Bandit Alley
GENERAL MOTORCYCLE FORUMS => GENERAL MOTORCYCLE => Topic started by: BLK on June 14, 2008, 01:55:10 PM
-
Is this possible?
The old girl is already giving me a regular 42mpg. My riding style is relatively conservative and is a combination of surface street and highway. So I am guessing that 42 mpg is about what I should expect. I was just wondering if there are any mods or adjustments that might get me another couple mpg's. My commute is about 25miles each way so any additional miles out of a gallon of gas would be welcomed.
Finally, what's the total miles I can expect out of a tank. Right now I am getting about 165miles on the california tank, which I think is about 4.3 total gallons. I know that I should be able to do that math but I was just wondering what the personal experience has been for others.
Thank,
BLK
-
I get 39 mpg average. My commute is 12 miles highway, 60 to 70 mph and 3 miles in town at 35 to 40 mph.
I use only regular fuel ( read cheapest ). Lots of law on my way to work and back, speeding not a good option.
27,000 miles on my 00 1200. Sorry no good ideas for you.
Mike
-
Yeah, I had a feeling that my 42mpg was pretty good.
I'm thinking about removing P.A.I.R system and am wondering if that might do any good or any harm.
I'm also running an aftermarket can (a Super-Trap) and haven't noticed any change in mpg's.
FWIW my highway speeds usually average around 80/90 (on the speed-o-meter - so whatever that translates to in terms of real speed I don't know).
BLK
-
I replaced the aftermarket can with the orginal ( ebay ) didn't care for the noise, I'm old.
Checked my speedometer with a gps it is 5 mph fast at whatever speed. 70 is 65 and 140 is 135. I can live with that.
There may be someone else with experince with the PAIR system, I have none.
I'm happy with my bike overall, but when I get all the red covered with Gun Metal Gray it will be even better.
I'm not a flashy rider.
Good Luck
-
My riding style is relatively conservative and is a combination of surface street and highway.
"Relatively" is just that... I suggest you re-examine your riding habits (not that they're bad) to look for things like limited use of the brakes, shift early and shift often but don't lug the engine, accelerate as slow as possible without putting yourself in a hazardous situation (might not be possible) and other similar items. Goggle the latest trend called hypermileing (or similar) for a better synopsis of my point.
Another suggestion would be to slightly over-inflate your tires.... say 42psi (assuming stock is 36... like on the best 2G models :stickpoke:). Check your brakes often for calipers that aren't releasing fully... usually noted by uneven brake pad wear.
To really maximize things you'll need to tuck in over 55mph (OK... it's just a guess) or otherwise figure out some way to reduce wind resistance.....................
..............OR.........................
Ride the snot out of it and enjoy doing something many folks only dream of. :beers: :thumb:
-
txbanditrydr:
After much examination, evaulation and consideration I think I'm going to go with your "Or" suggestion.
BLK
-
..............OR.........................
Ride the snot out of it and enjoy doing something many folks only dream of. :beers: :thumb:
for a bike the size of the bigger bandits...in all honesty I think this may be the only option. :bigok:
makes it tempting to get a small commuting bike...
-
I've found that on my 1250S ('08 model) I get 44.9 MPG using Premium Gas, and about 40.5 using regular with my "relatively" conservative riding style. That is I try to tuck in every so often, and I don't gun it out of the gate, etc. (unless, of course, I need to.)
That extra 4.4 mpg may cover the extra .20 Cents per gallon, but it does keep me from stopping as often. :motorsmile:
However, I've decided to take the alternative . . . JUST RIDE! :grin:
-
Many people operate under the mistaken belief that accelerating gently will assist in reducing fuel consumption this is in in fact entirely false.
If you are accelerating gently you have the throttle open for longer, particularly as trying to be gentle generally involves using a higher gear (changing up early to reduce revs).
If however you rev the motor out to the torque peak revs and then change you are consuming fuel as efficiently as possible, you are accelerating harder for a far shorter period of time.
Please allow that I am not the best at explaining these sort of things in writing.
Dink
-
Dink is right, but you have to find the balancing point. I've actually found in my Pickup that accelerating slowly LOWERs my MPG, but jack rabbit type starts also lower it. If, like Dink says, I go on and get up to speed, my MPG will hang around 18 - 17.6 (in the truck). If I go to fast, or too slow it drops to 16. The question is what RPM range would be the best for acceleration? I would think somewhere around where the torque is highest.
The problem is that most folks around you think you are drag racing, or something, because they're still under that false impression.
-
33 mpg ave on my '98. sometimes going to 30. Once I got 37.
-
Only easy option that comes to mind is to drop some weight on the bike, but probably not a whole lot you can get rid of. I imagine the aftermarket can you have has to be lighter than the stock one. Like tx said you can up the psi in your tires by a little bit, but remember that lowers the contact area your tire has with the road. I'd rather have solid grip over getting an extra mile per gallon.
Personally I'm happy with the mileage the Bandit gets for the size engine it has. Go with option #2 :thumb:
-
I've gotten over 50MPG with my 1250 Bandit.
I average about 47MPG.
-
wow. Well, I might get that if I removed the hard side and top cases. I have to carry my laptop and associated gear, as well as some other things with me when I commute, not to mention I weigh about 230 lbs. So, 45 MPG ain't too bad.
-
My wife's Prius gets better mpg then either my 1500cc cruiser or my Yamaha FZ1, but hey, the bikes are still a great deal better than driving my Tahoe.
-
If I want kick ass gas mileage I ride my KLR 650 (the urban assault vehicle) but it lacks that certain something on the street!
-
Is this possible?
If you seriously want more MPG at the expense of performance, you can lean out the idle and needle circuits a little. The bike will loose some power off the bottom and mid range, but should pick up some MPG. Then don't feed it full throttle, run at steady throttle as much as possible and your MPG should improve by a couple. Keep and eye on the plugs to ensure your not TOO LEAN or TOO HOT.
And keep a clean air filter in it. You can also add a little more tire pressure, make sure the chain is well lubed, and run sythetic engine oil. None of these will make much difference, but together, they do add up.
-
wow. Well, I might get that if I removed the hard side and top cases. I have to carry my laptop and associated gear, as well as some other things with me when I commute, not to mention I weigh about 230 lbs. So, 45 MPG ain't too bad.
I weigh about 288.
-
I was reading an issue of Motorcycle Classics that someone left laying around at work the other day and there was an article in it on the Honda S65 ('67 model, IIRC). According to the specs, Honda was advertising 190 mpg and a top speed of 57 mph. I don't think any of today's scooters can come close to that kind of economy - and few in that size category can go that fast. (And at least in the USA, I don't think you can buy a street-legal motorcycle in that category anymore.) I noticed Yamaha is advertising a some of it's <50cc scooters in the 90-110 mpg range, but these machines will only do ~35-40 mph. (Partly due to many states allowing <50cc & <35 mph machines to be licensed as mopeds and not requiring a m/c endorsement.) I remember my first bike ('66 Suzuki 80) would get >100 mpg on it's big trail sprocket (top speed ~35). I never measured it's mpg on its tiny street sprocket, because I rarely used it, but it would do ~50-55 with that gearing.
:rant2: Now, if they could do that 40 years ago, :wtf: is going on today? They ought to be able to build scooters & tiddler bikes today that could beat that!
Same deal with cars... I've owned two 86 Honda Civics (both bought used) that would easily get 40 mpg city and 49 highway - and neither one was the more fuel efficient 1.3L HF model, but the middle line 1.5L carb'd motor... but you can't buy a new non-hybrid car today that'll do that. :annoy:
OK, off my soapbox now... :trustme:
-
There used to be a annual race that challenged bikers to get the most mpg at freeway safe speeds. I read an article about it last summer. One of the challenges was to use 1 inch of fuel in a fuel line to see how far you can go. I will try to dig it up and post more info.
-
an ignition advancer will net you some better mpg`s and the reason some econo cars built in the 80`s can get better mpg`s than todays econo boxes is the addition of more epa regulations on todays cars ,leaner isnt cleaner
-
Same deal with cars... I've owned two 86 Honda Civics (both bought used) that would easily get 40 mpg city and 49 highway - and neither one was the more fuel efficient 1.3L HF model, but the middle line 1.5L carb'd motor... but you can't buy a new non-hybrid car today that'll do that. :annoy:
One word: weight. Today's cars, even compacts, are heavier than the equivalent sized car was 20 years ago.
-
I can see the weight thing on cars, with air bags and other impact protection, and other gov't mandated stuff - along with buyers wanting more creature comforts... I admit, my Civic's weren't opulent and were pretty bare bones compared to my MINI Cooper. (A little surfing shows the 86 Civic Si weighed 1984 lbs (and my DX's were probably lighter still) vs the Cooper's 2524 lbs. - so the extra 540+ lbs is costing me ~14 mpg.)
OTOH, I'm sceptical on weight as a reason why little bikes can't be doing better... the monocoque chassis common to Japanese bikes of the 60's wasn't lightweight and I'd think one would be heavier than a similar tube framed bike.
-
Just to weigh in on the fuel economy : I just pulled into the house from a 700 mile trip with the wife . I was very pleasantly surprised by the fuel mileage on the trip , better than what I get commuting. 47 on one tank 48 on another and on a 85-90 mph blast down the interstate from fayetteville to oklahoma i got 55 m pg !! Mind you the wife and I together weigh in at more than 400 lbs. and we had the poor bike [over]loaded to the hilt
'07 bandit 1250 , bone stock :motorsmile:
-
Rather then wanting more MPG I think the main issue is personal supply and demand. Forget about the nation as a whole and think of ways you can lower your commuting expense based on commuting needs and means of transportation. Demand is the key and if you can cut down on your demand and need to commute using petroleum it will have the biggest impact on your cost. The second biggest factor is means of transport and a cheap bicycle is a great way to do allot of short trips and get in some needed exercise. In fact there are allot of companies out there that are developing small attachable motors for multi speed bikes and since humans only put out .25 to .35 HP (Armstrong) to power a bicycle imagine what a 2 HP motor would do for a bike that weighs only 10-20 pounds. I don't count the rider because we never count them in motorcycle specs.
Since I retired I have cut down my driving by 99% and besides using my motorcycles when I can for errands I try and use my bicycle. After trying a scooter (Yamaha 125 Vino) that weighs 250 pounds and has just enough acceleration to get you run over, I decided that a bicycle with a bolt on 15 HP V-twin lawnmower engine would be the best way to go. I figure with a centrifugal clutch and 6 gears using the rear derailer, you would have no problem keeping up with traffic. LOL
-
In fact there are allot of companies out there that are developing small attachable motors for multi speed bikes and since humans only put out .25 to .35 HP (Armstrong) to power a bicycle imagine what a 2 HP motor would do for a bike that weighs only 10-20 pounds.
Isn't that pretty much how motorcycles got started in the first place?
:btw: Several of today's motorcycle manufacturers got their motoring start doing this... Suzuki, Honda & Ducati to name a few off the top of my head.
-
Live i australia, got 03 1200,have pipe, air filter, with dyno,(stage one)and on high way, sticking to the speed limit, i always get 54mpg,if i up it, goes down to 42mpg, so if perfectly tuned,uses less effort to run.
-
That's 54mpg (Imperial) right?
Remember, us Yanks use the smaller US gallon.
-
this has been mentioned before...and I don't have a lot of data yet but with the 5 degree advancer I'm getting way better gas mileage. First tank after the switch waited till 220 km thats 126 miles before switching to reserve, before that was usually around 190km, mind you the last tank i was stuck on a ride going fairly slow for about half of it. Will post when I've put a few more tanks through it.
-
That's 54mpg (Imperial) right?
Remember, us Yanks use the smaller US gallon.
I forgot you fellas are backward(he he) We work on 4.54609 litre to the gallon, What you work on?
-
That's 54mpg (Imperial) right?
Remember, us Yanks use the smaller US gallon.
I forgot you fellas are backward(he he) We work on 4.54609 litre to the gallon, What you work on?
* 1 nestegallona (USA) = 3,785 l=liquid gallon
* 1 gallona (Iso-Britannia) = 4,54609 l
* 1 kuiva gallona (USA) = 4,405 l=try gallon
-
That's 54mpg (Imperial) right?
Remember, us Yanks use the smaller US gallon.
I forgot you fellas are backward(he he) We work on 4.54609 litre to the gallon, What you work on?
One imperial gallon is approximately equal to 1.201 U.S. gallons.
One imperial gallon is exactly 4.54609 litres, whereas one U.S. gallon is exactly 3.7854118 liters.
Why the differnce? The American Colonies adopted the British systems for measure that were in place at the time of thier revolution. America adopted what was then known as the "wine gallon" (also known as the Queen Anne gallon, 231 cubic inches) for all fluids in an effort to simplify the system. The Brits changed their system to be more uniform in 1824 and adopted a new 160 fluid ounce imperial gallon (277.419 cubic inches) as their standard, close in size to the "ale gallon" (282 cubic inches) in use at the time. One exception was for wine sales, which were still by the 128 ounce wine gallon, so they could get more tax money on wine sales.
Seems like those colonial rebels were smarter... they could tax everything on the smaller gallon. :grin:
Probably more than you wanted to know, eh? :stickpoke:
Now give me an ale gallon of ale! :beers: :bigdrink: :singing:
-
Man, my mileage sucks. I get about 34mpg in the 400. But it's re-jetted, K&N filter and got the full Yosh exhaust. I suppose I gotta do something about that, but still, it's fun! I think a big part of that is a combination of a natural tendency to go about 80 mph and being naked. I guess a little bubble fairing is worth a couple of MPGs.
ANyone else got mileage stats for a 400? I seem to recall my 91 got similar mileage as well. oh well.
-
I average about 45 mpg with a pretty conservative riding style. I stay at 65 indicated (probably more like 60) on the highway, and generally shift quickly up to 6th to keep my revs low. My commute is about 56 miles round trip. In town I'm a little more aggressive, but not much. I do stay in the powerband in case things get hairy, but still manage mid-40s with regular gas, no mods.
-
Absolutely, all true. But what has been lost and worthwhile is the MPG and with today's lighter and stronger bikes and variety of small OHV lawn & garden engines, one should be able to come up with a real fun bike for the price of used parts. Oh by the way my B1250 gets an honest 46 highway MPG, which begs the question why I would mess with it to increase performance as Suzuki must have taken this into great consideration. :duh:
In fact there are allot of companies out there that are developing small attachable motors for multi speed bikes and since humans only put out .25 to .35 HP (Armstrong) to power a bicycle imagine what a 2 HP motor would do for a bike that weighs only 10-20 pounds.
Isn't that pretty much how motorcycles got started in the first place?
:btw: Several of today's motorcycle manufacturers got their motoring start doing this... Suzuki, Honda & Ducati to name a few off the top of my head.
-
That's 54mpg (Imperial) right?
Remember, us Yanks use the smaller US gallon.
I forgot you fellas are backward(he he) We work on 4.54609 litre to the gallon, What you work on?
One imperial gallon is approximately equal to 1.201 U.S. gallons.
One imperial gallon is exactly 4.54609 litres, whereas one U.S. gallon is exactly 3.7854118 liters.
Thanks for the history lesson,and i`m not being sarcastic, quiet interesting, the extent of my knowledge is, i use a spoon to eat porridge!! Well in the big picture, i get 190MLS to reserve
Why the differnce? The American Colonies adopted the British systems for measure that were in place at the time of thier revolution. America adopted what was then known as the "wine gallon" (also known as the Queen Anne gallon, 231 cubic inches) for all fluids in an effort to simplify the system. The Brits changed their system to be more uniform in 1824 and adopted a new 160 fluid ounce imperial gallon (277.419 cubic inches) as their standard, close in size to the "ale gallon" (282 cubic inches) in use at the time. One exception was for wine sales, which were still by the 128 ounce wine gallon, so they could get more tax money on wine sales.
Seems like those colonial rebels were smarter... they could tax everything on the smaller gallon. :grin:
Probably more than you wanted to know, eh? :stickpoke:
Now give me an ale gallon of ale! :beers: :bigdrink: :singing:
-
Were you gonna say something, John? :bandit:
-
Yes i was, but my nerd box,due to our telecommunications, which is substandard fails all the time, was going to say thanks for the history lesson, and i`m not being sarcastic, the limit of my knowledge is , i use a spoon to eat porridge, bottom line, i get, 190MLS to reserve.
-
Hi guys, im abit of a n00b but if your not fussed with loosing power, i think that chaning sprocets size at the front and or back would give you more mpg (depending on how you size it) if your doing alot of highway milage and by that keeping the rev low.
Normally i go around 60-80 on the motorway, but yesterday to test my new mra screen i cained it down the road at a minimum of 110-145 mph.
i had half a tank (3 bars) but when i got of the highway (only 3-4 miles) my tank indicator was at 1. normally i dont se a drop like that with revs like ~4000 = 75mph (on my sak8
-
Yes i was, but my nerd box,due to our telecommunications, which is substandard fails all the time, was going to say thanks for the history lesson, and i`m not being sarcastic, the limit of my knowledge is , i use a spoon to eat porridge, bottom line, i get, 190MLS to reserve.
190 miles or 190 kilometers? By my reckoning 190 miles is approximately 305 kilometers. I can only get that sort of 'milage' out of my 02B12 on a long highway run at a constant 110-120 km/h, around town I'm lucky to get 190 kilometers until I have to switch to reserve.
-
Thats right,305 klms, if your an aussie,and you know QLD, i can go from Brisbane to Gin Gin, 355klms, and it takes 18L, thats sitting on the speed limit.
-
That's pretty good milage, what do you get around town?
-
That's pretty good milage, what do you get around town?
Always get about 250-260 to reserve, and thats after been dynoed with yosh pipe, K&N filter, if i get up it, town 220, hi-way 250 to reserve.
-
05 b12s, (minus fairing for now), HS jet kit (stage 1), HS exhaust, synthetic, 5 degree advancer and I routinely get 43-45 MPG during my 42 mile commute, mixed back road and freeway, not gentle on the throttle, but not super agressive. Roughly 200 miles per tank, with reserve of 30-50 miles left at each fill. Regular gas. :grin:
-
That's pretty good milage, what do you get around town?
Always get about 250-260 to reserve, and thats after been dynoed with yosh pipe, K&N filter, if i get up it, town 220, hi-way 250 to reserve.
I must be very heavy on the throttle, there's no way I could get 200 to reserve around town, 220 to empty maybe.
-
Until you ride with someone, there's in no real way to know what they mean by "heavy on the throttle". For example, I'm pretty heavy on the throttle on my B4. But that means I run up to speed really hard, but rarely ride more than a few mph over the limit. Some friends are pretty sedate about the acceleration, but just keep on going up to double the limit...
-
i used to only get 200 to reserve as well..now with the timing advancer its up to 220 ish... but I'm heavy on the throttle, and somewhat unreasonable. I run close to redline, but of course always maintain the posted speed limit :wink: also i seldomly ride in town and my commute is always out of heavy traffic times.
-
i used to only get 200 to reserve as well..now with the timing advancer its up to 220 ish... but I'm heavy on the throttle, and somewhat unreasonable. I run close to redline, but of course always maintain the posted speed limit :wink: also i seldomly ride in town and my commute is always out of heavy traffic times.
I'm thinking you get 220 Kilometers to reserve, some of us are using Miles. Apples to oranges guys. :trustme:
-
I ride conservatively on the highway and I routinely hit 200 MILES before I get the last blinking bar.
-
I know jeffw, I had thought though that the aussie guys would also talk in km, and not miles. My 220 turns in to 136miles, which although terrible is in tune and slightly below most of the people I ride with.
-
Man, my mileage sucks. I get about 34mpg in the 400. But it's re-jetted, K&N filter and got the full Yosh exhaust. I suppose I gotta do something about that, but still, it's fun! I think a big part of that is a combination of a natural tendency to go about 80 mph and being naked. I guess a little bubble fairing is worth a couple of MPGs.
ANyone else got mileage stats for a 400? I seem to recall my 91 got similar mileage as well. oh well.
Well if my 919 with the Givi screen is any indication, the mileage dumps straight into the toilet with the windscreen on.
For instance I have 255kms on the tank right now (gotta go fill it up before work) and haven't hit the "fuel light". I should get about 60kms out of that, but I don't want to be wrong and fall short on my 55km commute. :annoy:
That should make for about a 40mpg consumption. When I had the givi screen on, I was getting about 170 to the tank.
HALF. The same mileage as the Mustang, and I don't get wet in the Mustang if Mother nature throws a surprise at me.
Same commute, pretty close to the same conditions. Possibly -slightly- windier, but lower speed as a result.
-
It's really depressing to be disappointed in middle-30's (mpg) gas mileage. :roll:
-
It's really depressing to be disappointed in middle-30's (mpg) gas mileage. :roll:
If you're doing hiway at all on the little B4, there's where your mileage goes. While they're a barrel of laughs in the city, and in the twisties, they work pretty hard at hiway speeds.
With Dita, I used to get something insane like 65 or 70mpg in the city. Now that we're on the hiway more, Ryan finds that he -has- to fill up at less than 200kms I think he said? I'll check with him when he gets home.
Did the math on the 919s mileage for the last tank. 40.95 US mpg.
-
With Dita, I used to get something insane like 65 or 70mpg in the city. Now that we're on the hiway more, Ryan finds that he -has- to fill up at less than 200kms I think he said? I'll check with him when he gets home.
is that really 65-70 MPG? that is insane. I do do a fair bit of highway speed riding. My main commute style ride these days is about 40 miles round trip on a country highway. I typically do a steady 65mph on that run with a tiny bit of city at each end. So that may be part of it. I never got better than mid-high 30's (US mpg) on my old bandit either. It was also jetted and piped, though it didn't have the K&N filter.
I'm pretty much resigned to the way things are, though I"m sure my emulsion tube/needle jet is worn and that will kill the mileage some.
-
With Dita, I used to get something insane like 65 or 70mpg in the city. Now that we're on the hiway more, Ryan finds that he -has- to fill up at less than 200kms I think he said? I'll check with him when he gets home.
is that really 65-70 MPG? that is insane. I do do a fair bit of highway speed riding. My main commute style ride these days is about 40 miles round trip on a country highway. I typically do a steady 65mph on that run with a tiny bit of city at each end. So that may be part of it. I never got better than mid-high 30's (US mpg) on my old bandit either. It was also jetted and piped, though it didn't have the K&N filter.
I'm pretty much resigned to the way things are, though I"m sure my emulsion tube/needle jet is worn and that will kill the mileage some.
http://forums.banditalley.net/index.php?topic=4913.msg42757#msg42757
http://forums.banditalley.net/index.php?topic=1587.msg10153#msg10153
I suspect that it's the hiway that's killing the mileage. I used a product called "Lucas Upper Cylinder treatment" that seemed to help a little too. The details are in that second thread.
-
I used a product called "Lucas Upper Cylinder treatment" that seemed to help a little too.
Don't want to poo-poo someone else's fix or product recommendation, but I wouldn't want to use these types of products unless I knew what it was actually doing. Many products that might be benificial for increased cylinder wall lubrication and/or valve train wear can result in significant piston ring deposits, leading to stuck rings and additional valve and exhaust deposit formation.
Just be carefull...
-
Agreed. The only reason I would have even thought to use or mention is it that the performance and transmission shop that r_outsider used to work at swore by it, and I respected a couple of the people there.
Say, Paul.. which day are you leaving for Washington? We might be coming through the interior before then...
-
I suspect that it's the hiway that's killing the mileage.
probably so. A good portion of my commute is running at 60-70mph. very little town driving... short hops. I did find another bit, dropping the needles to the second position helped with my stumble and probably will push up the mileage as well.
I'm not all that concerned about it as it's still the best mileage vehicle I have by 50% or so...
A
-
I suspect that it's the hiway that's killing the mileage.
probably so. A good portion of my commute is running at 60-70mph. very little town driving... short hops. I did find another bit, dropping the needles to the second position helped with my stumble and probably will push up the mileage as well.
I'm not all that concerned about it as it's still the best mileage vehicle I have by 50% or so...
A
And it's damn fun to save the gas too. :thumb:
-
Say, Paul.. which day are you leaving for Washington? We might be coming through the interior before then...
Plan is for 7:00 AM approx, Friday, Aug 15th, to meet up with Red and bobcat (and maybe Cargo7).
If your coming through Cranbrook on the 12-14th, give me a call. We can at least have coffee at the Tim Horton's. PM me with your schedule and I'll give you my cell number.
-
amazing what driving habits will do. I just got the best gas mileage ever out of the bandit as about 70% of my riding on this tank was on wet roads, with a fuel mileage increase of about 15%.
-
I just did the math and I'm down a bit with my Scorpion slip-on. Just averaged 43 mph, while I was getting 45 or better with the stock exhaust. Hmmmm. It also seems like the bike wants more gas when coming off idle than it did with the stocker. Is it running leaner now?
-
yup. probably a little leaner, though how much is anybody's guess.
How much of that mileage is caused by "enjoying" the new sound?
-
:grin: At least a little.
-
Is it running leaner now?
I assume the 1250 FI has an exhaust sensor? The freer flowing exhaust may have changed how the FI unit works. A little more fuel should also result in a little more power as well.
I know Holeshot will sell you an FI tuner box, so you can richen it up throughout the range, and really watch your fuel mileage go down (and your smile factor go up with the new found power :grin:)