S&S 124 2007+ new build + minor mods - Page 2 : V-Twin Forum: Harley Davidson Forums

HDWRENCH · 10-25-2012, 09:35 AM

Well the lifters are S&S, the baker item is very nice.. Draw back is to adjust chain you have to remove the outer primary cover. However it will reduce the stress on the out put shaft and comp as well.. I have the engine apart and found both heads at 89 CC it has .050 head gaskets, so a .030 will get the comp bump I am looking for.. The springs are triple with Ti retainers.. I have not checked seat or open PSI yet.. But will today, the valve to throat is a tad big, I may install a 2.020 to tighten that up ..

windwolf · 10-26-2012, 12:32 AM

Hi HD Wrench: S&S states in my manual that valve spring pressure is 178lbs at rest and 432lbs at 640 lift. It will be interesting to see how close these specs are when you test them.
I've been running a pre 06 motor in my 01 Dyna for 5 yrs, G carb, makes 126.2hp/133t in current state with V&H Propipe (old style). 100% reliable to date with 25000miles+. windwolf

HDWRENCH · 10-26-2012, 12:06 PM

Well this is what we have on this engine .. Seat psi at 1.810 196lbs @ max lift 640 we have 555 lbs.

windwolf · 10-26-2012, 05:25 PM

Thats quite adifference, 196 to 178 and 555 to 432!!! Installed spring height is listed as 1.800" in my service manual. Kind of goes against everything I've read about bigger lifts needing excessive pressure. Old school or a gross printing error????

windwolf

HDWRENCH · 11-12-2012, 05:44 PM

66 MM SS hog for this set up..

nw_guy4_fun · 11-12-2012, 07:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by windwolf

Thats quite adifference, 196 to 178 and 555 to 432!!! Installed spring height is listed as 1.800" in my service manual. Kind of goes against everything I've read about bigger lifts needing excessive pressure. Old school or a gross printing error????

windwolf

The change to the AV&V spring seats and their retainers and locks will changed the spring pack height. It is not clear in these posts if the springs were changed or not.
Last set I installed had valves reseated at higher protrusion and I had 180# seat@ 1.905 and 433# at .66 lift.
The single Oviate wire spring can control the valves with less than what was considered reasonable pressure in days past. They work better at closer to coil bind too, like about .060, than a conventional spring but that is not the case here, .115 which is very happy too.

windwolf · 11-12-2012, 07:17 PM

HD Wrench: You mentioned having to remove the outer primary now to adjust the chain tensioner.
I was wondering if the old style case with the removable plate would interchange with the new style, or did they (HD) change some outer dimensions too.
The 124 sounds like its going to be a mover, that 66 Hog tb should do the trick!! windwolf

windwolf · 11-12-2012, 07:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nw_guy4_fun

The MVA head has a spring pack height of nominal 1.835
This changes with the AV&V spring seats and their retainers and locks.
Last set I installed had valves reseated at higher protrusion and I had 180# seat@ 1.905 and 433# at .66 lift.
The single Oviate wire spring can control the valves with less than what was considered reasonable pressure in days past. They work better at closer to coil bind too, like about .060, than a conventional spring but that is not the case here, .115 which is very happy too.

I would assume that my valve springs with 25k on them have lost a little of their pressure. The engine remains very quiet for 640 lift, is it something I need to be concerned with or just paranoid?
I have been thinking of going in to have a look, maybe thinner head gaskets, clean up the ports and matching. With an orignal style V&H Propipe it runs very well at 126hp/133t. IYO, is the exhaust restricting output somewhat? thanks for any opinion rendered, windwolf

nw_guy4_fun · 11-12-2012, 07:43 PM

All of these motors are on a case by case basis as far as spring pressure needed. Plus the cam profile albeit the S&S.640 lift has very easy lobes. Weight of the valves are not too bad.
I would not assume anything about the spring without checking them. Then decide. If the heads are coming off anyway it takes just a few minutes to check them. A little clean up on those heads and IME a bigger valve and they work real well. Get the CR up too and they like that.

INDEPENDENT 1 · 11-12-2012, 07:49 PM

delete......

windwolf · 11-12-2012, 11:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nw_guy4_fun

All of these motors are on a case by case basis as far as spring pressure needed. Plus the cam profile albeit the S&S.640 lift has very easy lobes. Weight of the valves are not too bad.
I would not assume anything about the spring without checking them. Then decide. If the heads are coming off anyway it takes just a few minutes to check them. A little clean up on those heads and IME a bigger valve and they work real well. Get the CR up too and they like that.

Hi Don: Whats involved with installing bigger valves, like 2.10 for intake. Does the exhaust side need to be larger too? Would a .030 gasket actually raise compression enough to make any difference or would I need to have the heads milled .030 too?
I really hate to mess with something that already works well. BUT, I rode an FXR with a 124 Kendall Johnson put together, and the power bug keeps haunting me- hehe. windwolf

HDWRENCH · 11-13-2012, 09:05 AM

The new S&S crate engine has the 89 CC chambers, so a .030 will raise the comp level to 11.2 ( range) the heads do not need a valve really any larger than a 2.020 and that is a easy install , the seat will take that with out any trouble. Valve job is all that is needed to bump that up, you are altering the throat % as with the stock valve ( 2.00) its running up in the 97% ratio.

Springs are going to be heavy check them or not, a S&S triple pack is one stout set up.

Another new 124 is going together as well getting a trip across the seas. We see where everything is in that one as well.

windwolf · 11-13-2012, 11:05 AM

Hi HD Wrench: My 124 uses the 91cc chambers so I can assume a .030 gasket would raise compression to 11:1. Thats only .2 over the claimed 10.8:1 stock. Any benefit to be had for the change?
I was thinking 11.4 static ot try for 9.3 dynamic ccp. My calculations show present dc at 8.9.
Stock intake is 2.0", so the 2.020" helps get the intake flowing better with a smoother transition from port to valve. Is my understanding of this correct? I take it AV&V is the valve to go to.
Thanks for the information, it great to have someone "in the know" participate on sites like this to help. windwolf

HDWRENCH · 11-13-2012, 11:17 AM

the 2.02 valve will help the low and mid lift flow numbers. Simple and easy to do, but others out there love to make the set up complicated.. A slight skim on the heads to 89 ( same head from S&S just one is cut the other is not) In the end your call.

windwolf · 11-13-2012, 03:43 PM

Thanks HD Wrench for explaining this for me. I appreciate the effort you put in here to show people the right ways to approach things.
I have not decided yet whether I hould rip into this. I would also look to match porting to intake and blend in the valve guide areas.
I did port an original 88" when I went to 95" with stock valves, ended up with a torque band that produced 98ft/lb from 2900 to 6000rpm using Crane 316-2 cams (510 lift, 242/252 duration).
I looked for areas that likely disturbed the air flow.
I'll talk to my local people about doing the valves, I live about 120 mile from nearest anybody with trusted skills. I had them redo my stock valves in the 95 when they became pitted from ethanol fuel. I used Manley Melonite, their work was fine then, but had to be sent to their main facilty 140 miles away.
Even getting parts like gaskets for my S&S takes acoouple of weeks, or longer. they have to come directly from S&S here. windwolf