AnonymousRandomKid
New member
Phil any pinging with this build?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
DYNO Numbers for Baggers???
- Thread starter AnonymousRandomKid
- Start date
mtcharliegirl
New member
You could drop in a R&R 155 street/strip motor............195torque/185hp............approx. $15000 installed.
All 3 of your dyno charts have been great............almost identical curves, just 10-20 points difference.
Steve
All 3 of your dyno charts have been great............almost identical curves, just 10-20 points difference.
Steve
It's pretty early, as I just got it back together Wednesday, broke it in and had it tuned today.
One of my (in fact my #1) requirements was NO PINGING when I had it spec'd out for me. I did try to make it ping this afternoon, but not able to.... at least yet. Been down that road and don;t want any part of it any more. The cams are designed for engines with between 9.5:1 to 10.5:1 CR. My build is @ 10:1, so I am comfortably below the threshold for compression induced pinging. TIme will tell.
One of my (in fact my #1) requirements was NO PINGING when I had it spec'd out for me. I did try to make it ping this afternoon, but not able to.... at least yet. Been down that road and don;t want any part of it any more. The cams are designed for engines with between 9.5:1 to 10.5:1 CR. My build is @ 10:1, so I am comfortably below the threshold for compression induced pinging. TIme will tell.
Even on my scale..... the R&R is a ways off! hahahhaha!!!!!!!!!!
The torque curve is obviously a result of the pipe. You're right, they all have very similar characteristics.
Ya know what.... It's possible that JMorton was right about the volume of the FatCat on a hotter motor. This mother is loud now. Seems like someone mentioned that the new quiet FC baffle improved torque.... Now maybe I have something else to try. ...... if wifey doesn't kill me 1st!
The torque curve is obviously a result of the pipe. You're right, they all have very similar characteristics.
Ya know what.... It's possible that JMorton was right about the volume of the FatCat on a hotter motor. This mother is loud now. Seems like someone mentioned that the new quiet FC baffle improved torque.... Now maybe I have something else to try. ...... if wifey doesn't kill me 1st!
Fluffy Hamster
New member
Phil
Ideal TQ curve - well done! TQ comes on early, rises quickly and is very broad - 100' lbs TQ at 2400 rpms, 110' lbs at 2750 rpms and flat lines out out past 5000 rpms. The Fat Cat exhaust is a key component in the early TQ rise.
The HQ package is one I've been interested in trying - just hesitant about going high compression and high lift cam in a bagger used for touring. Do you do long distance touring, two up and loaded with gear?
The HQ-0039 is HQ's recommended TQ cam for baggers. With an intake close of 36 and Lobe Separation Angle of 101 your build reflects the TQ.
HQ-0039
20 - Intake Open
36 - Intake Close
52 - Exhaust Open
24 - Exhasut Close
236 - Intake duration
256 - Exhaust Duration
44 - Overlap
98 - Intake Lobe Center
104 - Exhaust Lobe Center
101 - Lobe Separation Angle
0.580 - Intake Lift
0.530 Exhaust Lift
I'll follow up with you next summer. With your TQ curve and if the 98"/HQ package doesn't ping during the hot Texas summers and starts easily without the use compression releases - no kickbacks, then your build potentially is a very good bagger build and adheres to the build philosopy below.
Building the Perfect Street Engine
http://www.nightrider.com/biketech/street_tc_engine.htm
The Sprocket Twins at Nightrider get hundreds of requests for engine configurations. Riders want the simplest engine to build, the highest power than can get, an engine to beat their friends, an engine to go racing with. In short, every rider wants the ideal engine. They want big power increases and instant throttle response. They describe thinly discuised race engine sitting in a street bike. What many riders don't want to discuss or hear are the issues associated with these "over the edge" engines such as:.
-Exceptionally loud exhaust tone (do you really want 120 dB drone in your ears on your FLH when riding down the interstate?)
-A strong tendency to overheat when exposed to parade duty (called cruising around town)
-High detonation potential when running on pump fuel (can you really find race fuel every 200 miles?)
-High maintenance usually requiring decarboning the cylinder heads and pistons on a frequent basis.
-Reduced Reliability (do you really expect an engine that has huge power and ridden very hard to last as long as a stock engine?)
And these are just a portion of the issues you have to face with these "gonzo" engines. Unfortunately, few riders think about this until their dream engine turns into a nightmare 9 months down the road.
After spending a lot of time thinking about what most riders really want versus what they think they want, I decided to come up with my own requirements for a strong engine upgrade package for Twin Cams. It had to meet the following requirements:
- An engine that can be used in heavy FLH's and Road Kings, as well as in the lighter Dyna's and Softail's.
- An engine that will run on pump fuel without having to worry about detonation.
- An engine that requires a minimum of parts and doesn't break the bank.
- An engine that has a horsepower figure high enough to get some respect when bench racing.
- An engine that will pull strong from idle and propel the bike to any legal or illegal speed chosen within some reasonable limits.
- An engine that would smoke the other V-twins between stoplights or at the drag strip.
- An engine that would be easy to ride and live with when riding in town.
- An engine that woud have near stock reliabililty.
Ideal TQ curve - well done! TQ comes on early, rises quickly and is very broad - 100' lbs TQ at 2400 rpms, 110' lbs at 2750 rpms and flat lines out out past 5000 rpms. The Fat Cat exhaust is a key component in the early TQ rise.
The HQ package is one I've been interested in trying - just hesitant about going high compression and high lift cam in a bagger used for touring. Do you do long distance touring, two up and loaded with gear?
The HQ-0039 is HQ's recommended TQ cam for baggers. With an intake close of 36 and Lobe Separation Angle of 101 your build reflects the TQ.
HQ-0039
20 - Intake Open
36 - Intake Close
52 - Exhaust Open
24 - Exhasut Close
236 - Intake duration
256 - Exhaust Duration
44 - Overlap
98 - Intake Lobe Center
104 - Exhaust Lobe Center
101 - Lobe Separation Angle
0.580 - Intake Lift
0.530 Exhaust Lift
I'll follow up with you next summer. With your TQ curve and if the 98"/HQ package doesn't ping during the hot Texas summers and starts easily without the use compression releases - no kickbacks, then your build potentially is a very good bagger build and adheres to the build philosopy below.
Building the Perfect Street Engine
http://www.nightrider.com/biketech/street_tc_engine.htm
The Sprocket Twins at Nightrider get hundreds of requests for engine configurations. Riders want the simplest engine to build, the highest power than can get, an engine to beat their friends, an engine to go racing with. In short, every rider wants the ideal engine. They want big power increases and instant throttle response. They describe thinly discuised race engine sitting in a street bike. What many riders don't want to discuss or hear are the issues associated with these "over the edge" engines such as:.
-Exceptionally loud exhaust tone (do you really want 120 dB drone in your ears on your FLH when riding down the interstate?)
-A strong tendency to overheat when exposed to parade duty (called cruising around town)
-High detonation potential when running on pump fuel (can you really find race fuel every 200 miles?)
-High maintenance usually requiring decarboning the cylinder heads and pistons on a frequent basis.
-Reduced Reliability (do you really expect an engine that has huge power and ridden very hard to last as long as a stock engine?)
And these are just a portion of the issues you have to face with these "gonzo" engines. Unfortunately, few riders think about this until their dream engine turns into a nightmare 9 months down the road.
After spending a lot of time thinking about what most riders really want versus what they think they want, I decided to come up with my own requirements for a strong engine upgrade package for Twin Cams. It had to meet the following requirements:
- An engine that can be used in heavy FLH's and Road Kings, as well as in the lighter Dyna's and Softail's.
- An engine that will run on pump fuel without having to worry about detonation.
- An engine that requires a minimum of parts and doesn't break the bank.
- An engine that has a horsepower figure high enough to get some respect when bench racing.
- An engine that will pull strong from idle and propel the bike to any legal or illegal speed chosen within some reasonable limits.
- An engine that would smoke the other V-twins between stoplights or at the drag strip.
- An engine that would be easy to ride and live with when riding in town.
- An engine that woud have near stock reliabililty.
hopetrammell2004
New member
Here's my dyno - 99.66 HP / 109.04 TQ. Now I could swap out my exhaust to a Fat Cat 2-1, and I know my TQ would increase in the 2000-3400 rpms. IMHO, based on several magazine exhaust testing articles and in looking at all the dynos on various forums, the Fat Cat is one of the best low end TQ producing exhausts.
2002 FLHRCI - 98 ci
(9.48:1 CR) (9.02:1 Corrected CR) (198 psi F/R Cyl.)
Revolution Performance 98" Cylinders
CP Pistons (9.7 CR Flat Top)
Baisley Super Stock Heads (84cc)
Crane Valve Springs 155 lbs - Titanium retainers
Kibblewhite Black Diamond High Tulip Valves (1.900" I/1.630" E)
0.040" Head Gasket
TP Engineering Pro-Vent Rocker Boxes
SE Roller Rockers
Andrews TW24G (old JM20)
Horsepower Inc 48mm TB
Doherty PowerPacc w/Ness Big Sucker Stage II Filter
Doherty PowerVents
RB Racing LSR 2-1
3.37 final gear ratio
Dyno Jet PCIII USB
2002 FLHRCI - 98 ci
(9.48:1 CR) (9.02:1 Corrected CR) (198 psi F/R Cyl.)
Revolution Performance 98" Cylinders
CP Pistons (9.7 CR Flat Top)
Baisley Super Stock Heads (84cc)
Crane Valve Springs 155 lbs - Titanium retainers
Kibblewhite Black Diamond High Tulip Valves (1.900" I/1.630" E)
0.040" Head Gasket
TP Engineering Pro-Vent Rocker Boxes
SE Roller Rockers
Andrews TW24G (old JM20)
Horsepower Inc 48mm TB
Doherty PowerPacc w/Ness Big Sucker Stage II Filter
Doherty PowerVents
RB Racing LSR 2-1
3.37 final gear ratio
Dyno Jet PCIII USB
My thoughts EXACTLY!!!!
As I mentioned, my #1 requirement was "NO PINGING", followed closely by "Starts EASY".
Yes, we do a good bit of touring. In fact, the last several years, we've taken "2-week" (2up) vacation rides that are in execss of 5k miles. We've been all over the US.
I did let them install compression releases, although I was against building a motor that "needed" them. (I've replaced too many starter clutches on previous bikes/builds) They assured me that @ 10:1 - with these cams, I'd be OK, but they are just an added precaution, because we do log a ton of miles.
I was also sceptical about seemingly "huge" cams in a bagger and inherrent valve train noise..... Non-issue, as they had told me up front.
It looks like you have a build that's pretty darn close already .... If inclined, it's be a simple swap. Check back this summer for an update.
BTW - Doug Coffey, @ HQ, has a way of keeping his stuff from pinging. Call him & talk to him about it.
HarleyPaw: Wives are all..... "wives"! I have not checked CCP yet, but I will & report back.
As I mentioned, my #1 requirement was "NO PINGING", followed closely by "Starts EASY".
Yes, we do a good bit of touring. In fact, the last several years, we've taken "2-week" (2up) vacation rides that are in execss of 5k miles. We've been all over the US.
I did let them install compression releases, although I was against building a motor that "needed" them. (I've replaced too many starter clutches on previous bikes/builds) They assured me that @ 10:1 - with these cams, I'd be OK, but they are just an added precaution, because we do log a ton of miles.
I was also sceptical about seemingly "huge" cams in a bagger and inherrent valve train noise..... Non-issue, as they had told me up front.
It looks like you have a build that's pretty darn close already .... If inclined, it's be a simple swap. Check back this summer for an update.
BTW - Doug Coffey, @ HQ, has a way of keeping his stuff from pinging. Call him & talk to him about it.
HarleyPaw: Wives are all..... "wives"! I have not checked CCP yet, but I will & report back.
Phil & I both have high comp, high lift engines...i rode mine thru last Texas summer and NEVER missed a beat...i dont use the releases, doesnt ping, and is quieter than the stock cams with my gear drive 615/585....i chose the cast head from R&R(revolution performance) and a slightly diff cam...you would be extremely pleased with either combo