Fatcat vs. Rinehart True Dual on 95 Inch
Thread Starter
|
Intermediate
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
From:
Fatcat vs. Rinehart True Dual on 95 Inch
I know this subject has been talked about several times but I am looking for some specfic information. I am going to include the spec's on my build with a Dyno sheet and I would like you guys to tell me how much improvement will I see by changing to the fatcat in your opinions. I am hoping you can get an idea of how good my build is off my dyno chart and how the heads where done according to the torque curve. You engine guys will know alot more then I do. I am just trying to make my mind up if the fatcat is worth the change. I will have the pipe cost and of course a new dyno. I am looking for some more low end torque. I would like to see 90+ torque at 2500 rpm is my goal. My build as follows:
95 inch (Jugs were bored to spec)
wiesco forged pistons
compression set at 9.8:1
Andrews 37G cams
Heads port and polished(heads have bigger valves)
Rinehart True Duals.
All the main small stuff as well.
Thanks For Your Help
[IMG]local://upfiles/30794/12E0219EC7E14D95A9D5C55D4B1E71BB.jpg[/IMG]
95 inch (Jugs were bored to spec)
wiesco forged pistons
compression set at 9.8:1
Andrews 37G cams
Heads port and polished(heads have bigger valves)
Rinehart True Duals.
All the main small stuff as well.
Thanks For Your Help
[IMG]local://upfiles/30794/12E0219EC7E14D95A9D5C55D4B1E71BB.jpg[/IMG]
Ultimate HDF Member
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,939
Likes: 3
From: TX
RE: Fatcat vs. Rinehart True Dual on 95 Inch
It's really difficult to compare one bike to another with all the variables, but I have enough experience with the Fatcat(s) to say, with certainty, that you would see much more torque below 3k RPMs.... which is where ya really need/want/use it anyway.
Here's a sheet of a 95", with economy port/polish, 9.7:1 CR, 37G's, FatCat, & PCIIIusb. It's similar build... slightly lower compression & this chart is STD, vs the SAE numbers on your chart.
The thing to really look at is how early the torque comes on.... more than just "peak" numbers.
[IMG]local://upfiles/8665/85858D147CBE4AFD9ED40146CF6D40A8.jpg[/IMG]
Here's a sheet of a 95", with economy port/polish, 9.7:1 CR, 37G's, FatCat, & PCIIIusb. It's similar build... slightly lower compression & this chart is STD, vs the SAE numbers on your chart.
The thing to really look at is how early the torque comes on.... more than just "peak" numbers.
[IMG]local://upfiles/8665/85858D147CBE4AFD9ED40146CF6D40A8.jpg[/IMG]
Road Warrior
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,282
Likes: 115
From: British Columbia
RE: Fatcat vs. Rinehart True Dual on 95 Inch
I tried the fat cat on my bike, gained 15 ft. pounds torque at 2500, lost 15at 3500. The extra torque off idle was nice, but the soft midrange compared to the rineharts I didn't like so they went back on. I tried this experiment twice now with different tuners with same results and for some reason the fat cat just don't work good on my build.
Road Warrior
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,530
Likes: 0
From: Diamond Bar, California
RE: Fatcat vs. Rinehart True Dual on 95 Inch
ORIGINAL: rideon
I tried the fat cat on my bike, gained 15 ft. pounds torque at 2500, lost 15at 3500. The extra torque off idle was nice, but the soft midrange compared to the rineharts I didn't like so they went back on. I tried this experiment twice now with different tuners with same results and for some reason the fat cat just don't work good on my build.
I tried the fat cat on my bike, gained 15 ft. pounds torque at 2500, lost 15at 3500. The extra torque off idle was nice, but the soft midrange compared to the rineharts I didn't like so they went back on. I tried this experiment twice now with different tuners with same results and for some reason the fat cat just don't work good on my build.
I just ordered a Fat Cat this morning, Im sure I wont be as disapointed as I was with the RH 2 to 1!
I lost all my low end when I traded it for a Thunderheader! I stuck some torque cones in and that made it alot more managable, but I feel that my Hi curve is suffering with the flow restrictions that I now have!
Ive got my finger crossed!
Road Warrior
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,530
Likes: 0
From: Diamond Bar, California
RE: Fatcat vs. Rinehart True Dual on 95 Inch
ORIGINAL: Road King 22
I know this subject has been talked about several times but I am looking for some specfic information. I am going to include the spec's on my build with a Dyno sheet and I would like you guys to tell me how much improvement will I see by changing to the fatcat in your opinions. I am hoping you can get an idea of how good my build is off my dyno chart and how the heads where done according to the torque curve. You engine guys will know alot more then I do. I am just trying to make my mind up if the fatcat is worth the change. I will have the pipe cost and of course a new dyno. I am looking for some more low end torque. I would like to see 90+ torque at 2500 rpm is my goal. My build as follows:
95 inch (Jugs were bored to spec)
wiesco forged pistons
compression set at 9.8:1
Andrews 37G cams
Heads port and polished(heads have bigger valves)
Rinehart True Duals.
All the main small stuff as well.
Thanks For Your Help
[IMG]local://upfiles/30794/12E0219EC7E14D95A9D5C55D4B1E71BB.jpg[/IMG]
I know this subject has been talked about several times but I am looking for some specfic information. I am going to include the spec's on my build with a Dyno sheet and I would like you guys to tell me how much improvement will I see by changing to the fatcat in your opinions. I am hoping you can get an idea of how good my build is off my dyno chart and how the heads where done according to the torque curve. You engine guys will know alot more then I do. I am just trying to make my mind up if the fatcat is worth the change. I will have the pipe cost and of course a new dyno. I am looking for some more low end torque. I would like to see 90+ torque at 2500 rpm is my goal. My build as follows:
95 inch (Jugs were bored to spec)
wiesco forged pistons
compression set at 9.8:1
Andrews 37G cams
Heads port and polished(heads have bigger valves)
Rinehart True Duals.
All the main small stuff as well.
Thanks For Your Help
[IMG]local://upfiles/30794/12E0219EC7E14D95A9D5C55D4B1E71BB.jpg[/IMG]
Ultimate HDF Member
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,939
Likes: 3
From: TX
RE: Fatcat vs. Rinehart True Dual on 95 Inch
ORIGINAL: mentor70
If that dosnt work, you might have to increace your compresion a little more and change to the HQ 0039 cams like Phil has!
If that dosnt work, you might have to increace your compresion a little more and change to the HQ 0039 cams like Phil has!
Here;s the same motor w/ HQ heads, 98" jugs,& HQ0039's.... This also has the FatCat on it.
[IMG]local://upfiles/8665/6827B11029D341D9AFEC693DED3D8AD7.jpg[/IMG]
Elite HDF Member
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,722
Likes: 5
From: Biddeford, Maine
RE: Fatcat vs. Rinehart True Dual on 95 Inch
ORIGINAL: Road King 22
I know this subject has been talked about several times but I am looking for some specfic information. I am going to include the spec's on my build with a Dyno sheet and I would like you guys to tell me how much improvement will I see by changing to the fatcat in your opinions. I am hoping you can get an idea of how good my build is off my dyno chart and how the heads where done according to the torque curve. You engine guys will know alot more then I do. I am just trying to make my mind up if the fatcat is worth the change. I will have the pipe cost and of course a new dyno. I am looking for some more low end torque. I would like to see 90+ torque at 2500 rpm is my goal. My build as follows:
95 inch (Jugs were bored to spec)
wiesco forged pistons
compression set at 9.8:1
Andrews 37G cams
Heads port and polished(heads have bigger valves)
Rinehart True Duals.
All the main small stuff as well.
Thanks For Your Help
[IMG]local://upfiles/30794/12E0219EC7E14D95A9D5C55D4B1E71BB.jpg[/IMG]
I know this subject has been talked about several times but I am looking for some specfic information. I am going to include the spec's on my build with a Dyno sheet and I would like you guys to tell me how much improvement will I see by changing to the fatcat in your opinions. I am hoping you can get an idea of how good my build is off my dyno chart and how the heads where done according to the torque curve. You engine guys will know alot more then I do. I am just trying to make my mind up if the fatcat is worth the change. I will have the pipe cost and of course a new dyno. I am looking for some more low end torque. I would like to see 90+ torque at 2500 rpm is my goal. My build as follows:
95 inch (Jugs were bored to spec)
wiesco forged pistons
compression set at 9.8:1
Andrews 37G cams
Heads port and polished(heads have bigger valves)
Rinehart True Duals.
All the main small stuff as well.
Thanks For Your Help
[IMG]local://upfiles/30794/12E0219EC7E14D95A9D5C55D4B1E71BB.jpg[/IMG]
There is a great comparison of the Fatcat vs. Rineharts on another V twin forum that really shows the difference perfectly.
Steve
Trending Topics
Elite HDF Member
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,722
Likes: 5
From: Biddeford, Maine
RE: Fatcat vs. Rinehart True Dual on 95 Inch
ORIGINAL: PhilM
My earlier post was using econo heads & Andrews 37's.
with economy port/polish
My earlier post was using econo heads & Andrews 37's.
with economy port/polish
You had one of the best looking 95" 37G builds anyone has seen..............with Big Boyz Heads.
Steve
HD Forum Stories
The Best of Harley-Davidson for Lifelong Riders
8 Best Harley-Davidson Motorcycles Ever
Pouria Savadkouei
10 Worst Harley-Davidson Motorcycles Ever
Pouria Savadkouei
Killer Custom's Jail Break Is The Breakout That Refused to Blend In
Verdad Gallardo
Crazy Bunderbike Build Looks Amazing, But Is It Impossible to Ride?
Verdad Gallardo
Harley-Davidson Reveals Super Cool Cafe Racer Concept
Verdad Gallardo
Engraved Rebellion: Inside Bundnerbike's Glam Rock II
Verdad Gallardo
10 Motorcycles You Should Never Buy
Joe Kucinski
10 Things Harley-Davidson Needs to Fix in 2026
Verdad Gallardo
Southpaw Super Glide: A Left-Hand-Drive 1979 Harley FXE Built to Fit the Rider
Verdad Gallardo
Thread Starter
|
Intermediate
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
From:
RE: Fatcat vs. Rinehart True Dual on 95 Inch
Gentlemen,
I appreciate the comments and information from your experience. I would love to see some dyno's where people had rinehart true duals and then changed them to the fatcat's.
Philm, what is the difference between SAE and STD on the dyno's? might be a stupid question but I really do not know the difference. I will probably go ahead and make the change to the fatcat, its just spending the additional money after the build is completed. I want to make sure I will see the gains to justify the change. Any other information would be appreciated. By the way Philm your dyno's have excellent curves. Thanks
I appreciate the comments and information from your experience. I would love to see some dyno's where people had rinehart true duals and then changed them to the fatcat's.
Philm, what is the difference between SAE and STD on the dyno's? might be a stupid question but I really do not know the difference. I will probably go ahead and make the change to the fatcat, its just spending the additional money after the build is completed. I want to make sure I will see the gains to justify the change. Any other information would be appreciated. By the way Philm your dyno's have excellent curves. Thanks
