117 c.i. h.p.?

[HDLARRY]

My experiance has been that just about all dyno's are giving numbers related to the rear wheel. They do make dyno's that are directly coupled to the motor and obviouly will read higher because of no losses getting to the back wheel. The rule of thumb of thumb I recall is about 15% loss of power getting to the rear wheel.

Your inflated factory spec's are rarely using rear wheel numbers.

Looks like I posted same time as Fiber

 

[dogvet]

Most dynos record rear wheel power and torque. Engine numbewrs will typically be 10-15% higher. the 04 and earlier BDMs had an 11% power loss between the engine and rear wheel.

As a rule, dyno numbers are SAE corrected to sea level so the numbers can be repeatable from one dyno to another.

Dynojet numbers will typically be about 10% higher than the dyno results on a Superflow dyno. Reason being the atmospheric correction capabilities of the dyno. Dynojet takes temp and humidity but the Superflow monitors Barometric pressure, humidity, air density, temperature as live inputs.

The 05 BDM were low on power and torque. About 70 HP (I've seen it as low as 64) and torque in the 100-110 ft/lb range.

The 06 and up models typically generate mid 90's for horsepower and 110-120 ft/lb torque in a bone stock configuration.

SAE corrected numbers of course!

 

[barhopper]

2006 stock dynoed 95hp and 110 tq.
2006 jetted with k&n and pipes 113hp and 120tq.
2006 jetted with k&n and stock pipes drilled 108hp. and 125tq.

These are DynoJet Numbers at the rear tire.

I have 114 HP, 124 torque, at the wheel, with 650 cam, ported, MM pipes, dyna ignition, K&N airfilter, XXX carb. I cant believe your #'s Cav. Very little work for those #'s. Don't seem right.

 

[lee]

hey vet - was the reason for the low numbers on the 05's mainly down to the restrictor plates and E carb? or is there more to it than that? did they have smaller valves too and is that an easy fix? sorry for so many questions

 

[dogvet]

hey vet - was the reason for the low numbers on the 05's mainly down to the restrictor plates and E carb? or is there more to it than that? did they have smaller valves too and is that an easy fix? sorry for so many questions

Restrictor plates and the E carb were the biggest contributors to lower power numbers. the current exhaust system pretty much limited any horsepower increase over 5000 rpm due to the amount of restriction in the system.

They did reduce the valve size on the 117 in 05 I don't have the valve diameters hady, but I'll figure it out and post the dimensions.

I never really understood the whole restrictor plate idea (especially considering that the engine got bigger). The old 107 had the big valves and a .600 cam, G carb and it was 50 state compliant!

 

[lee]

Thanks Vet and I totally agree with what Sul said too - is it a big job to install bigger valves and guides? do you think it would make much difference? I've already done exhaust, carb, cam and zero deck and have the IST ingition going in soon - apologies if I am making this thread a bit personal to me but useful info for all with 05 bikes I'm sure

 

[lee]

thanks a lot Sul

 

[dogvet]

Thanks Vet and I totally agree with what Sul said too - is it a big job to install bigger valves and guides? do you think it would make much difference? I've already done exhaust, carb, cam and zero deck and have the IST ingition going in soon - apologies if I am making this thread a bit personal to me but useful info for all with 05 bikes I'm sure

It's a pretty involved job to install bigger valve seats, and depending on the cam profile would make a difference. Would the performance increase be worth the money? That is what you'd have to ask yourself!

There comes a point in performance mods that small increases in performance require large increases in the cost to get them, plus you start trading useable torque for top end power...can't have low end torque and high horsepower. increasing one sacrifices the other. Unless you race or do a lot of riding at 6000 rpm, a high lift-long duration cam and increased compression (having your heads decked) will probably do as much for performance as increasing valve diameter.

I believe in regard to intake valves, you'd be talking about a 1.9" valve compared to a 2" valve. I'm not certain whether the exhaust valve diameter changed...I'll let you know.

 

[barhopper]

Thanks Vet and I totally agree with what Sul said too - is it a big job to install bigger valves and guides? do you think it would make much difference? I've already done exhaust, carb, cam and zero deck and have the IST ingition going in soon - apologies if I am making this thread a bit personal to me but useful info for all with 05 bikes I'm sure

I went larger valves with my port job. It made the bike louder also(bigger exhaust valves)

 

[Raywood]

Restrictor plates and the E carb were the biggest contributors to lower power numbers. the current exhaust system pretty much limited any horsepower increase over 5000 rpm due to the amount of restriction in the system.

They did reduce the valve size on the 117 in 05 I don't have the valve diameters hady, but I'll figure it out and post the dimensions.

I never really understood the whole restrictor plate idea (especially considering that the engine got bigger). The old 107 had the big valves and a .600 cam, G carb and it was 50 state compliant!

I guess I will add that all if not most of the 05 owners have removed the restrictor plates and either installed a G carb or had there E modified (mine bored out by Triple X). Then everyone changes pipes and airfilter or intake so really only real restriction was smaller valves but this didn't seem to cause to much restriction to our bikes according to my dyno.

Just glad that BDM made it easy to modify for us regular users!

:flag:

 

[lee]

all very useful info there and thanks to all - I'm more into torque than top end HP so will leave my valves alone - I'm guessing, particularly from what the vet has said, increasing the size of the intake valve has a similar affect to increasing the size of the carb - higher HP but less low end torque due to slower air flow? I have the woods .650 cam which is high lift short duration for torque but have the Triple X G which I think is for the opposite i.e. high top end power - they are therefore contradicting each other and I am presumably not therefore getting the max benefit out of either - Think I will change my carb (PSI top of the list as it supposedly gives the best of both worlds) when I have the cash

 

[lee]

great thread this!

 

[Raywood]

great thread this!

 

[barhopper]

all very useful info there and thanks to all - I'm more into torque than top end HP so will leave my valves alone - I'm guessing, particularly from what the vet has said, increasing the size of the intake valve has a similar affect to increasing the size of the carb - higher HP but less low end torque due to slower air flow? I have the woods .650 cam which is high lift short duration for torque but have the Triple X G which I think is for the opposite i.e. high top end power - they are therefore contradicting each other and I am presumably not therefore getting the max benefit out of either - Think I will change my carb (PSI top of the list as it supposedly gives the best of both worlds) when I have the cash

Lee, I have 124 lbs of torque. Pulls like hell. I love it. And when I get a 2 into 1 pipe, it will be even more.

 

[GymRat]

Those are the same numbers I got w/my 05 chopper.

 

[Nomad2day]

I stopped at a local shop here in Clarksville TN to see if I couldget it dyno'ed but it would not fit on his setup.:bang:
Need to find a place somewhere around here.
Neil in Tenn

 

[francoblay1]

I guess I will add that all if not most of the 05 owners have removed the restrictor plates and either installed a G carb or had there E modified (mine bored out by Triple X). Then everyone changes pipes and airfilter or intake so really only real restriction was smaller valves but this didn't seem to cause to much restriction to our bikes according to my dyno.

Just glad that BDM made it easy to modify for us regular users!

:flag:

@Alexey ,

Hello friends. Sorry, that was gone a long time. I did a full engine Rebild. Everything worked out. But my question is: is it possible to remove the plate between the intake manifold and head to the front and rear cylinder? I asked at the S&S. They said they can be assembled without them. Leaks will not. I read on our forum. Write can not be remove. It will be the distance between the manifold and head. I tried with them and without them. Good and so and so. But how right? What are these plates? Thanks for the help!
P.S. Does anyone is going to Moscow?

Talk to Raywood. or someone will shim in regarding the restrictor plates... I´ve done a quick search but I can´t find the thread I am looking for... there were pictures and a good explanation about this subject.

Also, start a new Thread about it and you will have more answers. My K9 came without restriction plates and a G Carb.

 

[BWG56]

This thread is only 8 years old

 

[Nukeranger]

Yes it is and I posted my dyno results a long time ago when in a place far from home.

 

[francoblay1]

Wankers.... I just bought it up to help our friend Alexey, then I saw his post.

HERE: http://www.bigdogbiker.com/threads/from-alex-help-to-understand.76871/