stage2 103 vs cvo 110

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

Jun 30, 2009 | 06:22 PM

#11

crustye

Thread Starter

5th Gear

Joined: May 2008

Posts: 9

Likes: 0

From: Orange Park, Florida

What was your cost for a 107?

Jun 30, 2009 | 06:46 PM

#12

emwolb

Ultimate HDF Member

Joined: Aug 2008

Posts: 5,413

Likes: 17

From: eastern oklahoma

great info. i have been considering the exact same thing. and with the cvo you're sorta painted into a box because mods would decrease its value i'm thinking. and that 30+grand is a big stack of dough. i think i'll be leaning toward a 103 stage II as well. i guess that's 9.5 flat tops and 255's?

Jun 30, 2009 | 07:15 PM

#13

Hammer107

Road Master

Joined: Apr 2009

Posts: 973

Likes: 1

Quote:

Originally Posted by crustye

What was your cost for a 107?

It depends on what you build but I'd say around 4k would build you a ripper. That's heads, cams, jugs, pistons, pushrods, rockers, etc.

Go to Head Quarters website and start reading. A 107 is the deal in my opinion at least when it comes to a 96 inch engine. No case boring, more cubes and more torque.

Plus it's just plain cooler than having a 103, which everyone has.

Jun 30, 2009 | 07:35 PM

#14

S&RSGLIDE07

Cruiser

Joined: Jun 2009

Posts: 152

Likes: 1

From: Warner Robins, GA

I love my 103". Has plenty of power and my buddy can not get away from me with his CVO RD Glide. If I really pushed it I would probably leave him all together. Plus the stock cams just don't sound as good as my 255 cams.
The CVO's sure are good looking machines though. My boss just bought a Ruby Red and Typhoon Maroon SE Ultra today. Looks really good.

Jun 30, 2009 | 07:37 PM

#15

Dalton

Ultimate HDF Member

Joined: Feb 2007

Posts: 7,663

Likes: 7

From: Northeast Ohio

+1 on building a 96" to whatever you want. The CVO bikes are real lookers but stinkers from a performance standpoint. I first built to 103 and then to 120". Even a new Ultra built to 113 or 120" will be less money than a CVO bike. I also agree on checking the Head Quarters site, good info there and great components.

Jun 30, 2009 | 07:48 PM

#16

aclass

Road Captain

Joined: Jun 2007

Posts: 627

Likes: 2

From: Blue Ridge Mtns

The CVO'ers seem to be getting around ~90hp and ~105ft/lbs after removing the cat and mufflers, open air cleaner, and dyno tune. Bone stock they're very restricted.

Jun 30, 2009 | 07:52 PM

#17

Hammer107

Road Master

Joined: Apr 2009

Posts: 973

Likes: 1

Quote:

Originally Posted by aclass

The CVO'ers seem to be getting around ~90hp and ~105ft/lbs after removing the cat and mufflers, open air cleaner, and dyno tune. Bone stock they're very restricted.

I would shoot myself in the head if I paid 30k for a CVO bike and it dyno'd at 90hp. Seriously...I think I'd jump off a building.

Jun 30, 2009 | 08:00 PM

#18

_Flea_

Banned

Joined: May 2009

Posts: 117

Likes: 0

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hammer107

I would shoot myself in the head if I paid 30k for a CVO bike and it dyno'd at 90hp. Seriously...I think I'd jump off a building.

Yeah, I don't think I'd be overly thrilled about that kind of power out of 110". They do look really nice and have a lot of accessories on them. So the looks alone bump up the cost. I guess they're more lookers than performers. But for someone used to a stock bike, the CVO's could still seem pretty quick. They just don't know what they're missin'.