Topic: Expected more (Read 6369 times)

Zinister · « **on:** March 25, 2011, 11:50:05 PM »

Over the winter I did some work on my 09 springer. I installed 408-6 roller rockers and roller lifters as well as 10.5:1 pistons and 50 mm throttle body. I also had the heads done locally. The bike is still in the shop but on the dyno its only 107 HP & 125 Tq. I had Bub 7 slip ons and the mechanic thinks the exhaust is my problem. I was expecting at least 125 and 125. Is this expecting too much?

Doc 1 · « **Reply #1 on:** March 26, 2011, 07:59:08 AM »

Quote from: Zinister on March 25, 2011, 11:50:05 PM

Over the winter I did some work on my 09 springer. I installed 408-6 roller rockers and roller lifters as well as 10.5:1 pistons and 50 mm throttle body. I also had the heads done locally. The bike is still in the shop but on the dyno its only 107 HP & 125 Tq. I had Bub 7 slip ons and the mechanic thinks the exhaust is my problem. I was expecting at least 125 and 125. Is this expecting too much?

What is your displacment?

Zinister · « **Reply #2 on:** March 26, 2011, 09:01:32 AM »

110ci with 0.010 to clean up the cyl.

timtoolman · « **Reply #3 on:** March 26, 2011, 10:15:00 AM »

erniezap · « **Reply #4 on:** March 26, 2011, 11:38:46 AM »

I would think maybe 115-120/125-130

Doc 1 · « **Reply #5 on:** March 26, 2011, 11:51:16 AM »

Quote from: Zinister on March 26, 2011, 09:01:32 AM

110ci with 0.010 to clean up the cyl.

I'm not a big fan of the Bub7 exhaust system and I'm sure you are suffering some Horsepower over them however not 20 hp. I think your numbers are great for a 110''....very rarley do I see one get over 120tq and most 110'' have a hard time breaking 100 hp....so all in all I think you have a winner there.
Doc

Zinister · « **Reply #6 on:** March 26, 2011, 01:50:57 PM »

Doc,

I agree with you if you don't add pistons but, I was expecting at least 120/120.

I don't like the looks of the 2-1 exhaust. Knowing that what is the best performing 2-2 exhaust. I have been told not Big Radius. Damn more money!!!

HD Street Performance · « **Reply #7 on:** March 26, 2011, 02:47:57 PM »

Put Cycle Shacks on the stock headpipes. It will perform better. You can play with the baffles too and IME that means drilling added holes, but be prepared to go back if they don't help, it can create a torque dip. I have not had any luck bending the tabs, but more noise and less power.
The best results I have had on any 110 build is using the TW8 or TW5 depending on the compression and level of headwork. The 5 has produced 114/123 SAE hitting 100 at 2,300 and the 8 129/129 SAE @ 10.35:1 on a 113" with 110 heads. Another worthy example is one I posted here that made 122/122 flat as a pancake torque curve but that was with a TW400. The trend I think between all of these is the motors seem to like to be shorted on cam timing from what is typically considered normal for a motor this size. Less overlap.

hornhonker · « **Reply #8 on:** March 26, 2011, 03:35:35 PM »

107 seems pretty good if you are still using the SE255 cams..

grc · « **Reply #9 on:** March 26, 2011, 03:47:50 PM »

Quote from: hornhonker on March 26, 2011, 03:35:35 PM

107 seems pretty good if you are still using the SE255 cams..

I think he said he was running the Wood 408 cams.

Jerry

timtoolman · « **Reply #10 on:** March 26, 2011, 07:02:02 PM »

the woods 408 and 400-6 both will get you there , head work required, I know this to be a fact, you will get it keep trying, I used fulsac x head pipe and reinhart slipons though

strokerjlk · « **Reply #11 on:** March 26, 2011, 11:09:12 PM »

Quote from: Zinister on March 25, 2011, 11:50:05 PM

Over the winter I did some work on my 09 springer. I installed 408-6 roller rockers and roller lifters as well as 10.5:1 pistons and 50 mm throttle body. I also had the heads done locally. The bike is still in the shop but on the dyno its only 107 HP & 125 Tq. I had Bub 7 slip ons and the mechanic thinks the exhaust is my problem. I was expecting at least 125 and 125. Is this expecting too much?

I agree with the mech. pipes killed hp some. 125 square would require that all worked together well. heads set to achieve 10:7-10:8 and flowing good. pipe that breaths good,T/B improved upon.good tune.
good pipe and tune should put you in the 120's on hp

Steve Cole · « **Reply #12 on:** March 27, 2011, 01:17:36 PM »

Quote from: Zinister on March 26, 2011, 01:50:57 PM

Doc,

I agree with you if you don't add pistons but, I was expecting at least 120/120.

I don't like the looks of the 2-1 exhaust. Knowing that what is the best performing 2-2 exhaust. I have been told not Big Radius. Damn more money!!!

I would wait and go pick the bike up before doing anything more. Take it out for a ride and see if you enjoy what you have today. Chasing dyno numbers is just that......... chasing numbers. These guys are talking more compression to get better numbers and that brings along harder starting in warm to hot riding conditions, better fuel requirements and on and on. Just being run on a different dyno may yield better results. Take a look at what range you ride the bike in not what a dyno sheet says first. Then compare only that area of the dyno sheet. I see way to many guys get wrapped up chasing numbers these days who will never even use the extra 5 HP as it's in an RPM range that you do not use. Remember that Torque is what gets a load moving and an engine with better Torque in the RPM range you ride in is going to feel and perform the best, unless of coarse you plan on drag racing your bike.

HILLSIDECYCLE.COM · « **Reply #13 on:** March 27, 2011, 07:32:39 PM »

Have seen 107"ers on several dynos that roll off 120/120 with relative ease, Wood 400, 408, or 9B.
Not any news to us with that displacement as we had sen that here, carbed, over 10 years ago, 9B's.
Ad 3 more cubes and it'll show 3 more hp/torque.

Scott

Zinister · « **Reply #14 on:** March 27, 2011, 08:30:31 PM »

Scott,

What do you think my problem is? I know dynos are a fickle but I was comparing this to a friends bike with less compression and a milder cam. I put a 50mm Screaming eagle TB that I don't think he put on. Do you think it could be all in the exhaust? I have Bub 7 slip ons with the stock header pipes. What 2-2 pipe have you seen the best sucess with?

I will probably ride it this way for a bit and see how it runs before switching to a new exhaust system. I like the looks of the Rinehart crossbacks, how do they perform?

eleft36 · « **Reply #15 on:** March 27, 2011, 09:13:43 PM »

Quote from: Steve Cole on March 27, 2011, 01:17:36 PM

I would wait and go pick the bike up before doing anything more. Take it out for a ride and see if you enjoy what you have today. Chasing dyno numbers is just that......... chasing numbers. These guys are talking more compression to get better numbers and that brings along harder starting in warm to hot riding conditions, better fuel requirements and on and on. Just being run on a different dyno may yield better results. Take a look at what range you ride the bike in not what a dyno sheet says first. Then compare only that area of the dyno sheet. I see way to many guys get wrapped up chasing numbers these days who will never even use the extra 5 HP as it's in an RPM range that you do not use. Remember that Torque is what gets a load moving and an engine with better Torque in the RPM range you ride in is going to feel and perform the best, unless of coarse you plan on drag racing your bike.

Amen

Steve,
Not many listen to reality and logic.

Al

HILLSIDECYCLE.COM · « **Reply #16 on:** March 28, 2011, 07:25:35 AM »

Quote from: Zinister on March 27, 2011, 08:30:31 PM

Scott,

What do you think my problem is? I know dynos are a fickle but I was comparing this to a friends bike with less compression and a milder cam. I put a 50mm Screaming eagle TB that I don't think he put on. Do you think it could be all in the exhaust? I have Bub 7 slip ons with the stock header pipes. What 2-2 pipe have you seen the best sucess with?

I will probably ride it this way for a bit and see how it runs before switching to a new exhaust system. I like the looks of the Rinehart crossbacks, how do they perform?

What do the heads flow?? Intake/exhaust?
That 50 is probably pinching things, as we are using 55mm HPI's on our 98" Hi-Output set-ups now.
What is the ccp?
We see that D&D pipes work very well, as does 2/1 Supertrapps.

Scott

HD Street Performance · « **Reply #17 on:** March 28, 2011, 12:33:02 PM »

I would not speculate about the heads even if I had flow sheets, just me I guess.
I have made 1.14+ hp and tq / cu.in. on these motors consistently even with heads that flowed 15cfm less then the stock CVO head, and with a flat as a pancake torque curve. Just creates a slippery slope to specualte on the heads.

timtoolman · « **Reply #18 on:** March 31, 2011, 12:54:15 PM »

Its depending on how much the tuner did, was it a "full tune," or just a "fluff" tune

Zinister · « **Reply #19 on:** April 07, 2011, 07:53:10 PM »

The mech put a tapered 2-2 cycleshack exhaust and it showed 222 Hp and 126 Tq. Guess that means the Bub7 slip ons are my problem. The Cycle shack was a 2 in. stepped header set.

Anyone have suggestions on what 2-2 exhaust to get. I would like to perform at least as well as the Cycleshacks.

SEgle · « **Reply #20 on:** April 08, 2011, 06:29:40 AM »

i use the Bassani Pro Streets on my 09 Springer.

Angry Pirate · « **Reply #21 on:** April 15, 2011, 12:46:24 PM »

Quote from: Zinister on March 26, 2011, 01:50:57 PM

Doc,

I agree with you if you don't add pistons but, I was expecting at least 120/120.

I don't like the looks of the 2-1 exhaust. Knowing that what is the best performing 2-2 exhaust. I have been told not Big Radius. Damn more money!!!

I have the Drag Specialties Staggered Duals (made by V&H) with the "quiet baffles" (not that quiet) for added back pressure. The look like dual pipes but have and X in the middle that you can't see. Searched around on the net and got them for $375 two years ago. Can't remember where. Run great and sound awesome with the baffles. THe X runs smoother than the big radius I ad on my Night Train and way better flow than the stock exhaust.

DesertHOG · « **Reply #22 on:** April 15, 2011, 05:25:44 PM »

What ci?
What cams?
What altitude?
What humidty?

Lots of variables.

Similar work on mine less high compression pistons resulted 104HP 105TQ at 6200ft

Rooster · « **Reply #23 on:** April 15, 2011, 06:01:32 PM »

Quote from: Zinister on April 07, 2011, 07:53:10 PM

The mech put a tapered 2-2 cycleshack exhaust and it showed 222 Hp and 126 Tq. Guess that means the Bub7 slip ons are my problem. The Cycle shack was a 2 in. stepped header set.

Anyone have suggestions on what 2-2 exhaust to get. I would like to perform at least as well as the Cycleshacks.

222hp WOOOOOHOOOOO

Zinister · « **Reply #24 on:** April 17, 2011, 06:23:46 PM »

Lol, 122 HP doesn't sound as good but......

Zinister · « **Reply #25 on:** April 17, 2011, 06:31:49 PM »

DesertHog, did you look at the previous posts as all but the Elevation has been given.....640 ft above sea level. I don't have the dyno graph as I'm traveling for work but will post it when I get back.

scj · « **Reply #26 on:** April 20, 2011, 07:52:55 AM »

What size injectors are you using with the 50mm TB?

The TTS gives you a calculator and I believe you'll need 5.3's to break the 120 HP mark.

RayG · « **Reply #27 on:** April 20, 2011, 11:08:48 AM »

Are Bub 7 slip on's very close to the RHTD set up?

Thanks

Author Topic: Expected more (Read 6369 times)