I guess I wasn't as heavy handed on the throttle -- my first fill up was 34.8mpg and my second was 36.7.

What bike do you have and how about posting your dyno sheet. It'd be good to compare how these 124kits perform in general.

Concerning the clutch pull, I have a 2019 and was fine with the pull and engagement point before the kit install. FM didn't tell me that the pull would be stiffer and I didn't expect it -- all my experiences with AIM high performance clutch kits on a twin cam has been reduced pull. it's not bad, just stiffer like a twin cam cable actuated clutch. I've been reading about some of failures (seal leaking and loss of clutch) on the AIM slave cylinder so I think I'll hold off for now until that gets sorted out.

All in all I'm very satisfied with FM. How far are you from them -- I'm assuming you trailered there and back. I was surprised it only took them one day to do the build -- had it on the dyno that evening, and gave it back to me around 12pm the next day.

 

I’ve got a 2017 RGS and I’ve been following these FM124 builds since FM introduced them with the Woods 408 cam. Along the way, I’ve tried to keep an open mind to considering some of the other kits available like S&S, Tman, and Suburban HD. My initial thoughts were “no replacement for displacement”, but after a few extended consultations with FM I began to appreciate everything that goes into the build from intake to exhaust. At this point, I need to say that FM’s Customer Support is second to none. I started using their products on my 2010 Ultra Limited with their head pipe and the PCV with the Wide Band Auto-Tune then I upgraded to the PV.

I live in Montana and it’s 1,200 miles to FM, so I started shopping for a local shop to do the build for me. My local dealer has never tuned with the PV and they were going through some personnel turnover in their Service Department so I rule them out. I considered a local independent shop with a good reputation, but they didn’t have a dyno so I called a neighboring dealership 152 miles away and talked to the Service Manager. I was impressed, they had a dyno and were familiar the PV for tuning and they had a good reputation for performance builds including turbo charged bikes making over 160 HP.

Basically, the FM chart that I based my purchase decision on showed a 2017 RGS making 154HP / 151 TQ, with nearly 140 TQ at 2500 RPM. I realized this was probably one of their best runs, so I tried to keep my expectations within reason. I replicated their build completely with FM 124 Big Bore Kit, Level A Ported Heads, Wood WM8-408 cam, SE 64mm TB with ported manifold, SE 5.5 msec injectors, AIM SDR Clutch with AIM Lightforce Actuator, Jackpot XXX 2-1-2 head pipe with Highroller mufflers and tuned with Power Vision and Target Tune. The only significant difference being the air cleaner, I went with the new FM / K&N High Flow Ventilator.

After watching everyone else's results, I was honestly expecting 145 / 145 +/- with 130 TQ at 2500. My build came in at 148 HP which was a good number and the peak torque came in at 136. I'm not really disappointed, and I have complete confidence quality of work done on my build. I was just expecting the torque curve to be maybe 5 ft/lbs higher across the rpm. FM tells me it can be the difference between a 6th gear pull and a 5th gear pull and that could explain it. The bike rides great and the power increase is very noticeable.

Full disclosure, for me this was sort of an exercise in validating the FM charts with results and this is what it is. I might call FM and ask if they think that air cleaner cost me some torque. I can’t help it, I’m just compulsively analytical.

Thanks for the heads up on the failures with the AIM slave cylinder, I’ll have to read up on those.

 

Beartooth, thanks for sharing different bike/dyno, but BigT's chart, very similar the tq/hp ratio ignoring the peak numbers, just as an experiment be real tempted to put a billet cat on & re-tune

 

Great info and thank you for posting. I don't think the AC costed you any torque, it appears to be a 5th gear run, a 6th gear run would have put the numbers nearly exactly were hdrider1's build landed here last week. Excellent consistency, especially considering the difference in altitude. Congratulations on a great build & tune!

 

I would agree with this statement, admittedly our original 124 testing was done last year late fall/early winter in nearly perfect conditions. The numbers change here as well as the season & weather changes one extreme to the next. This is specifically why are transparently with the info we share and continually add charts to our dyno charts page to allow users to develop a common denominator on what they can expect from their build.

 

I agree! The Billet Cat has some impressive performance, but my build is built and I'm going to go ride it! My performance upgrade budget is spent!

 

At this point, I am willing to verify your transparency! Good job Fuel Moto, and keep up the R&D!

 

Just mentioned as a thought ,big numbers repeated all good
Great pipe but not for me in reality already spent mine too FM pipes, was going S&S 475 as keeping stock heads here, but waiting for FM new woods cam release, sounds like a lot of development in it,aready sent inlet manifold to Wards.
Be an optimised package for my set up

 

Maybe Jamie can share with us what the design / performance objectives are for the new Woods cam. I think the 408 is a great cam for the 124, it's like a power cam with a good torque curve. I know they are still learning a lot about these M8 motors and it's hard for me to imagine improving the 408 cam , but I'll just wait and see. I'll be looking for some new charts by the end of the riding season just in time for building season.

 

That chart is for stock heads/springs with FM std Jackpot system & 64mm tb/ported intake