I have a 2010 SE Ultra. I dynoed the stock engine before making engine upgrades. The stock 110 was putting out 77hp/100 ftlbs from the factory on the dealer's dynojet.

I made the following engine upgrades:

• headwork done by Hillside (10.5 comp)
• upgraded the injectors to 5.3 gm/sec
• swapped the 50mmThrottlebody for the larger 58mm TB
• replaced the stock air cleaner with the ventilator air cleaner
• installed roller rockers
• installed Woods 408-6 cams
• removed the exhaust Cat and replaced the baffles with Fullsac 2.25" performance baffles
• installed the SuperTuner

After dyno tuning this setup, the performance was improved to 107hp/108ft lbs. Almost all the 110 engines with this exact build are generating over 120hp and 120ft lbs. The main difference between my build and the other 110s were the exhaust (2:1 vs my 2:2) and all of the other bikes were 2009 and older.My bike performed excellent above 2500rpms but was definitely soft below 2500rpms.

I decided to upgrade the exhaust and installed the D&D Fat Cat Boss 2:1. Bike was tuned again (dealer offered at no charge after his techs returned from Harley tech school last week). The techs that did the tuning said they have maxed out the ST's limits and there's no more room to improve the performance.

As you can see from the dyno below they did a great job tuning the bike in terms of AFR. 111hp/115ft lbs. Nice broad torque band with 100ft lbs or more from 2700-5700 rpms. It pulls strong all the way to 6000.

The bike rides incredible. Endless torque everywhere. The throttle "pulls" to the rev limiter. Its an explosive ride with excellent slow speed throttle handling. It's everything I thought it would be OTHER than appearing to be delivering far less performance on paper than other identical builds.


Here's my questions:

• Is the overall HP held back by going to the 58mm TB? I still have the 50mm and could reinstall. The techs and Harley believe the 58mm is too big for a 110 but I struggle to see how it would reduce high end HP. If handling was poor I could blame the 58 but that isn't an issue.
• Is the problem with the tuning software? To date I have yet to see a single 2010 110 that is able to perform better than the graph below. Other tuning shops believe the problem is the new 2010 ST software which is different from the past versions and is not allowing engines to be tuned to their full potential. Some tuners are suggesting I may need to piggy back a Power Commander or other tuning software on top of the ST if my goal is more power.
• Am I leaving alot of performance on the "table"? Should I be disappointed that the engine doesn't appear to be delivering the same level of performance that identical 110 builds from 2009 and older were capable of?
• I'm not really hung up on paper performance other than the fact that it appears to be so much less than other bikes with the identical engine build, which has me wondering how great the performance would be with 10+ more hp and ft-lbs.

What do others think? Is anyone else struggling to get more power out of their 2010 110 engine build or is it just me? Has anyone been able to get more Hp/Tq from a naturally aspirated 2010 110" engine? All constructive feedback welcome.

 

Well since you said all responses welcome.......

"The bike rides incredible. Endless torque everywhere. The throttle "pulls" to the rev limiter. Its an explosive ride with excellent slow speed throttle handling. It's everything I thought it would be OTHER than appearing to be delivering far less performance on paper than other identical builds."

Forget the paper IMO, you seem very happy with the power range and performance. Damn it man.......ride the heck out of it!

 

 

Yes you should be dissapointed.

 

That sounds good but i will tell you what I had. I had an 07 fatboy that i had my HD dealer rebuild my engine. I had a Headquarters 103 10.0 to 1 compression. I was running V&H staggered big shots. I dont have my dyno chart to upload but my tq reached 116 at just over 2000 and peak hp was 106. I had a powercommamder.

 

Not really,thats about average.

 

I'd be pretty damn happy with it. Sounds like you did good.

 

I personally havent seen any 110's with 120/120. If it pulls like you say and your happy, thats what matters. Dont get caught up in the numbers game.

 

Think you have a good solid build. With that TW 408-6 cam and 10.5 CR, I believe your corrected compression is 9.5. Not bad. Am I reading your charts correctly, were these the results of 4th gear (SAE) roll-on?

Which baffle do you have in the FatCat? If its the standard baffle, they may be restricting your exhaust and holding back on your numbers some. You may want to consider the performance or performance quiet baffles.

Are the 50mm and 58mm TBs you refered to the Harley/SE products or some other aftermarket part? The larger TB may impact on your low end torque, but certainly not your overall peak results.

I would discuss your parts list with Scott at Hideside for his advice, as he ported your heads and know how they respond with the Wood cams.

 

Yes...the dyno is a 4th Gear SAE roll-on.

I have the Performance (Big Bore) baffle in the Fat Cat.

Because this is a 2010 there are only 2 throttle bodies that can be run and they have to Harley's since its a fly-by-wire TB. No one (to the best of my knowledge) has come out with an aftermarket FBW TB for HD touring bikes.

Scott (at Hillside) is the one who made the recommendation for this engine build with the Woods 408-6 cams and he's equally surprised by the low dyno #s. I think this may be the 1st 2010 with this engine build and therefore the low dyno performance could be related to the significant changes that Harley made to the SuperTuner software.