Print

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

[Shodan01]

Ok -

Talking about the Springer.  I have called Dynojet research regarding a temporary map for my SE Springer.  They told me to just take the setup that I have (Rinehart 2:1 on the 110ci), and use the map that was done for the 96ci setup with the same devices.

So I called, and the guy said to use the above, but I noticed a map for the 110 FLHTCUSEII on their website. 


Here is the Question:  I am getting the bike tuned on this thursday, but would like to ride this week.  Am I better to run the 96ci setup, or use the touring 110 setup?  I have installed it all, and run both tunes.  The latter "feels" better, but the amount of difference I feel in the saddle is insignificant.

My assumption is that the setup for the FLHT is a bit richer than the one for the 96ci setup, but I could be way off.

Anybody with experience that would make reccomendations?  Which one will do better for the week?

Steve

[hd-dude]

Steve;
While I do not have specific expirience with this exact setup I would use the map designed for the 110 motor. Logically it would be a closer match to yor motor than the 96" map. Getting it on the dyno is best way to go to be sure its dialed in.

[RedDevil]

Steve;
While I do not have specific expirience with this exact setup I would use the map designed for the 110 motor. Logically it would be a closer match to yor motor than the 96" map. Getting it on the dyno is best way to go to be sure its dialed in.

Steve,
Agree.  The only thing I can think of that would be different would be to have the engine running a little richer for the touring rig over the soft tail because of the lowers on the touring rig not allowing as much airflow over the cylinders.  But I'd go with the map engineered for the 110 engine regardless and then, if you're concerned about it alot, get the bike dyno'd at a later date.
Cheers ,