Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 2 3 [4]  All

Author Topic: MoCo gave us 2 types of 110 engines in 2014 - one concidered a new design  (Read 15891 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

MrSurly

  • Formidable Faux
  • Elite CVO Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 790
    • TX

Re: MoCo gave us 2 types of 110 engines in 2014 - one concidered a new design
« Reply #45 on: September 20, 2013, 11:17:19 AM »


When I picked up the bike, I let my brother ride it part way home.  (The only other person who will ever ride my bike).  He has Fat Boy and he definitely noticed the extra heat on the right side coming from the pipes.
Please clarify this statement? He noticed the extra heat of your bike, or has previously noticed it on the FatBoy?

AFAIK, the twin cooling was not designed as a heat management solution per se, but a way to further tweak the torque.  What I mean is they weren't necessarily trying to solve a heat problem, but introducing a new feature that allows better performance. 
My understanding is that they did not do this for heat mgmt OR performance. They did this SOLELY to control NOX emissions to comply with impending mandates. Any gain in performance or comfort was lagniappe (welcome, of course.)
This was thrust upon us (and them) much as catalytic converters, but this time we may get some gains as an aside.
Logged
Rhetorical questions, who needs 'em?

2010FLHTCUSE5
Dethroned Garage Queen, Sullied 2013

AMEDD_SFC

  • Senior CVO Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 479
  • 2014 CVO Limited
    • TX


    • CVO1: 2014 CVO Limited - The Big Red One
Re: MoCo gave us 2 types of 110 engines in 2014 - one concidered a new design
« Reply #46 on: September 20, 2013, 03:38:39 PM »

Please clarify this statement? He noticed the extra heat of your bike, or has previously noticed it on the FatBoy?

He noticed a great deal more heat on the CVO as compared with his FB.

My understanding is that they did not do this for heat mgmt OR performance. They did this SOLELY to control NOX emissions to comply with impending mandates. Any gain in performance or comfort was lagniappe (welcome, of course.)
This was thrust upon us (and them) much as catalytic converters, but this time we may get some gains as an aside.

Can't comment further on this due to my ignorance on the subject.  I Thought I recalled discussion on this board stating that the TC was for a performance tweak to get more torque.  Though if it's a emissions thing, wouldn't all the bikes have to start having it?  Regardless, I couldn't get the CVO without it, so there I am.

I am not much of a motor head.  I just like to ride.  I have had several varied bikes over the years. Never had a new one. I was just tired of compromising so I got the "bells and whistles" version.  I just want it to run trouble free for a long time.  And, of course, the verdict is still out on that account.  Warranty, extended warranty, blah, blah....

Thanks for your input.

Regards,

M

SFC, USA (RET)
Logged

Mark B.
SFC, USA (RET)
Pages: 1 2 3 [4]  All
 

Page created in 0.128 seconds with 21 queries.