Stock late model CVO heads

[1FSTRK]

A Friend picked up a 2014 CVO Softail and is looking to do some bolt on upgrades.
Does anyone have flow numbers for these late model stock CVO heads?
What is the most horsepower and tq you have seen with stock or big bore using Stock CVO heads?
I looked around the dyno section but not much is there with stock CVO heads. Any owners, tuners, or dyno sheets would be appreciated.

[Hilly13]

This probably won't be all that helpfully but it might get some discussion going, an engine builder slash tuner over here by the forum name of Dynoharley did some flow testing on those heads stock, he posted the sheets on the Aussie forum, I did copy the sheets because I was surprised at how well they did, I can't find the sheet but from memory the peak numbers were over 300, I don't remember exactly at what lift that was but I think it was around .55-.6.
Anecdotally because of core shift they can be good or bad so you can't just blanket assume anything, I believe the set I have are decent, room for improvement for sure but I'm comparing it to my last 103 which was a 116/116 dynoed Dyna running more compression than my current 110 and the 110 feels much stronger, it has not been dynoed, I street tuned it and I know what you think of that so as I said, not a lot of help but there it is.

[1FSTRK]

This probably won't be all that helpfully but it might get some discussion going, an engine builder slash tuner over here by the forum name of Dynoharley did some flow testing on those heads stock, he posted the sheets on the Aussie forum, I did copy the sheets because I was surprised at how well they did, I can't find the sheet but from memory the peak numbers were over 300, I don't remember exactly at what lift that was but I think it was around .55-.6.
Anecdotally because of core shift they can be good or bad so you can't just blanket assume anything, I believe the set I have are decent, room for improvement for sure but I'm comparing it to my last 103 which was a 116/116 dynoed Dyna running more compression than my current 110 and the 110 feels much stronger, it has not been dynoed, I street tuned it and I know what you think of that so as I said, not a lot of help but there it is.

Thanks for the info and your time. If you happen on the rest of the flow data or a link please let me know.

[Hilly13]

Had a bit of a search around and found the pics. I don't think he will mind me sharing them as they are already in the public domain.
The first one is a stock 110 head, as it came off a bike.
[attach=0,msg1271693]
The second is after he had put a 2.100" intake valve in and done a 4 angle cut on the original seat and two on the new valve.
[attach=1,msg1271693]
The third is with the modded intake valve but with intake manifold and air cleaner fitted to the head and flowed. Don't know for sure if it's the stock intake but I believe it was.
[attach=2,msg1271693]
The last pic is his test rig, means not a lot to me but may to others.
[attach=3,msg1271693]

[1FSTRK]

Thanks for taking the time to look that all up and post it. It would have been interesting to see a 4th test with the SE 58mm TB for comparison. I found this Stock head 117"combo in the dyno section here that is running the SE58mm TB and it has a pretty good curve.

http://harleytechtalk.com/htt/index.php?topic=92061.msg1060863#msg1060863

[attach=0,msg1060863]

[1FSTRK]

This 110" tuned by Steve at GMR actually has a run with the stock TB and a run with the SE58 TB.

http://harleytechtalk.com/htt/index.php?topic=90763.msg1045415#msg1045415

[Hilly13]

1FSTRK I don't have dyno data to share on the difference between 50 and 58, I can say it makes a difference, my street tuning showed significant VE changes with my current bike, no other changes, if you want to talk about it give me a call, 61439071965.

[Don D]

No disrespect but has this bench been calibrated with test plates and with the head mounted was the setup tested for leakage. Reason I ask is the initial test seems very high from what I and others typically see. If I have time I will have to dig around for some of the baselines I have or snap another. IIRC they were in the 270cfm range stock, head tested with a 45mm x 51mm velocity stack mounted. With stock valve ported they go a bit over 300 single digits, same test method, and with a 2.120 up to ~335. My bench is calibrated monthly with tractorsport.com plates. Years ago I had issues with calibration.

[dsvracer]

i agree with Don that their is something up with those flow numbers.  best i ever seen for a stock head but i wonder why the flow pressure is so low ??   these numbers are not anything i see on a regular basis.  just curious.  dsv

[Hilly13]

I have no idea on the leak checks or methods that were used in the tests. All my previous dealings with the man convinced me he is a straight shooter and very knowledgeable, he builds and tunes turbocharged Harley engines as well as naturally aspirated ones, can tune with just about any brand of tuning interface, does his own headporting etc. Maybe he had a bad day?
What does a typical stock head test sheet look like?
Don and Dan, would either of you be willing to post a sheet or two as a benchmark if you could spare the time?
I do know the 110 heads can vary quite a bit in stock state because of one thing or another but that is due to the characteristics of the actual head being tested assuming the testing is being done correctly.

[Barrett]

Here's a few numbers to compare.

[Ohio HD]

Not knocking the info the guy created on his bench, as I have no idea as to the conditions he tested under. I tend to agree with Dan and Don about 110 stock being less. I have sheets from a guy I trust, 110 stock, 110+ stock, and MVA stock. The only numbers in that range are the MVA stock, they're slightly more. The 110 heads are about 270'ish and the 110+ are less than that. 

[1FSTRK]

Not knocking the info the guy created on his bench, as I have no idea as to the conditions he tested under. I tend to agree with Dan and Don about 110 stock being less. I have sheets from a guy I trust, 110 stock, 110+ stock, and MVA stock. The only numbers in that range are the MVA stock, they're slightly more. The 110 heads are about 270'ish and the 110+ are less than that.

What are the differences between those two heads?

What head comes on the 2014 CVO from the factory, are they a different head from the 110 stock and the 110+?

[Ohio HD]

The factory 110 head comes on all 110 motors.


http://harleytechtalk.com/htt/index.php?topic=90639.0;all

[motolocopat]

Id do a drop on 117", cam it, tune it, ride it.

[TorQuePimp]

I have yet to see a stock 110 head break 270cfm@28"
Most CNC ported mva heads go high 280 to low 290's@28"
Always worth it to do a valve job and grind the valves
The jinked up factory valve job wreaks havoc on the exhaust seat and the exhaust valve

[1FSTRK]

Thank to all for the head info.

Just to keep this from become a  flow bench thread (it  is winter here), what are the best dyno numbers you have seen from the factory CVO heads?

It looks like the bigger the displacement the more efficient they become, much like the M-8 heads.

[Don D]

Not knocking the info the guy created on his bench, as I have no idea as to the conditions he tested under. I tend to agree with Dan and Don about 110 stock being less. I have sheets from a guy I trust, 110 stock, 110+ stock, and MVA stock. The only numbers in that range are the MVA stock, they're slightly more. The 110 heads are about 270'ish and the 110+ are less than that.

What are the differences between those two heads?

What head comes on the 2014 CVO from the factory, are they a different head from the 110 stock and the 110+?

The 110+, an over the counter SE head, has a 2.12 intake VS a 2.08 CVO stock, head is milled .025, the port geometry is very different. The 110+ head is the base casting for the MVA and IMO to reduce run time has some areas larger and some smaller to allow for core shift and a clean cut. Again IMO HD just got the wise idea it would be something they could market. The CVO head is a good start to port. The later castings are more consistent and there is not the undercut intake seats we saw in the earlier years.

[1FSTRK]

Not knocking the info the guy created on his bench, as I have no idea as to the conditions he tested under. I tend to agree with Dan and Don about 110 stock being less. I have sheets from a guy I trust, 110 stock, 110+ stock, and MVA stock. The only numbers in that range are the MVA stock, they're slightly more. The 110 heads are about 270'ish and the 110+ are less than that.

What are the differences between those two heads?

What head comes on the 2014 CVO from the factory, are they a different head from the 110 stock and the 110+?

The 110+, an over the counter SE head, has a 2.12 intake VS a 2.08 CVO stock, head is milled .025, the port geometry is very different. The 110+ head is the base casting for the MVA and IMO to reduce run time has some areas larger and some smaller to allow for core shift and a clean cut. Again IMO HD just got the wise idea it would be something they could market. The CVO head is a good start to port. The later castings are more consistent and there is not the undercut intake seats we saw in the earlier years.

Thanks for that info Don. I had a set of the very early 110 heads on the Softail 10 years ago and the core shift was horrible.
I had heard that the later production CVO heads were better but the engine builder I always used got better results with other castings so I have no actual test data, flow or dyno, on the late castings that is why I started this thread.

[Don D]

The hidden advantage is the valve angles change by minus one degree on all of the CVO based castings which allows much larger valves and no need to sink them so much. As displacement (and bore) grow these heads become a better choice. Just like the other heads they have their pluses and minuses and need a different treatment that the OEM head to address the issues.

[1FSTRK]

The hidden advantage is the valve angles change by minus one degree on all of the CVO based castings which allows much larger valves and no need to sink them so much. As displacement (and bore) grow these heads become a better choice. Just like the other heads they have their pluses and minuses and need a different treatment that the OEM head to address the issues.

Yes he had shown me they were an easy way to get some power when guys build a bigger engine and do not want the expense of a highly modified head.

At the risk of derailing my own thread it is looking like the late CVO heads were too big in stock form for the 110" engine they came on. This is the first time I have researched any data on them but they appear to act like the 107 M-8 head where if you leave them alone, add CI's, a better cam, and TB they become more efficient.

[Don D]

I see your line of thought and agree.

[1FSTRK]

I see your line of thought and agree.

Following this new line of thought I just found this interesting comparison by searching the dyno section.

107 to 117" with Red Shift 472, T-Max, D&D Billet Cat.  CP 4.125" flat tops, stock heads, HPI 62mm throttle body, 7.1 injectors [Edit] This engine started life as a factory 107" (3.937" x 4.375"), is now 117" by boring the stock cylinders from 3.937" to 4.125". ~JK
[attach=0,msg1244088]

2016 FLHXSE, SE 117 race kit, Suburban Speed Shop Mahle 10.6:1 pistons, 259E, 58mm, Boarzilla w/quiet baffle, stock CVO heads.  Very happy with the results.

[attach=0,msg1060863]

If the trend continues with each head, the advantage of the M-8 is it can grow to 124" with drop on cylinders where the CVO Twin cam is all done at 117". I am not sure I would even bother with a Twin cam 124" without doing head work, by the time you split the cases, to change the crank it is a not just a bolt on project anymore. This would be the first clear cut advantage I have seen for the M-8. The ability to easily grow the engine to the point the heads start working.

[Hossamania]

If I'm paying for a 124", those heads are getting touched, whether Twin Cam or M8. Why wouldn't I?

[Ohio HD]

For reference, an out of the crate, bone stock CVO 110 put on the dyno puts down 100 TQ and 84 HP SAE. Know the guy who did this and believe him. This is only to compare to the later improvements.