Fuel Economy Of Nouvo Elegance 135 And My Ideas Of How Honda Pcxi Can Claim 118 Miles/gallon

[jackcorbett]

I have posted a spreadsheet with my actual city driving gas mileage figures for Pattaya driving as well as a few projections of how Honda can claim the 125 c.c. PCXi gets UP TO 118 MILES TO THE GALLON. Key words here are UP TO. Excel spreadsheet with fuel economy figures o 135 c.c. Nouvo Elegance

Here's a hint. First...all mileage is non stop highway or country driving. Second, put a small gal on the bike for its driver to get the best power to weight ration. Put skinny tires on the bike and inflate them to the max, do the test runs in the mountains where the air is thinner and there's less drag.

I will suggest that if one were to put any kind of decent fuel injection system on the 135 c.c. Elegance that it will actuallly beat the fuel economy of the PCXi IN THE MOUNTAINS and that even with the carburetor in low altitude driving in warm climes it will actually beat the PCXi dues to its lighter weight.

Edited March 3, 2010 by jackcorbett

[CMX]

None of this will seem important to many until fuel prices double (assured pretty soon, IMHO), but it does to me because I'm buying in May.

Irrefutable data for your bike, and 33k/l makes perfect sense to me, considering weight of passengers and traffic conditions. And I am sure that it improves a great deal in the countryside, even in the hills.

On the other hand, while I have no doubt that Honda put its fingertips on the scales whenever it could, their figures are derived from the standard they picked - ECE40mode. It takes a lot of Googling to get to the bottom of it, but it's a standard used to discover pollution levels, as well as mileage, and it has norms for operation. Very interesting is the fact that that method includes more distance away from traffic conditions (WAY away from those you used to test). But does not assume as many kilometers/miles in city driving as, for example, the USA's EPA mileage estimates. Their estimates have less to do with those of us traveling in any "downtown."

But the idea of a Honda Jockey of 40 Kilos piloting the PCX downhill (OK, a terrible exaggeration) is probably not exactly the case. It is of use, I think, in comparing recent Honda models. Meanwhile, until other reports about PCX mileage appear - hopefully as precise as yours, brilliant, we'll have to gather more facts.

For example, a fellow I know (I may have PM'd you) told me his Nouvo Elegance got 135 m/gal on a trip from CM to Mae Hong Song, which involves a LOT of hills and curves - but little city driving at all. 'Course, I was astonished and disbelieving. But it was an Imperial gallon he meant, and he got out his notebook for the whole trip. I saw his notes - fifty-something k/l. It was a group trip and they may have been sight-seeing at 60k/h, or there might even have been an error - which is why we need more facts about the experience of people who do NOT, as you note, go by guesstimates or fillup times when they've got a bigger tank now. Facts trump opinions - and advertising. Personally, I dying to get numbers from PCX owners, together with their driving conditions and weights carried and hope that you've started the ball rolling. Thanks

Edited March 3, 2010 by CMX

[jackcorbett]

I am not trying to denigrate the Honda PCXi by any means but I do think a lot of people here see the latest fuel injection systems and other refinements as miracle technology. As I pointed out there are advantages to fuel injection but for Honda to claim it's going to get 15 % better fuel economy for say an Air Blade versus the older model Air Blades, I don't think so. For those putting off the purchase of a Nouvo until it comes out with fuel injection, I'm saying there won't be much difference driving here in Thailand. To wait for a 150 c.c. Nouvo Elegance...well that might be a different story. But to claim the Elegance is a gas hog, that's so much b.s. I've performed my analysis with real hard core figures along with some of my theories based on examples of other vehicles. Like you I want to see the real evidence. Now---a Honda Wave.....now that's another story. I think it will get better gas mileage but that's another subject. But I just talked to a pal of mine who is an excellent driver who had a 125 c.c. Wave and now is driving a Mio. He claims the Mio in the real world has better acceleration. We both agree....these autos hang in there at higher rpms whereas he'd easily get stuck in the wrong gear and simply not have the power when he needed it. He missed shifts. The autos are safer he says and we both agree on that.

None of this will seem important to many until fuel prices double (assured pretty soon, IMHO), but it does to me because I'm buying in May.

Irrefutable data for your bike, and 33k/l makes perfect sense to me, considering weight of passengers and traffic conditions. And I am sure that it improves a great deal in the countryside, even in the hills.

On the other hand, while I have no doubt that Honda put its fingertips on the scales whenever it could, their figures are derived from the standard they picked - ECE40mode. It takes a lot of Googling to get to the bottom of it, but it's a standard used to discover pollution levels, as well as mileage, and it has norms for operation. Very interesting is the fact that that method includes more distance away from traffic conditions (WAY away from those you used to test). But does not assume as many kilometers/miles in city driving as, for example, the USA's EPA mileage estimates. Their estimates have less to do with those of us traveling in any "downtown."

But the idea of a Honda Jockey of 40 Kilos piloting the PCX downhill (OK, a terrible exaggeration) is probably not exactly the case. It is of use, I think, in comparing recent Honda models. Meanwhile, until other reports about PCX mileage appear - hopefully as precise as yours, brilliant, we'll have to gather more facts.

For example, a fellow I know (I may have PM'd you) told me his Nouvo Elegance got 135 m/gal on a trip from CM to Mae Hong Song, which involves a LOT of hills and curves - but little city driving at all. 'Course, I was astonished and disbelieving. But it was an Imperial gallon he meant, and he got out his notebook for the whole trip. I saw his notes - fifty-something k/l. It was a group trip and they may have been sight-seeing at 60k/h, or there might even have been an error - which is why we need more facts about the experience of people who do NOT, as you note, go by guesstimates or fillup times when they've got a bigger tank now. Facts trump opinions - and advertising. Personally, I dying to get numbers from PCX owners, together with their driving conditions and weights carried and hope that you've started the ball rolling. Thanks

Edited March 3, 2010 by jackcorbett

[ThaiRich]

Hi, let me share my experience with you. I am a PCX owner. I am about 260 lbs. If I drive at a moderate speed 60kmh I get 45km to the liter of gas multiply this by 4 equals 180 km on a GALLON of gas divide by 1.6 =112 miles per a gallon. When I run between 80kmh to 100 kmh this drops to about 50 miles to the gallon. I don't have a spead sheet to show everyone. The great gas milage is possible at low speeds.

[katabeachbum]

Hi, let me share my experience with you. I am a PCX owner. I am about 260 lbs. If I drive at a moderate speed 60kmh I get 45km to the liter of gas multiply this by 4 equals 180 km on a GALLON of gas divide by 1.6 =112 miles per a gallon. When I run between 80kmh to 100 kmh this drops to about 50 miles to the gallon. I don't have a spead sheet to show everyone. The great gas milage is possible at low speeds.

I m heavy on the throttle, full throttle up all the phuket hills and always first off the redlights, and my weight is 105kg. Most riding is single, except for very short trips with 55 kg passanger. I have both PCXi and Elegance 135, and both manage 30km/litre.

PCXi may have more fuel efficient technology, but its higher weight and wider tyres come at a price.

My GF also has an Airblade PGMFi, which is approx 28 km/litres. Very small fuel tank makes it difficult to measure exactly, pumps are not accurate less than 4 litres, and terrible range. Due to lack of power, Airblade is full throttle most of the time, which increases fuel consumption.

In comparison my Kawasaki Ninja 650R manages 18-25 km/litres. 18 is very fast, 25 is average speed 50% higher than scoots.

All with 95 E10 gasohol in Phuket 30-35C degrees

[PeaceBlondie]

I keep track of my CBR150 mileage figures. I doubt most Thais do. They seldom fill up or compute. Mai pen rai.

[CMX]

I am really happy with these entries, as they represent facts about fuel - which must increase in price, fairly soon and quite a lot, I suppose. Refined thinking is helping too - driving conditions, speeds, and weights. I'm buying in May - after "the Show" and mileage will be a factor in my choice.

But even though I call it mileage, I post in k/l because, unless I'm mistaken (good possibility), we already have two kinds of gallons above. Plus, it saves me converting this way or that.

English needs a word - "kilometrage."

[ttakata]

good info, very precise.

I averaged 34.14 KM/L over 7 tanks of gas on the stock tires on my Nouvo El.

One tank even measured at 37 KM/L.

I ride with no concern about economy and I'm 90 kilos.

I didn't care about the break-in process, I was going full throttle and 90KMH on the way home from the dealer.

Maybe this hard break-in gave me a better sealed engine which gave me better fuel economy.

Edited March 4, 2010 by ttakata

[jackcorbett]

Agree. It is nice to have these precise numbers here instead of such outrageous statements as "The Nouvo is a real gas hog" and automatics require a lot of maintenance. For one thing such unfounded statements might lead someone to make a purchase based on what a complete fool is writing here. And as far as measuring fuel economy one cannot base his info on just one fillup. I averaged 46 kilometers per liter on fillup number three where I used just 1.38 liters. The way that went down is I started with a very full tank but when I had it refilled the attendant did not fill the tank to the top. We must keep in mind that these tanks are very small so that kind of thing will make a huge difference. Also.....Thai Rich, thanks for the info. However since there are 3.785 liters in a gallon you would want to multiply the 45 km/ liter times 3.785 then divide by 1.62 to get your actual miles to the gallon. Which means you are getting 105 miles to the gallon. By the way, you were very specific when you stated you are driving at moderate speeds of 60 kilometers per hour. But is this stop and go driving such as we experience in city driving in places such as downtown Pattaya or is it pretty steady driving? When I evaluate my own driving, I'm sitting at red lights and I'm constantly slowing up for speed bumps since there are many of those close to my condo. I'm having to nearly stop due to baht buses and other vehicles constantly pulling in front of me, etc. So what we have here is the mass of my bike plus myself and girlfriend brought up to a certain speed, then having that mass constantly slowing down only to have it brought up to a moderate velocity level again and again and again. Simple physics tells me I'm losing A LOT of efficiency here.

Also......about the Honda Wave and similar manual transmission bikes. They are often going at low rpm levels because their drivers are often loafing along in 4th gear at low speeds. Although one can downshift to get the rpms up it takes time to do so. In normal driving this won't be problematical but in a place such as Pattaya where one is constantly having to change speeds suddenly this process is slow and very tedious. Imagine.....you are cruising along just fine at say 30 to 40 kilometers per hour and you are in fourth gear. Suddenly a baht taxi changes lanes right in front of you after just picking up passengers at a dead stop. You will have to decelerate from 30 or

40 to say 5 kilometers per hour and then here you are in fourth gear having to get around that taxi. You simply don't have the power because your rpms are way too low so you must downshift from fourth to say second. If you were driving a Nouvo Elegance you'd simply twist the throttle and reel in the power and it's there. For one thing your rpms are already much higher than you would be if you were in fourth driving a Honda Wave.

So it's no wonder why a Honda Wave will do so well at the fuel pump. In city driving such as we find in Pattaya it's constantly lugging about whereas Yamaha for example has tuned its Nouvo Elegance to offer a lot of on demand useable power for the kind of driving conditions one often experiences here. Also, I can't say what difference tire size makes, but nearly all Honda Waves I've seen here in Pattaya have spindly tires on them. 60's in the front and when I'd observe Honda Waves all lined up at a dealership and then look over at an Air Blade or two with their 80 mm front tires there visual difference was phenomenal. So although I might like the idea of upgrading my tires when they start to show a lot of wear from say the 70's in front to 80's and going to a 90 in the back from the 80 I'm already using due to the greater performance and smooth ride the wider tires might offer there is a price I'm going to have to pay for decreased fuel economy.

[ThaiRich]

Hi Jackcorbett,

Thanks for the exact math. This will help in the future. My driving is mixed. When I have alot of stop and go I use the "stop idle" switch on the PCX which kills the engine. That 46 kilo per liter is very impressive, have you modified your bike to help you achieve that?

Everyones milage is going to differ and probably the biggest variable is driving habits.

[CMX]

I certainly agree that we cannot hope to compare drivers, one on one. But with a large field of figures, we'd have something. Meanwhile:

I have created a statistical model that is 1) based on “practical” available data (ignoring publicity claims), 2) accurate (assuming my several assumptions are correct), and 3) intuitive (mine). But it represents what I need to know before I buy.

Once owners of their shiny new Honda PCX’s begin to report in numbers as accurately as Jack and others here have done, they (few have reported in; either they are having too much fun, are too rich to care, or don’t understand math well enough to correctly figure km/l – 72000 baht, after all - just kidding!!!!) will indicate, eventually, 15% - 20% better costs per km. in heavy city driving than the Nouvo Elegance. This is due, in part, to the lower engine capacity (admittedly offset somewhat by a higher compression ratio), fuel injection, start/stop if it is used, and the lower cost of E20, where it can be purchased. Assumptions indeed.

In country driving, I have read and heard enough from owners initially to suggest that the Nouvo will challenge the PCX. Some Nouvo “country” driving reports are quite impressive. Certainly, the Nouvo will be able to go faster. Yes, the exception might be at the highest altitudes here – but staying up near 2,000 meters is a rare occasion in a year’s time.

In all, the Prestige owner who travels 12,000 a month can be assured of saving upwards of 1,400 baht per year compared to the Elegance driver. While it seems that it would take a long time for the PCX driver to recover 12,000 baht in purchase price, we have to recall that fuel prices are going to go up. Meanwhile, that owner can enjoy a bunch of gadgets, discovering if they last or cause problems, not to mention that they can enjoy the looks of the thing – I mean, you can park with Big Bikes!

But in spite of protestations from some owners, truth is that the Prestige conductor will be driving a wider (14cm, as I have mentioned) and heavier vehicle compared to the NE. Weaving - to avoid mirrors - is a fact of life where I drive. Far as I’m concerned, it’s all but a tie – excepting resale, another ball of worms to untangle.

Edited March 4, 2010 by CMX

[dave_boo]

FWIW,

back when I was worried about efficiency of my CBR 150R, I measured out the km/L. Using 95 I was getting just under 40 km/L. Going with 91 Gasahol resulted in a bump down to 34(ish). However, I got to thinking...and realised that over 1000 km using 91 I'd spend some 936 THB (using today's cost); the same distance using the 95 Bensine would cost 924 THB....so even with the loss of some 6 km/L, I still can't complain about 12 THB!

Notice that I wasn't babying the bike, but rather maintaining speeds in excess of 110 (indicated) with perhaps 85% country riding.

Basically I don't understand the point of this thread. Is it to exert the superiority of the Elegance in regards to the Pcxi? Cause that's not really needed. Being happy with your ride and not worrying about whether or not another bike may be more efficient seems to be the best thing to do.

And there's another problem with your assertions; at higher gas prices the more efficient bikes have better returns. Going back to my 1000 km average, if a Pcxi is indeed getting some 50 km/L, you're going to spend 636 THB...and the figures from a member listing his Elegance at 37 km/L would cost 860 THB....meaning the Pcxi saved you some 224 THB. However if gas was doubled in price the savings double to some 448.....at fuel costs so high the Pcxi earns back its extra 12 000 THB after 24 000 (ish)km; and then becomes a real saver.

[ThaiRich]

My decision to buy the PCX is based wholy on personal preference. I prefer Honda over other makes of scooters. Probably something I inherited from my father who inherited it from his father. But I do enjoy the information about gas milage. Information is knowledge and we can never get too much of that. I would keep my PCX even if it got 30k/l and wouldn't buy a Yamaha if it got 60 k/l. Just personal preference.

[katabeachbum]

My decision to buy the PCX is based wholy on personal preference. I prefer Honda over other makes of scooters. Probably something I inherited from my father who inherited it from his father. But I do enjoy the information about gas milage. Information is knowledge and we can never get too much of that. I would keep my PCX even if it got 30k/l and wouldn't buy a Yamaha if it got 60 k/l. Just personal preference.

agree, both do 30k/l and I prefere yammy because more power, better brakes and less weight

[CMX]

dave_boo

Agreed. At some point we cannot know, the fuel efficiency of the PCX, however slight or great - and depending upon fuel prices (+PCX being able to use the cheaper E20 where available), the 12000 Extra Baht to buy the new PCX will be erased through that model's fuel savings. I don't think they will be anywhere NEAR Honda's figures, but the thing will use less fuel.

It must be wonderful to say in a few words what it takes certain others kilotons of paragraphs to express.

And I still can't make up my mind for reasons expressed just above (and briefly, too).

Edited March 5, 2010 by CMX

[dave_boo]

dave_boo

Agreed. At some point we cannot know, the fuel efficiency of the PCX, however slight or great - and depending upon fuel prices (+PCX being able to use the cheaper E20 where available), the 12000 Extra Baht to buy the new PCX will be erased through that model's fuel savings. I don't think they will be anywhere NEAR Honda's figures, but the thing will use less fuel.

It must be wonderful to say in a few words what it takes certain others kilotons of paragraphs to express.

And I still can't make up my mind for reasons expressed just above (and briefly, too).

What really gets me is that you have people, apparently from both camps, going on and on about scooters. For the prices paid you're talking about a disposable product back home. Sure, one costs some 400 USD more than the other, but unless you're super budget constrained, who cares? Also, as I pointed out, the savings are minute...much less than most forum members spend on their internet connections.

So I shall ask agakn, what's the point of this thread? Small savings on petrol? Extra hp (even a 25% increase is laughable if you're talking about all of 10 hp)? Better brakes for all those Rossi moments you have at sub 100 kph speeds? 1/2'' narrower handlebars/mirrors for all those times you're beating a yaa-baa'd out Somchai to Big C? Please help me understand.....

[jackcorbett]

My decision to buy the PCX is based wholy on personal preference. I prefer Honda over other makes of scooters. Probably something I inherited from my father who inherited it from his father. But I do enjoy the information about gas milage. Information is knowledge and we can never get too much of that. I would keep my PCX even if it got 30k/l and wouldn't buy a Yamaha if it got 60 k/l. Just personal preference.

Agreed on that one. I like a lot of things about the new PCXi. Let's start with its style. It's a looker to be sure. What I don't like is the absense of hooks, small rails and the like on which I can hang grocery bags or attach bungee cords which I can use for larger objects...eg....a desktop computer I'm taking into the shop. It's not as practical as the Elegance in many ways. I like the fact it has a lot of rubber on the ground which is going to make it more stable and ride better. This is going to hurt it at the gas pump however. Making up for this and then some is the much larger fuel tank---(6.2 liters) to the Air Blades 4 and the Nouvo Elegance's 4,8. I Iike the idea of the automatic shutoff that turns the engine off at stoplights which is a fuel saver where there's a lot of city driving. Although I like the large tires on the PCXi I like the Yamaha's 16 inch diameter wheels since they give it more ground clearance. It's nice to be able to jump over curbs and other obstacles when one has to. I must do this at one of my favorite bars to get into the parking area and Air Blades will ground out on the curb. And when you are in tight parking spots such as you find at Tuc com and Central Shopping Mall, it's a lot easier having to wrestle a Yamaha Nouvo Elegance around than heavier machines. Also there is something about that 135 c.c. Yamaha Elegance engine. It seems very lively and responsive. It's like comparing a fine fast shooting well made long bow (back over 50 years ago) to a similar bow made of wood that simply isn't as lively. That's the same sense I get from the 135 c.c. Nouvo engine. My old 115 c.c. Yamaha Nouvo just didn't have its feel and neither did the Air Blades I have driven. In fact I'm wondering that even if Yamaha does come out with a 150 c.c. Nouvo that something might not be lost in that subjective feel one gets from driving a thoroughbred and that's what I have to call this 135 c.c. engine...a thoroughbred.

[CMX]

dave_boo

"1/2'' narrower handlebars/mirrors for all those times you're beating a yaa-baa'd out Somchai to Big C? Please help me understand....."

Sorry. Thought I had written 14cm (= 5 1/2 inches), which makes the PCX somewhat more difficult to maneuver - or so I felt while driving it during a day's test. Here in CM, we have a lot of places where autos take over the "bike" left lane to make left turns and so bikers drive forward to an almost eternal red light - sometimes over 200 meters - between two lanes of stopped cars and a forest of mirrors. A PCX cannot do so well, and that might be a thought for some, who, like myself, are about to buy a bike but who, unlike myself, did not test the thing beyond a dealer's neighborhood.

But if that's an unimportant quibble, akin to Honda's exaggerations, I'm OK with that. I quite agree that I would not be pursuing these issues to so great a degree were I not about to buy a bike, and as for the rest, I dislike generalities and vagaries.

Edited March 5, 2010 by CMX

[dave_boo]

dave_boo

"1/2'' narrower handlebars/mirrors for all those times you're beating a yaa-baa'd out Somchai to Big C? Please help me understand....."

Sorry. Thought I had written 14cm (= 5 1/2 inches), which makes the PCX somewhat more difficult to maneuver - or so I felt while driving it during a day's test. Here in CM, we have a lot of places where autos take over the "bike" left lane to make left turns and so bikers drive forward to an almost eternal red light - sometimes over 200 meters - between two lanes of stopped cars and a forest of mirrors. A PCX cannot do so well, and that might be a thought for some, who, like myself, are about to buy a bike but who, unlike myself, did not test the thing beyond a dealer's neighborhood.

But if that's an unimportant quibble, akin to Honda's exaggerations, I'm OK with that. I quite agree that I would not be pursuing these issues to so great a degree were I not about to buy a bike, and as for the rest, I dislike generalities and vagaries.

You should know that those stupid Americans can't understand Metric...and that is a pretty big difference for the bikes.

[anthonywoodall]

My decision to buy the PCX is based wholy on personal preference. I prefer Honda over other makes of scooters. Probably something I inherited from my father who inherited it from his father. But I do enjoy the information about gas milage. Information is knowledge and we can never get too much of that. I would keep my PCX even if it got 30k/l and wouldn't buy a Yamaha if it got 60 k/l. Just personal preference.

agree, both do 30k/l and I prefere yammy because more power, better brakes and less weight

Just a quick note. I have a PCX here and a Benelli 900 Tornado tre in England. I was just reading your message and thought I would add a little truth to this thread. I have just filled up my tank on the pcx at 200.1 km-4.68ltrs! Driving at 80-90 average carrying a total weight of 130kg's. My missus generally has the throttle pinned but I enjoy the journey as im never in a hurry.The pcx has a tank capacity of 6ltrs and when I filled it today it still had 2 bars left on the gauge so its fair to say that its pretty economical. As far as your claim about power and brakes?? I believe the pcx has a 1kw higher output than the Yamaha and also that its front brake is a triple cylinder calliper (combined braking system-two pistons operated from the front lever and 1 from the rear lever). I can tell you as a superbike rider that for a scooter the pcx brakes are the best I have ever known. Is your Yammy a single piston im not sure but certainly it will not have the braking power of the pcx system. If I had 1 complaint about the pcx it is that the top speed is limited as the engine is governed and it kicks in at 109km/hr which is a little slow but apart from that I and my buddys that come over here are mightily impressed by this scooter and if you owned / used 1 for any time you would likely see it's merits too !

[CMX]

AW

I was glad to see your report about mileage - the part regarding km/l. I'm convinced that the model will do well for an automatic in that way. Your offering of one tank's experience begins to indicate that my guess was correct (I mistrust gas gauge notches, even if they are digital), and I'll be happy to read that the figures hold up or improve over time. Incidentally, many of our reports mention if they are recorded in heavy traffic of downtown Bangkok, mostly, or country, or mixed, and I've seen variations on our many archives.

You're right about top speed too; generally the Yammie in question has a bit of an edge with regard to speed, assuming similar payloads.

Brakes, I don't know for sure from having ridden the bikes. For one thing the PCX is heavier and for another pots themselves don't assure best braking (size, materials, geometry); I like the Nouvo Elegance for braking too, but admire the power of your Honda's and the combi-brake.

No question that I'd rather tell someone that I rode a PCX instead of having to admit to owning an Elegance. It's just that Prestige word that balances things out. Tie here, slight edge there.

Edited March 30, 2010 by CMX

[nikster]

As a point of reference, I measured my 5 year old Wave 125i (fuel injected, semi-manual) at 50km/l. That's 117 mpg (**) and that's not optimal conditions - just normal riding.

So the PCX with automatic but a much more modern engine under ideal conditions claiming 118 does not surprise me at all.

BTW I'd be interested in the Nuovo figures, could you put it in a post, the attachment seems to be gone.

(**) Measured at the gas station with the top up method - top up fully, go, at the next fill up note kms driven vs fuel bought when topping up again. The fuel gauge is way too inaccurate to guess the mileage from it.

Edited March 30, 2010 by nikster

[katabeachbum]

My decision to buy the PCX is based wholy on personal preference. I prefer Honda over other makes of scooters. Probably something I inherited from my father who inherited it from his father. But I do enjoy the information about gas milage. Information is knowledge and we can never get too much of that. I would keep my PCX even if it got 30k/l and wouldn't buy a Yamaha if it got 60 k/l. Just personal preference.

agree, both do 30k/l and I prefere yammy because more power, better brakes and less weight

Just a quick note. I have a PCX here and a Benelli 900 Tornado tre in England. I was just reading your message and thought I would add a little truth to this thread. I have just filled up my tank on the pcx at 200.1 km-4.68ltrs! Driving at 80-90 average carrying a total weight of 130kg's. My missus generally has the throttle pinned but I enjoy the journey as im never in a hurry.The pcx has a tank capacity of 6ltrs and when I filled it today it still had 2 bars left on the gauge so its fair to say that its pretty economical. As far as your claim about power and brakes?? I believe the pcx has a 1kw higher output than the Yamaha and also that its front brake is a triple cylinder calliper (combined braking system-two pistons operated from the front lever and 1 from the rear lever). I can tell you as a superbike rider that for a scooter the pcx brakes are the best I have ever known. Is your Yammy a single piston im not sure but certainly it will not have the braking power of the pcx system. If I had 1 complaint about the pcx it is that the top speed is limited as the engine is governed and it kicks in at 109km/hr which is a little slow but apart from that I and my buddys that come over here are mightily impressed by this scooter and if you owned / used 1 for any time you would likely see it's merits too !

I do own a Pcx and Elegance, and Elegance handles and brakes better. Elegence is also more powerful loaded up the hills. should try one

PCX combo brake setup is an advantage for unexperienced riders, but does in itself not make the brakes more efficient. front disc is simply to small compared to weight and speed.

I am aslo a Ninja 650R owner, which handles and brakes extremely much better

Edited March 30, 2010 by katabeachbum

[PeaceBlondie]

The differences between the two automatics on gas mileage can't be great.

[katabeachbum]

The differences between the two automatics on gas mileage can't be great.

same milage. PCX higher weight and wider tyres is compensated by injection and some other gas saving features

[jackcorbett]

The differences between the two automatics on gas mileage can't be great.

same milage. PCX higher weight and wider tyres is compensated by injection and some other gas saving features

Agreed. For what it is worth after returning the Honda CBR 150 R to the rental place at Ao Nang beach in Krabi I told one of the guys in the rental shop about how I owned a Nouvo Elegance in Pattaya and was keeping track of my mileage. I told him what I was getting, then emphasized almost all my driving was two up and heavy city driving. I then asked him what the CBR was getting IN THE KRABI AREA. He told me around 40 kilometers to the liter. I then asked him what his Yamaha Nouvo 135 c.c. Elegances are getting. He said 40 kilometers to the liter which is of course the same. If he had an Air Blade or a PCxi to rent I imagine he would have told me 40 kilometers to the liter. Now I"m not about to suggest that my Nouvo will get better mileage here in Pattaya than a CBR. What the man was telling me there's not that much difference driving in the countryside near Krabi. Which reminds me of a few bikes I used to own. I once had a Honda 185 c.c. XL on off road bike. I once got 75 miles an hour out of it but I'm sure there was some speedometer error. Usually it was good for around 70 miles an hour on the speedometer. I figured it was getting around 80 miles per gallon or so. But if I drove the same bike say at a steady 30 miles an hour it would have done better. Eventually I traded it off for a Honda 500 XL off road but I didn't keep it for very long because it was not nearly as suitable for the real world kind of riding I was doing around the farm. I finally ended up getting another Honda 185 c.c. XL.

I suppose what I'm saying is there's probably not a lot of difference between most of these bikes around 125 c.c's when it comes to fuel economy or top speed assuming they are being driven in the same manner (a Honda Wave going say a steady 15 miles an hour next to a Yamaha Nouvo Elegance at the same speed is not being driven in the same manner because the Nouvo is in the powerband a lot more because of its gearing). On the other hand there's a lot of difference between the PCXi and the Yamaha 135 Elegance when it comes to features and quite possibly handling. And because of gearing and other factors different bikes will behave differently while accelerating.

Edited March 30, 2010 by jackcorbett

[nikster]

So the consensus is: Both Nuovo Elegance and PCX get about 40km/l in day to day driving? Pretty good mileage for the Nuovo...

[katabeachbum]

So the consensus is: Both Nuovo Elegance and PCX get about 40km/l in day to day driving? Pretty good mileage for the Nuovo...

steep hills in phuket and full throttle, I have never seen better than 35km/l for both PCX and N Elegance. wave never better than 40 km/l on the 3 waves i v had. wave can be run very cheap on flat roads, low rpm and most wave riders are slow, but when loaded or up the hills milage is like the autos.

[guzzi850m2]

As a point of reference, I measured my 5 year old Wave 125i (fuel injected, semi-manual) at 50km/l. That's 117 mpg (**) and that's not optimal conditions - just normal riding.

So the PCX with automatic but a much more modern engine under ideal conditions claiming 118 does not surprise me at all.

BTW I'd be interested in the Nuovo figures, could you put it in a post, the attachment seems to be gone.

(**) Measured at the gas station with the top up method - top up fully, go, at the next fill up note kms driven vs fuel bought when topping up again. The fuel gauge is way too inaccurate to guess the mileage from it.

I can't open the attachment too

My 2009 Fino do app. 33 km/lit, mixed riding around pattaya area, sometimes going full throttle on Sukhumvit road (app. 100 km/h).

Having never tried either the Elegance nor PCX I don't know anything about them, but I do know that I will never buy a PCX, a huge thing but no power, looks a one of those 4-500cc scooters which can go fast.

[jackcorbett]

So the consensus is: Both Nuovo Elegance and PCX get about 40km/l in day to day driving? Pretty good mileage for the Nuovo...

The rental place at Aol Nang Beach (there were many rental shops) told me the Honda CBR 150 R and the Nouvo Elegance both got around 40 km per liter. This is not city driving as most roads are two lane. I'd get around 32 to 33 in Pattaya driivng most of the time two up and all city. And in my spreadsheet I extrapolated several scenarios the first of which factored in highway mileage and that would produce around 40 km to the liter so I'm thinking the Krabi rental shop was about spot on.

Interestingly enough, I saw about one Air Blade for rent at Ao Nang Beach and not one PCxi. There were a number of Clicks however, and there were Honda Shadows and bigger bikes. I found the absence of Air Blades and PCxi's a bit odd, especially the Air Blades being about non existent.

Edited March 30, 2010 by jackcorbett