Print

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

[CVOJOE]

Engine               Twin Cam 96             Twin Cam 103           Twin Cam 110
Displacement   96.0 in.             103.0 in.                     110.0 in.
Bore x Stroke   3.75 in. x 4.38 in.       3.87 x 4.37in.         4.00 in. x 4.38 in.
Torque              92.6 ftlbs@3500rpm      100 ftlbs@3500rpm   115ftlbs@3000 rpm
Fuel System      (ESPFI)              (ESPFI)               (ESPFI)      
Comp. Ratio      9.2:1              9.0:1                9.3:1             
Miles/Gallon      45hwy/32.5 city        46hwy/34city            53.5 hwy/37.7city
Primary Drive     Chain               Chain              Chain
Gear Ratios (overall)                                           
  1st              9.312              10.110                     9.312
  2nd             6.421              6.958                     6.421
  3rd             4.774               4.953                     4.774
  4th             3.926             3.862                     3.926
  5th             3.279              3.150                   3.279
  6th             2.790               N/A                        2.790
                    

[BLM777]

Might be good to remind everyone that these are HD dyno numbers represented as "Engine Torque" and not comparable to the real dyno numbers as posted throughout the site as measured at the rear wheel.  I suspect they will be more like 80,85 and 90, respectively.

[grc]

Might be good to remind everyone that these are HD dyno numbers represented as "Engine Torque" and not comparable to the real dyno numbers as posted throughout the site as measured at the rear wheel.  I suspect they will be more like 80,85 and 90, respectively.

Bill,

I think you might be going too conservative on your estimates.  I would "guesstimate" something more like this:  TC96 - 81.5 ft-lb, TC103 - 88 ft-lb, TC110 - 101 ft-lb.  

Over the years I've compared the H-D crankshaft numbers to those in various rear wheel dyno charts, and it seems like the difference is normally in the 10% to 12% range.  My guesstimates listed above are 88% of the crank numbers.  BTW - love the fact that the MoCo figured out we wanted the torque at lower rpms.  Should make a significant "seat-of-the-pants" difference, I would think.

Jerry

[BLM777]

Going to be interesting to see.  One of my best bud's is the premier dyno man in these parts and will give me the stock numbers as soon as he starts running the '07's prior to intake, exhaust and cam mod's.  Will also be interesting to see what the mod's do with these new CI motors.

[SBB]

CVOJoe

do these #'s from your post represent all the same stroke?

your quote,             96                          103                         110
 Bore x Stroke   3.75 in. x 4.38 in.       3.87 x 4.37in.         4.00 in. x 4.38 in.

[CVOJOE]

Took the numbers off the '07 specs on the web, and 103" off my spec sheet, but will take another look at them to see if there is a typo, etc.

Joe

[arcticdude]

One more change to add, the torque of the 103 hits at 4000 rpm, not 3500.  That's why the six will work great in the 110, but not so well in a 103.

[kng103]

One more change to add, the torque of the 103 hits at 4000 rpm, not 3500.  That's why the six will work great in the 110, but not so well in a 103.

just do the 3.37 gear change, and the six speed is a pleasure!!! [smiley=huepfenjump3.gif]

[ace4059]

Can anyone explain the why the 110 supposedly gets better EPA gas mileage estimate than the 103? If it is due to the 6 speed tranny, then why does the 96 w/ 6 speed get less than last years 88 w/ 5 speed. Doesn't make sense to me.

[grc]

Can anyone explain the why the 110 supposedly gets better EPA gas mileage estimate than the 103? If it is due to the 6 speed tranny, then why does the 96 w/ 6 speed get less than last years 88 w/ 5 speed. Doesn't make sense to me.

ace,

You're not the only one who wonders about that.  The only thing that I can think of that could possibly explain it is the torque curve on the 110 - peak torque comes in at 3000 rpm versus 3500+ on the 103 - and the closed-loop EFI.  By definition, an engine is most efficient when it's producing peak torque, and the closed-loop system should also improve fuel economy by optimizing the A/F.  Of course, I still won't believe it until we get reports back from real owners.

Jerry

[arcticdude]

I am looking and the FXD Dyna Super Glide specs and it shows 92.0@3000 torque figure and 53.0hwy/34.0 city??  Someplace some numbers got off a little!  I expect you'll find that you need to compare model to model more than engine to engine with the way the moco posts it's "specs".  As long as you're in the same LINE, you should be okay, but otherwise you're comparing apples to pomegranates!

[arcticdude]

Also, look at the final drive ratios, you're going from a 3.15 103 to a 2.79 110.  Pretty easy to see why the 110 gets better fuel mileage.

[ace4059]

I am looking and the FXD Dyna Super Glide specs and it shows 92.0@3000 torque figure and 53.0hwy/34.0 city??  Someplace some numbers got off a little!  I expect you'll find that you need to compare model to model more than engine to engine with the way the moco posts it's "specs".  As long as you're in the same LINE, you should be okay, but otherwise you're comparing apples to pomegranates!

If you just look at the EPA estimates for the Ultra  model for '06 88" vs '06 103" vs '07 96" vs '07 110" you will see what I am talking about. I realize you have to compare bikes of the same weight. Both '06 models had the 5 speed tranny and both "07 models (CVO and non CVO) have the 6 speed. So the EPA descrepancies cant be attributed to the tranny. If these estimates just serve as a guide to the relative actual MPG that you will get in the real world then the new 96" really sucks when it comes to gas mileage (literally)!

[475wildey]

anyone know what t.b. and injecters there useing on the 110???

[CVOJOE]

Haven't seen any details on the 110" throttle body published anywhere. But the injectors are new. "25-degree fuel injector nozzles offer better fuel atomization and spray targeting than the previous 8-degree injectors, and help reduce exhaust emissions and improve driveability. A new O2 feedback sensor in the exhaust helps fine-tune EFI performance and reduce exhaust emissions."

A lot of the improved (EPA) mileage estimates can be attributed to the improved EFI and the new transmission and gear set that supposedly reduces engine RPM by 11% on the highway. IMHO.
Joe