Print

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

[Doubletap]

I could probably look this up but I thought someone here might have the answer at hand. I'm looking for the stock hp and torque numbers for the 103 in in the 2005 SEEG.

[spydglide]

I could probably look this up but I thought someone here might have the answer at hand. I'm looking for the stock hp and torque numbers for the 103 in in the 2005 SEEG.

I remember the MoCo advertising 100ft.lbs. of torque.  Don't know if that was all blowing smoke or not?  spyder

[grc]

Harley doesn't include HP in it's specs pages, just torque at the crank.  I don't remember what they claimed at the crank back then, but the rear wheel numbers were approximately 92 torque and 83 horsepower per the charts in the SE catalog for the 103 Stage I kit (the same thing that came stock in the CVO's).

It's enlightening that the stock rear wheel numbers for a current CVO110 aren't much different, maybe mid 90's torque and mid 80's horsepower.  Of course the 110 has it's torque come in at a much lower engine speed than the old CVO103.  Another indication of how important it is to look at the actual curves and not just peak numbers.  And also another indication of how Harley keeps stock performance low to better help sell those profitable performance upgrade kits and illegal tuning devices.


Jerry

[SHRADER]

My 2004 B&B is 113HP and 115TQ and it is stock  Hey wait a minute I sound like Otis.....

But seriously I believe the 83HP would be slightly optimistic for a stone stock 103. More like 74-76HP

I base this on the fact that I had a stock 2000 95 inch CVO Roadglide that was only 68 and that was with pipes and air cleaner. That same bike with heads and a 211 cam was 82HP and felt stronger than my 2004 did stone stock.

Regards
Shrader

[spydglide]

My 2004 B&B is 113HP and 115TQ and it is stock  Hey wait a minute I sound like Otis.....

But seriously I believe the 83HP would be slightly optimistic for a stone stock 103. More like 74-76HP

I base this on the fact that I had a stock 2000 95 inch CVO Roadglide that was only 68 and that was with pipes and air cleaner. That same bike with heads and a 211 cam was 82HP and felt stronger than my 2004 did stone stock.

Regards
Shrader

That's probably why you pumped that motor up....it was such a 'wimpy' one.  If mine had been that weak I'd have had to do something too.  har.   spyder

[Fired00d]

That's probably why you pumped that motor up....it was such a 'wimpy' one.  If mine had been that weak I'd have had to do something too.  har.   spyder

 
Ride Safe,
Fired00d
 

[SHRADER]

That's probably why you pumped that motor up....it was such a 'wimpy' one.  If mine had been that weak I'd have had to do something too.  har.   spyder

Har back at ya

Regards
Shrader

[Doubletap]

Thanks for the responses. After having tuning issues on mine I ended up taking it back to the dealer last week and they put it on their dyno to get the tuning better this time. They showed me dyno printouts with 94 hp and 99 lbs torque and said it was far from stock. I know the bike has larger cams in it and possibly some head work before I bought it. Then I added the V&H head pipes, Rineharts and the Stage 1 air kit and had it tuned using the latest SERT. I was expecting to see number more like 105-110 hp and torque at least over 100. I know they do not know a lot of using their dyno and I have yet to talk to anyone that says otherwise. I'm not sure if they didn't set up the dyno right or what. I'm disappointed in the printed results but happier with the performance than I was before. It definitely runs better on this second tune but I think it could be even a little better.

For what it's worth, went riding yesterday with the usual gang and had no trouble out running everything there including a well built 95" stroker in a Dyna and a 2012 SG with a few mods.

[bmcgc]

my 06 FLHTCUSE is bone stock except for a PC-V retrofit and a 6 speed.  I put the PC-V on due to excessive pinging at WOT, it is a canned tune.  It has the oem muffs with cats.  I bought it 2 months ago with 5,000 miles on the odometer.

It dyno'd at 81hp/88tq.

My wifes 13 SERK that is 100% bone stock dyno'd 83.5hp/103 tq.

[kr]

Just dug up my FLHTCSE 2004 brochure...100 FT. LBS. @ 3500 was listed.

[SHRADER]

I think that 100 in the brochure is at the crank.

[Sundog1258]

Are you happy with the way it runs? any pinging or popping issues?
Phil

[Doubletap]

I've put about 500 miles on it since the latest tune and dyno run. The decel popping is still there but not near as bad as it was. Power/acceleration is about what is was prior to the last tune but I did notice a shift in the power range. Before, there was a reasonably smooth power curve from off idle, say 1,500 rpm,  up to 3,500 rpm then hold on like hell. Now, the power seems less up to about 3,000 rpm then it starts coming on. It's a more gradual curve now instead of smooth then slapping you in the face. No problems passing anything on the road and it cruises nicely at 100 mph, although I don't do that often.

I'm still not 100% happy with it but I guess that's what owning a Harley is all about. Constant tinkering. Now I'm beginning to re-think my exhaust system. Damn!

[Unbalanced]

of the 4 of these that I have owned with just a tune, pipes and air cleaner they all made 91-94 hp and 97-100 torque.

[SHRADER]

of the 4 of these that I have owned with just a tune, pipes and air cleaner they all made 91-94 hp and 97-100 torque.

Hey Harry

Which one busted Ol' Hubbard???

Regards
Shrader