www.CVOHARLEY.com

Custom Vehicle Discussions => Screamin’ Eagle® Ultra Classic® Electra Glide® => Topic started by: GC_Super on September 05, 2005, 03:25:13 PM

Title: SE  Ultra/  Couple of obversations
Post by: GC_Super on September 05, 2005, 03:25:13 PM
Was looking thru some literature last nite and a couple of things caught my eye. One is the weight of the bike. It weighs in at a whopping 845 lbs,  57 lbs more than a standard Ultra.  All that bling bling is heavy.

Second, on page 51 of the screaming eagle catalog, they list all the cam specs, including the 253, which they used to keep secret for some reason.  When you see that cam compared to all the others, I can see why they kept it a secret.  LOL  What really stands out was the intake opening at  7 deg BTDC.  Also the duration is the longest of all their cams. No other cam is even close to single digits. Also on the right side of the page where they describe each cam, there is no mention of the 253.  For comparisons sake, I wish they would list the stock 88 cam just to see how they compare.  I assume the difference in the CVO cam is EPA mandated.
Title: Re: SE
Post by: GC_Super on September 05, 2005, 03:27:30 PM
How about observations?  [smiley=oops.gif]
Title: Re: SE
Post by: grc on September 05, 2005, 06:52:14 PM
Quote
Was looking thru some literature last nite and a couple of things caught my eye. One is the weight of the bike. It weighs in at a whopping 845 lbs,
Title: Re: SE
Post by: GC_Super on September 05, 2005, 07:18:55 PM
Thanks GRC, just checked it out.  The timing number is equally low, -02 for carb, +02 for efi.  Again, I'm sure the EPA makes the cams hard to build for power, although the stock 88 cams have always been pretty good for low end torque.  I'm still thinking the TW26 would be a pretty good choice for a bolt in to lower the power band with stock comp. Only cost a few hundred to find out.  [smiley=xyxthumbs.gif]
Title: Re: SE
Post by: Twolanerider on September 15, 2005, 01:01:08 AM
Quote
Was looking thru some literature last nite and a couple of things caught my eye. One is the weight of the bike. It weighs in at a whopping 845 lbs,
Title: Re: SE
Post by: displacing air on September 15, 2005, 08:47:24 AM
The lid of the tour pak could be ten pounds heavier by itself...at least it feals it.
Title: Re: SE
Post by: GC_Super on September 15, 2005, 08:58:27 AM
Of all the places to add weight, the tour pack would be the worst. HD tour packs stick out like a sore thumb as it is, plus I usually put a small cooler or travel bag on the rack when traveling.
Title: Re: SE
Post by: Twolanerider on September 15, 2005, 11:36:43 AM
Quote
Of all the places to add weight, the tour pack would be the worst. HD tour packs stick out like a sore thumb as it is, plus I usually put a small cooler or travel bag on the rack when traveling.



Have had the same thought myself GC.  Adding weight both high and behind the rear axle is about the worst place we could possibly put it.  In fact I tell myself that everytime I load up the tour pak just because it's easier to get to than the saddlebags  [smiley=xyxthumbs.gif]
Title: Re: SE
Post by: 110tHunDer on September 15, 2005, 12:20:36 PM
I agree, but they did lower the regular tour-paks an inch or so for 2006 which will help with the center of gravity.  I assume the leather CVO tour-pak is similarly designed.
Title: Re: SE
Post by: FR8TRN on September 15, 2005, 08:22:49 PM
Quote
Of all the places to add weight, the tour pack would be the worst. HD tour packs stick out like a sore thumb as it is, plus I usually put a small cooler or travel bag on the rack when traveling.



I'll say this, my '04 Ultra Classis was rock solid at high highway speeds (100mph+), for some reason the '06 SE is a bit unstable, however when the wife and I went out to WV for the weekend it did feel a bit more stable all loaded, both saddlebags, the tourpak and a pak on top of it.
Title: Re: SE
Post by: FR8TRN on September 15, 2005, 08:32:45 PM
Quote
The lid of the tour pak could be ten pounds heavier by itself...at least it feals it.



You sure got that right, that thing is heavy.  Not as easy to take apart the backrest on it either, my wife hates the lumbar support so I'm removing it and will probably have the padding in it cut in half or some lighter weight (pressure) padding put in.
Title: Re: SE
Post by: 06ULTRASE on September 15, 2005, 09:38:50 PM
My biggest disappointment is the cotton picking head light, you would think that a headlight that cost $162 would be a BETTER light but that's not the case.
Title: Re: SE
Post by: FR8TRN on September 15, 2005, 09:50:58 PM
Quote
My biggest disappointment is the cotton picking head light, you would think that a headlight that cost $162 would be a BETTER light but that's not the case.



LOL, I've about had it with night riding anyways, too many damn bugs commitin suicide.
Title: Re: SE
Post by: Twolanerider on September 15, 2005, 11:23:11 PM
Quote
My biggest disappointment is the cotton picking head light, you would think that a headlight that cost $162 would be a BETTER light but that's not the case.



Pay a little more Harley tax and get the new HID headlight?
Title: Re: SE
Post by: ridefar on September 15, 2005, 11:23:27 PM
Regarding the tour pak adapter to locate tour-pak further to rear: where can I get one? Thanks
Title: Re: SE
Post by: Twolanerider on September 15, 2005, 11:25:37 PM
Quote
Regarding the tour pak adapter to locate tour-pak further to rear: where can I get one? Thanks



Kuryakyn part number 3311.  It should be at the following link:

http://www.kuryakyn.com/products.asp?bn=Harley&ci=3311
Title: Re: SE
Post by: FR8TRN on September 16, 2005, 06:37:38 AM
Quote
Regarding the tour pak adapter to locate tour-pak further to rear: where can I get one? Thanks


See below for the information.  I had the Kuryakyn Relo Kit on my '04 Ultra, much prefered this adapter, easier to put on and more adjustment, not to mention cheaper.  Just give George a call, he'll set ya up.


COPIED FROM THE ROAD KING FORUM

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

George Anderson
Moline, IL
309-762-6291

Another advantage to George's relocator - it allows you to use the stock position (remove George's kit, 10 bolts out, 5 bolts in), or swich between 1.25" back and 2.5" back by removing 5 bolts and putting them back in at the new location. This can be useful if you ever expect to ride with different passengers. I will be riding with my 8 1/2 year old grandson this summer, for example... we'll probably move the tour pak forward, perhaps to the stock position.

Here is a photo of the kit so you can see what you'd be getting. One warning - you have to use the newer tour pak mounting rail with 5 holes all the way through the bar - the older rails had problems with failures (they have threaded inserts and no holes all the way through the bar).

(http://home.rochester.rr.com/maxdb/george-anderson-tourpak-rel.jpg)
Title: Re: SE
Post by: 110tHunDer on September 16, 2005, 08:24:57 AM
Quote
I had the Kuryakyn Relo Kit on my '04 Ultra, much prefered this adapter, easier to put on and more adjustment, not to mention cheaper.
Title: Re: SE
Post by: FR8TRN on September 16, 2005, 10:38:09 AM
Quote

Fr8, thanks for the info. on this piece.
Title: Re: SE
Post by: DREBBIN on September 25, 2005, 05:31:50 PM
Amen on that BTDC -- it sure is staying open to get those gases out.  Good for us.
Title: Re: SE
Post by: DREBBIN on September 25, 2005, 05:34:09 PM
Quote


Kuryakyn part number 3311.