Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[+RO@D*R@GE+]

So my current set up I have on my 2012 cvo road glide: fullsac DX header and cross under with the 2.25 SD fullsac cores…performance is good but for me not enough sound And don’t like how it sounds on deceleration. So I was thinking of changing to some slip ons. I’m down to 2 CFR's and the supertrapp stouts from bagger nation (they take out the packing) I know the stouts by themselves give you around 9.6 hp gains  so they say on bagger nation (not sure how true that is).  So my question is does anyone have either the CFR"S with the fullsac DX header or the Supertrapp stouts from bagger nation with the same set up ? how do they sound vs the 2.25 sd cores.....I’m leaning towards the stouts  4 inch but I have never heard them in person just on you tube from bagger nation…..also would I have to change the map I have now to put these slip ons on? I’m guess with my map from fullsac now with the stage 1 with 2.25 would be fine but I’m not sure
I would love CFR’s on my bike I’ve heard them…they sound killer but the torque dip is too much for me just for sound so not sure I want to go that route
Thanks for any info in advance

for the supertrapp stouts

[Rio]

I had what you have on your bike and I felt the same way.  I kept the Fullsac X-Pipe and the TTS Mastertune, I sold my stock cans with the Fullsac 2.25 cores.  I have a set of CFR knockoffs for sale if you want to try them.   I bolted them on to hear them, then I listend to the sound clip you posted on you tube and got interested with the Kerker Stouts.  The CFR's are too really loud....really really loud, and I like loud.  The Kerker Stouts are "perfect" loud and you do NOT have to pull the packing out.  I left mine in and they sound exactly the same, in fact I posted a you tube sound clip of my bike in an earlier thread.  I pick my bike up from the tuner today.  He actually said that the canned TTS Map for the the Fullsac set up was pretty dead on, that I really didn't need to create a new map.  He said he may be able to get me 4 more HP and work on the curve, but he said it looked good.  I had him go ahead and do it because I want to see the power curve for myself and compare it to the previous.  I'm guessing it will be dead on close.  I would go with the Stouts, but if you want to try the CFR's, I have them listed for $150, you can do what i did, bolt them on to hear them and make a decision.  Good luck, I will let you know the outcome when i pick my bike up later today.

I think I answered all your questions?

[Rio]

I got my bike tuned today. They Re. Tts dealer but they aren't big on the system?  Anyway, I went from 84hp to 89hp, forgot what the torque was but its at 103 ft lbs now with the Kerker Stouts

[atomic orange]

I have FuelMoto headers with the fullsize crossover. I also have the Supertrapp Stout (95-09).
The mufflers are not from BaggerNation, they are from Supertrapp directly.
Sound....they are definitely not too quiet. These are louder than my Supertrapp SE's.
Quieter than Rineharts. I am glad I did not go with louder mufflers.
To me, these mufflers sound quite good.
No second thoughts. I would do this same set up again.
Different note; my 2013 CVO Road Glide hauls ass, even compared to my modified 2010 Road King.

[Rio]

84hp to 89hp is that right? with the dx headers and fullsac setup you should be around 95 or so I think maybe I'm wrong
at least it went up that's a good sign

I'm going to try and remove the packing 1st from my stock mufflers and fullsac 2.25 SD cores
if I don't like it then I'm going with the stouts

I don't remember what the fullsac numbers were, but these are the numbers with the X-Pipe,TTS tuner, and the Kerker Stout mufflers on a stock 110 engine?  
Previous: 83.61  Max torque 95.27
Now: 88.05 with Max torque at 102.39

Previously, I had the stock cans with the 2.25 cores no wrap, bike wasn't tuned, just a canned map?  According to these numbers, this is a huge drop from what is posted with 95HP and 113ft lbs torque?  Something has got to be wrong, Im confused because I didn't feel any power change?

[Rio]

OK, I will admit to being stupid when it comes to this stuff and I'm certainly not interested in racing my bike, however I do want the power and ability to pass someone up on a two lane road without having to downshift.  I'm confused, HD website boast 115 ft lb of torque at 4000 RPM stock, FUllsac states the Stage 1 kit gives you 98hp and 113 ft lbs of torque.  I went from the fullsac x-pipe, 2.25 cores and it read 83hp and 95.27 max torque, added kerker stout mufflers and it went to 88 hp and 102.39 max torque?  What am I missing here?  Is there different ways to measure these statistics? 

[Midnight Rider]

OK, I will admit to being stupid when it comes to this stuff and I'm certainly not interested in racing my bike, however I do want the power and ability to pass someone up on a two lane road without having to downshift.  I'm confused, HD website boast 115 ft lb of torque at 4000 RPM stock, FUllsac states the Stage 1 kit gives you 98hp and 113 ft lbs of torque.  I went from the fullsac x-pipe, 2.25 cores and it read 83hp and 95.27 max torque, added kerker stout mufflers and it went to 88 hp and 102.39 max torque?  What am I missing here?  Is there different ways to measure these statistics? 

The HD statistics are measured at the crankshaft, not the rear wheel, thus the claim of 115 TQ on a stock engine.  You lose a lot through the drivetrain.  The Stage I from Fullsac gives between 94-98 HP and 108-114 TQ, depending on a number of factors when the Dyno run is done....those are "typical" results.

This is just a guess, but did the guy do the pulls in 4th gear?  If so, that explains the low numbers.  4th gear pulls were what they did when the transmissions were 5 speed. 6 speeds should be done in 5th gear.  I'm sure there is a way to calculate what the numbers would be in 5th gear, but I'm no math wizard so won't even attempt to answer that little problem.

There are more knowledgeable people on here concerning this stuff, so perhaps one will chime in.  If I were a betting man, I'd say they did the pulls in 4th gear though...

[Rio]

The HD statistics are measured at the crankshaft, not the rear wheel, thus the claim of 115 TQ on a stock engine.  You lose a lot through the drivetrain.  The Stage I from Fullsac gives between 94-98 HP and 108-114 TQ, depending on a number of factors when the Dyno run is done....those are "typical" results.

This is just a guess, but did the guy do the pulls in 4th gear?  If so, that explains the low numbers.  4th gear pulls were what they did when the transmissions were 5 speed. 6 speeds should be done in 5th gear.  I'm sure there is a way to calculate what the numbers would be in 5th gear, but I'm no math wizard so won't even attempt to answer that little problem.

There are more knowledgeable people on here concerning this stuff, so perhaps one will chime in.  If I were a betting man, I'd say they did the pulls in 4th gear though...

Hey MIDNIGHT, glad to see the site addition is still there even though you sold your scooter!  If you were a betting man, you would win, they did pull the numbers in 4th gear but I'm not sure why that would make a difference....but then again I'm not very mechanically inclined?

[Midnight Rider]

Hey MIDNIGHT, glad to see the site addition is still there even though you sold your scooter!  If you were a betting man, you would win, they did pull the numbers in 4th gear but I'm not sure why that would make a difference....but then again I'm not very mechanically inclined?

I don't know all the details involved, but it has to do with the ratios in the transmission, the time factor involved in getting from the beginning RPM to the maximum RPM (longer time in 5th than 4th results in more stable A/F ratios).  You can get even bigger numbers in 6th gear, but the speeds at the rear tire become kinda dangerous, so the "compromise" is to pull in the next to highest gear.  The 4th gear run is probably why your TQ/HP lines are "wavy" as compared to a 5th gear pull, which would result in a more stable (less wavy) line.

As I said, there are others here who can probably calculate the difference (in %) between 4th and 5th.  A round number I've read would be about 5%, so your TQ would be in the neighborhood of 110 ft lbs, which I would consider to be within the "normal" range considering the modifications you've done to the bike.

Hopefully, somebody like GRC (Jerry), Doc1, or some of the other tuners on here will pipe up (no pun intended) and do a better job of explaining this than I am capable of doing.

This is my opinion, but you mention wanting to be able to pass on a two lane road without downshifting...again, IMO, if my RPM was 2200 or higher, I would not hesitate to pass in 6th gear, as that is when the stock 255 cams start really starts coming in, up to about 4K RPM.  I PERSONALLY think rolling on the throttle and putting a big load on the engine at anything below 2200 is not a good idea and borders on lugging the engine, which is a bad thing to do to a HD.  Gradually increasing speed from 2000 RPM without putting undue stress on the engine because of loading is fine, but if I'm running 2K in 6th gear and want to do something in a hurry, I'm going to drop down a gear and make it happen faster.  That's just how I ride though...others do differently.  I just do not like to even come close to lugging my motor, so err on the side of higher RPMs, within reason, of course.  Again, IMO, there is never a need to wind it up to 6K unless you are in a race.  I have DONE it, but don't make a practice of it.

[Fired00d]

.....

This is my opinion, but you mention wanting to be able to pass on a two lane road without downshifting...again, IMO, if my RPM was 2200 or higher, I would not hesitate to pass in 6th gear, as that is when the stock 255 cams start really starts coming in, up to about 4K RPM.  I PERSONALLY think rolling on the throttle and putting a big load on the engine at anything below 2200 is not a good idea and borders on lugging the engine, which is a bad thing to do to a HD.  Gradually increasing speed from 2000 RPM without putting undue stress on the engine because of loading is fine, but if I'm running 2K in 6th gear and want to do something in a hurry, I'm going to drop down a gear and make it happen faster.  That's just how I ride though...others do differently.  I just do not like to even come close to lugging my motor, so err on the side of higher RPMs, within reason, of course.  Again, IMO, there is never a need to wind it up to 6K unless you are in a race.  I have DONE it, but don't make a practice of it.

I agree w/the above 1000%... I'm not a pro (lot of knowledge or tuner) but I totally concur and would say that would be called staying "on the cam" IE: the most productive (TQ) part of it. You have to know your bike and know when to shift to keep the RPM's for desired purpose... if  you want to pass (no matter what gear) get into a gear that provides the RPM's that will provide the TQ needed.

 
Ride Safe,
Fired00d
 

[Rio]

Thanks guys.  At the end of the day, looks like they did a good job and I can recommend them with confidence.  Im happy, I love the sound of these mufflers, spring is here and we are 30 days out from our annual trip

[2013SERG]

I was hoping that Steve would have chimed in, I always love his comical approach to: We Want it LOUDER Or, It's not loud enough for me/Threads