Author Topic: TB size  (Read 3384 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline GMR-PERFORMANCE

  • Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5544
  • Country: 00
TB size
« on: October 07, 2016, 09:29:18 AM »
In the past there have been several posts on what size to use pros and cons etc.. Well Just recently I had a tune from a dealer.. Bike is a 2016 RG they installed a 124 HC S&S crate engine into the bike. 66 MM SS with S&S air cleaner with DD zilla pipe.. Well the guy wanted super smooth down rpm " like stock" he is chugging through schools zones and the pipe is too loud .. Think 1850 RPM in 2nd gear.. Not happy to say the least.. Well the bike came back I swapped the 66 to a SE 58 with SE heavy breather retuned. No other changes . The bike will now do what he wants ( its his bike so right or wrong its how he rides it ) overlay of the two with weather stack readings.

Just some back to back to look at .. as well with the 66 it was not happy making the pull from 2000 either as far as being smooth , with the 58 it was fine.


« Last Edit: October 11, 2016, 07:20:39 AM by GMR-PERFORMANCE »
www.gmrperformance.com  www.compensaver.com
817-741-2000   FORT WORTH TX

Offline kd

  • Site Supporter
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4850
  • Country: ca
Re: TB size
« Reply #1 on: October 07, 2016, 09:36:20 AM »
Interesting all round change to the good.   :up:  Good information. Thanks
KD

Offline Ohio HD

  • Professional Cat Herder
  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17442
  • Country: us
Re: TB size
« Reply #2 on: October 07, 2016, 10:11:12 AM »
Good info as always Steve. Does the S&S66 flow much more than the SE58, both out of the box?
For the best deal on bike parts, call Calif Phil
     www.harleypartscheap.com

Offline wfolarry

  • Premium Vendor
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2508
  • Country: us
  • BREATHE DEEP
    • Larry's Motorcycle & Machine Inc.
Re: TB size
« Reply #3 on: October 07, 2016, 10:33:09 AM »
Never liked those S&S TB's. This is more proof why.

Offline GMR-PERFORMANCE

  • Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5544
  • Country: 00
Re: TB size
« Reply #4 on: October 07, 2016, 10:59:19 AM »
Never liked those S&S TB's. This is more proof why.


Larry I have the 66 on my own bike and have to say that I am a not impressed either.. I plan on going back to either a 58 or 62 HPI this winter when I do all of the pipe testing. It runs well but one thing that that bugs me is say a 5th or 6 th gear light roll on is so unresponsive. riding that last bike from the 66 to the 58 was shocking at how much of a change it made .  :up:
www.gmrperformance.com  www.compensaver.com
817-741-2000   FORT WORTH TX

Offline drhooligan

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 201
  • Country: 00
Re: TB size
« Reply #5 on: October 07, 2016, 11:08:09 AM »
I've seen some very strong charts of 117s and 120s with a 55 TB.
2007 FXDWG 120", Hillside Stage 3 Heads, 10.6:1, TW777, V&H 2:1, HPI55, 5.3 g/s

Offline Jammer53

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 512
  • Country: us
Re: TB size
« Reply #6 on: October 07, 2016, 11:26:45 AM »
TB?  Throttle body? 

Sorry. Just learning.
The internet is full of Kowardly Keyboard Kommandos

Offline Coff 06

  • Site Supporter
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2290
  • Country: us
  • Warren ,Member since 06. Mendocino county,Ca
Re: TB size
« Reply #7 on: October 07, 2016, 11:30:14 AM »
TB?  Throttle body? 

Sorry. Just learning.




   Correct.            Coff 06
06 FX Springer, 98",11/1,9B+4*,HPI 55/58 /5.3inj,
HDSP Pro Street heads,123/118

Offline Jammer53

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 512
  • Country: us
Re: TB size
« Reply #8 on: October 07, 2016, 11:54:01 AM »
TB?  Throttle body? 

Sorry. Just learning.




   Correct.            Coff 06

Thanks Coff.
The internet is full of Kowardly Keyboard Kommandos

Offline JohnCA58

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 2727
  • Country: es
Re: TB size
« Reply #9 on: October 07, 2016, 03:19:37 PM »
Had a HPi 51mm sent back to HPi and converted to 55mm for the 120,  great parking lot and all around performance.
YOLO

Offline wfolarry

  • Premium Vendor
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2508
  • Country: us
  • BREATHE DEEP
    • Larry's Motorcycle & Machine Inc.
Re: TB size
« Reply #10 on: October 07, 2016, 03:34:51 PM »
Had a HPi 51mm sent back to HPi and converted to 55mm for the 120,  great parking lot and all around performance.

The HPI 55 is one of my favorites.  :up:

Offline hogasm

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 356
  • Enjoy it while ou can
Re: TB size
« Reply #11 on: October 07, 2016, 04:21:59 PM »
Did you use the same injectors for each TB
04 SEEG
02 FLHTC

Offline build it

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1618
  • Country: 00
Re: TB size
« Reply #12 on: October 07, 2016, 04:24:10 PM »
That's pretty impressive.

It'd be interesting to know what each combination flowed (TB and head). Kinda gives some credence to SE parts  :up:
Internally Red Pilled, externally Black Pilled...without the sociopathy.

Offline 2006FXDCI

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 2522
  • Country: 00
  • Born to lose
Re: TB size
« Reply #13 on: October 07, 2016, 06:06:28 PM »
Had a HPi 51mm sent back to HPi and converted to 55mm for the 120,  great parking lot and all around performance.

The HPI 55 is one of my favorites.  :up:
I have a HPI 55 on my 124" , made 145/140 on it using 6.2 injectors
2006 Super glide 107" , 2005 electra glide 124"

Offline 03NhHarley

  • Site Supporter
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 390
  • Country: us
Re: TB size
« Reply #14 on: October 07, 2016, 06:12:47 PM »
On my 117" I went from a hpi 51mm to a 58/62. Both 1.800 runners. The 51 seemed so much more responsive. Actually come to think of it the HPI 51 and thunderheader seemed funner/ quicker than the 58/62 with a zilla. Could just be me cause I have no numbers to prove it.
« Last Edit: October 07, 2016, 06:23:23 PM by 03NhHarley »

Offline Matt C

  • Locked
  • Full Member
  • Posts: 3288
  • Country: us
Re: TB size
« Reply #15 on: October 07, 2016, 07:38:39 PM »
Flow numbers only give half of the picture (just like with heads). Velocity is very important and often overlooked.
This exercise drives home that point. Enjoy yourselves y'all, its Friday night!  :bike:

Offline pwmorris

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1905
  • Country: us
Re: TB size
« Reply #16 on: October 07, 2016, 08:33:01 PM »
Excellent straight up swap-

Not suprised-The flow numbers untouched from the factory, of the 58 vs the 66 (313 vs 324), aren't a huge gap between them, and with untouched Superstock heads not flowing very much, the velocity of the 58 appears to be correct intake for this 124". As usual, matching correct parts is key, and why so many fail when trying to achieve big HP.
A 124" with B2's and/or a comp bump or different cam profile, or a similar test with a 126" or 143" I would think would show different results.

Offline drhooligan

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 201
  • Country: 00
Re: TB size
« Reply #17 on: October 08, 2016, 06:09:15 AM »
How far can you go with 4.9 injectors?
2007 FXDWG 120", Hillside Stage 3 Heads, 10.6:1, TW777, V&H 2:1, HPI55, 5.3 g/s

Offline build it

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1618
  • Country: 00
Re: TB size
« Reply #18 on: October 08, 2016, 07:26:03 AM »
66 MM SS with S&S air cleaner with DD zilla pipe..
SE 58 with SE heavy breather retuned. No other changes .
Not a real comparison... my money's on the HB made the difference.

I tried a similar test on a built 95", between a 50mm SE and a HPI 55mm both with the same HB.  without the HB the HPI 55mm did nothing more.  with a HB [FWIW the HB was for the dyna and had the smaller ID that just happened to be the same as the ID of the entrance into the HPI 55mm] the bike ran stronger.

The HB for the TBW TB's is close to the same ID as the SE 58mm TB [I'm not talking about blade diameter but the entrance/opening of the TB, iirc the id is 63 64.9mm on the HB]

edited: if we up scale the 95" by 31% = 124.45"; and the TB 55mm by 31% = 72.05mm

Good catch Q1! Not exactly an AB test, not sure if a true AB test is possible though?
Internally Red Pilled, externally Black Pilled...without the sociopathy.

Offline q1svt

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 2172
  • Country: 00
Re: TB size
« Reply #19 on: October 08, 2016, 08:11:37 AM »
Sure, for just a heads up, run them both without an air cleaner...

IMHO, the SE58mm will not like the second gear and 1850 RPM either.

For a performance comparison you'll need a Heavy Breather with similar ID/Cross-seation as the S&S 66 intake diameter.  IMHO it too will run low RPM as the SE 58 did.

Harley's problem with any TB is the intake runner [plus TB] is just too F'ing short unless you plan on running over 10,000 RPM  :wink:
Greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance, it's the illusion of knowledge.

Offline Admiral Akbar

  • Past Poster
  • Past Admin
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24011
  • Country: tr
  • Not Admin
Re: TB size
« Reply #20 on: October 08, 2016, 08:38:55 AM »
66 MM SS with S&S air cleaner with DD zilla pipe..
SE 58 with SE heavy breather retuned. No other changes .
Not a real comparison... my money's on the HB made the difference.

I tried a similar test on a built 95", between a 50mm SE and a HPI 55mm both with the same HB.  without the HB the HPI 55mm did nothing more.  with a HB [FWIW the HB was for the dyna and had the smaller ID that just happened to be the same as the ID of the entrance into the HPI 55mm] the bike ran stronger.

The HB for the TBW TB's is close to the same ID as the SE 58mm TB [I'm not talking about blade diameter but the entrance/opening of the TB, iirc the id is 63 64.9mm on the HB]

edited: if we up scale the 95" by 31% = 124.45"; and the TB 55mm by 31% = 72.05mm

To scale the diameter correctly ref flow you need to multiply by the square root of 1.31... 

Offline q1svt

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 2172
  • Country: 00
Re: TB size
« Reply #21 on: October 08, 2016, 09:41:39 AM »
 :up: thanks I thought of that after I left the house... I'm driving but post the correct number if you will [think it's about 63/64mm].  but there are many additional factors/issue with the scaling from the 95" to a 124" for any real comparison, the SE Heavy Breather is the key factor of the difference between the 124" and the two TBW 58 & 66 TB's.

FWIW, always nice to see your posts  :wink:
Greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance, it's the illusion of knowledge.

Offline Matt C

  • Locked
  • Full Member
  • Posts: 3288
  • Country: us
Re: TB size
« Reply #22 on: October 08, 2016, 11:33:11 AM »
Harley's problem with any TB is the intake runner [plus TB] is just too F'ing short unless you plan on running over 10,000 RPM  :wink:

 :agree:

(It's also too short for 10,000 rpm, but who's counting...lol)

Offline pwmorris

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1905
  • Country: us
Re: TB size
« Reply #23 on: October 08, 2016, 02:12:18 PM »
I understood the purpose of the test to be which would be the ideal intake on this customers' S&S crate 124". The filter swap could change the results (or maybe not as I have also seen basically zero change swapping filter/breather elements). As is, with this pipe and tune combo in this test, the 58 appears to have better street manors, and overall power numbers across the board did not suffer, or actually were better.
Again, if your motor (heads) don't have the big lungs to breathe and move that N/A air, not only ain't you gonna gain anything with bigger and bigger volume induction-you will lose velocity, low speed manors, and even HP.
Or course, too small, and it suffers the other way as a choke point.
Milk and cookies...

Offline Nastytls

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 604
  • Country: us
Re: TB size
« Reply #24 on: October 08, 2016, 03:31:01 PM »
I thought that I had read on here somewhere they the SE 58mm is not any good. The HPI55mm is supposedly better. It seems in this case it's a really good TB.

Offline pwmorris

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1905
  • Country: us
Re: TB size
« Reply #25 on: October 08, 2016, 03:49:51 PM »
I thought that I had read on here somewhere they the SE 58mm is not any good. The HPI55mm is supposedly better. It seems in this case it's a really good TB.
For this application on this customers' motor and flow capability-remember, this is off the shelf, non worked stuff. Bolt on, bolt off-actually very real world results that Joe 124" customer would do...

Offline build it

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1618
  • Country: 00
Re: TB size
« Reply #26 on: October 09, 2016, 05:11:25 AM »
I'd agree that this test is testimony to GMRs tuning ability and this combination being better. Not sure you need a 450 cfm set of heads (edit) and a 350 cfm intake to make under 200 wheel, but everyone has an opinion  :rtfb:

« Last Edit: October 09, 2016, 07:26:13 AM by build it »
Internally Red Pilled, externally Black Pilled...without the sociopathy.

Offline GMR-PERFORMANCE

  • Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5544
  • Country: 00
Re: TB size
« Reply #27 on: October 09, 2016, 07:11:40 AM »
Both air cleaners flow more than enough NOT to be a restriction . Sorry not going to have the debate on how much power and A/C is worth. The test is as good as you can get as the 66 bolt pattern restricts you on backing plate.
www.gmrperformance.com  www.compensaver.com
817-741-2000   FORT WORTH TX

Offline build it

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1618
  • Country: 00
Re: TB size
« Reply #28 on: October 09, 2016, 07:26:45 AM »
Both air cleaners flow more than enough NOT to be a restriction . Sorry not going to have the debate on how much power and A/C is worth. The test is as good as you can get as the 66 bolt pattern restricts you on backing plate.

I don't think anyone is pissing on what you did here...
Internally Red Pilled, externally Black Pilled...without the sociopathy.

Online FlaHeatWave

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 901
  • Country: us
Re: TB size
« Reply #29 on: October 09, 2016, 08:24:18 AM »
Steve,
An enlightening comparison, thanks for Posting :up:
'01 FXDWG2 Red 103/6sp  '05 FLHTCSE2 Cherry  '09 FLTRSE3 Yellow 117/DD7

Offline GMR-PERFORMANCE

  • Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5544
  • Country: 00
Re: TB size
« Reply #30 on: October 09, 2016, 11:03:49 AM »
Without getting into " the specs of what should do this or that based on intake tract length " I tuned both and the 66 is not a happy camper at low RPm compared to the smaller unit. The 58 swap made the low rpm doable and it runs extremely well. No issues in fact very smooth for the large cam , pipe  etc etc .. To the point in my opinion I feel the customer really bought the wrong engine , However that is not the point of my post . With a smaller T/B the bike has great manners now.

I really don't care what cam it should have . Really that is silly as this test did in fact prove that the smaller unit on this given build worked better .  IF others want to debate it feel free.

Cam swap on this build is very costly as its the S&S package pump.

smaller FBW  improved the tq curve , has great low speed manners now all based on a swap nothing more nothing less.. Air cleaners have nothing to do with the increase in tq . And I did in fact remove the units and the numbers did not change. So based on KPA readings and the final numbers tells me the A/C are not a restriction.  Now a heavy breather that was made for the 66 would have made the test even better. However I feel that specs aside it does not have that great effect on an engine like this . Too many things else going on to say that adding a longer intake will solve " X" issue..

But now we are back to what it was designed to do .
www.gmrperformance.com  www.compensaver.com
817-741-2000   FORT WORTH TX

Offline 1workinman

  • Site Supporter
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 854
  • Country: us
Re: TB size
« Reply #31 on: October 09, 2016, 11:31:14 AM »
Excellent straight up swap-

Not suprised-The flow numbers untouched from the factory, of the 58 vs the 66 (313 vs 324), aren't a huge gap between them, and with untouched Superstock heads not flowing very much, the velocity of the 58 appears to be correct intake for this 124". As usual, matching correct parts is key, and why so many fail when trying to achieve big HP.
A 124" with B2's and/or a comp bump or different cam profile, or a similar test with a 126" or 143" I would think would show different results.
   I was trying to understand the purpose of using a large tb and a set of heads that flow what 270 ish or they different on a hc 124. I am not a tuner or ever have great skills on a Harley.  I also wondered if because of the larger area of the bore the throttle response would make tuning at low throttle angles a bit more difficult . Again not a tuner , just asking. I choose the hpi 58 mm which is capable of what 315 I think and have RR make the air cleaner match .  The smaller tb would seem to have a higher volicity at the same throttle angle ? I know there is a reason you take a bike to a builder to say I want this what does it take lol The  smaller tb seems to me be more responsive to the low rpms and have better street manors

Online Frédéric CM

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 265
  • Country: fr
Re: TB size
« Reply #32 on: October 09, 2016, 12:00:26 PM »
So based on KPA readings and the final numbers tells me the A/C are not a restriction.

Please can you elaborate this a little more ?
Thanks !
'14 Street Bob : Andrews 57H cams (0.030" Cometic), Woods lifters, Smith Brother

Offline TorQuePimp

  • Site Supporter
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2834
  • Country: us
Re: TB size
« Reply #33 on: October 09, 2016, 05:33:54 PM »
I'm glad someone finally mentioned shape....not unlike ports.....the shape plays into how it works as well......I've never seen an se 58 or a hpi 58 hurt a 103-107 and by some people's "calculations" or theory they are too big and kill velocity.....rest assured it's not so

Offline 03NhHarley

  • Site Supporter
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 390
  • Country: us
Re: TB size
« Reply #34 on: October 09, 2016, 05:53:47 PM »
This thread has me thinking I will try to sell my 58/62 Maxflow and go back to a 55mm HPi

Offline m1marty

  • Site Supporter
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 381
  • Country: us
  • The Outsider
Re: TB size
« Reply #35 on: October 09, 2016, 06:22:54 PM »
I'm glad someone finally mentioned shape....not unlike ports.....the shape plays into how it works as well......I've never seen an se 58 or a hpi 58 hurt a 103-107 and by some people's "calculations" or theory they are too big and kill velocity.....rest assured it's not so
A question I have on that-  have you seen much in the way of difference between the SE and HPI 58mm on the same/similar builds? I have both sitting here and one thing I noticed is the HPI has a bunch more volume behind the plate. 
OFFO

Offline 1workinman

  • Site Supporter
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 854
  • Country: us
Re: TB size
« Reply #36 on: October 09, 2016, 06:34:51 PM »
Excellent straight up swap-

Not suprised-The flow numbers untouched from the factory, of the 58 vs the 66 (313 vs 324), aren't a huge gap between them, and with untouched Superstock heads not flowing very much, the velocity of the 58 appears to be correct intake for this 124". As usual, matching correct parts is key, and why so many fail when trying to achieve big HP.
A 124" with B2's and/or a comp bump or different cam profile, or a similar test with a 126" or 143" I would think would show different results.
   I was trying to understand the purpose of using a large tb and a set of heads that flow what 270 ish or they different on a hc 124. I am not a tuner or ever have great skills on a Harley.  I also wondered if because of the larger area of the bore the throttle response would make tuning at low throttle angles a bit more difficult . Again not a tuner , just asking. I choose the hpi 58 mm which is capable of what 315 I think and have RR make the air cleaner match .  The smaller tb would seem to have a higher volicity at the same throttle angle ? I know there is a reason you take a bike to a builder to say I want this what does it take lol The  smaller tb seems to me be more responsive to the low rpms and have better street manors

 One of the key parts of your post is "at the same throttle angle". This is true but given that the throttle angle is controlled by the rider not the engine and the rider adjusts the throttle to give the engine speed he wants, the velocity at a given angle really means nothing to the engine or rider. At wide open throttle the velocity in the TB bore could be lower on a given engine at a given rpm if going from a perfectly sized TB to one that is too large but even that can produce a gain in cylinder fill if it relieves some flow restriction for the intake tract as a whole and causes an increase in flow and velocity at the valve seat which is where it actually counts.
The test was done at wide open throttle so it shows nothing about the manors at low speed, low throttle position and any smoothness or tune ability that was gained there was likely due to the differences in the manifold section of the TB. Both shape and volume play a factor there, but the bore diameter does not because the open area is controlled by the blade angle and therefore the rider.
  Yes your right about that and I had wondered about that because the rides controls the throttle and how ever I was  not sure because I never tuned a bike and I was not sure how to make the  throttle response to small changes . 
« Last Edit: October 09, 2016, 07:05:41 PM by 1workinman »

Offline TorQuePimp

  • Site Supporter
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2834
  • Country: us
Re: TB size
« Reply #37 on: October 09, 2016, 09:50:32 PM »
I'm glad someone finally mentioned shape....not unlike ports.....the shape plays into how it works as well......I've never seen an se 58 or a hpi 58 hurt a 103-107 and by some people's "calculations" or theory they are too big and kill velocity.....rest assured it's not so
A question I have on that-  have you seen much in the way of difference between the SE and HPI 58mm on the same/similar builds? I have both sitting here and one thing I noticed is the HPI has a bunch more volume behind the plate.

  Not that much in the few builds ive done where both were involved or similar builds

  I think.....think....the HPI shows an advantage in some bigger builds as it does flow more air and can come configured for different sized port openings..

  I have also used the S&S 58 T hog in a few builds ......it seems to like larger builds for some reason

  couple of 113-117 builds had killler curves and really good manners with that TB

I almost always work them a little to sometimes more than a little as sometimes the ports/castings are not machined perfectly on center.....work with what you have

Offline m1marty

  • Site Supporter
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 381
  • Country: us
  • The Outsider
Re: TB size
« Reply #38 on: October 09, 2016, 11:11:36 PM »
Thank you.  :up: The SE seems to be a pretty decent bang for the buck considering the price.
OFFO

Offline GMR-PERFORMANCE

  • Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5544
  • Country: 00
Re: TB size
« Reply #39 on: October 10, 2016, 07:29:02 AM »
So based on KPA readings and the final numbers tells me the A/C are not a restriction.

Please can you elaborate this a little more ?
Thanks !


With a restirction you will see that the KPA will not go to where it should.. So lets say you snap the throttle open and it goes to 101 KPA and then as you get to 4000 it starts to roll back to 94 . Pop the air filter off and now it stays at 101 -99 = filter restricting the engine..


As for the light throttle roll on correct there is no sheet to show that. That is just seat of the pants "feel"   I have the 66 as I said and it is not super responsive at 2500 rolling along and you want to just speed up a small amount . You lightly roll the throttle and it does pick up but its a tad soft.  Now with the smaller unit on the bike you repeat the same thing and the engine is happy to instantly respond.

Again with this build .. but in my opinion the 66 is really too large for the avg big build..  Now drop that build in a dyna where the bike weighs 300 less lbs and that a different story .
www.gmrperformance.com  www.compensaver.com
817-741-2000   FORT WORTH TX

Online Frédéric CM

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 265
  • Country: fr
Re: TB size
« Reply #40 on: October 10, 2016, 10:35:44 AM »
Got it, thank you for the explanations :)
And is there a similar way to know if the heads or TB are limiting ? (or maybe the drop in Kpa is just the offset of the MAP sensor ?)
'14 Street Bob : Andrews 57H cams (0.030" Cometic), Woods lifters, Smith Brother

Offline itsafatboy

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 815
  • Country: us
  • 2001 116" FLSTFI
Re: TB size
« Reply #41 on: October 10, 2016, 11:17:03 AM »
Just a opinion when i got my HPI throttle body for my 116" talked to HPI and they said the 53mm was the one i wanted then when i sent it back to them for a throttle blade bearing change , they said they could change it to a 55  but then talked me out of it still saying the 53mm was what i wanted ,  i got 132hp and 140tq on mine with tw8g cams at the time,   

Offline Merc1100sc

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 437
Re: TB size
« Reply #42 on: October 10, 2016, 11:45:03 AM »
Not sure if this fits within forum rules but I have a HPI 55 cable TB I am selling with 5.3 HPI injectors. PM if interested.

Offline No Cents

  • Site Supporter
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7806
  • Country: us
  • there is no cure for what I got !
Re: TB size
« Reply #43 on: October 10, 2016, 12:31:46 PM »
   I know HPI makes some of the nicest t/bodies that money can buy...and I don't think anyone can go wrong with running one. That said...I run a 66mm t/hog on my 124 that has been massaged on a little. I personally don't have any kind of lag with it rolling on the throttle at 2500 rpm's...or from any rpm for that matter. My fuel injectors are currently the Bosch 60lber's...which are pretty big and they shoot a ton of fuel to the engine. My fuel mileage is actually terrible the way it guzzles the gas...but parking lot manners are surprisingly very smooth with no erratic feeling. I will drop back to yellow band 6.2 injectors this winter to see if that improves the gas mileage any.

Ray
08 FLHX 124", wfolarry 110 heads, CR630i cams, Burns pipe, 158/152 sae

Offline GMR-PERFORMANCE

  • Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5544
  • Country: 00
Re: TB size
« Reply #44 on: October 10, 2016, 01:22:45 PM »
   I know HPI makes some of the nicest t/bodies that money can buy...and I don't think anyone can go wrong with running one. That said...I run a 66mm t/hog on my 124 that has been massaged on a little. I personally don't have any kind of lag with it rolling on the throttle at 2500 rpm's...or from any rpm for that matter. My fuel injectors are currently the Bosch 60lber's...which are pretty big and they shoot a ton of fuel to the engine. My fuel mileage is actually terrible the way it guzzles the gas...but parking lot manners are surprisingly very smooth with no erratic feeling. I will drop back to yellow band 6.2 injectors this winter to see if that improves the gas mileage any.

Ray


Injectors are not going to help with MPG  that is based on the target AFR that is set.. 

as for yours not having a issue that is where the " build" comes into play.. A 124 with a 640 set at 10.8 is not anywhere near what you have.. you are at maybe 185 CCP .

We all know that a increase makes it better even so the cam likes to be 2500+ I did not break 120 Tq with my ex until 2600 now the 2-1 brings that one faster I have the comp ratio to make it work the pipe is controlling my current curve.. 

I have pipe testing that I will be doing ,
www.gmrperformance.com  www.compensaver.com
817-741-2000   FORT WORTH TX

Offline pwmorris

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1905
  • Country: us
Re: TB size
« Reply #45 on: October 10, 2016, 03:36:26 PM »
This test ain't about HPI, a custom made intake, or any other combo of parts.

This is a crate 124 straight up intake swap between two S&S products (the 58 and the 66)-Super simple. Joe Customer says, "My bike is having issues at low speed-This intake isn't working so well"...The shop (in this example, Steve at GMR) and customer agree to test the other S&S product...The bigger intake is removed, and the smaller one installed...bingo-a nice combo gets dialed in and happy customer rides on-
This is a from the factory crate 124"- there is no head work or intake porting, compression bump, cam change, other aftermarket intake tested, it's not a bigger or smaller motor or anything else. This specific combo for this customers crate motor and bike combo works. Sure, you can test and test and test just about every intake, pipe, cam profile, and motor combo out there but 99% of riders ain't doin' that.
The stock 58 wouldn't be optimum on Rays motor, my built 126", a 143", or a mild 95".
Again, the total combo of parts working together on a specific motor for a specific goal is key.

Offline 98fxstc

  • Site Supporter
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1054
  • Country: au
Re: TB size
« Reply #46 on: October 10, 2016, 04:22:12 PM »
This test ain't about HPI, a custom made intake, or any other combo of parts.

This is a crate 124 straight up intake swap between two S&S products (the 58 and the 66)-Super simple. Joe Customer says, "My bike is having issues at low speed-This intake isn't working so well"...The shop (in this example, Steve at GMR) and customer agree to test the other S&S product...The bigger intake is removed, and the smaller one installed...bingo-a nice combo gets dialed in and happy customer rides on-
This is a from the factory crate 124"- there is no head work or intake porting, compression bump, cam change, other aftermarket intake tested, it's not a bigger or smaller motor or anything else. This specific combo for this customers crate motor and bike combo works. Sure, you can test and test and test just about every intake, pipe, cam profile, and motor combo out there but 99% of riders ain't doin' that.
The stock 58 wouldn't be optimum on Rays motor, my built 126", a 143", or a mild 95".
Again, the total combo of parts working together on a specific motor for a specific goal is key.

The TB's are not both S&S
we have S&S 66 and SE 58
but the 'test' is not about different brands either
'test' says to me , bigger is not always better
but result is tainted by different brand as well
Steve has discounted the effect of the Heavy Breather
'test' result says to me , the SE58 does better on this motor than a S&S 66   :nix:

Offline pwmorris

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1905
  • Country: us
Re: TB size
« Reply #47 on: October 10, 2016, 04:44:14 PM »
This test ain't about HPI, a custom made intake, or any other combo of parts.

This is a crate 124 straight up intake swap between two S&S products (the 58 and the 66)-Super simple. Joe Customer says, "My bike is having issues at low speed-This intake isn't working so well"...The shop (in this example, Steve at GMR) and customer agree to test the other S&S product...The bigger intake is removed, and the smaller one installed...bingo-a nice combo gets dialed in and happy customer rides on-
This is a from the factory crate 124"- there is no head work or intake porting, compression bump, cam change, other aftermarket intake tested, it's not a bigger or smaller motor or anything else. This specific combo for this customers crate motor and bike combo works. Sure, you can test and test and test just about every intake, pipe, cam profile, and motor combo out there but 99% of riders ain't doin' that.
The stock 58 wouldn't be optimum on Rays motor, my built 126", a 143", or a mild 95".
Again, the total combo of parts working together on a specific motor for a specific goal is key.

The TB's are not both S&S
we have S&S 66 and SE 58
but the 'test' is not about different brands either
'test' says to me , bigger is not always better
but result is tainted by different brand as well
Steve has discounted the effect of the Heavy Breather
'test' result says to me , the SE58 does better on this motor than a S&S 66   :nix:
Yes,
SE 58 (not S&S) vs S&S 66-my bad. This was a simple product swap on this bike and motor.
As I said, I have tested and seen tested different filters/breather elements and it may or may not make a difference, within, the margin of dyno error and conditions.

Offline rageglide

  • Site Supporter
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3310
  • Country: us
Re: TB size
« Reply #48 on: October 10, 2016, 05:05:03 PM »
Steve, from driveability perspective.  Did you change the blade control as part of the testing, or are you running the same settings?

Offline GMR-PERFORMANCE

  • Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5544
  • Country: 00
Re: TB size
« Reply #49 on: October 11, 2016, 06:45:31 AM »

Do your own test then  .  I did what I did based on what I have to work with. Wrong title , wrong parts


And no I did not alter the FBW control  My table is the same for most I leave it low on larger inch engines. until 2000 for the most part on some it will not be until 2500.. Its all based on how the engine reacts and how smooth the curve is , many times you will see better numbers and smooth with less opening .. every build is different.
« Last Edit: October 11, 2016, 06:49:35 AM by GMR-PERFORMANCE »
www.gmrperformance.com  www.compensaver.com
817-741-2000   FORT WORTH TX

Offline Nastytls

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 604
  • Country: us
Re: TB size
« Reply #50 on: October 11, 2016, 07:00:19 AM »

Do your own test then  .  I did what I did based on what I have to work with. Wrong title , wrong parts


And no I did not alter the FBW control  My table is the same for most I leave it low on larger inch engines. until 2000 for the most part on some it will not be until 2500.. Its all based on how the engine reacts and how smooth the curve is , many times you will see better numbers and smooth with less opening .. every build is different.

No good deed goes unpunished. You post an interesting comparison and are essentially attacked over semantics.  :idunno: This thread is sad.