95" Build - Disappointing (Help!!)
Thread Starter
|
Advanced
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
From:
95" Build - Disappointing (Help!!)
I just completed the break-in of my 1450 conversion to 1550. The objective was to hit 100hp/100tq and maintain the integrity of the engine rpm for touring cross country.
Need some of you to help me think through reasons why my 95" build on my 2006 SG did not produce better results (especially torque). Don't get me wrong, the performance is better than stock. After the break-in and additional tuning on the dyno, the results were a bit disappointing 96hp/92tq [:@].. The A/F ratio is 13.4 and the curve on the chart is fine.
This is the 2nd engine that I have had built. I am not an expert, but I am not a novice either. I was especially concerned when the HP was higher than the torque. The HD wrench said that the 2006 engines have a slightly different throttle body which has a tendency to reduce torque. Not sure if that contributes to the results. Other thoughts include the 251 Cam that was installed? A bad port job (Mancuso HD)? Other?
The following provides the parts:
1020-0001 Power Commander 02-04 FLT USB
Big Ness Sucker
Cyl-95 95"bored and honed cylindar
32076-04 Compression release
25121-03 SE 251 cam
18273-00 SE performance valve spring kit
18266-03 valve spring shim kit
16101-01 SE head gasket
17052-99b top end head gasket
37951-98 diaphraghm spring
16933-99b High performance heads
22440-00a SE HTCC piston kit
0932-0018 Fueling oil pump
0929-0005 Tappet set TC88 HP+
DS-193723 Adjustable push rods
436-32b D&D Fat Cat 2:1 Exhaust
17045-99c Gasket kit & cam service
Heads-RP06 SE Race Port Compression Valve Job
17378-98 Roller rocker kit
Any comments would be appreciated.
Thanks!
Need some of you to help me think through reasons why my 95" build on my 2006 SG did not produce better results (especially torque). Don't get me wrong, the performance is better than stock. After the break-in and additional tuning on the dyno, the results were a bit disappointing 96hp/92tq [:@].. The A/F ratio is 13.4 and the curve on the chart is fine.
This is the 2nd engine that I have had built. I am not an expert, but I am not a novice either. I was especially concerned when the HP was higher than the torque. The HD wrench said that the 2006 engines have a slightly different throttle body which has a tendency to reduce torque. Not sure if that contributes to the results. Other thoughts include the 251 Cam that was installed? A bad port job (Mancuso HD)? Other?
The following provides the parts:
1020-0001 Power Commander 02-04 FLT USB
Big Ness Sucker
Cyl-95 95"bored and honed cylindar
32076-04 Compression release
25121-03 SE 251 cam
18273-00 SE performance valve spring kit
18266-03 valve spring shim kit
16101-01 SE head gasket
17052-99b top end head gasket
37951-98 diaphraghm spring
16933-99b High performance heads
22440-00a SE HTCC piston kit
0932-0018 Fueling oil pump
0929-0005 Tappet set TC88 HP+
DS-193723 Adjustable push rods
436-32b D&D Fat Cat 2:1 Exhaust
17045-99c Gasket kit & cam service
Heads-RP06 SE Race Port Compression Valve Job
17378-98 Roller rocker kit
Any comments would be appreciated.
Thanks!
Outstanding HDF Member
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,537
Likes: 21
RE: 95" Build - Disappointing (Help!!)
Only thing that I would have added would be the 50 mm TB Unit......
More air and Fuel, gotta get it in there to make HP/Tq
I would NOT have used the 251's.... SE 260's perhaps....
Maybe the Woods TW8 or 9G......
Unsure what kind of mods were done to the heads, as it makes me wonder WHY, especially to HTCC's?
More air and Fuel, gotta get it in there to make HP/Tq
I would NOT have used the 251's.... SE 260's perhaps....
Maybe the Woods TW8 or 9G......
Unsure what kind of mods were done to the heads, as it makes me wonder WHY, especially to HTCC's?
Road Warrior
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,817
Likes: 4
From: MONTGOMERY,AL.
RE: 95" Build - Disappointing (Help!!)
Assuming your compression ratio is at least 10/1 an enging built like this should pro duce at least 105 in torque. I dont quarrel with the HP number. I would definitely have gone with gear drive cams. An Andrews TW-37would fit nicely and as also suggested a bigger throttle body.
Banned
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,139
Likes: 2
From:
RE: 95" Build - Disappointing (Help!!)
I will agree with the throttle body, and also, you realize that the ness air cleaner is hurting you as well. It is roughly the same as a SE set up. 140 cfm. You need something in the 300 cfm range. Something else.....what were the conditions inside the dyno? Temperature, humidity? It has been said that a dyno tuner can "Trick" 10% in or out of your dyno numbers if he knows what he is doing. I am doing a build soon, and I understand where you are coming from. I hope I am not dissappointed with mine.
nogood o~`o
nogood o~`o
Cruiser
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
From: NB Canada
RE: 95" Build - Disappointing (Help!!)
I hate to say it but almost everyone I know that does a 95" build with screaming eagle stuff are dissapointed in the end, sad but true. an expensive lesson to learn.
Banned
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 8,603
Likes: 10
RE: 95" Build - Disappointing (Help!!)
i'm sorry...sounds like something is restricting it...TB, AC, or cams(i dont know the specs on a 251)...personally i dont care for SE stuff but you should be alittle higher on your #'s...so how hot was it in the dyno room
Trending Topics
Thread Starter
|
Advanced
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
From:
RE: 95" Build - Disappointing (Help!!)
Guys, I was floored to see 92 tq numbers. I thought this would produce about 104 tq.
The whole throttle body discussion is interesting. When we planned the build, I suggested a 50mm and the wrench said no that it was not necessary. Then when the numbers came out, he implied that the 2006 engines have throttles that are greater than 2005. The head mechanic doen't understand the changes made in 2006, but across the board, the change made by HD to the 2006 EFI throttle robs the TQ....according to him.
I am in Houston. I was in the dyno room when the tuning occured. So, I watched him tune each cylinder. The guy did a nice job and checked the timing throughout the tune process. Being in Houston, the heat and humidity was well..... Houston like. So I know that this impacts the results, but come on.
I think that I need to research the 251 cam that was installed, the throttle body and the work done on the heads. I had the cylinders diamond cut after they were worked on. They send all these to Nevada and are constantly receiving cut cylinders back. I am kinda wondering if the wrench installed a pair of HTCC heads that did not have the porting and polishing done on them.
.
On other HDs that I have owned, I have had Mancuso's drag shop do porting and polishing and have seen an additional 10% from the job they do.
The whole thing is a head scratcher (no pun intended).
The whole throttle body discussion is interesting. When we planned the build, I suggested a 50mm and the wrench said no that it was not necessary. Then when the numbers came out, he implied that the 2006 engines have throttles that are greater than 2005. The head mechanic doen't understand the changes made in 2006, but across the board, the change made by HD to the 2006 EFI throttle robs the TQ....according to him.
I am in Houston. I was in the dyno room when the tuning occured. So, I watched him tune each cylinder. The guy did a nice job and checked the timing throughout the tune process. Being in Houston, the heat and humidity was well..... Houston like. So I know that this impacts the results, but come on.
I think that I need to research the 251 cam that was installed, the throttle body and the work done on the heads. I had the cylinders diamond cut after they were worked on. They send all these to Nevada and are constantly receiving cut cylinders back. I am kinda wondering if the wrench installed a pair of HTCC heads that did not have the porting and polishing done on them.
. On other HDs that I have owned, I have had Mancuso's drag shop do porting and polishing and have seen an additional 10% from the job they do.
The whole thing is a head scratcher (no pun intended).
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
Ultimate HDF Member
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,939
Likes: 3
From: TX
RE: 95" Build - Disappointing (Help!!)
THat does seem a bit low... 
Are you confident in the tune? Was it done by Mancuso too? Generally speaking, those guys are good and know their ****....
I doubt that an 06 TB would choke it down that much. I made 100/100 with a stock 05 TB (smaller). I don;t know much about that cam either, but I have been told that those heads really don't "shine" on anything less then a 103". No personal experience, just advise from someone much smarter than I.
I think I'd wanna re-evalute the state of tune.....
Please keep us posted and let us know what ya fine.
As far as cleaning up the heads goes (good idea!), we've done that on new S/E heads too, as the powder coating of the exterior casting was all over the interior of the ports. We were shocked to see that, but it was what it was. I understand rough surfaces aiding in keeping air/fuel "mixed", but thats a crummy way to do it. I've also seen uncleaned S/E heads with chunks of powdercoating missing from within the ports after being run for a while... Wonder where it went...???... [sm=confused06.gif]
Are you confident in the tune? Was it done by Mancuso too? Generally speaking, those guys are good and know their ****....
I doubt that an 06 TB would choke it down that much. I made 100/100 with a stock 05 TB (smaller). I don;t know much about that cam either, but I have been told that those heads really don't "shine" on anything less then a 103". No personal experience, just advise from someone much smarter than I.
I think I'd wanna re-evalute the state of tune.....
Please keep us posted and let us know what ya fine.
As far as cleaning up the heads goes (good idea!), we've done that on new S/E heads too, as the powder coating of the exterior casting was all over the interior of the ports. We were shocked to see that, but it was what it was. I understand rough surfaces aiding in keeping air/fuel "mixed", but thats a crummy way to do it. I've also seen uncleaned S/E heads with chunks of powdercoating missing from within the ports after being run for a while... Wonder where it went...???... [sm=confused06.gif]
