Print

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

[kojak]

yes they are both stroked.   the 88's or 1450 cc motors were not.   the 1690 is a stroked motor from HD

I don't think the 2012 factory 103 would be a stroker engine since only the bore was changed from the 96 to get to the 103. I never thought stroking engines was a good idea unless you wanted performance and didn't worry about reliability or upgraded other parts of the engine as well. Back in 04, they basically took the 88 jugs and bored and stroked them to get to a 103. For the newer engines, the stroke for the 96 and the 103 was the same, the bore was increased.

[kojak]

Well, so far.....of those that's posted that owned an 04 it's unanimous.  Ya think we could get the MoCo to go back to that motor?    Naw.....that thing was to reliable and therefore unprofitable.

No, because they took the TC88 as far as they could with the 103 stroker. They had to go to a bigger stock displacement engine to make todays 110's and 120's possible.

[Unbalanced]

No, because they took the TC88 as far as they could with the 103 stroker. They had to go to a bigger stock displacement engine to make todays 110's and 120's possible.

Kojak I am not sure if you are agreeing or disagreeing on the 103.

The 88" motor was  3.750 x 4.00 the 2012  103 engine is a 3.875 x 4.375  same stroke as the 2004 103 engine  which was also 3.875 x 4.375 

the 96, 103, and 110 all share the same crank.  The difference is the bore.

Please see the data  on the 103 crank from the HD Manual.

[Unbalanced]

110

[kojak]

Kojak I am not sure if you are agreeing or disagreeing on the 103.

The 88" motor was  3.750 x 4.00 the 2012  103 engine is a 3.875 x 4.375  same as the 2004 103 engine  which was also 3.875 x 4.375 

the 96, 103, and 110 all share the same crank.  The difference is the bore.

Please see the data  on the 103 crank from the HD Manual.

The fact that the bore and stroke from the old cvo 103 and todays 2012+ stock 103 is the same doesn't make them the same. One of the biggest improvements from the TC88 to the TC96 and on forward was not just engine components but also better flowing heads. I could be wrong but I believe Harley used the same heads on the tc88 as the early 2000 cvo's which would be the first thing someone would fix to get more performance out of that motor. As a matter of interest, anything coming out of the factory as the base engine is generally not considered a stroker, you take the stock engine and increase displacement either by boring the cylinders or lengthening the stroke or both hence the terms bored and stroked for after market kits. Technically, the 96 was a stroker motor as Harley took the 88 and left the bore alone and changed the stroke along with the heads and all the other stuff people love so much these days (efi, o2 sensors, etc)

[grc]

The fact that the bore and stroke from the old cvo 103 and todays 2012+ stock 103 is the same doesn't make them the same. One of the biggest improvements from the TC88 to the TC96 and on forward was not just engine components but also better flowing heads. I could be wrong but I believe Harley used the same heads on the tc88 as the early 2000 cvo's which would be the first thing someone would fix to get more performance out of that motor. As a matter of interest, anything coming out of the factory as the base engine is generally not considered a stroker, you take the stock engine and increase displacement either by boring the cylinders or lengthening the stroke or both hence the terms bored and stroked for after market kits. Technically, the 96 was a stroker motor as Harley took the 88 and left the bore alone and changed the stroke along with the heads and all the other stuff people love so much these days (efi, o2 sensors, etc)

Nope.  The CVO103's used a hemi head, totally unlike the modified bathtub design of the standard TC88, or the TC96/TC103.  Similar to but not the same as the CVO110 heads.

As for the "stroker" thing,  it all depends on the baseline reference one wants to use.  I use the original bore and stroke of the first Twin Cam (TC88) as the baseline for the engine design.  Thus the CVO103 is a bored and stroked TC88 as Unbalanced noted, and the TC96/103 and CVO110 are "stroked" as well.  They don't use the same cranks though.  The CVO103 had the older style primary design and a much better crankshaft.  The crank for 2007 and later has the same stroke as the CVO103, but is a different design and is built on different tooling.  Quality is not close to the old design.

Jerry

[kojak]

Jerry, you could be right for the 2004, not sure. Harley has had many SE Head designs over the years. I know getting your heads reworked was pretty much a must if you wanted more performance out of your engines. Overall, the new 103's are better than the old cvo 103 in so many ways in terms of their design.
You might get a kick out of what Donny Petersen used to say about the old cvo 103, he probably rebuilt more of them than any one around.
"The Screamin’ Eagle 103 cubic inch models were the hot ticket for those who could
afford them in the early 2000’s. They had the same bore and stroke specifications of a TC96 to
TC103 big bore conversion, a 4 ⅜” stroke, ⅜” or .375” up from the stock TC88 4.000” and a
bored out stock TC88/TC96 3 ¾” cylinder bore, ⅛” or .125” to a 3 ⅞” diameter.
The TC96 conversion to a TC103 is superior to the older Screamin’ Eagle 103. Head
design alone makes it so. The TC96 heads while not flowing sufficient air; flow more than
their TC88 counterparts do.
I have repaired many of the S.E. 103’s and brought them much closer to their true
performance capabilities. Unbelievably, the first S.E. 103 engines use close-to-stock fuel
delivery and ignition with stock TC88 head fitment! The Factory threw on heads that flow less
air than those for the 80 cubic inch Evolution onto a 103 cubic inch engine. Many other S.E.
103 components were stock Twin Cam 88 ones like fixed length pushrods and rubbing rocker
arms that, in my mind should have been Screamin’ Eagle adjustable pushrods and S.E. roller
rocker arms."

[Lucky Doug]

Good thread. I asked a similiar question when I joined this site and had just seen my first SERK 03 and had fallen in love with it. OP did a much better job of posing the question than I did and got the answers I really wanted back then. Thanks to the forum members that are so knowledgeable.