Has anyone had real saddle time in both a Stock or equally built 96 and 103 Dyna? If so, would you say there is any notable difference in power? I went from a 88" 2006 model to a 96" 2009 model and the difference was night and day. Could the bump to 103 be that noticeable of a change as well?

I am curious because while I read a lot of comparisons from model to model here on the Dyna forum, I haven't seen anything comparing the 2 engines back to back. Any HP and Torque specs would be great also. Thanks!

 

When I bought my 2012 street bob with a 96, i also rode the 103 fat bob and couldn't tell any difference, I know there is

 

I just bought an '09 FLSTC and was asking about the 96 vs 103. I'm told the 103 has about an extra 8 pounds of torque. Some people told me don't do anything except the 103 but I will only ever be riding solo which means my 96 is at least equal to a 103 riding double. Good luck with your research and decision.

 

There was a thread last week I think where someone asked the same question..

Basically, in stock form, the 103 will have about 8 ft/lb more TQ at the crank (a little less at the wheel) and 1-2 HP more than the 96. However, you also have to take into consideration the weight of the bike. It takes 10 ft/lb of TQ to offset roughly 80 lbs.

I own an FXDC with the 96 & have spent some seat time on several newer Dynas & Softails with both a 96 & 103 & can't tell the difference from the seat of the pants between the two.

The only difference between the 96 & 103 are the pistons/jugs...103 has a bigger bore. Heads, valves, springs, etc are exactly the same.
When HD went from the 88 to the 96, they increase the stroke, not the bore.
I've rode some 88s also & I can tell the difference between them & my 96, but there are other factors too....fuel injection, newer ECMs, 6 speed transmissions, etc.

 

So in stocker form, the 103 isn't worth much more, but if you're going to upgrade (better heads) you could really wake it up?

This is coming from a guy with a puny 80" EVO.

 

There isn't that much different between the 96 vs the 103 both engines have a better throw in their stroke but the 103 is suppose to prove to be more reliable in he long run.

I just rode to Sturgis and back from the central coast of California and before that I used to live in the Seattle area and rode my 96 from there to Sturgis and honestly I noticed almost NO difference in performance, but then I went for the latest and greatest with the Switchback vs the Street Bob. The Switchback is a little heavier than the Bob so it could be an unfair comparison but I will say one thing about these new Harley motors, they can go ALL damn day and not skip a beat!

 

build your 96 and youll most likely be happy with the outcome, i just did cams, and will be doing the heads down the line that with a stage 1 will make me happy...i really dont see the need for a 103 or 106 kit now...im not racing and i really want reliability

 

My 2009 96" with stage 1 A/C, Rush Mufflers and Powervision tuner runs real strong. Others who have been on it can't beleive how hard it pulls. I did major enging work on my 2006 88" and it was nothing but probelms. This 96 is fine for me so no engine work in the future at all. I was jusy curious if there was as a big a difference from the 96 to the 103 as there was from the 88 to the 96. If not it will keep my desire to get a new bike anytime soon in check

 

If you build your 103,,,,,you will see a difference. And be Happy!

 

I expected more from the 103. Im happy with my bike over all but the power this thing is putting to the ground in stock form is..... meh. I guess thats why they are called cruisers though right?

I'm hoping an exhaust and a stage one will wake this thing up a little. Im not looking for a rocket ship but at least give me a little punch!!