Hello all,

Finally got my 2010 TMax and am *loving* it! I'm busy trying to cover the first 600 miles as soon as possible, and am mostly sticking to the running in guidelines.

However, I noticed that I'm getting around 180 miles on a tank, which seems really high compared to my old 2003 model. Admittedly I am not doing many 85mph motorway runs, but I am doing a lot of stop start brake throttle trips to avoid a constant speed until the first 600 miles is up.

Is this what I can expect longer term? If it is its great! But I always though Burgers and others have better consumption than the juicier Tmax?

Will be posting pics as soon as I get my sports screen and whatnot, the standard screen is ugly as sin!

Ciao, Gibbsy.

It's got a bigger tank.

Oh. My. God.

Delete post! delete post!

LOL

Don't worry we won't tell....

Well, yes it does have a bigger tank, but only by 1 litre!
Since you are in running in mode, you might get good mpg figures. I have read people saying that the mk3 T-max is more economical than older models - for me, it is, but the difference is quite small.
On the mk1 I got around 49mpg all year round, on the mk2, normally around 51-2mpg, but only around 47 in the winter, whilst on the mk3 I'm getting perhaps a 1 or 2mpg extra than I did out of the mk2 at all times - but I'm not using it for commuting, so that might affect things.

I wonder how much the styling effects the mpg? My XEvo has the same engine as my previous X8 and they're both euro3 so I don't think there's any update there, but I'm getting around 6mpg better economy for the same riding out of it? I don't know if it's the effect of better aerodynamics on the new model or perhaps how it was run in?? If so running it in relatively hard (not thrashing it but giving it some welly on occasion and not being afraid to get the revs up as long as they're not constant) seems to have done it good in the mpg department!

The 2003 had carbs. with that you loose fuel in the bowls by evap. every time you switch off.
Also a little more G.Gs. I wonder if the belt drive is different as it costs more than the earlier
model. According to the store man at Webb's of Lincoln.

Brilliant. We've all rapidly moved on from my initial balls up, thanks chaps!

I think the running in thing might be something to do with it, but I wondered if in general a tank was lasting around 150 miles+. I'm going to have done the initial 600 mile run in thing by early next week, so I'll get it sorted and start looking at it then.

Have not really stuck to the always going steady rule, as I've never done that on my motorbikes either and it's not done them any harm.

Ciao, Gibbsy,

Yes and you're probably less likely to do damage with CVT since you can't have it at 12,000 rpm in first by accident for eg. So the CVT will soften the load on the engine as you can't balls it up in that way.

My Xevo seems to have responded well to the "not by the book" method of running in... so far anyway!

sounds a bit high to me ....... i ride a 2010 t max admittedly nearly all in town and i recon on 10 pence a mile don't know what that converts to mpg , had mine nearly a year and yes still loving it