is dependent on so many things: rider behaviour, road conditions, how fresh the oil is, temperature, tyres etc., that it is hard to point a finger at a particular item and say it's responsible for an increase in economy unless all the other factors can be eliminated.
Just a general breathing difference i reckon, with much better throttle response, which to me is a huge improvement in itself.
-
Have to say I don't buy mgp numbers in general. Can you really measure mileage and fuel consumption accurately enough see a 3mpg difference?
-
posted twice
-
Well I've been putting the figures into the spreadsheet since September so I'd say yes.
-
I haven't measured mine before and after exactly, but my mpg seems to have gotten better since the K&N went in. My mainly town regular commute is turning out about 55mpg. And performance is notably better. Haven't looked at the plugs.
-
Have to say I don't buy mgp numbers in general. Can you really measure mileage and fuel consumption accurately enough see a 3mpg difference?
I've been using the fuelly app to help with my last 3 bikes, it's quite accurate tbh.
-
Have to say I don't buy mgp numbers in general. Can you really measure mileage and fuel consumption accurately enough see a 3mpg difference?
No, it means nothing to me at all, which is why i have no idea what fuel my bike uses,'cos if you have daily traffic compared to a motorway run there's no comparison at all.
I fill up when needed, money isn't an issue with an empty tank!
-
Why would new tyres decrease mpg?
scroll half way down
http://www.bridgestonetrucktires.com/us_eng/real/magazines/ra_special-edit_4/ra_special4_fuel-tires.asp (http://www.bridgestonetrucktires.com/us_eng/real/magazines/ra_special-edit_4/ra_special4_fuel-tires.asp)
Seems a good reason to buy part worn tyres and and not to change tyres until legal min tread limit reached
-
Interesting read, thanks midden. I think the engineering within, and forces on, the tyre, are somewhat different from the truck tyres discussed to ours though! A touch tyre starts out with a huge tread depth for starters (sure someone will know how deep), so a very different thing.
-
Interesting read, thanks midden. I think the engineering within, and forces on, the tyre, are somewhat different from the truck tyres discussed to ours though! A touch tyre starts out with a huge tread depth for starters (sure someone will know how deep), so a very different thing.
There's no way you can compare car/truck tyres against a bike tyre as bike tyres barely touch the ground so have much less drag, hence the reason cars are so much better around corners, the reason they benefit is because they have the bigger engine to compensate, and also why fitting larger tyres to your bike is not necessarily such a good thing.
-
From my first post I still a question.
What I want to know is why did they tune the fazer to run rich, there must of been a good reason, so by fitting a K&N are you not "braking" the tuning the factory made.
I've only just changed my filter at 16,000 miles to another OEM one, and didn't notice any difference in performance,
So far I only read darrsi has seen a difference in performance with the K&N filter has anyone else seen a difference?.
My brain cogs are thinking if I saw no difference from a 16000k - 15 year old one to new oem then why would I expect to see a difference from an original to a K&N, I fear that any difference felt is physiological.
-
From my first post I still a question.
What I want to know is why did they tune the fazer to run rich, there must of been a good reason, so by fitting a K&N are you not "braking" the tuning the factory made.
I've only just changed my filter at 16,000 miles to another OEM one, and didn't notice any difference in performance,
So far I only read darrsi has seen a difference in performance with the K&N filter has anyone else seen a difference?.
My brain cogs are thinking if I saw no difference from a 16000k - 15 year old one to new oem then why would I expect to see a difference from an original to a K&N, I fear that any difference felt is physiological.
The K&N isn't as filtered as other brands, it literally lets more air in and these bikes seem to love it.
As to why they were originally rich, who knows, but the fact is they work really well with only positive side effects.
-
Yep I hear you.
But is there anyone else on this forum who has fitted one (on a fzs 600 ) and seen a difference.
You see I am biased because I have just fitted an OEM one and dont want to feel ive made ---- not a mistake, but missed a trick by not fitting a K&N one, And so far there is only one person saying they saw a difference.
-
From my first post I still a question.
What I want to know is why did they tune the fazer to run rich, there must of been a good reason, so by fitting a K&N are you not "braking" the tuning the factory made.
I've only just changed my filter at 16,000 miles to another OEM one, and didn't notice any difference in performance,
So far I only read darrsi has seen a difference in performance with the K&N filter has anyone else seen a difference?.
My brain cogs are thinking if I saw no difference from a 16000k - 15 year old one to new oem then why would I expect to see a difference from an original to a K&N, I fear that any difference felt is physiological.
I agree, it's psychological (assuming that's what you meant). A filter that is less restrictive won't alter the fuel/air ratio and the amount of work the engine has to do to pull air through the filter is trivial. It will make a difference at the top end of the engine's performance where it will make a couple of extra horsepower available (with a corresponding increase in fuel consumption).
I neglected the air filter on my bike for many years, it probably did about 80,000 miles in that time. There was no detectable change in mpg when I put the new one in.
-
physiological. ---------------- it wasnt me that spelt it wrong it was the spell cheque !!!!
-
Yep I hear you.
But is there anyone else on this forum who has fitted one (on a fzs 600 ) and seen a difference.
You see I am biased because I have just fitted an OEM one and dont want to feel ive made ---- not a mistake, but missed a trick by not fitting a K&N one, And so far there is only one person saying they saw a difference.
You still don't believe me do you? :lol
If anything it's worth getting just to save money, 'cos it'll be the last one you buy for the bike!
-
Sure, I failed to mention other factors that may have effected it, fact is they have only just sprung to mind.
My bike has 48,000 miles on it, I purchased it at 44,000 miles
When I changed the filter, the oem filter had writing showing the mileage it was fitted. But it had 2 lots of mileages, which makes me think that it was fitted at 21,000 miles, then cleaned and refitted at 33,000.
Retrospectively, I would think this to be the major contributor - reused oem filter.
But who cares? Bike feels livelier and I don't need to look at the filter until I hit 100k on the mileage!
:)
-
You still don't believe me do you? ([url]http://foc-u.co.uk/Smileys/efocicon/lol.gif[/url])
No and neither does Fazerider
I agree, it's psychological (assuming that's what you meant). A filter that is less restrictive won't alter the fuel/air ratio and the amount of work the engine has to do to pull air through the filter is trivial. It will make a difference at the top end of the engine's performance where it will make a couple of extra horsepower available (with a corresponding increase in fuel consumption).
I neglected the air filter on my bike for many years, it probably did about 80,000 miles in that time. There was no detectable change in mpg when I put the new one in.
I think the OEM one will be the last one I buy for the bike 16000 miles over 15 rears till first change so my next will be at 32000 miles in the year 2029
-
You still don't believe me do you? ([url]http://foc-u.co.uk/Smileys/efocicon/lol.gif[/url])
No and neither does Fazerider
I agree, it's psychological (assuming that's what you meant). A filter that is less restrictive won't alter the fuel/air ratio and the amount of work the engine has to do to pull air through the filter is trivial. It will make a difference at the top end of the engine's performance where it will make a couple of extra horsepower available (with a corresponding increase in fuel consumption).
I neglected the air filter on my bike for many years, it probably did about 80,000 miles in that time. There was no detectable change in mpg when I put the new one in.
I think the OEM one will be the last one I buy for the bike 16000 miles over 15 rears till first change so my next will be at 32000 miles in the year 2029
I think i've walked more miles than that at work over that period of time! :lol
-
I got a K & N after seeing Darrsi's write up about is and I honestly did notice a considerable difference. Partly that was due to the filter I removed being covered in emulsified oil along with most of the bottom of my air box. I think whoever last replaced the filter had put waaaaayyyyyy too much oil on the foam bit and it had gone everywhere or mixed with some water somehow. After cleaning all that up and putting the K&N in the bike ran superb and low down grunt was vastly improved. It really struggled pulling away previously. I don't look at or record the mpg, its good so that's all I need to know. I agree with his statement about throttle response as well, felt nice and crisp where it felt very vague and hesitant before. Obviously, that is likely mostly down to having a load of crap in my air box but the K&N just looks a much better made product than the one I replaced which is now in a landfill somewhere along with all the other disposable ones everyone has got rid of.
-
Yamazer-92 your testomony does not count because the OEM filter does not have oil in -or on it, so what you had was almost a complete air blockage due to the oil that shouldnt be there.
-
When I bought the bike it had allegedly been fully serviced, although after having trouble pulling away and a few other issues I decided to inspect some parts myself and decided to service it properly. From what I could tell they hadn't serviced it at all and that was from a dealer. As for the oil in the air box, I have no idea why that got there or how but thankfully it's all gone now. It was emulsified and looked like mustard. It wasn't all over the air filter, just underneath it where the foam part is where it sits on the bottom of the air box. The air filter was quite dirty looking though. I think its a bit unfair to just fully discount what I've written anyway. If you mean its not really valid because I didn't ever have a fully new working OEM one to try then fair enough but the point still stands I put in the K & N about 4k miles ago and I have noticed a good positive improvement. For £30, if that's partly psychological then I'm not complaining as its going to last the life of the bike anyway.
-
I dont mean to be harsh its just when I read the 1st line of your post I thought Oh there you are fazersharp there is some more proof, (I want to be convinced) and then you say it was full of mayonase and gravey and mashed potato.
There is still only 1 person saying it made a difference :evil
-
When I bought the bike it had allegedly been fully serviced, although after having trouble pulling away and a few other issues I decided to inspect some parts myself and decided to service it properly. From what I could tell they hadn't serviced it at all and that was from a dealer. As for the oil in the air box, I have no idea why that got there or how but thankfully it's all gone now. It was emulsified and looked like mustard. It wasn't all over the air filter, just underneath it where the foam part is where it sits on the bottom of the air box. The air filter was quite dirty looking though. I think its a bit unfair to just fully discount what I've written anyway. If you mean its not really valid because I didn't ever have a fully new working OEM one to try then fair enough but the point still stands I put in the K & N about 4k miles ago and I have noticed a good positive improvement. For £30, if that's partly psychological then I'm not complaining as its going to last the life of the bike anyway.
Like this:
-
I dont mean to be harsh its just when I read the 1st line of your post I thought Oh there you are fazersharp there is some more proof, (I want to be convinced) and then you say it was full of mayonase and gravey and mashed potato.
There is still only 1 person saying it made a difference :evil
Can you not add up, there's 3 people on this post alone blatantly saying it made a difference but you are choosing not to listen? :rolleyes
-
fight fight fight :lol
-
fight fight fight :lol
I just don't get it, it's dcurzon's post praising them, everyone knows my thoughts anyway, then Yamazer-92 said how much he noticed a big difference, so how the foc is that one person? :lol
-
1st of all what is that stuff and how does it happen.
And my question is about the suposed increase in power/ responce which dcurzon did not say anything about he only said about mpg which also has been debuncked.
yamazer-92 (in my mind) dont count as his 1st filter was blocked with custard anyway so of course hes going to see a difference.
That leaves 1 yay sayer ---- MR darrsi
-
1st of all what is that stuff and how does it happen.
And my question is about the suposed increase in power/ responce which dcurzon did not say anything about he only said about mpg which also has been debuncked.
yamazer-92 (in my mind) dont count as his 1st filter was blocked with custard anyway so of course hes going to see a difference.
That leaves 1 yay sayer ---- MR darrsi
Something to do with moisture mixing with oil vapours from the engine i think?
That was actually my bike.........and my finger. :)
-
Do you have the large rubber shroud/ skirt/hood fitted thing that also acts as a rubber grab for the side pannels
-
Do you have the large rubber shroud/ skirt/hood fitted thing that also acts as a rubber grab for the side pannels
Yep
-
The oily crap comes from over filling the oil or from excessive gases getting past the rings and pressurising the crankcase causing oil to get pushed into the airbox. There's a pretty big kink in that breather too so it'll get blocked quick enough and then the lovely mayo builds up from water vapour not being able to get through the breather. That's my theory anyway and I'm sticking to it :lol
-
Do you have the large rubber shroud/ skirt/hood fitted thing that also acts as a rubber grab for the side pannels
Yep
Ok I was thinking -- somone on here was asking if they could do away with all that faff of a thing and although i know it wasnt you I thought maybe somone before you removed it, and then I thought ---yes that is what it is for - to prevent excess moisture.
Anyway its still only you (on this forum ) with a FZS 600 that "thinks" there is a difference with a K&N filter with reguard to responce and performance. Dont get me wrong I want to be convinced.
-
The oily crap comes from over filling the oil or from excessive gases getting past the rings and pressurising the crankcase causing oil to get pushed into the airbox. There's a pretty big kink in that breather too so it'll get blocked quick enough and then the lovely mayo builds up from water vapour not being able to get through the breather. That's my theory anyway and I'm sticking to it :lol
Now you see you have got alot of big words there and so im convinced
-
The oily crap comes from over filling the oil or from excessive gases getting past the rings and pressurising the crankcase causing oil to get pushed into the airbox. There's a pretty big kink in that breather too so it'll get blocked quick enough and then the lovely mayo builds up from water vapour not being able to get through the breather. That's my theory anyway and I'm sticking to it :lol
That's what i meant to say :lol
-
The oily crap comes from over filling the oil or from excessive gases getting past the rings and pressurising the crankcase causing oil to get pushed into the airbox. There's a pretty big kink in that breather too so it'll get blocked quick enough and then the lovely mayo builds up from water vapour not being able to get through the breather. That's my theory anyway and I'm sticking to it :lol
Now you see you have got alot of big words there and so im convinced
What like crankcase? That's not big and I think it might be two words :lol I thought we'd done the k&n debate before and someone had dynographs showing there was no increase in power but that it gave a better power curve so you get better mid range whatever that means :lol I haveone because you can clean it and reuse it. If you don't have one I don't think you're losing out anything really
-
Do you have the large rubber shroud/ skirt/hood fitted thing that also acts as a rubber grab for the side pannels
Yep
Ok I was thinking -- somone on here was asking if they could do away with all that faff of a thing and although i know it wasnt you I thought maybe somone before you removed it, and then I thought ---yes that is what it is for - to prevent excess moisture.
Anyway its still only you (on this forum ) with a FZS 600 that "thinks" there is a difference with a K&N filter with reguard to responce and performance. Dont get me wrong I want to be convinced.
If you want to be convinced........buy one!
-
Yet to fit a K&n to my Fazer,really must do this Spring.
Previous vehicles so fitted defo gave better pickup plus slightly better mpg.
k&n negatives:
temperamental wet weather starting, why? or if this also applies to fazer version i do not know.
Slightly alarming that when you hold a K&N up to the light you can see pin holes! :eek Anyone?
-
Yet to fit a K&n to my Fazer,really must do this Spring.
Previous vehicles so fitted defo gave better pickup plus slightly better mpg.
k&n negatives:
temperamental wet weather starting, why? or if this also applies to fazer version i do not know.
Slightly alarming that when you hold a K&N up to the light you can see pin holes! :eek Anyone?
I've never had problems with starting in wet weather, that sounds like an issue elsewhere.
-
Two seperate vehicles, both fine with standard filter, but grumbled with a damp plus K&N combo.
No matter,
i'm happy to take your word for it if it's not an issue with fazers.
-
Only really had minor grief starting in extreme cold weather, but even that was cured once i started using the choke, otherwise it starts on the button every time.