Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Author Topic: Vance & Hines Eliminator 400 vs. 4" Rinehart  (Read 8234 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

SIKBIRD

  • Elite CVO Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 638
  • www.CVOHARLEY.com
    • AL


    • CVO1: 2004 FLHTCSE: Orange Pearl & Jet Black
Vance & Hines Eliminator 400 vs. 4" Rinehart
« on: March 08, 2017, 04:09:12 PM »

I am on the fence about which slip-on to go with V&H Eliminator 400 or 4" Rineharts(currently running V&H DD w/ old style V&H Ovals & PCIII).  I have searched high & low for info about the 400's and there is just not much out there.  I did contact Cheyne at V&H and he told me that the Twin Slash Rounds have 2.25" mechanical baffle and the 400's have 2.5" mechanical baffle but they sound virtually identical so I went out to Youtube and found this video comparing the twin slash w/ Rinos:   This is an awesome real-life video (hats off to the guys that made it).  While both pipes sound amazing, the Rinos are a little deeper and the V&H are a little louder but it could be that the V&H rider seems to let it eat a little more than the Rino rider.  So my question to you guys is do any of you have or know anyone with the V&H Eliminator 400's and if so what are your thoughts?  It should be noted that the V&H slip-ons are $125 cheaper than the Rinos at FuelMoto.com  Thanks in advance for your opinions.
Logged

MadCVORG

  • '11 FLTRUSE
  • Senior CVO Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 317
Re: Vance & Hines Eliminator 400 vs. 4" Rinehart
« Reply #1 on: March 08, 2017, 09:18:18 PM »

This video is a pretty good comparison. I have the 4" Rineharts--got those because my mechanic said they produce a deeper sound. He was right.
Logged

SIKBIRD

  • Elite CVO Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 638
  • www.CVOHARLEY.com
    • AL


    • CVO1: 2004 FLHTCSE: Orange Pearl & Jet Black
Re: Vance & Hines Eliminator 400 vs. 4" Rinehart
« Reply #2 on: March 13, 2017, 09:32:16 PM »

I see you are from Hunts-Vegas, about an hour north of me, who is your wrench and how is the HD dealer up there with the new owners?
Logged

Lars

  • Senior CVO Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 407
  • It's not the destination, "IT'S THE RIDE"

    • CVO1: 2013 SEUC8
    • CVO2: 1983 Shovelhead "Ole Black Betty"
Re: Vance & Hines Eliminator 400 vs. 4" Rinehart
« Reply #3 on: March 13, 2017, 11:41:01 PM »

If you want a deep rumble sound, have you thought about CFR's??
Logged
With old age has come the wisdom to embrace my immaturity.

Lars

SIKBIRD

  • Elite CVO Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 638
  • www.CVOHARLEY.com
    • AL


    • CVO1: 2004 FLHTCSE: Orange Pearl & Jet Black
Re: Vance & Hines Eliminator 400 vs. 4" Rinehart
« Reply #4 on: March 14, 2017, 06:01:27 AM »

Yes, I love the way the CFR's sound. My brother had a set on his RK (w/ Y pipe) and they sounded awesome so I bought a set when I put my Dresser duals on.  Man, I ran her about 10 miles and came back and put my old V&H's back on; way too loud for me and they just didn't sound as good on my Bird or run as good as his RK.  I think it's the DD's b/c he recently put a set on and then swapped the CFR's for Rinos (same issues with sound and performance).  I tell anybody that asks, I you're gonna keep the y pipe then the CFR's are the way to go but if you have DD's or are going to get them in the future then I would go with something else.
Logged

SIKBIRD

  • Elite CVO Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 638
  • www.CVOHARLEY.com
    • AL


    • CVO1: 2004 FLHTCSE: Orange Pearl & Jet Black
Re: Vance & Hines Eliminator 400 vs. 4" Rinehart
« Reply #5 on: April 04, 2017, 08:59:32 PM »

Ok, got the 400's on and man what a difference!  At first I thought uh oh, they're too loud.  But finally got to do a hot lap this past weekend and I must say they are EXACTLY what I wanted!  Perfect Vance and Hines performance sound and just the right loudness I was looking for.
Logged
 

Page created in 0.131 seconds with 21 queries.