Page 1 of 1
Noob question: MPG Stella vs Buddy
Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2012 4:21 am
by Swordsman
Okay, riddle me this: HOW in the world does the 150cc Stella achieve a claimed 140 mpg vs the 150cc Buddy only getting 90 mpg???? Engine is the same size...?
~SM
Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2012 5:01 am
by viney266
Simple. 4 speed with a clutch versus a CVT.
I have heard of guys actually getting 100MPG real world with the 4t stellas
Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2012 5:10 am
by ericalm
140MPG on a Stella in real world riding is unlikely. 100 is definitely possible. When I bothered keeping track, I was getting around 100. Now, probably less as I ride a bit harder.
90MPG is possible on a Buddy 125. A bit lower is more common.
It's not all manual vs. CVT. The Stella also has lower emissions. But a stock Stella doesn't perform like a Buddy. All of the Stella's settings are dialed in for maximum fuel efficiency. It'll be slower off the line and have lower top speed.
Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2012 1:17 pm
by Rail 50
I can agree with Eric.. I am getting 107 mpg with the Stella and my Chinascoot is faster. However, I get more positive comments about the Stella.
Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2012 1:48 pm
by Swordsman
ericalm wrote:140MPG on a Stella in real world riding is unlikely. 100 is definitely possible. When I bothered keeping track, I was getting around 100. Now, probably less as I ride a bit harder.
90MPG is possible on a Buddy 125. A bit lower is more common.
It's not all manual vs. CVT. The Stella also has lower emissions. But a stock Stella doesn't perform like a Buddy. All of the Stella's settings are dialed in for maximum fuel efficiency. It'll be slower off the line and have lower top speed.
Ah, I wondered if that might be the case. Thanks for the info!
A fellow Uralista that lives near me has a red 2 stroke Stella. I've sat on it and fired it up... neat little machines! I love the hidden spare tire.
~SM
Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2012 8:14 pm
by SkutiJo
Keep in mind, too, guys - the EPA testing is done in fixed gears, with almost no loss.
Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2012 11:43 pm
by ericalm
Indeed. EPA for cars is also going to be much different than real-world.
I've always wondered why CVTs are less fuel efficient than same-displacement manuals. That seems counterintuitive to me. You "waste" a lot of revs—and, it would seem to me, fuel—on a shifty, especially in stop-start city riding. There is a lot of lost power in a CVT, though, so you may need more fuel to get an equivalent amount of power output. Wait, I may have just explained this to myself…
Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2012 12:47 am
by Spiffy
I was getting 120 mpg on my 2012 Stella when I was riding super easy on it during the break-in period... with the crappy stock spark plug...
now that I ride it like it wants to be rode I only get about 80-90 mpg out of it...
and it's always been a mix of city and highway...
Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2012 4:16 am
by viney266
ericalm wrote: Wait, I may have just explained this to myself…
^^^ Yeah, I do that sometimes,too !
