V-Twin Forum banner

1 - 20 of 23 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,700 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
2007 FLHX standard Stage II 103 /SERT /SE street perf slip-ons , no headwork.

I'm quite happy with the torque curve , 111.27 lbs ft and 94.23 hp .. not bad for a 103" EPA motor

for those that can't view it , 100 lbs ft+ @1800-4900rpm , 110 lbs ft from 2400-2800

PM me if you want to see it
 

Attachments

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
517 Posts
nidan said:
2007 FLHX standard Stage II 103 /SERT /SE street perf slip-ons , no headwork.

I'm quite happy with the torque curve , 111.27 lbs ft and 94.23 hp .. not bad for a 103" EPA motor

for those that can't view it , 100 lbs ft+ @1800-4900rpm , 110 lbs ft from 2400-2800

PM me if you want to see it

looks to be the 255 cams?? simple build that has the tq over a very broad range where ya ride!1 looks good for touring bikes
Happy
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,700 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Yep 255 cams , as maligned as they are , good numbers , more than a stock SE 110 so no complaints
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
517 Posts
nidan said:
Yep 255 cams , as maligned as they are , good numbers , more than a stock SE 110 so no complaints

all the tq and hp is right whre most of ride so its a great setup.. how many cams can make those ##,,s down low. granted its not a big end build but if ya shift it in the range it is making the nice #'s its gonna take a hell of a build to get by yours. as far as the 110" i have a 07 CVO with that motor.. its a pig the way it comes out of the box. put a little fuel to it and a pipe and its a diffferant story.. add headwork and cams, its a nice ride.. even with the 255 cams with some headwork. its a good touring setup.. will suprise lots of the hot rodders to say the least. put in some other cams its a good one.. i am not afraid of my 110"" i has less than .002 runout.. if i ride with a little respect that motor will run for 80 tho. then may want to peek at the top end and camchest again..

Happy
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,700 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
The 110 certainly has more potential, I rode one and liked it, but wanted a Street Glide. For an all SE build and under warranty I'm very happy.

My wrench is great and really has done a wonderful job on it and my last build.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,700 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
I have to credit the wrench , he's very good at tuning/builds.

I'm pleasently surprised , I looked at the stock 110 SE build on the Latus HD site , and I'm making 14hp / 11 lbs ft more with no headwork and the same cams.

As far as the torque curve goes :
"Fat bottom girls you make the rockin world go round"
 

·
AXTELLERATOR
Joined
·
441 Posts
That's a great torque line, but don't bet your house on the numbers from the dyno run. The sae correction is 1.17 because the baro shows 25.23. If you divide the correction factor into the final numbers, you end up with the actual. Forgetting about the numbers game, that torque line is what most of us wish for. Enjoy the ride.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
517 Posts
Qhorin said:
after looking at that chart and those build specs it gets me pissed off that I coulda just did a simple build like that last winter ,kept the warrantie,and probably have better #s then I have now(definatly way more low end torq). Hell, looking at that chart Im thinking I might pull the HQ 575,s out and try the 255,s. Would i need to change the springs in the heads back to stock? And im at 10:1 now so I would need to see where the ccps would fall with that cam. And what do you know he has a screaming eagle exhaust also. ALmost seems to good to be true. Hell of a great build and still under warrantie . Good job man!
I am curious what your squish is?? also with the 575 cam i believe if you would have went to 10.5 there is more tq to be had that you would feel down low, that said you will not beat the 255 cams in a roll on in high gear or 5th gear all things being equal. the 255 cam is a serious cam for the person who likes to cruise and have tq for a very very wide band especially if you get the compression up to about 9.7 no more than that and even 9.5 that cam if the the heads can move some air is great for two up heavy bikes especially. this ca hild the tq for a lot of rpm, but its not for dragracing.
Happy
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
467 Posts
Some very nice numbers on that build!

Do you know what head gasket was used and what the compression ratio ended up at? Also the cranking ccps? Wouldn't the compression be around
10-1 with just the 103" volume?

thanks
Dave
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
23 Posts
From what I have read, the 103BB kit takes compression from stock 9.2
to about 9.8. I run the same build except for a Woods 6-6. Enjoying
ever minute of it. Pulls hard all the way.

Geez
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
467 Posts
Onegeezer said:
From what I have read, the 103BB kit takes compression from stock 9.2
to about 9.8. I run the same build except for a Woods 6-6. Enjoying
ever minute of it. Pulls hard all the way.

Geez
how is the engine noise (sorry, couldn't resist). This is what I really want to run!

:thanks:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
467 Posts
What are you using for pushrods and covers? When I did my 95" build on my old '05 RG, I used SE adjustable PR and they caused some "ticking" by hiting the covers. The ticking (especially at 2500 rpm) drove me "Nuts" on trips.

:thanks:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
23 Posts
Used the SE chrome moly, at 32 threads per inch. They came with new
covers. Bob Woods told me to set them between .140-.150, so I am
currently at the low end. I have a Road Glide, so the fairing does add
a little flavor to the noise. But again, the tick is very slight.

Push-rods are not hitting the tubes that I can tell.

Now if this %#T#&$ crank will hold together :wootdnc:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
467 Posts
Now if this %#T#&$ crank will hold together :wootdnc:[/QUOTE]@gree:

That scares me also, that and the roller bearing, makes me want to keep the build pretty mild.

Dave
 

·
"Jane you ignorant slut!"
Joined
·
2,292 Posts
nidan said:
2007 FLHX standard Stage II 103 /SERT /SE street perf slip-ons , no headwork.
That's about the nicest tq power curve I've seen.

Just courious what pistons you used and if you had your old barrels bored.

I'm looking in the SE catalog (pg 26) there is a nice kit, pistons, barrels, 255 cams, gaskets ect... To buy the parts seperatly would be about $675 (no barrels), and the kit is $593 with barrels from Zanotti's.

I could be temped to do this. I guess to pay for it I could cash in my 7 year extended warranty I won't be needing since they won't cover the engine.

The extra money from the policy could go toward funeral expenses since my wife will kill me since I told her it was staying stock, hence the need for the warranty. But that's another issue to be ironed out.

Chris
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,700 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
I used the Stage II kit without the cat exhaust that has the flat top cast pistons and SE 255 cams Stage II 103 29893-07
 

·
AXTELLERATOR
Joined
·
441 Posts
Dyno numbers incorrect.

nidan said:
2007 FLHX standard Stage II 103 /SERT /SE street perf slip-ons , no headwork.

I'm quite happy with the torque curve , 111.27 lbs ft and 94.23 hp .. not bad for a 103" EPA motor

for those that can't view it , 100 lbs ft+ @1800-4900rpm , 110 lbs ft from 2400-2800

PM me if you want to see it
As much as I like your torque line, I think you should know( as I explained in a previous message) your dyno numbers are not correct. The sae correction (due to a faulty weather station on the dyno) is 1.17. This means the dyno readings are 17% over the actual readings.
111.27 TQ divided by 1.17 = 95.1 actual torque
94.23 HP divided by 1.17 = 80.5 actual horsepower
These are your actual numbers.That's not to say your bike isn't tuned correctly. It just means the dyno program is trying to correct for the erroneous baro pressure reading of 25.23. That low a number is impossible.
I think it is for your benefit and anyone who may want to change parts on their engines, to have as much correct info before money is spent.
I know a shop here in Cntrl. MA. that does big number dynos because his weather station gives faulty info into the Winpep7 program. That's not to say he doesn't tune the bikes well. It just means he's fudging the end result dyno numbers. Your torque is still nice, just not numerically what the printout suggests.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
82 Posts
103 build

I built my 2007 bike to a 103 changing cylinders piston and a wood cam with a 275 lift plus ported and polish heads my no were 97 hp and 107 lbs of tourque on a dyno on a warm day in the south. bike before was at 66hp and about 90 lbs, of tourque, Bike run great and has the pulling power in the mid range of rpm.


Jim
 
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
Top