05 and 06 heads why ones better than the other

[nc-renegade]

And for all those guys that think the new heads are WAY better than the old ones I hate to be a heartbreaker but ask me who set a new world's record last year with those lousy '03 heads & that little stock throttle body on a little 95" bagger.
Bigger ain't always better.

Larry, I did not read anyone saying they are "way better", but it is a fact that the 06 and up STOCK heads flow more/better than the 99-05.  From a Stage 1 standpoint, that is better....marginally.  To get the older ones to flow the same, you got to work on the exhaust port.

[Tre_11 FLHX]

I hate to be a heartbreaker but ask me who set a new world's record last year with those lousy '03 heads & that little stock throttle body on a little 95" bagger.

Not to  but was this using untouched 03 heads?  Trying to compare apples to apples.

[PanHeadRed]

Excellent thread. Thanks to all.



Max, Mayor, you two learn anything?

[Sonny S.]

the faster the air flows over the top "hump" of the wing it causes lift."

And separation. The speed on the floor is already too fast. I don't try to make it faster. As a matter of fact after I re-shape the floor the speed on the roof increases. I must be doing something wrong. I even stay with the little stock valves in a lot of applications. 100/100 no problem.

More to it than meets the eye...... or the flow bench 

[Admiral Akbar]

Max, Mayor, you two learn anything?

Yeah,

I like the Larries theories better than yours...   


Max



(just kidding  )

[ederdelyi]

Lots of ways to get there ... if any one person had the ultimate "hot setup" there wouldn't be any need for more than one source.

FWIW, I had a set of Mondello SBC heads that were considered to be the "best" for the application I had in mind. It was found thru test/tweak/tune that even those heads could be improved upon. Does that mean that Mr. Mondello didn't know what he was doing or the heads were crap? Heck no, it just means that the generic solution could be made better if one put the time and effort into it.

Good heads that are appropriate for the application are the starting point for any performance upgrades, IMO. Considering the cost versus benefit ratio it doesn't make sense to me why at least a cleanup or "street port" job should not be in the budget for even the mildest builds. JMHO

[mayor]

I even stay with the little stock valves in a lot of applications. 100/100 no problem.

I can attest to that...

Max, Mayor, you two learn anything?

yep, I learned that Max likes to     other than that, yep lots of good stuff here. 

[Admiral Akbar]

yep, I learned that Max likes to      other than that, yep lots of good stuff here.

Mayor, You just figure that out?    Max

[mayor]

Mayor, You just figure that out?    Max

nope.    

[Jeffd]

I thought the raised floor actually slowed the air flow down a bit so it could make the turn into the valve.  I thought otherwise the air flow would be traveling too fast to make the bend.

[POORBOY]

Hardy,  you saying you make the short side steeper,no wonder you get so much tuburlance.

[PanHeadRed]

Is it the "raised floor" or the larger radius created by having more material? Or increased port volume? Or the smaller curtain?

Maybe it has less of a turn to make? Maybe it's a straighter shot at the valve?

Just wonder'n.

[Don D]

no wonder you get so much tuburlance

My thoughts. been there and seen that (and heard that)

[PoorUB]

I hear so much negative of the '05 heads, but to save some $$ I reused my '05 heads on my Ultra this winter, just milled them to 83cc. It really depends on what you are looking for in your build. Sure the '06 heads may get you a couple more HP at high RPM, but I am riding a bagger that sees 90% of its time at 2500-3000 RPM. I was not convinced I needed to drop more money into heads to achieve the results I wanted. Now after the build is done, and I have ridden my Ultra, I am glad I saved my money. The bike has all the top end HP I need, and more.

[mayor]

I hear so much negative of the '05 heads, but to save some $$ I reused my '05 heads on my Ultra this winter, just milled them to 83cc. It really depends on what you are looking for in your build.

IIRC most of the negatives with those heads are valve stem seal related. 

[les]

The most efficient port is a straight shot.  However, the H-D port just can't happen like that.  If you cut the floor down too much then you have the mixture hitting the valve at too much of an angle.  The proper floor allows the mixture to be brought around and drop down on the valve to the greatest extent considering the curved port.

[Admiral Akbar]

The proper floor allows the mixture to be brought around and drop down on the valve to the greatest extent considering the curved port.

While this seems to be the theory.. I've followed that theory and it increases low lift flow but makes the port stall at higher lifts due to the differences in velocity when looking at a cross section of the port.. It seems that killing the flow at lower lifts by making the turn sharper helps at higher lifts. I think that the issue is that mass air flow is lazy and always want to take the shortest path...

Max

[PanHeadRed]

>air flow is lazy and always want to take the shortest path...<

Kinda, sorta, "path of least resistance".

[PanHeadRed]

>heads........the cost versus benefit<

Sounds like a excellent topic/title for another thread.

[ederdelyi]

>>Sounds like a excellent topic/title for another thread<<

Probably could be a good thread. I don't think it would get very far before it would degenerate into something very different than it's intent ... I'll pass, I'd rather be fishing :>)

[PanHeadRed]

Awww, come on Ed, you'd make a great pivot man for that one.

Let's go to the general section, I LOVE talk'n fish'n.

[Don D]

There is a way to maximize the port and obtain laminar flow. When that happens there is not an either or situation airflow picks up across the lift range. When the flow goes turbulent is when problems arise. Just measuring airflow with very low resolution (low test pressures) doesn't always show these ugly animals to us however.
It is an interesting topic however better suited to a forum such as Gofastnews.com.
Here the guys generally don't want to hear the labor pains and all the grueling details they just want to get a part and bolt it on. There are the technologists among us though that really get off on the stuff.
All good.
For the bottom line guy
The 05 heads are just another year. They are not the best or the worst. For that matter IMO there is no windfall "BEST" year of OEM production head. They are different than a 00-04 and 06up. They are a transition year and ANY of the heads can be made to work a lot better and suit the application with time and money. They ALL benefit from tailoring the design to the intended end result. Sometimes this is just minimal and other times very evasive and costly.

[Big Dan]

Here's a question. My heads are the early (99-04)castings, with the later valves, guides, springs, seals, etc. Is this good, bad, or indifferent? I'm asking because I don't know.

[mayor]

Let's go to the general section, I LOVE talk'n fish'n.

let me know if you need an expert's opinion.   

[Don D]

Dan
You have created a 05 head, simple as that. The 7mm valves are lighter but no airflow windfall. The beehives work fine. The 7mm valves are gone from any serious HP makers in my book. The higher lift cams need a bigger stem, better valve locks, and spring pads. When under .600 lift cams and less than or = 1.900 intake valves are the order then the 7mm stuff works well. Have even cut the tops for viton seals and put conventional spring cups under them. Then no more of the oil buildup under the seal hat.
So I guess the answer is if it is working well for you it is fine and sounds like you have duplicated the 05 configuration with better seals hopefully.
All good.