I find your reported engine temperatures almost more unbelievable than the 58 mpg! 240? 250? 260? How?!

I'm running some similar-ish testing since I installed the Smart Tune Pro and got a wideband tune from FuelMoto for the PV. Just ran the first big run today, 100+ miles. Engine temperatures start at 100 and climb steadily as you'd expect, but man, they don't stop anywhere near 250. 250 is as I'm just heading out of my neighborhood. By the time I hit the freeway onramp it's usually already 280+, and shortly thereafter it settles in to around 310-320 for most of the trip, regardless of whether it's freeway speed, stop and go, whatever. By the end of the trip and a lot of idling it got to 329.

Granted, our ambient air temperature here of 100 degrees might have something to do with it!

 

Your ambient temperature has a LOT to do with it! If the heat produced by the engine's operation is enough to raise the engine temperature, say for example only by 200 degrees F over ambient air, and the ambient temperature is (like mine during the rides) about 66 F, then the engine temp will get to 200 + 66 = 266. But if YOUR ambient temperature is 100F, then 200 +100 = 300 f !

Plus, you were not riding gently like I was. I needed to ride gently as explained earlier to keep the sequence of tests on a common basis. But you instead likely had to accelerate often, had to pass cars, maybe ran into traffic, etc. Notice that I mentioned above that when I did my aggressive ride to fill in as many boxes as possible on the "recording" table, my fuel mileage dropped by several mpg AND, I did not mention above, my engine temperature at one point hit 290 during that aggressive ride. Remember, these are NOT thermostatically controlled engines. They are air and oil cooled, and the "cooling" oil has been pre-heated by the hot engine and specifically also by the exhaust valves by which the oil is forced to run!

So, you are comparing apples to oranges!

Jim G

 

By the way, FatBob2018, when I owned my 2014 Breakout, I lived in Austin, Texas, so I know the temperature conditions in Texas, and especially about the REALLY bad summer weather in Houston (high temperatures AND high humidity!). Austin wasbad enough - lotsof 100+ F days there. Mike Lozano installed an oil cooler on my 2014 Twin Cam Stage 4 engine because it was obvious it needed one!

Those days, we had no Bluetooth tuners so I do not know how hot that engine got, but I am sure it was pretty hot.

Jim G

 

Found the updated S1 in my files folder after reconnecting the app. I haven’t looked at it on the Pc, but the gauges are working now too.

Bike has 2k on it now and has been wonderful, clutch and trans are silky and the engine doesn’t use a drip of oil.

2k is my line for warranty voiding, so I’ll be moving on to a PV tuner and riot pipe from FM. I’m done with the SE stuff, some have had good luck and good power numbers by tricking the software, load a S4 into a S3 and dyno time. I’ve been using PV software on my other bikes and FM has never let me down.

Good luck Jim, you provided lots of good information from detailed posting.

 

Apparently confirmed: Smart Tune DID improve fuel mileage

Earlier, I posted that the Smart Tune process did improve fuel mileage on my standard 80.5 km = 50 mile test loop. This monring, that mpg improvement manifested on a 204.5 km = 127 mile ride, first westward and then eastward, in a 13 kph = 8 mpg north westerly wind that was, per the regional weather record, gusting to 23 kmp = 14 mph. The speed was held to exactly 97 kph = 60 mpg via cruise control. The 204.5 km included about 18 km = 9% of unavoidable city traffic (6km at each end of the trip, plus just over 6 km midway).

In 204.5 km, the bike consumed 8.5 liters, which means 4.16 L / 100 km = 56.5 US miles / gal., even absorbing the unfavourable 9% city travel.

The "Range" reading after the fill-up showed 480 km. This is the best "Range" figure the bike has ever displayed. This is significant, because the return trip, having a crosswind / tailwind angle of wind, would naturally have gotten slightly better mpg than the outgoing trip, which would be reflected to a partial extent in this dynamic Range number. i.e. The return trip would have generated a higher "Range" value than the outgoing trip on its own, but because I did not fill up between the outgoing and return segments (no handy gas station and it was starting to rain so I had to hightail it back toward home!), the Range number is instead a "mix" of the lower outgoing range and the higher return range.

The Breakout tank holds 19 liters. So, a Range =4 80 means 19 L / 480 km = 3.96 L/100 km, which translates to 59.4 miles / US gallon! Tantalizingly close to 60 mpg, which beats many small displacement lightweight motorcycles! Too bad I was unable to refill the tank midway to separate the outgoing and return ranges. An "undiluted" return range would possibly have been even higher than the 480 TOTAL range number.

Again, before wondering why your HD does not get close to 60 miles / US gallon, remember that I was able on this trip to keep the cruise control engaged for all but 18 km of the trip at a steady 60 mph. In most real world riding, this kind of steady state operation is not practical beyond short test sections, AND many (most?) HD riders travel faster when given the opportunity to do so.

Jim G

 

Working on finishing up tuning my bike with the Smart Tune Pro and PowerVision. On the way home I set the cruise at 60 mph on a long level road, and the mpg showed about 59 mpg.

Prior to these tuning sessions, I was averaging 44 mpg. Best I've ever seen out of a tank was 51 mpg. That 59 during cruising is outstanding, but it remains to be seen how real-world conditions affect it. Now I gotta quit doing tuning runs and just let it run through a tank and see what the reality is.

Also, MPG generally goes up in hotter weather and down in colder weather, and it can't get much hotter here...

 

See, the latest Harley engines are NOT inefficient relics of the past. They CAN be remarkably efficient.

Jim G

 

I hope you post some further data on the gas mileage. I find that increase an interestingly attractive point.

While I'm never adverse to an increase in power, on my Harley(s) I've never been willing to give up the broad powerband and stock gas mileage for a power bump. Your data so far has me intrigued.

 

Foxtrapper, you are going to love this: I did a 121.1 km = 75 mile ride this morning, at a cruise-controlled 97 kph = 60 mph for most of it, and the fuel mileage numbers were as follows:

4.8 L / 121.1 km = 3.96 L // 100km = 59.4 mi / US gal. Range shown on the instrument display after the refill of gas was 450 km = 279 miles.

Again, just a frustratingly close 0.6 mpg below the magical 60 mpg purely fanciful target that I never seriously considered I could hit with a 117 inch Harley.

I MIGHT even possibly have hit it if:

- I had not diverted off the highway to see what the town of Magrath, Alberta looked like (noted VERY wide business AND residential streets for a small town!)

- If I had not had to get brake down to under 50 kph = 30 mph and then re-accelerate on 2 separate occasions during the ride where the police had stopped a vehicle presumably for speeding, with one stop using TWO police cruisers for some reason. In Alberta, we are required to slow down to no more than 60 kph maximum when passing by a stopped vehicle or police car on the highway

Still, 59.4 miles / US gallon is impressive, especially when repeated now twice, not just a fluky single run, AND this run was done with an 11 kph head crosswind / then tail crosswind, with gusts up to 23 kph occurring non-stop.

Note that this wqas done at 60 mph (2156 rpm in 6th gear on the 2023 Breakout 117), not the 40 or 45 mph typically used by testers trying for maximum mpg.

Yes, a Stage 1 setup enhanced by a Smart Tune seems to make a measurable improvement in fuel mileage.

Jim G

 

My LRS won't go 60mph. It goes faster than that while it's warming up, in neutral.