Throttle body and engine swap

[ultrahogrider]

Why go to the trouble and expense to swap motors when all you need is the new 110" bolt in kit. HD offers a 58mm cable operated T/B for your application; PN27639-07; you will need the intake manifold and injectors as well. A 50mm would work up to 100HP but a 110" motor with the right cams and tune will break 100HP easy. Your head will fit but without porting they will be a bit of a bottleneck for a larger T/B. Use a .040" Cometic MLS head gasket and cams like S&S 585 or Andrews 55.

Exchanging motors makes no sense at all with the parts that are available. JMHO.:s

Because my 96 motor has over 90K miles is why and the crank is loose. The new motor is costing me $2800 and it is by far the cheapest way to get a completely new lower and top end. That si why. I am installing Andrews 57H cams and away I go.

 

[FishHunter]

Mocking up any motor pre-assembly is always a good idea. However, one does not need mocking up to take the 583 cams off the table with a 107" motor and OEM chamber volume heads; CCP is in the 220psi range. I doubt the motor would even turn over.:icon_wink:

Wrong answer.
Natually no one here would be using a bone-stock cylinder head on a 107", as a modified cylinder head with reverse tulip larger valves/chamber blending becomes MUCH larger than the OE 85cc advertised volume.
Combined with a .040" cyl head gask.......... no issues whatsoever.
Currently building one for a client in the Norfolk, Va area.
57 Andrews thrives at 10.1/1 cr and that IS an 85cc chamber with a .040" on top of a 3.937" hole.
Probably 10-12 of those this year alone.
And lastly, even at 220 psi ccp(which is way out of order) the bike would still start and run with an S&S EZ Start, or a set of manual releases, but you'd never be able to pull enough timing to control the detonation.
Any other info you'd be interested in??

 

[FishHunter]

Wrong answer.
Natually no one here would be using a bone-stock cylinder head on a 107", as a modified cylinder head with reverse tulip larger valves/chamber blending becomes MUCH larger than the OE 85cc advertised volume.
Combined with a .040" cyl head gask.......... no issues whatsoever.
Currently building one for a client in the Norfolk, Va area.
57 Andrews thrives at 10.1/1 cr and that IS an 85cc chamber with a .040" on top of a 3.937" hole.
Probably 10-12 of those this year alone.
And lastly, even at 220 psi ccp(which is way out of order) the bike would still start and run with an S&S EZ Start, or a set of manual releases, but you'd never be able to pull enough timing to control the detonation.
Any other info you'd be interested in??

Shouldn't have ended that information with that last sentence........just being a wise-guy.

 

[dolt]

Wrong answer.

First, there is no wrong answer; maybe different answers but no wrong answer.

Naturally no one here would be using a bone-stock cylinder head on a 107"

A bold statement. No disrespect to the other members, but I think you over estimate the technical knowledge of the average forum member. Many don't know the difference between static compresssion, corrected compression and CCP. The OP apparently intends to use OEM 2016 heads.:s

a modified cylinder head with reverse tulip larger valves/chamber blending becomes MUCH larger than the OE 85cc advertised volume.
Combined with a .040" cyl head gask.......... no issues whatsoever.

Understood which is why the "seriously hog out" comment in a previous post. The chamber would have to be 90+ccs to get the CCP down near 200psi with the 583 cams. Not being a head porter but having spent a few nights in a Holiday Inn, 90+CCP is "hogging out" in my limited vocabulary.

Currently building one for a client in the Norfolk, Va area.
57 Andrews thrives at 10.1/1 cr and that IS an 85cc chamber with a .040" on top of a 3.937" hole. Probably 10-12 of those this year alone.

I can see that but at 196CCP, still on the cusp for me in a touring model.

And lastly, even at 220 psi ccp(which is way out of order) the bike would still start and run with an S&S EZ Start, or a set of manual releases, but you'd never be able to pull enough timing to control the detonation.
Any other info you'd be interested in??

Agree. My comment about not starting was tongue in cheek but you probably never make those kinds of remarks, so I can understand you missing the humor. Snarky comments don't bother me, so no worries on the last sentence in your follow up post but, yeah, unnecessary.

We just have a different approach to building motors and I am not a pro; don't build for $$ but for friends and family so I stay on the conservative side. Don't like to see CCP much past 190psi or corrected CR much past 9.4. That's my story and I am sticking to it.

Anyway, looks like the OP has landed on a solution and his OP may have been rhetorical.

 

[FishHunter]

Seriously "hogged out", should be replaced with "precision cylinder head chamber modifications" which is same/same procedure in shops accross the country.
200 psi ccp no good?
OEM CVO 110"s come off the showroom floor with 205-207 psi ccp, and 195-200 psi ccp is our threshold for EFI bikes, 190-195 is the cap for carb models unless a Saturday Night Special is being built.
30 years of 12 hr, 6 day work-weeks, and running an AHDRA Mod Class bike has taught us this.

 

[dolt]

Seriously "hogged out", should be replaced with "precision cylinder head chamber modifications" which is same/same procedure in shops accross the country. 200 psi ccp no good? OEM CVO 110"s come off the showroom floor with 205-207 psi ccp, and 195-200 psi ccp is our threshold for EFI bikes, 190-195 is the cap for carb models unless a Saturday Night Special is being built. 30 years of 12 hr, 6 day work-weeks, and running an AHDRA Mod Class bike has taught us this.

You know, after reading this and my previous post, I actually think we are in general agreement on CCP and I do like your substitution for "seriously hogged out". Sounds much more technical, almost like engineering speak but still, at 90+CCP, a bit OTT for me. However, it is nice to know that a shade tree hack like myself views CCP not that much differently from someone with as much experience as Hillside Cycles.:s

Oh yeah, almost forgot. Those OEM CVO 110's are something else. One of my bikes, a 95" FXSTDI with CCP just a shade under 190 shows them taillights at every opportunity. Did the MoCo ever figure out why those 110 monster power pland leaked so much at the cylinder bases?

 

[FishHunter]

You know, after reading this and my previous post, I actually think we are in general agreement on CCP and I do like your substitution for "seriously hogged out". Sounds much more technical, almost like engineering speak but still, at 90+CCP, a bit OTT for me. However, it is nice to know that a shade tree hack like myself views CCP not that much differently from someone with as much experience as Hillside Cycles.:s

Oh yeah, almost forgot. Those OEM CVO 110's are something else. One of my bikes, a 95" FXSTDI with CCP just a shade under 190 shows them taillights at every opportunity. Did the MoCo ever figure out why those 110 monster power pland leaked so much at the cylinder bases?

At least they were able to keep the rear exhaust guides from migrating....ouch!
A 110" is actually a sleeping giant and can be brought to a LARGE power level quickly.
125/125 is not a big hurdle to overcome.

 

[dolt]

At least they were able to keep the rear exhaust guides from migrating....ouch!
A 110" is actually a sleeping giant and can be brought to a LARGE power level quickly.
125/125 is not a big hurdle to overcome.

Agreed, nice note on which to say adios; see you around.:s

 

[Fisherking]

Because my 96 motor has over 90K miles is why and the crank is loose. The new motor is costing me $2800 and it is by far the cheapest way to get a completely new lower and top end. That si why. I am installing Andrews 57H cams and away I go.

Nice choice on the cams I have a set of 37 I'm deying to put in
F.K.