120R realistic hp/tq numbers
#21
07-05-2011, 09:33 PM
My Stock 120r made 134 uncorrected hp. Fuel mileage adveraged 38 in touring mode.That was tuned at jd's cycle works in Penn. I have since changed the cams to the tman 662-1 cams. I can tell you already with just a vtune on the street its making more torque. I will be posting numbers when I get It dyno tuned.
I can also tell you mine does get very hot when in traffic. I do have a hd oil cooler on it.
I can also tell you mine does get very hot when in traffic. I do have a hd oil cooler on it.
#22
07-06-2011, 07:53 AM
My Stock 120r made 134 uncorrected hp. Fuel mileage adveraged 38 in touring mode.That was tuned at jd's cycle works in Penn. I have since changed the cams to the tman 662-1 cams. I can tell you already with just a vtune on the street its making more torque. I will be posting numbers when I get It dyno tuned.
I can also tell you mine does get very hot when in traffic. I do have a hd oil cooler on it.
I can also tell you mine does get very hot when in traffic. I do have a hd oil cooler on it.
There is no way that the 120R is making those numbers in stock config. If that was true they would make 170 with the hurricane heads,12:1,62mm throttlebody, 267 cam and that ain't happening. 1 hp per cubic inch that's about it for them in stock form. I got the old 139/137 dyno sheet from HD it's a bunch of crap to keep customers happy. If some tuner is telling you those numbers he probably has 116/116 stage 2 103s too.
Not to say your tuner is bad... just that his numbers are high. Let me guess... it was a Dynojet.
Last edited by HDThunder; 07-06-2011 at 07:59 AM.
#23
07-06-2011, 08:36 AM
Seems like the 120r at 120/120 is an underacheiver, considering you can build a 107 with flat tops, .550 lift cams, a mildly cleaned up stock 50mm throttle body and lightly ported stock heads and make 116/127.
It's ridiculous, and why I don't engage in dyno comparisons. Using dyno charts as a basis of comparing performance is like jacking off and calling it sex.
It's ridiculous, and why I don't engage in dyno comparisons. Using dyno charts as a basis of comparing performance is like jacking off and calling it sex.
The following users liked this post:
dhaheli@gmail.com (07-11-2019)
#24
07-06-2011, 08:46 AM
But I completely agree with your second comment even though I didn't quote it.
#25
07-06-2011, 08:51 AM
Ultimate HDF Member
There is a certain tuner in Maine who has done an awfully good job of convincing people that his 4 gas tunes are the only way to properly tune Harley. Thankfully, most people know better.
That said, there are an awful lot of dyno jockeys out there who love tossing out happy dyno numbers (like all those 120/120 95s that were so popular 5 or 6 years ago).
I have no idea what a 120R will do on a dyno. I know that my JD's-built & tuned 103 (which damn sure isn't a stage II) makes an honest 116/116 SAE that's been verified on three different dynos with three different operators (margin for error was less than 5% up or down).
That said, there are an awful lot of dyno jockeys out there who love tossing out happy dyno numbers (like all those 120/120 95s that were so popular 5 or 6 years ago).
I have no idea what a 120R will do on a dyno. I know that my JD's-built & tuned 103 (which damn sure isn't a stage II) makes an honest 116/116 SAE that's been verified on three different dynos with three different operators (margin for error was less than 5% up or down).
#26
07-06-2011, 10:11 AM
Road Warrior
I think the 120r's should hit 130 square. I tuned one that uncorrected hit 131/129. Sae 129/127. Yes it was on a dynojet. The bike also was held back IMHO with the supertrapp pipe. 34 disc's closed cap. These engines, like most are sensitive to a good exhaust. This bike would have made more with larger head pipes, but was quiet to ride.
#27
07-06-2011, 02:13 PM
"Seeker of Freedom"
So, what you guys are saying is all the Harley Dealers in America got together and decided they wanted thier tunes to be 10-15% better and some how had all their dynos set-up that way? They did this because they knew their mechanics couldn't possibly tune a bike better than an independent. I would say that's a lawsuit of fraud waiting to happen. I'm not an expert on dynos, but is it not true that Dynojet is generally chosen because of its consistentency within 1% of each other according to the manufacture and reliability and use of the SAE correction helps even more with variances? It's my understanding that the dynojets can't even be adjusted more than 1% by the user, is that true? Again, not an expert on dynojets and just trying to understand the reason why a factory pro is more accurate than a dynojet and why the industry has generally decided to use a less accurate machine.
On a side note, doesn't really matter what number is on the sheet as long as the bike performs on the street.
What tuner did you use on those 3 bikes Hydro,PCV?
On a side note, doesn't really matter what number is on the sheet as long as the bike performs on the street.
What tuner did you use on those 3 bikes Hydro,PCV?
#28
07-06-2011, 02:52 PM
So, what you guys are saying is all the Harley Dealers in America got together and decided they wanted thier tunes to be 10-15% better and some how had all their dynos set-up that way? They did this because they knew their mechanics couldn't possibly tune a bike better than an independent. I would say that's a lawsuit of fraud waiting to happen. I'm not an expert on dynos, but is it not true that Dynojet is generally chosen because of its consistentency within 1% of each other according to the manufacture and reliability and use of the SAE correction helps even more with variances? It's my understanding that the dynojets can't even be adjusted more than 1% by the user, is that true? Again, not an expert on dynojets and just trying to understand the reason why a factory pro is more accurate than a dynojet and why the industry has generally decided to use a less accurate machine.
On a side note, doesn't really matter what number is on the sheet as long as the bike performs on the street.
What tuner did you use on those 3 bikes Hydro,PCV?
On a side note, doesn't really matter what number is on the sheet as long as the bike performs on the street.
What tuner did you use on those 3 bikes Hydro,PCV?
#29
07-06-2011, 03:00 PM
There is a certain tuner in Maine who has done an awfully good job of convincing people that his 4 gas tunes are the only way to properly tune Harley. Thankfully, most people know better.
That said, there are an awful lot of dyno jockeys out there who love tossing out happy dyno numbers (like all those 120/120 95s that were so popular 5 or 6 years ago).
I have no idea what a 120R will do on a dyno. I know that my JD's-built & tuned 103 (which damn sure isn't a stage II) makes an honest 116/116 SAE that's been verified on three different dynos with three different operators (margin for error was less than 5% up or down).
That said, there are an awful lot of dyno jockeys out there who love tossing out happy dyno numbers (like all those 120/120 95s that were so popular 5 or 6 years ago).
I have no idea what a 120R will do on a dyno. I know that my JD's-built & tuned 103 (which damn sure isn't a stage II) makes an honest 116/116 SAE that's been verified on three different dynos with three different operators (margin for error was less than 5% up or down).
Zach
#30
07-06-2011, 03:50 PM
"Seeker of Freedom"
SEPST on one and TTS on the other. I don't know whether the Factory pro is more accurate but it showed lower numbers than most of the dynojet 250Is and Land&Sea dynos. One tuner showed mid 120s with the SEPST on the 120R useing a Dynojet 250i I don't see how the 120R can produce these high 130 numbers that some are posting,maybe my local dealership got a bad batch of 120Rs. A few locals that own them in my area got the same dyno sheet from HD that i got stating 139/137 and are happy as heck. I proceeded to waste some more cash on tunes to see how much they can vary. Seems to me that tuners can do pretty much what they want to the numbers to make their customers happy,not all but some. One horse per cubic inch on a streetable v-twin seems pretty common after researching with several v-twin engine builders. I have five maps for my SEPST that are for the 120R and the one that i have in there now is one of the lowest numbers and done with the 4-gas. To me it seems the best running out of them .
At some point people need something semi standard to base comparisons on and at this point dynojet has around 80% of the market. So, they are the defacto standard by any measure; no matter what the factory pro guys say. Even if the factory pro numbers are a more accurate representation of rwhp; it's irrelevant. Most consumers generally accept the Dynojet as the standard to be measured by with an acceptable margin of error. Once you get past the equipment comparison and assume they are slightly different then its up to the individual to decide whether the paticular tune is being manipulated on the dyno or not.