Author Topic: 2015, 148", FLHTCU, no forced induction needed  (Read 4358 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline GMR-PERFORMANCE

  • Premium Vendor
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5917
  • Country: 00
Re: 2015, 148", FLHTCU, no forced induction needed
« Reply #75 on: April 16, 2018, 07:07:03 AM »
that was what I was asking .. So i am not the only one confused here .
www.gmrperformance.com  www.compensaver.com
817-741-2000   FORT WORTH TX

Offline jbroski

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 85
  • Country: us
Re: 2015, 148", FLHTCU, no forced induction needed
« Reply #76 on: April 16, 2018, 07:24:46 AM »
JC, bigger ci in same cc is 10.9, I guess that makes the number more real. room full of brain surgeons

Offline turboprop

  • Site Supporter
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3407
  • Country: 00
Re: 2015, 148", FLHTCU, no forced induction needed
« Reply #77 on: April 16, 2018, 07:31:53 AM »
JC, bigger ci in same cc is 10.9, I guess that makes the number more real. room full of brain surgeons

This is a technical site. For fun, check out some of the lifter discussions. Same discussion, countless times, and they go on and on. No kidding. Welcome.

Back to your dyno sheet. Your new claim is 10.9:1 compression @ 148". Is this correct?

Offline jbroski

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 85
  • Country: us
Re: 2015, 148", FLHTCU, no forced induction needed
« Reply #78 on: April 16, 2018, 08:23:47 AM »
This is the first number posted. No new claim

Offline turboprop

  • Site Supporter
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3407
  • Country: 00
Re: 2015, 148", FLHTCU, no forced induction needed
« Reply #79 on: April 16, 2018, 08:29:05 AM »
This is the first number posted. No new claim

Yes, it is. First you said 10.5, now 10.9. I assume you are going with 10.9.

187 hp from 148" at 10.9 compression? BS.

Offline jbroski

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 85
  • Country: us
Re: 2015, 148", FLHTCU, no forced induction needed
« Reply #80 on: April 16, 2018, 08:34:33 AM »
I never said 10.5. What time are you performing surgery?

Offline Nastytls

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 871
  • Country: us
Re: 2015, 148", FLHTCU, no forced induction needed
« Reply #81 on: April 16, 2018, 09:28:58 AM »
Not for nothing but Post #20 states stock comp which is just under 10.5.

Offline jbroski

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 85
  • Country: us
Re: 2015, 148", FLHTCU, no forced induction needed
« Reply #82 on: April 16, 2018, 11:09:32 AM »

187 hp from 148" at 10.9 compression? BS.
[/quote]

Thanks for sharing your technical response.

Offline 1workinman

  • Site Supporter
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1021
  • Country: us
Re: 2015, 148", FLHTCU, no forced induction needed
« Reply #83 on: April 16, 2018, 04:16:09 PM »
Bike pic
Nice bike and welcome aboard . I not trying to find out how you made the power you did , I appreciate you posting what you did. I ridden a 143 as it is stock and it did not impress me with its low rpm response and frankly the horse power when you consider how big it is. I probably catch some grief nothing new but its far from a race motor lol at its compression ratio.  I know some like the 635 but not me .... So I decided to go a different route .  I ridden a 124 that Steve built and the stock 143 and to be honest the 143 did run harder but not a huge amount and the 124 has a ton of better low end response . How does your bike respond down say at 2800 or 2900 and roll on the throttle . Thanks again Jim

Offline build it

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1655
  • Country: 00
Re: 2015, 148", FLHTCU, no forced induction needed
« Reply #84 on: April 17, 2018, 05:32:39 AM »
OP,

What can you tell these guys about the camshaft, headers, collector, and heads?
Heads flow what or who did them?
Exhaust steps and length?
Collector dimensions?
Camshaft specs?
Who’s dyno?

When you put the smack down with those kind of numbers you make people feel small. Make them feel smaller by being a little more transparent, keep in mind, the “sharks”  are circling, not me, I never get off the boat.
What is directionally correct? I ask myself that 100s of times per day.

Offline 1workinman

  • Site Supporter
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1021
  • Country: us
Re: 2015, 148", FLHTCU, no forced induction needed
« Reply #85 on: April 17, 2018, 04:43:44 PM »
OP,

What can you tell these guys about the camshaft, headers, collector, and heads?
Heads flow what or who did them?
Exhaust steps and length?
Collector dimensions?
Camshaft specs?
Who’s dyno?

When you put the smack down with those kind of numbers you make people feel small. Make them feel smaller by being a little more transparent, keep in mind, the “sharks”  are circling, not me, I never get off the boat.
  This what I think the fellow said , custom grind and the 625 did a good job so you can go from there , custom pipe with a maga cat DD I think muffler . I would assume a stepped pipe . Heads loved on lol so I have a number in mind but I going to keep that one to my self

Offline Barrett

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 2386
  • Country: us
Re: 2015, 148", FLHTCU, no forced induction needed
« Reply #86 on: April 17, 2018, 05:23:26 PM »
Are those Ward heads?

Offline jbroski

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 85
  • Country: us
Re: 2015, 148", FLHTCU, no forced induction needed
« Reply #87 on: April 22, 2018, 03:47:52 PM »
No, star power, heads, ti valves, pistons

Offline build it

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1655
  • Country: 00
Re: 2015, 148", FLHTCU, no forced induction needed
« Reply #88 on: April 23, 2018, 04:15:11 AM »
JBroski, again, no skin in this discussion. I don’t know you, and wouldn’t conclude that I did based on forum posts like so many seem to do.

Did you measure the head CC, dome, and crushed gasket assembled? I’ll take an answer here or via PM which will remain PM between you and I, if you’d like.

Knowing GB did the heads, valves, and pistons, that stroke makes a whole pile of sense.

I’d be real interested in knowing how frequent tear downs are required. I know GBs thoughts and reasoning on the Ti valves, but never met anyone that put miles on one of those builds.
« Last Edit: April 23, 2018, 04:37:52 AM by build it »
What is directionally correct? I ask myself that 100s of times per day.

Offline jbroski

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 85
  • Country: us
Re: 2015, 148", FLHTCU, no forced induction needed
« Reply #89 on: April 24, 2018, 06:29:38 AM »
didn't measure any of that, flat top piston, s&s only makes one thickness head gasket. i'm curious about tear down too, will follow up with any info.

Offline build it

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1655
  • Country: 00
Re: 2015, 148", FLHTCU, no forced induction needed
« Reply #90 on: April 24, 2018, 07:12:43 AM »
Jbroski, so you don’t know what the compression is, which is fine. That’s where all the BS came from and could’ve been avoided. Back calculating it via a CCP test isn’t the proper way to do it, but it might give a small indication of where you’re at with some other data points.

Did you do a CCP test, and can you part with any of the camshaft info?

FWIW, I’m pretty excited about this build.
What is directionally correct? I ask myself that 100s of times per day.

Offline Barrett

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 2386
  • Country: us
Re: 2015, 148", FLHTCU, no forced induction needed
« Reply #91 on: April 24, 2018, 07:45:36 AM »
When Star did my heads the CC's went from 89 to 90.8.
I didn't know their CNC program did the chamber also.  :emoGroan:

Offline build it

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1655
  • Country: 00
Re: 2015, 148", FLHTCU, no forced induction needed
« Reply #92 on: April 24, 2018, 08:38:26 AM »
When Star did my heads the CC's went from 89 to 90.8.
I didn't know their CNC program did the chamber also.  :emoGroan:

B3 heads?
What is directionally correct? I ask myself that 100s of times per day.

Offline Barrett

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 2386
  • Country: us
Re: 2015, 148", FLHTCU, no forced induction needed
« Reply #93 on: April 24, 2018, 08:45:39 AM »
No, S&S 89cc 2.00/1.605.. I'm only 117".
I asked George about a larger valve and he told me the 2" would be plenty for me.
I was shooting for 10.8 and gaining a few cc's wasn't in the plan.
I'm guessing I'll be around 140hp without my bottle..

Offline build it

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1655
  • Country: 00
Re: 2015, 148", FLHTCU, no forced induction needed
« Reply #94 on: April 24, 2018, 09:10:43 AM »
I hear you and am not a huge fan of the surprise. You can make it work though.
What is directionally correct? I ask myself that 100s of times per day.

Offline jbroski

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 85
  • Country: us
Re: 2015, 148", FLHTCU, no forced induction needed
« Reply #95 on: April 25, 2018, 09:57:47 AM »
i don't believe star uses a cnc.
i did post an est comp ratio of 10.9
using a 143 stk ratio of 10.5 calculated ccv by the formula,  ccv=CV divided by (CRn-1), then took the new CV with that ccv


Offline sfmichael

  • Site Supporter
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5622
  • Country: us
  • Hoping to build the next mighty 'mouse'
Re: 2015, 148", FLHTCU, no forced induction needed
« Reply #96 on: April 25, 2018, 12:20:46 PM »
S&S T143 stroked to 148
HPI T body
left the clutch slippage in it for now, trying to control the launch
how's this for street torque?

(Attachment Link)


 :dgust:  mighty impressive I'd say
Colorado Springs, CO.

Offline build it

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1655
  • Country: 00
Re: 2015, 148", FLHTCU, no forced induction needed
« Reply #97 on: April 25, 2018, 12:48:50 PM »
i don't believe star uses a cnc.
i did post an est comp ratio of 10.9
using a 143 stk ratio of 10.5 calculated ccv by the formula,  ccv=CV divided by (CRn-1), then took the new CV with that ccv

JBroski,  I appreciate the transparency.

I’m looking forward to teardown, inspection and measurement. That engine deserves the details.

Good job and nice work so far.
What is directionally correct? I ask myself that 100s of times per day.

Offline motolocopat

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 335
  • Country: us
Re: 2015, 148", FLHTCU, no forced induction needed
« Reply #98 on: June 24, 2018, 06:18:12 PM »
Very nice build and thanks for sharing.
MotoLocoPat
2013FLHX 2010FXDF 2006 S2R1000 2004Adv950