No you're right.
I looked over the list and said what am I leaving out;
pipes
a/c
etc....

So I made the change and we both know
Thanks everyone for taking the time and looking this over

I am making a run over to Daytona, it's next door, in the morning and then going over to get them to look into the decel pop.

 

I'm confused....stock 96ci puts out 96 tq and 68 hp @ 3500 rpm. I had a gain of 10 hp with V&H slip ons, SE a/c and Fuelpak. Don't remember what the tq was.

 

ezrider, you apparently are confused. Here's the stats as published by American Rider:

n Evo 80 inch (1984): Torque—65, Horsepower—57

n Twin Cam 88 (1999): Torque—71, Horsepower—59

n Twin Cam 96 (2006): Torque—86, Horsepower—68

A TC96 produces 86 ft/lbs stock, not 96.

 

confused, that must be one heck of a rush turning the wick at 2000 rpm. That torque curve has no curve at all--It goes straight up!

 

Nice, thanks for sharing. I have an 08 Ultra, and have been looking at whether to go with the SE255, SE204, or HQ500.

 

Is that a bad thing?

 

You guys have got to stop buy that Harley 255 cam. Mine also makes 80 lbs at 2300 and over 90 by 2500 and carries to the red line.
Not giving you crap but I don't believe in factory Harley technology and I have never felt that Harley was looking out for our best interests with there aftermarket parts.

 

OK, I was mistaken about the tq, according to HD stock 96ci is 92.6 tq and 68 hp. I got 78 hp with no internal mods and a "stinking" fuelpak. Being i'm old I forgot what the tq is but I remember it was down a few from stock.

 

You should tell them which cam you are using.

 

that 92.6 ft/lbs of torque for the 96 is flywheel, not rear wheel. thats the way the Moco gives their numbers, like the 102 ft/lbs of torque on the 2010 limiteds, not actual rear wheel numbers