Author Topic: 2013, 117", FLTRXSE, Ward CNC heads, S&S 635HO, Zilla, SE 58 TB  (Read 4384 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Jonny Cash

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 468
  • Country: us
Re: 2013, 117", FLTRXSE, Ward CNC heads, S&S 635HO, Zilla, SE 58 TB
« Reply #25 on: March 11, 2018, 06:08:16 PM »
I guess my take on the dyno section here is different than others, I thought it was a place to post a sheet of what a particular bike made on a dyno on a certain day.  I didn't realize it was a competition. 
   I know Brandon personally, and never seen him be anything but a forthright and honest guy. Did this one put up a big number? yes.  I've also saw one he did recently that didn't do what I thought it should given the combo, but it was posted anyway.
     I helped tune a bone stock 88" a couple weeks ago, bone stock air cleaner et al.  Bike made 80/86 stock, went 90/95 with an air cleaner and slip-ons.  Wouldn't have believed it if I didn't see it, and that on a stingy dyno.  So sometimes even us that think we know are surprised. 

    PW, if I hit a 9 second pass, you can bet I'm gonna go run it everywhere I can, but that's what racers do.  That's not what this section is to me at least.  My bike has made more power on other drums than my sheet posted somewhere here, never posted it.  Lots of guys on here always seemed to insinuate that the C&S drum was happy, its not.  Stingy in fact. When I hit 9.99 Ill back it up, but that's not gonna happen with my superstock head engine, I'm a year away.
« Last Edit: March 11, 2018, 06:22:52 PM by Jonny Cash »
Accurate information is expensive, rare and difficult to find!

Online 1FSTRK

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 7868
  • Country: 00
Re: 2013, 117", FLTRXSE, Ward CNC heads, S&S 635HO, Zilla, SE 58 TB
« Reply #26 on: March 11, 2018, 06:30:11 PM »
I am not sure what has some of your panties in such a bunch.
This cam shines in the T143 at 10.5:1 compression; the parts are all known good parts so there are no questions there.  George Bryce has a 113Ē 10:1 compression bolt on kit that is making 140 square which is 1.23lb/ci of tq.  This engine is 4ci bigger so at 1.23 that is 5lbs more right there now add what you want for the other .5 of compression ratio and you are in shooting distance of 150lbs.

Next thing is we all know sometimes parts just work together to make the perfect storm. I am not putting this build down in any way, in looking at the graph the big stand out is the tq number but if you look objectively at the graph this combo is weak at the hit as a lower comp engine would be, you can get 100tq at 2300rpm with a 103ci and we have seen 125-135lbs at 2500 with some builds of this caliber and size. We also see a curve shape that is uncharacteristic of a D&D so is the big tq hump just this cam, heads, and pipe working together at 4k? Think about the right side of the graph, this cam pulls up to 6400 rpm in some engines yet this build levels at 5500 and peaks at 5750 rpm. This cannot be the first time you have seen a combination work above normal in one spot while being uncharacteristic in all other areas.

A 117 dyno shootout engine would make 1.35+hp/ci which would be 157 hp but it would be at 6400-6500 rpm and to do that you would need more air, bigger ports, more exhaust and that would all work to drop the tq down to what everyone is expecting to see in the middle.

Just a good example of how different combinations of certain good parts can change the outcome on the dyno.
"Never hang on to a mistake just because you spent time or money making it."

Offline pwmorris

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1959
  • Country: us
Re: 2013, 117", FLTRXSE, Ward CNC heads, S&S 635HO, Zilla, SE 58 TB
« Reply #27 on: March 11, 2018, 07:05:51 PM »
The Star 113" kit mentioned above is STD, and I am told SAE the numbers cam in at 135/136 SAE. This is way short of the OP numbers at SAE, 145/151.
No such thing in my experience of "a perfect storm". Either you make the numbers or you don't.
Again, post up a sheet at 10.5, anyone, anywhere in the world making 145/151 from a 117"-
No almost, close, should get there, my buddy saw one, add this or that, or any other BS.

This Dyno sheet from the OP is the King Kong, numero uno 117" at that mild comp anywhere in the World. Period.
This shop in Tennessee is making more N/A power from a 10.5 117",  than any other shop in the Country.
Very simple, again, prove me wrong, post it up or quit the BS.







Cash Money,
I really don't care if the dyno is "stingy" or "loose", I only care about reality.

I also used to think a dyno sheet posted from a shop was what you said but learned over time it is about far more than that.
1.
Consistent, big number sheets are used to sell parts and services..."Wow! did you see Billybobs Road glide after that shop built and tuned it! Damn, I want my bike over there!" "They sure know how to make HP!" Cha ching...
2.
SAE means almost nothing. I know, and have seen almost a dozen BS ways over the years to "inflate" numbers on the drum, not counting old, out of date, generous drums and software. That's why when I was into shootouts, kicking ass, I would run against anyone, ANYWHERE (not hide in some shop), anytime. I prefered to run in open public against someone, or hell, even in their shop drum if asked, as long as expenses were paid, and their buddies were there to see the beat down. Straight up, no games, same drum, same day....
You vouch for this shop?
Have then drive 20 minutes and make a couple pulls with this bike for 50 bucks at Colboch HD on their drum-Hell, I will even pay for the pulls and lets put this to bed (I have offered this before and no one has ever taken me up on it). This would end this quick and fast.

Offline Jonny Cash

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 468
  • Country: us
Re: 2013, 117", FLTRXSE, Ward CNC heads, S&S 635HO, Zilla, SE 58 TB
« Reply #28 on: March 11, 2018, 07:23:57 PM »
I'll vouch for him.  Even you didn't doubt him on another 117, made 148, little higher comp.
http://harleytechtalk.com/index.php?topic=94241.0

Not sure I understand what this all about, it just when I know a person, and know their integrity I will vouch for them.  If a guy puts out bogus stuff in this day and age, it travels fast.  The internet will catch up and the few builds gained will be lost when the truth comes out. 
Accurate information is expensive, rare and difficult to find!

Offline pwmorris

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1959
  • Country: us
Re: 2013, 117", FLTRXSE, Ward CNC heads, S&S 635HO, Zilla, SE 58 TB
« Reply #29 on: March 11, 2018, 07:36:54 PM »
I'll vouch for him.  Even you didn't doubt him on another 117, made 148, little higher comp.
http://harleytechtalk.com/index.php?topic=94241.0

Not sure I understand what this all about, it just when I know a person, and know their integrity I will vouch for them.  If a guy puts out bogus stuff in this day and age, it travels fast.  The internet will catch up and the few builds gained will be lost when the truth comes out.

Cool-
respect that, but your example with even MORE comp, 11.2, doesn't touch this OP post....Sorry man, 11.2 making less than a 10.5 moves this into a whole nother situation.
One more time....no one, no touches this 10.5 build dude.
You can dig to China on every site out there but you ain't gonna touch it.

Online 1FSTRK

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 7868
  • Country: 00
Re: 2013, 117", FLTRXSE, Ward CNC heads, S&S 635HO, Zilla, SE 58 TB
« Reply #30 on: March 11, 2018, 07:44:22 PM »
We are not gonna get on here and argue like a bunch of school kids. Way too busy to waste our time with all that nonsense. Its pretty simple, if you don't like it or think its BS don't look at it. End of story.

Justin

 :up: :up:
Like the man said
I can explain it to you but I cannot understand it for you.
"Never hang on to a mistake just because you spent time or money making it."

Offline N-gin

  • Site Supporter
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4092
  • Country: us
  • \,,/ (>.<) \,,/ Brraaaaap!
Re: 2013, 117", FLTRXSE, Ward CNC heads, S&S 635HO, Zilla, SE 58 TB
« Reply #31 on: March 11, 2018, 07:56:21 PM »
I look at the graph and had moved away from the numbers, but sometimes the candy is tempting and I look at the numbers..

I'm not here cause of a path before me, Im here cause of the burnout left behind

Offline FLDavetrain

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 97
  • Country: us
Re: 2013, 117", FLTRXSE, Ward CNC heads, S&S 635HO, Zilla, SE 58 TB
« Reply #32 on: March 11, 2018, 08:21:01 PM »
I am not sure what has some of your panties in such a bunch.
This cam shines in the T143 at 10.5:1 compression; the parts are all known good parts so there are no questions there.  George Bryce has a 113Ē 10:1 compression bolt on kit that is making 140 square which is 1.23lb/ci of tq.  This engine is 4ci bigger so at 1.23 that is 5lbs more right there now add what you want for the other .5 of compression ratio and you are in shooting distance of 150lbs.

Next thing is we all know sometimes parts just work together to make the perfect storm. I am not putting this build down in any way, in looking at the graph the big stand out is the tq number but if you look objectively at the graph this combo is weak at the hit as a lower comp engine would be, you can get 100tq at 2300rpm with a 103ci and we have seen 125-135lbs at 2500 with some builds of this caliber and size. We also see a curve shape that is uncharacteristic of a D&D so is the big tq hump just this cam, heads, and pipe working together at 4k? Think about the right side of the graph, this cam pulls up to 6400 rpm in some engines yet this build levels at 5500 and peaks at 5750 rpm. This cannot be the first time you have seen a combination work above normal in one spot while being uncharacteristic in all other areas.

A 117 dyno shootout engine would make 1.35+hp/ci which would be 157 hp but it would be at 6400-6500 rpm and to do that you would need more air, bigger ports, more exhaust and that would all work to drop the tq down to what everyone is expecting to see in the middle.

Just a good example of how different combinations of certain good parts can change the outcome on the dyno.


Youíre trying too hard. Just give up.
currently 482ci in the garage

Online Barrett

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 2377
  • Country: us
Re: 2013, 117", FLTRXSE, Ward CNC heads, S&S 635HO, Zilla, SE 58 TB
« Reply #33 on: March 12, 2018, 05:43:16 AM »
At 10.5:1 with a 43.5 intake close it's about 200ccc. That isn't much difference from an 11:1 with a 50 intake close..
I'm close to being done with my 117" using the same cams but with S&S heads done by Star and an HPI 58/62.
I guess if my numbers turn out well I'll have to get an okay to post them ;)

Offline cherryseeg2

  • Site Supporter
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 482
  • Country: us
Re: 2013, 117", FLTRXSE, Ward CNC heads, S&S 635HO, Zilla, SE 58 TB
« Reply #34 on: March 12, 2018, 06:03:05 AM »
Guys I will admit this build did ring the bell.  It even exceeded our expectations and what we told the customer it would do, however it is not the first time we've seen similar results from this cam.  When we put together these combos for our customers it isn't just guessing and hoping for dumb luck that they will perform as promised.  Call it happy or whatever but we have never had a customer leave unhappy because we over promised and under delivered.  We have retuned several bikes from the local dealers in this area and a few from well respected tuners here on this forum and our numbers are always right in line with theirs.  I'm going to post one sheet of a build with the same cam and compression.  Had the tiny PM breather not held it back it would have went the same HP.  BTW this bike baselined within 1hp/1hp of a well respected dyno in Illinois.   

[ Guests cannot view attachments ]

2005 Cherry SEEG2-J&B Performance 120 163hp/144tq

Online No Cents

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 8071
  • Country: us
  • there is no cure for what I got !
Re: 2013, 117", FLTRXSE, Ward CNC heads, S&S 635HO, Zilla, SE 58 TB
« Reply #35 on: March 12, 2018, 07:14:27 AM »
Damn,151 tq on a 117. Head work the magic here?

   I'd say yes...and a great tune!
The over all combination of parts with a set of 110" heads that Rick Ward seems to have down to a science...I believe creates the results we see.

   I don't think this is a case of an over inflated dyno run...just the perfect storm of parts working together nicely. When everything works together as designed...high compression isn't always needed. Perfect example is the Star Racing 126".  It's a perfect storm of parts in a lower compression engine where all the parts work together perfectly.
08 FLHX my grocery getter, 124ci, wfolarry 110" heads, Burns pipe, 158/152 sae

Offline BVHOG

  • Site Supporter
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3381
  • Country: 00
Re: 2013, 117", FLTRXSE, Ward CNC heads, S&S 635HO, Zilla, SE 58 TB
« Reply #36 on: March 12, 2018, 07:36:50 AM »
Looks like a legit dyno run to me.  I don't think these guys are playing games. Obvious it made that power on that day on that dyno. It's just a number on an imperfect machine. I have only seen one 117 break 150 on my dyno and that was after an entire summer of the guy changing head porting, cams, pipes etc but in the end it did it.........on that day. I rode it, my 127 making similar numbers would have spanked it.   Look at the graph, it is a bit wavy, lets say it waves enough to change it by maybe 4 less, would everyone be happy then?  It's not like it's carrying 150tq for a 2500 rpm stretch.  All I have to say is good job guys and be proud of your work and please tell me that it's not a stock crank. :teeth:
If you don't have a sense of humor you probably have no sense at all.

Offline build it

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1643
  • Country: 00
Re: 2013, 117", FLTRXSE, Ward CNC heads, S&S 635HO, Zilla, SE 58 TB
« Reply #37 on: March 12, 2018, 08:04:13 AM »
Problem here is youíve got guys standing on piles of parts sacrificed to the Gods of Speed, and theyíre not making those numbers with similar combinations, let alone parts of a higher order. It makes the hard work (for some) but mostly the money spent for guys that donít get their hands dirty, particularly bitter.

Cash, I look at this section the same way you do. Itís the proper way to look at it.

J&B, I donít know you, unlike some on this site (or this exact thread) that do vouch for people they donít know, I will not; but, Iím not going to shit on your floor considering the same.
What is directionally correct? I ask myself that 100s of times per day.

Offline 1workinman

  • Site Supporter
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1007
  • Country: us
Re: 2013, 117", FLTRXSE, Ward CNC heads, S&S 635HO, Zilla, SE 58 TB
« Reply #38 on: March 12, 2018, 05:15:27 PM »
I'll vouch for him.  Even you didn't doubt him on another 117, made 148, little higher comp.
http://harleytechtalk.com/index.php?topic=94241.0

Not sure I understand what this all about, it just when I know a person, and know their integrity I will vouch for them.  If a guy puts out bogus stuff in this day and age, it travels fast.  The internet will catch up and the few builds gained will be lost when the truth comes out.
  The 635 camshaft might make big numbers but my experience with part throttle was not stellar lol on the 143 .

Offline pwmorris

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1959
  • Country: us
Re: 2013, 117", FLTRXSE, Ward CNC heads, S&S 635HO, Zilla, SE 58 TB
« Reply #39 on: March 13, 2018, 07:32:13 PM »
Damn,151 tq on a 117. Head work the magic here?


   I'd say yes...and a great tune!
The over all combination of parts with a set of 110" heads that Rick Ward seems to have down to a science...I believe creates the results we see.

   I don't think this is a case of an over inflated dyno run...just the perfect storm of parts working together nicely. When everything works together as designed...high compression isn't always needed. Perfect example is the Star Racing 126".  It's a perfect storm of parts in a lower compression engine where all the parts work together perfectly.

Ray,
If you could just step back a second and think about this objectively-Not as a friend of the shops or a cheerleader.
 Of course its a solid build, with great heads and tune....that is NOT what is being discussed here. Neither is how great or stand up the guys who run the shop is either (sounds like they run a great shop with happy customers)-I have personally been impressed and posted such about their builds.
The difference with me, is I really don't care who I praise of piss off- I only see what I see, better or worse, and speak it. I dont have a horse in the race, have zero agenda or financial motivation, and in this case, Hell I dont even have a 117" motor.
My friends have told me  (some times yelling at me first), they respect me more than even their family members sometimes cause I ain't afraid to tell them to their face, what IMO needs to be said.
 I have both praised and pissed you off by you personally, and IMO, that's all good. I think you know how much I respect your HP journey, and how much you remind me of me (except you wont ever take that bike to the track, and it deserves to be there-but its all good :wink:).
On the net, I'm not your friend, enemy, or cheerleader. Funny as hell, when I speak positive for someone, all is good with the World-but question something, God forbid, and all hell breaks loose. That tells me alot about people. Those who can give it, love the praise, but cant stand the heat. Total BS.

As far as the 126", do you remember this, and your friend Stroker ripping it (you never disagreed with him so I assume you vouch for his comments)?-
http://harleytechtalk.com/index.php?topic=84205.0
My old 10.5 motor with tuning went 154/150, but also went 152/149, and a few up or down from that number, depending on the dyno.
This 117" should easily pull 145/150 plus or minus a few 20 minutes from their shop at the HD Dealer. Hell, maybe it pulls 150/156...who knows-

Ray, You should know (or maybe not-but I do), a 126" B2 Head, bigger intake valve motor, with a much bigger bore, and with 9 more cubes , designed by one of the greatest shops in the history of the V Twin world, should not even be in the same zip code at the same 10.5 CR, HD Screamin Eagle whatever with good heads. That SE motor shouldn't be in the same conversation as the Star 126"-and that we are even having this conversation of this motor knocking on the 150 square door at 10.5-SAE SM 5, is interesting.
BTW, WTF is the cheerleaders keep mentioning a "perfect storm" BTW? That is one of the lamest excuses for a dyno sheet I ever heard.

Ray, you have had some nice real nice motors including your 124"'s (with 7 more cubes than a 117") builds with some great guys doing your head work, and you have been back there at mild street comp 10.5. with your motors, or close to it I'm sure-your motors didn't even get near 150 square,  to this until you bumped comp-if I am wrong about this please correct me.
You cant have it both ways-either this 117" 145/151 (10.5) motor smokes your current or previous headwork, or not.
The perfect storm is someones excuse to be a hero or get out of a jam on the wrong side. You have worked too hard for that excuse.
You proudly post your 150 square numbers in your signature, as you should.
Are they a "prefect storm"? Hell no. That is sweat, talent, hard work, hard money, and persistence that produced those numbers.
If someone said Ray got those numbers due to a "perfect storm", I would BS, Ray could produce those numbers within a few, plus or minus, on any legit Dyno anywhere, and would have absolutely no hesitation doing so. Right Ray?

Finally, you are a smart guy.........You know who no one, not even the keyboard commandos, who jerk around looking for this kind of stuff,  have yet to produce a 117" at this mild street comp that beats it? Take a wild guess why?
Guys from a few top shops that I know have contacted me about this, laughing actually- all I can say is, the build is very impressive and Ill leave it at that.
Not WFO, HD Performance, Baisley, Zippers, Cyclerama, Wood, Kendall Johnson, or any other top shop in the World have posted a 117'', 10.5 SAE SM5 on any of their sites pulling near 150 square? Or here at HTT-I wonder why that is.......Cause they dont have it, and have never done it that's why.
Do you really think if they pulled that number they wouldn't post it? really? This would be their winning lotto ticket, and that sheet would be up so fast it would make your head spin.

That's all I have said since my first post. The OP posted one amazing 117" 10.5 motor.
Period.

« Last Edit: March 13, 2018, 09:04:30 PM by pwmorris »

Online FTW359

  • Member
  • Posts: 43
  • Country: us
Re: 2013, 117", FLTRXSE, Ward CNC heads, S&S 635HO, Zilla, SE 58 TB
« Reply #40 on: March 14, 2018, 05:38:35 AM »
Hell let's start a dyno fund raising for a different dyno testing see where it lands.

Offline yobtaf103

  • Site Supporter
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 251
  • Country: gb
Re: 2013, 117", FLTRXSE, Ward CNC heads, S&S 635HO, Zilla, SE 58 TB
« Reply #41 on: March 14, 2018, 10:35:27 AM »
At 10.5:1 with a 43.5 intake close it's about 200ccc. That isn't much difference from an 11:1 with a 50 intake close..
I'm close to being done with my 117" using the same cams but with S&S heads done by Star and an HPI 58/62.
I guess if my numbers turn out well I'll have to get an okay to post them ;)

 :pop: fancy TB too  :smilep:

Online No Cents

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 8071
  • Country: us
  • there is no cure for what I got !
Re: 2013, 117", FLTRXSE, Ward CNC heads, S&S 635HO, Zilla, SE 58 TB
« Reply #42 on: March 14, 2018, 11:47:35 AM »
   damn Paul...I didn't expect all that from you...when I simply agreed that the 117" in question could of made the power it did. I have no horse in this race either. Can this combo be duplicated or backed up on a different dyno...I don't know the answer to that. Do I think Brandon or Justin would intentionally post up a false dyno sheet...no I don't. I think they were proud of their hard work and surprised to see this 117" land where it did. I know I would of been too.
   I will say this...as you well know Paul...the heads are a major key factor for making big horsepower builds...but a lot more things have to play together as well too. Did this one do it...just looking at the sheet with the historical power curve that the 635HO produces...it looks very possible. That 635 hits early and hard and seems to carry the power across the board without falling off too quick.
   I know Rick Ward has been working on his 110" head program for quite sometime, and I have seen some great results with guys using his head work. I was assuming this bike received a top notch set of Rick's heads...therefore I could see the bike making the power it did. I think this combo "rang the bell" and took a few dyno readers by surprise...myself included.
   Paul...I just looked at a 10.50:1 compression little 103" in the dyno section on here that banged out an amazing 142/133 sae. It ran Mike's Wild Thing heads with his 46 cams. That little 103" made 1.37 hp per cube. Is the magic in the heads on this build?
  As far as Jim making a comment about the 126"...that is his opinion on that engine...not mine. The 126" is actually one of my favorite engines because of the larger bore and short stroke.
  As far as my bike goes...I'm very happy with it and I hope the weather will finally break around here so I can put it in the wind.
 
08 FLHX my grocery getter, 124ci, wfolarry 110" heads, Burns pipe, 158/152 sae

Online Barrett

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 2377
  • Country: us
Re: 2013, 117", FLTRXSE, Ward CNC heads, S&S 635HO, Zilla, SE 58 TB
« Reply #43 on: March 14, 2018, 01:17:20 PM »
Wouldn't a smaller tire with taller gears bike show different from a geared down fat tire bike?
FWIW I expect about 140/140 from my 117".

Offline pwmorris

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1959
  • Country: us
Re: 2013, 117", FLTRXSE, Ward CNC heads, S&S 635HO, Zilla, SE 58 TB
« Reply #44 on: March 14, 2018, 08:59:53 PM »
   damn Paul...I didn't expect all that from you...when I simply agreed that the 117" in question could of made the power it did. I have no horse in this race either. Can this combo be duplicated or backed up on a different dyno...I don't know the answer to that. Do I think Brandon or Justin would intentionally post up a false dyno sheet...no I don't. I think they were proud of their hard work and surprised to see this 117" land where it did. I know I would of been too.
   I will say this...as you well know Paul...the heads are a major key factor for making big horsepower builds...but a lot more things have to play together as well too. Did this one do it...just looking at the sheet with the historical power curve that the 635HO produces...it looks very possible. That 635 hits early and hard and seems to carry the power across the board without falling off too quick.
   I know Rick Ward has been working on his 110" head program for quite sometime, and I have seen some great results with guys using his head work. I was assuming this bike received a top notch set of Rick's heads...therefore I could see the bike making the power it did. I think this combo "rang the bell" and took a few dyno readers by surprise...myself included.
   Paul...I just looked at a 10.50:1 compression little 103" in the dyno section on here that banged out an amazing 142/133 sae. It ran Mike's Wild Thing heads with his 46 cams. That little 103" made 1.37 hp per cube. Is the magic in the heads on this build?
  As far as Jim making a comment about the 126"...that is his opinion on that engine...not mine. The 126" is actually one of my favorite engines because of the larger bore and short stroke.
  As far as my bike goes...I'm very happy with it and I hope the weather will finally break around here so I can put it in the wind.
 

I hope someday you take your bike to the track Ray as you said, and promised. It is one cool bagger.....
I thought you also were vouching for this build? You believe it possible, yet no one on the face of the Earth has done it. Builds like this, so special, so amazing, deserve the props when then can smoke the best builders in the World (including WFO Larry who did your heads on your builds). They also need to hold up to the test of reality. Can't have it both ways.......
 You have an awesome build after years of tweaking it, and I'm glad you finally found your sweet spot to enjoy it and the fun riding your hot street build ahead.

Back to this amazing 117"-
Of course heads are a big factor, but less and less as compression diminishes. FACT.
Compression is the KEY here, and the numero uno reason that separates the pack. Once you bump comp, you can run bigger cam profiles, and get more radical with the entire motor. This is THE KEY to this entire debate. You and I know, once you open the compression sandbox, you have full use of the entire toolbox of HP-just look at Dan's (TXCHOPS) 117', which makes this 117' look like the JV team. Shit, I know of 113" promod motors making 200 HP with enough cam and comp.
You didn't answer this, but you were nowhere near 150 square at 10.5-at any cubic inch that you have ever run so far....Can you answer this?

I have run stock heads, modded street heads, hi performance top level street heads and full blown race heads on any and every damn dyno and track I could get to, so I know a little about about heads making the build. Lets just say, heads can't make this massive power on their own (sorry Ray), at this mild compression, and based on the builders who I know who have won many Championships contacting me about this build......well, they just laughed, but maybe you know better.

Again, here is what you said-

"I don't think this is a case of an over inflated dyno run...just the perfect storm of parts working together nicely. When everything works together as designed...high compression isn't always needed. Perfect example is the Star Racing 126".  It's a perfect storm of parts in a lower compression engine where all the parts work together perfectly."
 


The Op's 117" is making more than Durwood's dyno testing of Frankie's 126" that I posted above---http://harleytechtalk.com/index.php?topic=84205.0.
AGAIN,. CANT HAVE IT BOTH WAYS-either Durwoods tune sucks (doubtful), or the motor with 4 3/8 bore, bigger valve, bigger cam, and 9 more cubes at the same comp, gets smoked by this OP 117"-
Fact, and this 10.5 117" is knocking on my old 126" door...Incredible....just unreal.
For the uneducated, here is where 99% of the top performer legit street comp 117"'s land, and this one has your head builders heads.


Yeah, it must be the heads.......no doubt. Rick Ward does great work, congrats. But guess what Ray? so do alot of other head guys, including the guy that did your heads.
Why would anyone go elsewhere? Baddest 117" street motor at this comp in the World. Rick Ward, all day.....You just thru every other top head guy under the bus-unless you think others could pull near 150 square at 10.5 as well. Again, stop trying to have it both ways.
Time to just own it as fact. We all could of saved a lot of time going round and round on the BS (really Ray-Wild Things? Wild Things- from Rowland, who have had all kinds of pissed off customers NOT being able to repeat those incredible numbers? BTW, Do you know of anyone who actually runs one of these set ups? Comon man.....post another 117" anywhere else in the World making more power than this. WTF is wrong with these forums over the last few years? Dancing, BS, and excuses, covering both sides,...not cool.

 
Have you ever in your life seen those numbers duplicated on another dyno (not WT dyno?), anywhere? Nope, and why not, why is no one on the face of the Earth is repeating those numbers ....... damn joke.
Ray,  it ain't a 117" so you are reaching just like the rest....like I said to Cash, you can dig to China but you ain't never gonna fnd it.
Do some homework Ray....look up any 117' from any builder on the face of the Earth-you will NOT find these numbers anywhere.
But then again, you already know that dont you Ray? You looked around and found nothing, zero, zip, nada, that touches this build at 10.5-


Hell let's start a dyno fund raising for a different dyno testing see where it lands.

They have a HD Dealer 20 minutes from the shop that will make a couple baseline pulls for 50 bucks (maybe free for a local shop), which I said I would pay for...no fund raising needed. Trust me, it aint happenin'.....
https://www.colbochhd.com/we-repair-your-harley--service

Wouldn't a smaller tire with taller gears bike show different from a geared down fat tire bike?
FWIW I expect about 140/140 from my 117".

There are tricks to do with the rear tire, and many others that I know of (and wont get into here),but in general, no. The contact patch is very similar on most tires, despite the size of the tire. The air inflation, type of tire, and other factors affect what stays and sticks on the drum.
Trust me, I dont stick out my neck on these posts without a little info of my own..I aint that stupid.

Offline mike jesse

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 958
  • Country: us
Re: 2013, 117", FLTRXSE, Ward CNC heads, S&S 635HO, Zilla, SE 58 TB
« Reply #45 on: March 14, 2018, 09:52:20 PM »
This thread should have been locked up 2 days ago. Jesus, what a bunch of BS!

Offline 04 SE DEUCE

  • Site Supporter
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6025
Re: 2013, 117", FLTRXSE, Ward CNC heads, S&S 635HO, Zilla, SE 58 TB
« Reply #46 on: March 14, 2018, 10:09:45 PM »
Paul,  I'm not going to get the least bit excited about this but since the Wild Things heads/build got brought up it and it doesn't sound like you know anyone that has WT build? 

I had a conversation about WT builds with one of my dad's previous mechanics that was an engine builder/machinist for decades at a performance oriented Harley dealership (Modesto) until he retired.  He didn't have anything to do with the WT builds as that was line mechanic work and he really could care less but he did say they were kinda surprised that the WT 95" builds made the claimed 120hp repeatably.  Greenrock Performance (Bill) in Ventura has done his share of WT builds and has WT heads on his personal bike. 

There's lots of options now and time has moved on but they were good producers.


Offline Herko

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1135
  • Country: us
  • Southern Indiana (Louisville KY Metro Area)
Re: 2013, 117", FLTRXSE, Ward CNC heads, S&S 635HO, Zilla, SE 58 TB
« Reply #47 on: March 15, 2018, 03:22:19 AM »
This thread should have been locked up 2 days ago. Jesus, what a bunch of BS!
Quite the opposite.
Good debate here. Civil. Informative.
Asking a mod to lock this one can make him look biased instead of being a moderator if he were to do so.
Considering a power upgrade?
First and foremost, focus on your tuning plan.

Offline turboprop

  • Site Supporter
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3364
  • Country: 00
Re: 2013, 117", FLTRXSE, Ward CNC heads, S&S 635HO, Zilla, SE 58 TB
« Reply #48 on: March 15, 2018, 04:11:38 AM »
Debate aside, 150 square from a 117" at 10.5 is hard to believe. Would like to see this bike run on a couple other dyne's and have repeatable numbers and have the CCP verified by the dyno operator. My money says this will not happen.
'Never try to teach a pig to sing, it only wastes your time and annoys the pig'.

Online 1FSTRK

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 7868
  • Country: 00
Re: 2013, 117", FLTRXSE, Ward CNC heads, S&S 635HO, Zilla, SE 58 TB
« Reply #49 on: March 15, 2018, 05:00:42 AM »
Every builder and tuner have seen a build that under performed because of one wrong piece in the combination. The other side is that we have all seen a build that over performs in a certain area because of a particular combination.

Because Ray has posted and been part of this discussion here is a link to his latest post where he lowered compression, changed cams, altered the exhaust and pick up tq while loosing some peak hp, yet another example that tq can not only be made with lower compression but in fact be gain over a higher compression version of the same build.

http://harleytechtalk.com/index.php?topic=96148.msg1117788#msg1117788


I have seen big Tq gains without changing compression.
Here is an old bike build that shows what just exhaust and tuning can do. The bike was tuned, never taken off the dyno, exhaust changed and returned.



Look how the tq falls off at the hit of the throttle and again at the top of the run but has a very strong mid range hump on the green run 017. Torque comes from cylinder fill not just static compression.

Some seem to ignore the curve the OP engine is making, if the dyno was the cause of the numbers wouldn't the entire curve be higher, 97lbs of tq at 2300 rpm is not record breaking.
And this engine is far from 150 square, anyone that has worked to raise the curve on a given build knows that to get that 145 hp up to 150 hp without lowering the 150 tq number is a massive under taking particularly at this hp/ci level. The minute you drag race/dyno shootout guys start doing your magic raise the compression, add more duration recipes the 150 tq will disappear as you move the curve to the right to gain the 5 hp needed to get 150hp.



"Never hang on to a mistake just because you spent time or money making it."