Flhxxx Fuel Mileage

[1550vt]

Just for comparison here, I am running and early TC-88 upgraded to a 95 stage II with some additional intake runner porting and V&H true duals.. It's likely making around the same power as the 96's out there....maybe a tad better. From what I have learned by reading posts all across the various forums, 31-33 highway is about as good as it gets with a trike out there in the wind. On 2-lane blacktops at 55-60 I can get close to 34-35 on average, but at 70+ on the Interstates, I drop down to closer to 31-32 and it does not seem to matter if I run in 5th. or 6th. I would rather have one with a fuel mileage problem than I would one getting 35-plus. To get the mileage you have to learn them out and goodness knows....these recent twin cams are already leaned out enough. I have a small aluminum auxiliary fuel tank and a fuel pump that holds 2-gallons and that is the only way I can run with these friends of mine having the 6-gallon tanks. I have the pump fed buy the ACC button on the dash and all I have to do is push it to transfer fuel. I have my range up there to around 225-240 depending on how I run.

This ad is not displayed to registered and logged-in members. Register your free account today and become a member on HD Forums!

[msocko3]

Originally Posted by 1550vt

Just for comparison here, I am running and early TC-88 upgraded to a 95 stage II with some additional intake runner porting and V&H true duals.. It's likely making around the same power as the 96's out there....maybe a tad better. From what I have learned by reading posts all across the various forums, 31-33 highway is about as good as it gets with a trike out there in the wind. On 2-lane blacktops at 55-60 I can get close to 34-35 on average, but at 70+ on the Interstates, I drop down to closer to 31-32 and it does not seem to matter if I run in 5th. or 6th. I would rather have one with a fuel mileage problem than I would one getting 35-plus. To get the mileage you have to learn them out and goodness knows....these recent twin cams are already leaned out enough. I have a small aluminum auxiliary fuel tank and a fuel pump that holds 2-gallons and that is the only way I can run with these friends of mine having the 6-gallon tanks. I have the pump fed buy the ACC button on the dash and all I have to do is push it to transfer fuel. I have my range up there to around 225-240 depending on how I run.

If you ride with me you wouldn't need the spare tank. I have a 6 gallon tank and have to stop every 140 miles for gas when running 70 - 75 mph freeway speeds. Mine isn't rich it's burning hot lean and under powered. I spend a good deal of the time with a lot of throttle opening to maintain 70 -75 mph when on the freeway in 6th gear. If I was to ditch the cat and fix the lean condition I would pick up power and fuel economy.

[msocko3]

Originally Posted by FLTR2008TRIKE

The torque figures Harley qoutes is measured from the crank. Not at the rear wheel. You typically lose 30% of the torque through the drive train

This is true, my point is the 103 in my 2010 TG is not making the power they claim. Its weak and not very impressive, only thing it does well is bake the rider. My dads 09 TG could kick its tail without a problem, I've ridden both and the 2010 is like it has a potato stuck up its back side. The Moco went and built a premium Trike and charged a premium price which I would expect to receive the premium value for the dollars I spent. It should have enough power to propel it self up a hill in 6th gear at 75 mph, it should get decent gas mileage, it should not burn the person riding it. When my pant leg reaches 140 degrees and it hurts I draw the line. All these things can be fixed. Only problem is if I fix them the way they should be done the Moco will not honor my power train warranty once they find out. There is a guy who has a SE Ultra that he put a power commander on. When a rep from the Moco found out about it they wanted the vin number so it could be flagged and the warranty voided.

They can do it and they can get away with it. The Magnuson Moss act don't protect people who tamper with emissions equipment. The Moco has folks by the short hairs and they know it. Who is willing to spend the thousands of dollars to fight them in court and then admit as a matter of court record that they knowingly tampered with emissions equipment, Uncle Samuel will eat that person alive once the court reports them.

[1550vt]

I would be honored to ride along with you msoko. Fact-of-the-matter is that I try to keep everybody stopping at around 100-125 miles. That is plenty long enough before a leg-stretch and a "comfort stop" is needed. I like the added range because I have been out there in the great hinterlands of the west riding by closed gas stations wondering how long I would be looking at that little amber fuel warning light before it all just shut down. I like that added insurance of my little spare tank and it has saved me more than once.

I can't help you with your 2010 though...good luck.

[oldmsocko]

We know the feeling about gas consumption. When we went to South Dakota last year we were lucky a couple times when we were short on gas. Msocko3 and I were just talking tonight about our planned trip to SD next year. We were both riding 06 Ultra Classics last year getting 42 to 44 mpg. Next year we will both be on a TG getting alot less mpg. We will need to pay more attention to the distance between gas stops. Stopping more often is way better than running out.

[1550vt]

There can be a lot of nothing between places out there in that part of the world and when you do find some, often it is like an 83 octane or some such stuff. A little 1-gallon plastic can from Wally-World could come in real handy. I am speaking as one that has ran out of gas before and it is not a comfortable feeling. I often short-pit when I don't have a feel for where I am. I had one guy with me once out there in Montana, that announced he still had 3/4 of a tank when we filled-up and he thought we were nuts and he needed no gas. Before we got to the next gas stop...his clothes were ringing wet with sweat, his hands were shaking and his seat almost had a hole in it from the pucker. Since then...when I get gas he gets gas.

[TheBobs]

First, I really love the forum. Lurked for quite a while before getting brave enough to pull the trigger and buy my own TG.

Common theme in most of the TG threads has been underwhelming power, overwhelming heat, and poor mileage. At about 1174 lbs, running a 103, kinda wasn't surprised. Mine's getting about 23-25, but I'm holding out hope for a post break-in mileage of the low 30's. Darn thing's hot too. But...

I rode a 2003 SE Road King. Put a bit over 20,000 miles on it, including a really cool cross country trip. It had a 103" from the factory, weighing in at about 810 lbs. Got about 32 mpg avg. The SERK motor ran relatively hot too, but not near as hot as this TG with its Cat. It had good power and was a good hill climber. Only 5 gears though...

To me the bottom line is that we have bone stock 103 in a ride that weighs 300+ lbs more than a RK or UC touring platform. The power to weight ratio alone puts us at a huge disadvantage. Then add the fact that our TGs are the aerodynamic equivalent to a tree stump. The peak torque is about 300 rpm too high for 6th gear on most (except in MT, AZ, NV, UT, NM) freeways. Finally, the clogged up exhaust.

But I live in California and I'm going to step away from any thoughts of modifying for now.

The TG puts a huge smile on my face. Every time the wife and I go for a spin, it's all good. Still very happy I pulled this trigger.

Steve and Jody

[oldmsocko]

Originally Posted by TheBobs

First, I really love the forum. Lurked for quite a while before getting brave enough to pull the trigger and buy my own TG.

Common theme in most of the TG threads has been underwhelming power, overwhelming heat, and poor mileage. At about 1174 lbs, running a 103, kinda wasn't surprised. Mine's getting about 23-25, but I'm holding out hope for a post break-in mileage of the low 30's. Darn thing's hot too. But...

I rode a 2003 SE Road King. Put a bit over 20,000 miles on it, including a really cool cross country trip. It had a 103" from the factory, weighing in at about 810 lbs. Got about 32 mpg avg. The SERK motor ran relatively hot too, but not near as hot as this TG with its Cat. It had good power and was a good hill climber. Only 5 gears though...

To me the bottom line is that we have bone stock 103 in a ride that weighs 300+ lbs more than a RK or UC touring platform. The power to weight ratio alone puts us at a huge disadvantage. Then add the fact that our TGs are the aerodynamic equivalent to a tree stump. The peak torque is about 300 rpm too high for 6th gear on most (except in MT, AZ, NV, UT, NM) freeways. Finally, the clogged up exhaust.

But I live in California and I'm going to step away from any thoughts of modifying for now.

The TG puts a huge smile on my face. Every time the wife and I go for a spin, it's all good. Still very happy I pulled this trigger.

Steve and Jody

Welcome to the forum and post often. By the way, I just love the color of your TG.

[msocko3]

Originally Posted by TheBobs

I rode a 2003 SE Road King. Put a bit over 20,000 miles on it, including a really cool cross country trip. It had a 103" from the factory, weighing in at about 810 lbs. Got about 32 mpg avg. The SERK motor ran relatively hot too, but not near as hot as this TG with its Cat. It had good power and was a good hill climber. Only 5 gears though...

You would have been amazed at what that 103 in the Road King would have done with a air cleaner, decent exhaust and a good tune. Around here they were getting 100ft/lb torque and high 90's hp with a few simple changes and a good tune. Would have seen an increase in fuel mileage providing the tuner did his job.

[TheBobs]

Welcome to the forum and post often. By the way, I just love the color of your TG.

It is awesome how it reacts with the sun. I loved the blue/silver after seeing it in person, but could not stand the salesman Ended up buying the red one at a small family owned dealer, where I took the SERK for all my maintenance.

You would have been amazed at what that 103 in the Road King would have done with a air cleaner, decent exhaust and a good tune. Around here they were getting 100ft/lb torque and high 90's hp with a few simple changes and a good tune. Would have seen an increase in fuel mileage providing the tuner did his job.

Sorry, I should have stated the mods on the SERK. The guy before me sunk some good money into it. It had a stage 1 air cleaner, Rinehart True Duals, HD R/T with a 104hp/108ft.lb. dyno tune. Again, all in at about 3900 rpm. Might have been lower with a 2 to 1 exhaust.

Steve