Nothing to tune bone stock and that's what its getting. Never checked before the 1000 mile service but on a stock motor that's about where it should be. Other than a built motor most touring bikes will end up 40 +mpg. And if he has a bike that cant pull better than he says he really should look at his tune.

 

Loaded, 2-up, 80mph highway and backroads mix, I get 38mpg. Its a recreational vehicle so I don't stress over it as much as the car.

The more I read about the M8, along with the upgraded user interface controls of the Rushmores, the more I feel that pull someday.

Some questions:
Can you explain the 3k slow run in after 12 heat cycles and carbon cleaning? Where did you get the tank lift? I'll have to do a search.

You run 87 octane? So more energy in the gas but you're not running a performance tune at all, are you? Any knocking? One could argue the higher energy of 87 octane produces more heat.

Have you checked your oil temperatures? That is the truest measurement of engine heat, curious what you're experiencing.

 

WOW!

Really?

My M8 stock got in the high 40's. With an A/C and stage I download, it gets in the high 40's. It can get in the mid 50's on all highway miles. My twin cam stock got in the mid 40's, low 50's on all highway miles. Why do you want to call the man a liar? It wasn't until my TC went to pipes, A/C, Cams, and a PCIII with FuelMoto map that it dropped to the mid 30's. If I do the same to my M8 it will likely react the same!

There WILL be a big difference in MPG based on fuel available and elevation, AND RIDING STYLE!!!! on any given bike!!!!!! If MPG is THAT important to you, figure out what works for you in your elevation, fuel available, and your riding style.

There have been a few posts about people adding pipes, A/C, and/or both, and reporting "my bike ran like a banshee", or my bike ran like a "striped *** ape". Then I put in a stage one map and it wasn't as fast. Better than stock but "not as fast".

That is the map. That is the air/fuel mixture. Rich is cool. Lean is fast.

Yep, go too far in either direction, and you will have problems that lose races. However the generality, or cliche', remains true.

Bottom line, YOUR MILAGE MAY VARY!!! Where are you? How is your bike Modified? How do YOU ride? What fuel octane is available to you?

Jeez I really get tired of these "my experience is difference, therefore you are full of $hit" posts. I think that is why I always leave these forums a few months after I buy a new bike. Too much B.S.!!!!

 

Deuuuce:

Make my lift kits out of scrap bar stock. Cost = 0

I have a chart from a magazine with H-D's recommended heat cycles. When I get a bike from my dealer it only has 1 to 2 miles on it. They don't test it I do.

A heat cycle does not break in an engine it prepares it by reducing the sharp machining edges. S&S and others have their heat cycles listed also.

When the engine is cold each cycle has a time limit and heat limit. As the cycles progress each time gets longer and the heat limit higher.

I used to mist the engine just off of idle with water. Then let it sit overnight. The next day I go on a slow ride with it. Not fast and hard like many say as they don't understand that the increased pressure and heat in the head will reharden it. Then I went to Chevron's Techron additive which was supposed to rid carbon. I treated three tanks every 3K. However when I tore down a 103H0 at 7,600 miles the piston was loaded with carbon so I went back to misting.

A long break in is simply taking the 50, 500 and 1K manufactures limits on rpm and go longer. If the manufacturer says under 3K rpm for the first 1K I keep it under 3K rpm for 3,000 miles.

American Iron magazine did a study a couple of years ago on the different methods of break in practices from doing it immediately on a dyno or hard and fast on the street to a long and slow.

What they found is that the hard and fast break in does produce a faster bike initially. The slow break in will over time result in a stronger running bike than the fast break in and will last longer.

Yes because 87 octane burns faster therefore more complete it generates more heat that the slower burning higher octane. Power is BTU's so burning more provides more power as long as there is not pinging. Here is the kicker. All gas is highly regulated and has about 115,000 BTU's per gallon so if I get fifty mpg on regular and someone with the same motor and bike gets 40 mpg on 91/93 octane they run hotter than mine. The more mpg per mile the cooler the engine. The other factors in heat is friction and compression. Both of those factors are roughly equal in run in engines that are stock.

The only way I know that the engine is not pinging besides not hearing it is they run stronger than other stock engines and if they were pinging the ECM would retard the ignition and performance would suffer. I do have some with oil temp gauges. Two bikes have been in Florida in stop and go traffic and one through Death Valley in the summer in the afternoon temps of 117 to 120 degrees. None pinged and the one ran 215 in Daytona stop and go traffic. I didn't check the one in Death Valley I just wanted to keep going.

I rarely trade in a bike but when I do the dealer has folks that scoop them up. My bikes and how well that I take care of them are well known in this area.

 

Checked my second tank today. City and country road driving 216 miles and 4.895 gallons = 44.1mpg

 

I'm averaging 50 mpg on my 96 fat boy. I'm happy.

 

Took the day off to get my 1k mile service. Afterwards I rode a couple hundred miles. Mostly highway at 75mph. Several long hills (that kill gas mileage). You know the type - where they add an extra lane for going up hills and have truck pull-offs going down the hills. One long stretch of road where trucks are limited to 20mph going down hill.

17 RGU got 46 mpg. Pretty darn good.

 

43-44 so far. Haven't got into it yet, just enjoying the new scooter

 

Those are some darn good numbers. What elevation were you riding at?

 

Son the touring Harley's at 55 in 6th gear are at 2,200 rpm. Well up on the torque curve of the M8. The H-D engineers say that is fine. Guess what they know a lot more about it than you do.

Lugging is NOT a function of speed and rpm. It involves the load also. Plus it is a physical reaction to a call for acceleration and not having sufficient torque to accomplish acceleration. The engine and drivetrain will buck around. That is lugging.

Folks that report 50 or more mpgs are "liars". You sir are a jackwad fool!