Print

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

[Tom149]

After speaking with D&D Technical they recommended the (506-32BBQ FLH/FLT) Fat Cat 2 into 1 95-06 Chrome, Back cut Big Bore Wrapped  Baffle Exhaust System for my 107CI Build (06' FLHTCUSE). My build consists of the following:

NRHS Stage 2 CNC welded and ported TC 88 heads set to 87cc to achieve 10.2:1 static compression (swapped out my 103 heads)
Andrews Hydraulic Cam Conversion Kit with Andrews 54N cams
Bored Cylinders to 3.938 and installed CP 107FT forged pistons
Changed out injectors to SE 4.90 gms/sec
Already had SE High Flow Air Cleaner and Rinehart True Duals with Performance Baffles
Dyno Tuned - SERT

He said the Big Bore Wrapped Baffle (Quiet) would be a better choice than the Standard Quiet Baffle (also wrapped) based on my displacement (107CI). He said that the Standard Quiet Baffle was for up to 103CI and the "Big Bore (Quiet) Wrapped" was for 107CI to 113CI. Any thoughts, trying to shift the torque curve left.

[aka_Matt]

at your power level i'd go with the standard quiet or standard standard... u don't need to get the big bore pipe with that setup... altho any 2-1 should fix that hole at 2500 caused by the true duals...

[Tom149]

at your power level i'd go with the standard quiet or standard standard... u don't need to get the big bore pipe with that setup... altho any 2-1 should fix that hole at 2500 caused by the true duals...

Thanks Matt, I'm thinking Standard Quiet as well.

Tom

[Twolanerider]

My 107 build is in many ways similar to yours.  Compression is comparable as are the heads.  None of the differences are at all extreme.  I use the standard quiet baffle.  "Quiet" is a relative term for their quiet baffles.  The bike makes a good sound with that compression in front of it.  It's not too loud.  Were it any louder the radio would have to work real hard to compete going down the Interstate.

The bike runs very well.  All the power I'll ever want out of it.  It comes in early enough stays in long enough to be very useful.  105 ft pds by 3000, 112 by 3500, climbs a bit more from there and doesn't start falling off at all until past 5000.  Nice long torque curve.

[Tom149]

My 107 build is in many ways similar to yours.  Compression is comparable as are the heads.  None of the differences are at all extreme.  I use the standard quiet baffle.  "Quiet" is a relative term for their quiet baffles.  The bike makes a good sound with that compression in front of it.  It's not too loud.  Were it any louder the radio would have to work real hard to compete going down the Interstate.

The bike runs very well.  All the power I'll ever want out of it.  It comes in early enough stays in long enough to be very useful.  105 ft pds by 3000, 112 by 3500, climbs a bit more from there and doesn't start falling off at all until past 5000.  Nice long torque curve.

Thanks Twolanerider,

I'm not sure why D&D Tech recommended the Big Bore Wrapped (Quiet) Baffle other than him saying that it works for 107CI - 113CI and the Standard Wrapped (Quiet Baffle) is for 88CI - 103CI.  I would love to see your Dyno Chart if you could post it.

Tom

[Twolanerider]

Thanks Twolanerider,

I'm not sure why D&D Tech recommended the Big Bore Wrapped (Quiet) Baffle other than him saying that it works for 107CI - 113CI and the Standard Wrapped (Quiet Baffle) is for 88CI - 103CI.  I would love to see your Dyno Chart if you could post it.

Tom

The chart is probably on the site somewhere.  I did the work close to three years ago and don't know where a copy is around here though.  I do have the engine history in a spreadsheet I keep so can at least offer the numbers.

It's a 107 (used Axtell jugs and their supplied pistons) with the HTCC CNC heads that Dave Mackie touched up just a bit more from stock.  CR was about 10.25:1.  Used a Mackie 598 gear drive cam.  50mm tb.  Other less illustrative details would be Feuling pump and lifters and... (I'm thinking....) oh yeah, roller rockers.  Don't do a lot but help it wrap it just a bit quicker but they're there.

Dynos vary of course.  A different machine would supply different numbers.  The shape of the curve would be consistent though.  It was tuned using Power Commander and done by a guy named John Golden.  I'm lucky to have him close by as he's one of the really really good ones.

Engine's final tune was:

         HP TQ
2000  37-84
2500  44-93
3000  60-105
3500  70-112
4000  85-118
4500  100-120
5000  110-122
5500  121-117
6000  124-108

There was a tune just prior to this that offered slightly better hp numbers (about which I could care less) but was done on a 30 degree day.  A couple weeks later I heard just the hint of detonation on an 85 degree day and we dialed the timing back just a touch.  Bike is fun to ride, great to pull the trailer or ride in the mountains with and gets about 35 mpg.  Haven't touched it again since I put the engine together.

[Tom149]

The chart is probably on the site somewhere.  I did the work close to three years ago and don't know where a copy is around here though.  I do have the engine history in a spreadsheet I keep so can at least offer the numbers.

It's a 107 (used Axtell jugs and their supplied pistons) with the HTCC CNC heads that Dave Mackie touched up just a bit more from stock.  CR was about 10.25:1.  Used a Mackie 598 gear drive cam.  50mm tb.  Other less illustrative details would be Feuling pump and lifters and... (I'm thinking....) oh yeah, roller rockers.  Don't do a lot but help it wrap it just a bit quicker but they're there.

Dynos vary of course.  A different machine would supply different numbers.  The shape of the curve would be consistent though.  It was tuned using Power Commander and done by a guy named John Golden.  I'm lucky to have him close by as he's one of the really really good ones.

Engine's final tune was:

         HP TQ
2000  37-84
2500  44-93
3000  60-105
3500  70-112
4000  85-118
4500  100-120
5000  110-122
5500  121-117
6000  124-108

There was a tune just prior to this that offered slightly better hp numbers (about which I could care less) but was done on a 30 degree day.  A couple weeks later I heard just the hint of detonation on an 85 degree day and we dialed the timing back just a touch.  Bike is fun to ride, great to pull the trailer or ride in the mountains with and gets about 35 mpg.  Haven't touched it again since I put the engine together.

Twolanerider,

Thanks for all the details, must be a real blast to ride.

Tom

[Twolanerider]

Twolanerider,

Thanks for all the details, must be a real blast to ride.

Tom

All kidding aside it really is.  It's not a monster that will get you in trouble if you're not careful.  I built it specifically with my riding in mind.  No care at all about what the HP numbers would be.  Just plenty of torque that started early and remained in through the pass-a-truck-on-the-twolanes RPM ranges.  It pulls great, wraps up quickly and is a joy to take riding.  It's been a build that works well for the afternoon run down to the hills of northen Arkansas, a weekend across the great plains or just clicking on the cruise and riding the super slab on a road trip.

Forgot to mention one other thing that was part of the build.  I know, I know, no impact on how it runs.  But it's something else that makes me happy with it.  It also got a wee bit of cosmetic work on the top end parts before all going back together.

[Twolanerider]

And the other side:

[Tom149]

All kidding aside it really is.  It's not a monster that will get you in trouble if you're not careful.  I built it specifically with my riding in mind.  No care at all about what the HP numbers would be.  Just plenty of torque that started early and remained in through the pass-a-truck-on-the-twolanes RPM ranges.  It pulls great, wraps up quickly and is a joy to take riding.  It's been a build that works well for the afternoon run down to the hills of northen Arkansas, a weekend across the great plains or just clicking on the cruise and riding the super slab on a road trip.

Forgot to mention one other thing that was part of the build.  I know, I know, no impact on how it runs.  But it's something else that makes me happy with it.  It also got a wee bit of cosmetic work on the top end parts before all going back together.

Twolanerider,

Sounds a like a really streetable and reliable build with very complimentary looks as well ..... 

Tom

[HILLSIDECYCLE.COM]

The chart is probably on the site somewhere.  I did the work close to three years ago and don't know where a copy is around here though.  I do have the engine history in a spreadsheet I keep so can at least offer the numbers.

It's a 107 (used Axtell jugs and their supplied pistons) with the HTCC CNC heads that Dave Mackie touched up just a bit more from stock.  CR was about 10.25:1.  Used a Mackie 598 gear drive cam.  50mm tb.  Other less illustrative details would be Feuling pump and lifters and... (I'm thinking....) oh yeah, roller rockers.  Don't do a lot but help it wrap it just a bit quicker but they're there.

Dynos vary of course.  A different machine would supply different numbers.  The shape of the curve would be consistent though.  It was tuned using Power Commander and done by a guy named John Golden.  I'm lucky to have him close by as he's one of the really really good ones.

Engine's final tune was:

         HP TQ
2000  37-84
2500  44-93
3000  60-105
3500  70-112
4000  85-118
4500  100-120
5000  110-122
5500  121-117
6000  124-108

There was a tune just prior to this that offered slightly better hp numbers (about which I could care less) but was done on a 30 degree day.  A couple weeks later I heard just the hint of detonation on an 85 degree day and we dialed the timing back just a touch.  Bike is fun to ride, great to pull the trailer or ride in the mountains with and gets about 35 mpg.  Haven't touched it again since I put the engine together.

John Golden of Rolling Thunder Dyno Services had tuned a bunch of our builds in the past.
A 120" that I recall, showed 125 hp/150 plus ft/lbs, in a bagger. Client had a hard time with traction!!
Scott

[Twolanerider]

John Golden of Rolling Thunder Dyno Services had tuned a bunch of our builds in the past.
A 120" that I recall, showed 125 hp/150 plus ft/lbs, in a bagger. Client had a hard time with traction!!
Scott

John lives local to me.  It's been great over the years having him only ten minutes away.  Great guy and a great tuner.

[HD Street Performance]

OK
Denver, ~5K feet. Air pressure is lower, cylinder pressure is lower. The FatCat bagger pipe has an inherent torque dip in the 3,200 range not too bad though and it has strong torque above and below that. The air pump sucks, the heads say go go go, the cam says slow down a little, the motor goes to get a breath and only gets 24.6 VS 29.9 pressure and this affects power and torque in all the operating ranges.
Based on this I always recommend builds at altitude to use smaller cams, higher compression (but not over the edge for sea level operation), and pipes on the smaller side when given a choice like you have here. The result will be nearly no loss on the top and better low speed torque, something you will notice all the time just running stoplight to stoplight or doing the famous "pass a truck" scenario.

[Tom149]

OK
Denver, ~5K feet. Air pressure is lower, cylinder pressure is lower. The FatCat bagger pipe has an inherent torque dip in the 3,200 range not too bad though and it has strong torque above and below that. The air pump sucks, the heads say go go go, the cam says slow down a little, the motor goes to get a breath and only gets 24.6 VS 29.9 pressure and this affects power and torque in all the operating ranges.
Based on this I always recommend builds at altitude to use smaller cams, higher compression (but not over the edge for sea level operation), and pipes on the smaller side when given a choice like you have here. The result will be nearly no loss on the top and better low speed torque, something you will notice all the time just running stoplight to stoplight or doing the famous "pass a truck" scenario.

Thanks Don,

Tom