www.CVOHARLEY.com

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 [2] 3  All

Author Topic: The New Water Cooled 103  (Read 4809 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

BaggerProud

  • Full CVO Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 178

    • CVO1: 2005 FLHTCSE2 banana
    • CVO2: 1994 FXSTC
    • CVO3: 1983 XLX
Re: The New Water Cooled 103
« Reply #15 on: August 22, 2013, 11:53:24 AM »

I got the answer ...  :bananarock:

Have ya checked out the new Indians?? :zwtf:
« Last Edit: August 22, 2013, 01:32:28 PM by BaggerProud »
Logged

ridefar

  • Full CVO Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 224
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
Re: The New Water Cooled 103
« Reply #16 on: August 22, 2013, 01:04:37 PM »

$27,000 bike
68 hp = 393 dollars per horsepower.

Using that scenario a new Shelby at 662 hp should cost $260,166.00.

I guess that means customers are getting a deal on the new Shelby or the shaft on the new Harley.
  I love it you guys are spot on! Maybe the power requirement for all the new electronic gobbley-gook shoved into the dash robs the rear wheel horsepower. For comparison, this year BMW, who has been doing twins for 90 years now, liquid cooled the cylinder heads on the boxer for the first time in the GS model. The concept is similar, in that they are just cooling specific areas(no cooling jacket) and the liquid cooling amounts to just 13% overall. Had been 22% oil 78% air, now 22%oil cooling with 13% Liquid(ethyl glycol and H2O) plus 65%air cooling. They picked up 15 horsepower with this simple addition at 12.5 to 1 compression on a 1170cc displacement motor! Now BMW is just a pimple on Harley's ass in terms of world-wide sales so who has more resources for R&D than the MOCO. What the hell is their problem?
 :nixweiss:     :nixweiss:      :nixweiss:     :nixweiss:


SBB
Logged

Skipper

  • Junior CVO Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 93

    • CVO1: FLHTCUSE-6
Re: The New Water Cooled 103
« Reply #17 on: August 23, 2013, 10:43:53 AM »

I got the answer ...  :bananarock:

Have ya checked out the new Indians?? :zwtf:

I can't wait to see Dyno test from Indians 111" engine.
Logged
"F..@* the Rushmore's, I'm gonna keep my Babe"

HD Street Performance

  • Vendor
  • 1K CVO Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1617
Re: The New Water Cooled 103
« Reply #18 on: August 23, 2013, 11:15:15 AM »

I expect about 100hp at the rear wheel.
Logged

Skipper

  • Junior CVO Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 93

    • CVO1: FLHTCUSE-6
Re: The New Water Cooled 103
« Reply #19 on: August 23, 2013, 11:37:16 AM »

There you go. Than, my second "American" will be Indian.
Logged
"F..@* the Rushmore's, I'm gonna keep my Babe"

Steve Cole

  • 1K CVO Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1231
Re: The New Water Cooled 103
« Reply #20 on: August 23, 2013, 11:59:05 AM »

I hope that this bike comes back after they get some more miles on it, so we can do another set of dyno pulls. What I showed was the highest and lowest of the pulls we made. While I am not really impressed with what I saw, I still hold out a little hope that the numbers come up some after it gets more miles on it. Now, I'm not holding my breath but am willing to see what it does down the road. The problem is I cannot be assured they will bring it back by again. We will be running more of the new engines in the near future so we will see how they begin to fall in line a month or two down the road.
Logged
The Best you know, is the Best you've had........ not necessarily the Best.

electraglideclyde

  • Full CVO Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 187
  • FLHRSEI.ORG
    • GA

Re: The New Water Cooled 103
« Reply #21 on: August 23, 2013, 12:48:39 PM »

 Kinda reminds you of the AMF days, doesn't it. Put out a crap product and tell you how lucky you will be to have one. "You gotta love it, it's a Harley"  Just drink the Kool Aid and remember, the MOCO woudln't lie to you. Oh wait....that might have been the government.  :oops:
Logged
Hair of the Dog

North Georgia Hawg

  • Honey Badger Don't Give a CHIT...
  • 2.5K CVO Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3173
  • I love SUMMER!

    • CVO1: 2012 FLHXSE3 Hot Citrus/Antique Gunstock
    • CVO2: 2009 Chevy Avalanche LTZ Inferno Orange
    • CVO3: 2012 Kawasaki Ninja 650 Candy Lime Green (wife's bike)
Re: The New Water Cooled 103
« Reply #22 on: August 24, 2013, 09:44:41 AM »

I did a little math on the Limited:

This is just the bike:
896 lbs / 68.63 HP        = 13.06 lbs per HP
896 lbs / 84.51 lb ft TQ = 10.60 lbs per lb ft TQ

With a 200 lb rider, the numbers look like this:
1096 lbs / 68.63 HP        = 15.97 lbs per HP
1096 lbs / 84.51 lb ft TQ = 12.97 lbs per lb ft TQ

With a 200 lb rider, a 160 lb passenger, and 40 lbs worth of gear, the numbers look like this:
1296 lbs / 68.63 HP        = 18.88 lbs per HP
1296 lbs / 84.51 lb ft TQ = 15.34 lbs per lb ft TQ

Your performance may vary... but any way you slice it, that's gonna be a SLUG...

Ken
Logged

Honey Badger Don't Care...

TD AK-20s | Drago's S/C/S-4 | SE 259Es | Feuling 8015/7060/Rods | Black Ops Lifters
Cometics | Big Sucker 2 | WPW Fans | +1 Clutch | Hayden BT07 | ClutchWIZ | TTS
T-L P7 LEDs & Aux Lights | Tour Pak | WO 575s | RT 665 | Corbin DualTour
BAH Flush Front Axle | Chrome Calipers | Lyndall Gold+ Pads
The Wizard's Tune

porthole

  • 10K CVO Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10243
  • Welcome to the Machine

    • CVO1: 2005.3217-45 FLHTCSE2
    • Porthole II
Re: The New Water Cooled 103
« Reply #23 on: August 24, 2013, 10:07:08 AM »

I hope that this bike comes back after they get some more miles on it, so we can do another set of dyno pulls. What I showed was the highest and lowest of the pulls we made. While I am not really impressed with what I saw, I still hold out a little hope that the numbers come up some after it gets more miles on it. Now, I'm not holding my breath but am willing to see what it does down the road. The problem is I cannot be assured they will bring it back by again. We will be running more of the new engines in the near future so we will see how they begin to fall in line a month or two down the road.

I'm guessing this pull was bone stock,  nothing done at all. So, curious, what made more noise the exhaust or air cleaner?
That was the first thing I noticed when I rode my 05 home, I couldn't hear the exhaust and the air cleaner sounded like the old days of flipping the lid.
Logged
:fireman: Duane  :fireman:


MV 2013

1982 LowRider * 1974 XLCH * 1972 Adnoh
You can't control the weather, only how you deal with it

Steve Cole

  • 1K CVO Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1231
Re: The New Water Cooled 103
« Reply #24 on: August 24, 2013, 03:07:04 PM »

The dyno runs were bone stock bike in 5th gear. On our dyno that puts the new WC engine about the same as the 2011 - 2013 103 engine as far as HP and slightly higher in torque. Not enough of a difference to write home about and as a matter of fact I'm pretty sure most riders could not tell the difference. Being on th edyno the exhaust is always louder than the intake but on the road things change.
Logged
The Best you know, is the Best you've had........ not necessarily the Best.

brwk

  • Full CVO Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 194
  • Annv #782

    • CVO1: 2013 FLHTCUSE8
Re: The New Water Cooled 103
« Reply #25 on: August 24, 2013, 10:14:29 PM »

So actually with the high flow air and the new cam, the HD tax got a bit less (of course the bike price went up).  Now you might just need a tuner rather than all 3. 
Logged

grc

  • 10K CVO Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10230
  • AKA Grouchy Old Fart
    • IN


    • CVO1: 2005 SEEG2
Re: The New Water Cooled 103
« Reply #26 on: August 25, 2013, 09:47:21 AM »


I'm somewhat amazed and amused by all the "shocked" responses to the numbers.  Where have you guys been for the past 20 years?  This is just a continuation of the traditional Harley business model, where they charge you much more than the competition for a product that is much less than competitive, then they charge you a bunch more for upgrades and kits to possibly make the output competitive.  It's been that way for as long as I can remember, and I can't imagine the money grubbing management of that corporation changing the business model as long as they can find so many victims customers willing to be used and abused.

Jerry
Logged
Jerry - 2005 Cherry SEEG  -  Member # 1155

H-D and me  -  a classic love / hate relationship.  Current score:  love 40, hate 50, bewildered 10.

Dead_Reckoning

  • Elite CVO Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 594
  • 03 SERK
Re: The New Water Cooled 103
« Reply #27 on: August 25, 2013, 12:22:17 PM »

That's just embarrassingly lame for that many cubic inches.  Have seen 118 commonly cited for crank rating on the 1800 wing with 96-98 personally seen on a couple of unmolested bikes on different dynos.

I juent back and looked at my Dyno Numbers for my 03 SERK SE103. Before I did anything at all to it.

TQ - 82.89
HP - 81.33

Boy, HD sure has come along way in 11 years.
Any normal person would have thought that HD could have improved those OEM numbers greatly in 11 years.




Logged
Government is best which governs least.

Power Commander 3 Tuner
Doherty Power PACC with K&N Air Filter
Screamin' Eagle® Hydraulic Cam Chain Tensioner and High-Flow Oil Pump
Headwinds 2" Bullet Passing Lights 50w'
Progressive 440HD Shocks & Monotube Fork cartridges
Dual Bulb Halogen Headlamp Kit

Thermodyne

  • Full CVO Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 162

    • CVO1: 2000 FXR4
Re: The New Water Cooled 103
« Reply #28 on: August 25, 2013, 09:23:37 PM »

My 11 FLTRX 103 did 70.9 and 90.6 right before they delivered it to me.  And to be frank, it ran pretty bad back then.
Logged

kraut

  • 1K CVO Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1810
  • Ride & Have Fun

    • CVO1: FLHTCUSE4
    • Harley Café Dresden
Re: The New Water Cooled 103
« Reply #29 on: August 26, 2013, 11:10:32 AM »

hmmm, not so impressive numbers  ::)
Logged
CU on the road, Hans

Ride & Have Fun
Pages: 1 [2] 3  All
 

Page created in 0.143 seconds with 22 queries.