I am just wondering if any other HD beside V-ROD stock models will beat Sporty on traffic light to traffic light war? I tried this trick with my 1994 XL1200 and 1999 FatBoy and FatBoy was in trouble. Little bit better after he switched to V&Hpipes and hypercharger but still no chances after I played with my rev limiter. I am just curious if current BT are closer to XL tails?

my uncle has a 07 eglide and it has stage 1 done to it and it is not even close i have never been beat by a bt and i ride with a few

A Screamin' Eagle Dyna could probably do well.

My dad's '07 Street Bob gives me a good run. I beat him off the line, up until around 65-75 mpg (not by a whole lot). Then he starts to catch up and slowly pass me. Then again he has 96 cubed motor compared to my 72 cubes.

1. power to weight ratio. You can see the power of a stage one 88 or 96 (or sleeper 95 or 103) or 110 cid BT in the SE catalog and the weights are on the hd website. Just compare the power to weight ratio of those to yours and that will give you an idea which one has the advantage.
2. gear ratio the larger the number:1 ratio the steeper the gear and thus the less the engine has to work to put the bike in motion.
3. Rider's ability. Do not underestimate rider ability as it makes up for a lot of power if someone makes a mistake or someone knows their bike a lot better or has a lot of experience getting it out the the hole quickest.

Sounds like shifting is important I heard that it is good idea to shift around 4000rpms to get good results (stock cam) with fast acceleation Have to try this this summer :-)

Burbur,
If you have a dyno sheet we could really dial in your shift points using the curves. Since the step from one gear to the next is not the same all the way up the gears, your shift point may vary slightly. On a stage one 1994 1200, I would likely start your shift at about 5000 rpms...I think you have a 5200 or 5400 rpm rev limiter stock. The stock D grind cams should pull strong to the rev limiter, but you don't want to hit it or it will cost you a tenth or so second. It is sometimes better to shift it 200 rpms before you hit the limiter. Again if you go from a dead stop, you will get the biggest advantage practicing hole shots and then running the bike through 1st and second gear (2nd gear it the toughest shift because you have to get your feet up and it has to go through nuetral from 1 to 2). Practice the launch rpms. I think the Sportster will shock you how hard it can be launched on a good pavement, so start lower rpms and work your way up.

It's and oldie, but still appropriate.....

http://www.strangepersons.com/images/content/8531.jpg

A one block race, gee wiz I wonder if the lighter bike would win.

How's about we race, first one to 120 wins?

I know you wouldn't think that fair, a lot of you can't get your bike to go that fast. (With out some work that is).

I have more power in my 96, and yes, my bike weighs 760 pounds, but I also have a six gear.

Does this make my bike better then yours?

No, it make it different, it's not made to race quart mile or through the twisties, it's made to cruise long distance.

Quit worrying about what the other guy is riding and enjoy the bike you have, and the next time you start to think about it, remember the old adage....

The grass is always greener..........Over the septic tank.

well i cant answer for the others jeff but i will gladly race you to top end.
i ride with four friends and they have all had the big bore kit done and my 1200c spanks them all off the line and top end.
i have a 2007 1200c, my buddies bikes are,fat boy,street glide and two ultras.

i agree with jeff, if your going to race do it on the track. a pro stocker would wipp anyone of us now that is fast.......

The new 96" motors will give your little sporty a run for it's money knowadays!! :laugh :rolleyes: :( :shhhh :laugh

Lets admit it, we like to race light to light. Jeffy, you could be riding a BUSA next to me and I still would race to the speed limit. It is fun and that is one reason to buy a bike. The fun of beating a BT is not about anything other than returning some of the shit issued over the years. If you think I ever let my friend on his fatboy beat me you are wrong. It is fun to race and that is why we do it. It is the street version of pulling out the measuring tape and measuring winkies. It is fun, not sensible, legal, moral, advisable, or prudent, but neither is riding a bike.

The apes have sealed my future losses because I am still scared they will come back into my lap when I get on it. I haven't even rde it and I think I am going to get some pull back.

I wouldn't attempt a low speed roll on (even in first gear) against a Dyna 96 as those motors have way too much torque down in the low and midrange but they make no more power than the rubbermount 1200 Sporty on the top end. Keep your rpm up with a good drag strip type launch and I'd bet you'd have a good race with two equal riders. With equal riders, I'd put my money on the Sporty but not by much. I'm not sure that the six speed would help the 96 go any faster on top. I think that the motor would run out of power before it ever hit the rev limiter in 6th. 60 some HP just isn't enough power to push all of that bulk to 135 mph.

My brother has a Dyna 95 with a Mik HSR 42 and Cycle Shacks. That 95 is torquey and the 96 is even more so, so they're more powerful in other ways. They're two different motors with different power characteristics. I like them both. If I wanted HP alone, I wouldn't have bought a Harley to begin with. These things are fun to ride while being lazy!

The wifey- poo and i used to do this alot. Dont get the wrong idea, she knows what she's doing. She's barely over 100 lbs, and im a little over 200lbs. On my deuce (which is now hers) i could get her off the stop, but not for long. In about third gear she would WALK away. Now, when i was on her 1200, and she was on my deuce, she would still beat me. So i'd say that the 100 extra lbs hanging off my gut has alot to do with all of this. Weight definatley makes a difference, especially on stock scoots. My SE 95 will walk them both, no questions asked.

I have had many hot rod BT's and none of them pull as hard as this sporty from stop light to stop light or nailing it from 60mph to whatever.

Take it it from someone who knows what bike is faster...Look at my bikes below...The silver one is the fastest:laugh:laugh:laugh:laugh

Actually part of the original question was are the new 96 inch BT's a closer match to the Sportsters. The simple answer is the 96 inch BT's make a little more power than the 88 inch models. I didn't read the original post as a bash against the big twins at all, just a personal observation and a question about how would he stack up against a 96 incher.
One of the biggest factors is rider ability and knowledge and control of his bike. Become really familiar with your bike, it's powerband and how to shift it and it will make up for quite a bit of power versus a competitor who isn't as 'one' with his bike.
Then look at power to weight ratio. SO as to not piss off any BT riders, I will use EVO Sportster vs Rubbermounted Sportsters. Let's just use dry weights for each bike so as to not even include possible fuel load variations. My converted 2000 883C weighs in at 491 lbs dry. For round numbers it makes 85 hp (and we'll just use max hp, not the average hp of the powerband used when racing, to keep things simple. A 2008 883C weighs in at 565 lbs. For the converted 2008 to run with mine, it would have to make almost 98 hp. 491 lbs/85 hp = 1 hp for every 5.77 lbs. 565 lbs/98 hp = 1 hp for every 5.77 lbs. So the difference of 74 lbs means it has to make 13 more hp to run even. Again this is all just simple numbers to show how much weight really does affect performance.
I changed my mind, I am going to post a stat on the Dyna SuperGlide for comparison. It is one of the lighter BT bikes weighing it at 632 lbs. It would need to make about 110 hp to compare.
Again these are just simple figures; wet weight, rider weight, rider ability, gear ratio's, and average power used in the powerband when going through the gears will all affect performance.

I like the mathematical approach. A stoplight would be fun too. gret work shu. Still got the notrous kit?????

Only ones who ever challenged me to a race were a couple GSXR's at a light one day. I saved myself the embarrassment.

Only ones who ever challenged me to a race were a couple GSXR's at a light one day. I saved myself the embarrassment.

Hell you should have run them just for the hell of it. No need to be embarrassed, your Sporty is what it is.

I like the mathematical approach. A stoplight would be fun too. gret work shu. Still got the notrous kit?????
Actually I just sold it today. Someone else is going to get to have some laughs with it now. I am sure it won't be too long and he'll post up his experience with it on here:)

Only ones who ever challenged me to a race were a couple GSXR's at a light one day. I saved myself the embarrassment.
I've ran my share of sportbikes. I've taken a few and lost to a few in street races. I have to say that every time I see a good rider launch and ring the piss out of a liter sportbike I am always impressed. If I just wanted to go fast and get there quick, I'd definately be on a sportbike....oh and if I didn't have to sit on the man berries....think I can do forward controls and ape hangers laid back on a sportbike? Plus I would have to unplug one of the plugs so it vibrates a little. :tour Oh and take off the entire back half of the exhaust system....and all the plastic.......there you go a naked sportbike running loud and on three cylinders with apes and forward controls.

Actually part of the original question was are the new 96 inch BT's a closer match to the Sportsters. The simple answer is the 96 inch BT's make a little more power than the 88 inch models. I didn't read the original post as a bash against the big twins at all, just a personal observation and a question about how would he stack up against a 96 incher.
One of the biggest factors is rider ability and knowledge and control of his bike. Become really familiar with your bike, it's powerband and how to shift it and it will make up for quite a bit of power versus a competitor who isn't as 'one' with his bike.
Then look at power to weight ratio. SO as to not piss off any BT riders, I will use EVO Sportster vs Rubbermounted Sportsters. Let's just use dry weights for each bike so as to not even include possible fuel load variations. My converted 2000 883C weighs in at 491 lbs dry. For round numbers it makes 85 hp (and we'll just use max hp, not the average hp of the powerband used when racing, to keep things simple. A 2008 883C weighs in at 565 lbs. For the converted 2008 to run with mine, it would have to make almost 98 hp. 491 lbs/85 hp = 1 hp for every 5.77 lbs. 565 lbs/98 hp = 1 hp for every 5.77 lbs. So the difference of 74 lbs means it has to make 13 more hp to run even. Again this is all just simple numbers to show how much weight really does affect performance.
I changed my mind, I am going to post a stat on the Dyna SuperGlide for comparison. It is one of the lighter BT bikes weighing it at 632 lbs. It would need to make about 110 hp to compare.
Again these are just simple figures; wet weight, rider weight, rider ability, gear ratio's, and average power used in the powerband when going through the gears will all affect performance.

Shu,

I get what you're saying and it makes a lot of sense but I think that we need to add the weight of the rider in there as well (just as you mentioned at the bottom) and your numbers should change. Add in the rider (especially a big guy) and the weight differences and thus the added power requirements don't seem quite so great percentage wise, or am I all washed up?

As an example, isn't it true that a stock rubbermount 1200 is slightly quicker than a stock pre-rubbermount (the S model excepted) due to the increased power from the cams and cylinder heads, etc., even though the rubbermount weighs 70 some lbs more? Yeah, I sure wish that I could get rid of some of that extra weight. H-D could have made a lighter frame setup. :)

Shu,

I get what you're saying and it makes a lot of sense but I think that we need to add the weight of the rider in there as well (just as you mentioned at the bottom) and your numbers should change. Add in the rider (especially a big guy) and the weight differences and thus the added power requirements don't seem quite so great percentage wise, or am I all washed up?

As an example, isn't it true that a stock rubbermount 1200 is slightly quicker than a stock pre-rubbermount (the S model excepted) due to the increased power from the cams and cylinder heads, etc., even though the rubbermount weighs 70 some lbs more? Yeah, I sure wish that I could get rid of some of that extra weight. H-D could have made a lighter frame setup. :)

Don, to keep it simple I just compared dry weights. But weight is weight regardless if it is part of the bike or part of the rider. More weight and your bike will slow down.

And your second question is a good one and one that could be debated and debated especially on an XL website. But to keep it using the same logic I used above, let's do the math: I think a 2003 1200 standard weighed in at 492 lbs dry and made right at 60 RWHP out of the crate. A 2008 1200R weighs 565 lbs dry which is 14.837% more. So for the '08 to be quicker it would need to make 69 hp. Out of the crate I do not believe they make quite that much power, so I would say completely stock the EVO would nudge out the rubbermount, but it would be close. However, at the stage one level, the new rubbermounts with the better cams and heads start to show their stuff and I would say that at that level the rubbermount would be able to take the EVO. Like I said, this will probably lead to a HUGE debate and someone will likely post a bunch of websites with claimed 1/4 mile times for each one and someone is going to find what I just wrote as offensive and not take it for the simple math it is. Everyone please keep in mind that I am not posting this for any ohter reason that to show how power to weight ratio has and effect on acceleration.


EDIT: I used to have the complete HD specifications for a bunch of different year Sportsters, but I lost them when my computer crashed a while back.
Again keep in mind there are so many variables I have not accounted for in the above mathematics. One major one is the gearing of the bike. Getting the bike out of the hole and up to the powerband is huge in reducing the total ET. In addition, the powerband of the engine and meshing that with the gearing and shift points to maximize the amount of HP on the ground is HUGE.

I am not sure what the question is.
1. How fast you can accelerate.
2. How fast you can brake.
3. Both

If you have BIG balls you might win. Everytime. It all depends what braggin' rights you are trying to accomplish. Dyno sheets are a pictorial of what the MOTOR is capable of, not the rider. Motor specs are bench racing fodder that usually never becomes reality.

Maybe I am to old(Balls small, Brain big) to be worried about such things. However I am building a 105 hp motor for my project because "I" think it is cool. Just my opinion. Dont want to step on any toes. I have to ride the streets with those with less of a thought process. I want the general public to respect us(Motorcyclist). This is not just a situation with Harley riders but especially the ricers. I love riding and I want EVERYONE that rides to get home safely. Please do our sport and yourselves (and your bike) a favor and arrive home alive. Sorry, I will climb down off my soap box now.

Hidollartoys,

The original question was are the 96 inch BT's closer to the performance of a Sportster in a stop light to stop light war. I am the one that took the thread slightly off course to explain power to weight ratio and how it affects acceleration. I couldn't agree more about riding safely......but we all accelerate hard from time to time....it's just in this case it happens to be two bikes acclerating hard next to each other.

105 hp? You can't tell us you aren't going to feel every single one of those expensive ponies at one time or another.......;)

Shu all true all true.

Shu all true all true.
;) Hey I too consider myself a careful and safe rider most of the time, but when I am at a stop light and that EVO is pounding under me and somebody pulls up and starts the taunting, I'll look around and see if the coast is clear and it's safe and I'll tear it up through a gear or two:smoke That's the Harley soul talking you into it BTW.

;) Hey I too consider myself a careful and safe rider most of the time, but when I am at a stop light and that EVO is pounding under me and somebody pulls up and starts the taunting, I'll look around and see if the coast is clear and it's safe and I'll tear it up through a gear or two:smoke That's the Harley soul talking you into it BTW.
:D +1 here :D :clap:clap:clap

;) Hey I too consider myself a careful and safe rider most of the time, but when I am at a stop light and that EVO is pounding under me and somebody pulls up and starts the taunting, I'll look around and see if the coast is clear and it's safe and I'll tear it up through a gear or two:smoke That's the Harley soul talking you into it BTW.

Ditto here:D.

Don, to keep it simple I just compared dry weights. But weight is weight regardless if it is part of the bike or part of the rider. More weight and your bike will slow down.

And your second question is a good one and one that could be debated and debated especially on an XL website. But to keep it using the same logic I used above, let's do the math: I think a 2003 1200 standard weighed in at 492 lbs dry and made right at 60 RWHP out of the crate. A 2008 1200R weighs 565 lbs dry which is 14.837% more. So for the '08 to be quicker it would need to make 69 hp. Out of the crate I do not believe they make quite that much power, so I would say completely stock the EVO would nudge out the rubbermount, but it would be close. However, at the stage one level, the new rubbermounts with the better cams and heads start to show their stuff and I would say that at that level the rubbermount would be able to take the EVO. Like I said, this will probably lead to a HUGE debate and someone will likely post a bunch of websites with claimed 1/4 mile times for each one and someone is going to find what I just wrote as offensive and not take it for the simple math it is. Everyone please keep in mind that I am not posting this for any ohter reason that to show how power to weight ratio has and effect on acceleration.


EDIT: I used to have the complete HD specifications for a bunch of different year Sportsters, but I lost them when my computer crashed a while back.
Again keep in mind there are so many variables I have not accounted for in the above mathematics. One major one is the gearing of the bike. Getting the bike out of the hole and up to the powerband is huge in reducing the total ET. In addition, the powerband of the engine and meshing that with the gearing and shift points to maximize the amount of HP on the ground is HUGE.

Shu, I think you missed Don's point. Adding the rider weight equally to each bike, reduces the percentage difference in weight. Reality is that the bikes don't ride on their own.

Using your calcs above with a 200lb rider, the 08 model at 765lb is only 10.55% heavier than the 03 at 692lbs. Thus it will only require 66rwhp to match it in acceleration, everyhting else being equal. The rider weight definitely matters.

I also wonder how many 'stock' 96" bikes would be out there. There ain't many stock sporty's, there all usually modified somehow, even it is just exhaust. There is a lot of performance potential in those 96" motors.

For the record, I race my relatively stock 1200 at the drags (safe, legal and still fun) and have been soundly beaten by a stock 103" SE softail and 95" S&S powered custom.

:spank

Shu,

after looking at some old magazine test data I'm not sure I believe your RWHP numbers on the solids vs. the rubbers...

...though comparing one mag to another or even the same mag from one year to another really opens up a whole other can of worms when it comes to dyno results.

Lets admit it, we like to race light to light. Jeffy, you could be riding a BUSA next to me and I still would race to the speed limit. It is fun and that is one reason to buy a bike. The fun of beating a BT is not about anything other than returning some of the shit issued over the years. If you think I ever let my friend on his fatboy beat me you are wrong. It is fun to race and that is why we do it. It is the street version of pulling out the measuring tape and measuring winkies. It is fun, not sensible, legal, moral, advisable, or prudent, but neither is riding a bike.

The apes have sealed my future losses because I am still scared they will come back into my lap when I get on it. I haven't even rde it and I think I am going to get some pull back.

no problem once you got them where you want them add a bracket
(a tab ) to lock them in place (a notch in the riser or cover )
and ride it like you stole it!! :laugh :p:D

I think a 2003 1200 standard weighed in at 492 lbs dry and made right at 60 RWHP out of the crate. A 2008 1200R weighs 565 lbs dry which is 14.837% more. So for the '08 to be quicker it would need to make 69 hp. Out of the crate I do not believe they make quite that much power, so I would say completely stock the EVO would nudge out the rubbermount, but it would be close.
.

Based on the information posted on the tech page at Sportster.org, a pre-rubbermount XL 1200 would run maybe 50 HP "out of the box", and perhaps 60 with stage 1 improvements. They don't specify what year and model that is based on.

A rubbermount carberated model will turn 60 hp or a little better out of the box, and 75 - 80 with a well tuned stage I. I don't know how the injected models fare.

So, 50 plus 14.837% is 57.4, and the 60HP rubbermount should be a shade quicker, given equal riding skill.

At the stage I level, the pre-rubber 60 hp plus 14.837% would be 68.90, and the rubbermount has a wider edge.

Well, I just got my adrenaline pumping for a loud-mouth-talking dude on a mostly stock 1996 Heritage Softail... He basically said, "well I've owned sportsters, and this would outrun any stock sportster", blah blah blah... I said, well...... not my sportster... He's like, "..well now you're just talking out of your ass"...

Well. :D :tour:banana
thats when my adrenaline got to pumping good... :D

So I say, you own it?? lets go for a race then. winner takes all. He's like, "well, I don't wanna take your bike". HA! backpedal backpedal...

Oh well, I kinda did want to take his bike. But I wouldn't have. Some people will never learn and will always talk shit. But sometimes, it would be fitting to put them in their place.

anyway... I thought I'd resurrect this thread out from the depths.... haha

Well, I just got my adrenaline pumping for a loud-mouth-talking dude on a mostly stock 1996 Heritage Softail... He basically said, "well I've owned sportsters, and this would outrun any stock sportster", blah blah blah... I said, well...... not my sportster... He's like, "..well now you're just talking out of your ass"...

Well. :D :tour:banana
thats when my adrenaline got to pumping good... :D

So I say, you own it?? lets go for a race then. winner takes all. He's like, "well, I don't wanna take your bike". HA! backpedal backpedal...

Oh well, I kinda did want to take his bike. But I wouldn't have. Some people will never learn and will always talk shit. But sometimes, it would be fitting to put them in their place.

anyway... I thought I'd resurrect this thread out from the depths.... haha

Seems to me someone last month started a tread about racing a Goldwing. Here we are now talking about racing a Softail.
What do these two stories have in common? Oh yeah the race never happened. :doh
How about not saying lets race for pinks, because that's going to scare 90 % of the guys out there with half a brain in their head into not racing.
It's time to man up and race somebody for a beer, a cup of coffee or just for the hell of it. :chtwo
Now call up that guy with the Goldwing and set up a real race, the guy with the Softail can be your next race. ;)
I'm not trying to give you a hard time, it's just time to stop talking shit and start racing. :)















P.S. I use to have a tweaked 1996 80" Fatboy that ran low 12's in the 1/4 mile with a 245 lb. rider. :smoke
Beside the pipes it looked stock.

I have run a lot of BT's the closest race was with an 96" Dyna super glide with stage 1. We rode together often. (and raced often) We were always neck to neck, But If I missed a gear or stumbled at all he was gone! A lot of the reason was this guy use to ride nothing but sport bikes. In other words He knew how to ride !

The better rider has the advantage always ! HP's are important but I will bet on Experience over power anytime !.............:shhhh

P.S. DONT BE SKEEERED !!!!

In a strait line race rider skill is somewhat less of a factor than a road type race. At the launch skill is involved but once you are under way most idiots grasp the concepts of redline/shift, redline/shift, etc. So in a stoplight to stoplight race I'd think HP/ weight and gearing, would determine most outcomes.

Seems to me someone last month started a tread about racing a Goldwing. Here we are now talking about racing a Softail.
What do these two stories have in common? Oh yeah the race never happened. :doh
How about not saying lets race for pinks, because that's going to scare 90 % of the guys out there with half a brain in their head into not racing.
It's time to man up and race somebody for a beer, a cup of coffee or just for the hell of it. :chtwo
Now call up that guy with the Goldwing and set up a real race, the guy with the Softail can be your next race. ;)
I'm not trying to give you a hard time, it's just time to stop talking shit and start racing. :)
. Yep, & thats what I told him. He wouldn't have raced me even just for the hell of it. I wasn't the one who started talking shit. But when he starts generalizing about all sportsters are this blah blah, I just needed to vent a little here. I was ready to race him, had my jacket on & all, (mind you I was at work) but he just wouldn't bite. You can flame me I guess if you want, I know I started a thread about the goldwing, but it just wasn't able to happen. Plus the guys getting it repo'd. There will be another time.

In a strait line race rider skill is somewhat less of a factor than a road type race. At the launch skill is involved but once you are under way most idiots grasp the concepts of redline/shift, redline/shift, etc. So in a stoplight to stoplight race I'd think HP/ weight and gearing, would determine most outcomes.

I have to dissagree somewhat Linkin, Its not quite as simple as redline/shift-redline/ shift. If you race that way I'll beat ya !..LOL

Knowing your bike is the secret, And knowing where the power/torque is..

Sorry Phone rang ! Anyway shifting at the right time is key, And that wont even be the same RPM in every gear !

Yep, & thats what I told him. He wouldn't have raced me even just for the hell of it. I wasn't the one who started talking shit. But when he starts generalizing about all sportsters are this blah blah, I just needed to vent a little here. I was ready to race him, had my jacket on & all, (mind you I was at work) but he just wouldn't bite. You can flame me I guess if you want, I know I started a thread about the goldwing, but it just wasn't able to happen. Plus the guys getting it repo'd. There will be another time.

It's all in fun. :)

I have to dissagree somewhat Linkin, Its not quite as simple as redline/shift-redline/ shift. If you race that way I'll beat ya !..LOL

Knowing your bike is the secret, And knowing where the power/torque is..

Sorry Phone rang ! Anyway shifting at the right time is key, And that wont even be the same RPM in every gear !

I have to agree, it's more complicated and takes more skill then just hitting redline in each gear after a good launch.
Most people would be surprised to find out they don't have a clue how to launch a bike at anywhere near it's full potential and as milmat1 pointed out the secrets to finding hidden power beyond the launch also.
In a road race if you lose by a 1/10 of a second, your unlucky. In a drag race when you lose by a 1/10 of a second, it's because you :censor up.

gotta say i've raced RK's, street gluids,fatboys, and a dyna and not one has got me. i thought i was hot shit one night and tried racing my buddies springer.....he has the top end board out to 113" and the bottom end is stroked.....i never stood a chance :)

It's all in fun. :)



I have to agree, it's more complicated and takes more skill then just hitting redline in each gear after a good launch.
Most people would be surprised to find out they don't have a clue how to launch a bike at anywhere near it's full potential and as milmat1 pointed out the secrets to finding hidden power beyond the launch also.
In a road race if you lose by a 1/10 of a second, your unlucky. In a drag race when you lose by a 1/10 of a second, it's because you :censor up.

hey... I understand... I race my buddies crotch rockets all the time... and get beat by them all the time.... but they get pissy when they cant pass me until x amount of speed... usually its after about 50-90mph mainly because they can't launch those things too well.

I would say my 1200 is like a "Strong Horse, it's not a "Gazelle (sportbike) or an "Elephant' (B.T.) It's what a Sporty is. A very nice motorcycle.

You guys need to try beating some hot FXRs. You can get an 80" evo up to around 90 or so hp, and with a little fiddling lower the weight to 550 or so. Rubber mounts mean easier revving, and there's some FAST ones around here. Mine is getting a 139" STD motor, that should make 150 + hp. With it, I'll race any 1200 on the planet!

You guys need to try beating some hot FXRs. You can get an 80" evo up to around 90 or so hp, and with a little fiddling lower the weight to 550 or so. Rubber mounts mean easier revving, and there's some FAST ones around here. Mine is getting a 139" STD motor, that should make 150 + hp. With it, I'll race any 1200 on the planet!

Don't you suppose that racing a 139" motor against a 74" is a bit out of class?

66, tell me about your STD 139" engine. Is STD doing the work or just supplying the parts, I've heard some good things about STD,( I have some of their old style round port heads ) I didn't know they did porting and assembly work, thought they just made componets. This is all very interesting. I may retire my old four speed engine and build a new S&S case five speed, with special application cases: 4 3/8" is the bore limit, alot of possibilities there..................Steve

I weigh 300 lbs and destroyed a new rocker a few months back. I don't think the guy really had a clue but considering I come off sportbikes and run quads and rode motox i had to learn how to wring every bit of power to even keep up with my little guy friends! It's def gonna depend on who knows how to run their machine and has the balls to do it andnot be afraid of taking it home on a trailer or picking it up in the morning at the police impound lot!LOL

It's a long story. I got it in trade from Dan Haggerty the Grizzly Adams guy. He had it in a really long spindly framed custom, and he could'nt get it to start dependably, and the bike kept breaking parts. I traded him for a 10-1 compression Axtell 97" motor that I was gonna run. Yeah I know I SCORED! Anyway, it turns out it was way undercammed, so now I've got a jims 660 in it, and I'm going to shoehorn it into my FXRT.

"Don't you suppose that racing a 139" motor against a 74" is a bit out of class?"

We did'nt win the gulf war by being equally matched did we? I'm not saying sportsters aint faster, HP per HP, but don't underestimate a hot-rod FXR, even an 80"!


STD makes great products, and they're like ten miles from my shop, so I use them pretty often. I don't hesitate to recommend them or they're heads, cases, etc.

66: I like the way you think, there is no displacement classes on the street. I was B-52 pilot in Desert Storm and my crew alone dropped 816,000 lbs of bombs on those towel heads, Bush 1 called it off about a week too early, we could have killed their whole army.
Anyway, your project sounds really cool, hope you get that 150+ rwhp, that thing will haul ass............................steve

NOW HERE IS SOME HORSEPOWER !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
http://xlforum.net/photopost/data/500/medium/Jets_2_B-52_mito.jpg

Yeah, I like to bring guns to knife fights! Fair fights are for people who are'nt too concerned with losing!

http://www.econsciousmarket.com/eco-times/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/applesandoranges.jpg

I had a guy on a dyna with all kinds of head work, cams or whatever pull me (not by much) until 4th gear then I was with him till we bailed. Also, I may have been a little late on the draw.

Had me a little race with a BT yesterday...RoadSofa of some sorts. Pulled behind this guy who was riding behind two cars. Made sure to sit just off to hisleft, so I could see his face in his mirror, so I knew he could see mine. Opportunity came to pass all three of them, so I down shift, blip the throttle to announce my myself and buzz him on the way past all three vehicles. Once I get past, I drop my speed back down to 60mph and just cruise. Didn't bother to look back, but all of a sudden Mr Road Sofa blows by me. I smile and let him go...but the raod ahead had a bunch of turns in it and ended in a round-a-bout...and just by maintaining my speed I had caught up to him...we both head straight through the round-a-bout and as I was right behind him, I decided to show Mr RoadSofa what a 'Hot' XL looks and sounds like. I started behind him and by second gear was next to him, blew past him and then let her roll out and back down to my 60mph cruising speed. Moved all the way over to the right of the lane to allow him to come on past if he so decided to...but nope...he stayed back...and I'm sure he's telling his buddies how some little red sporty was messing with him yesterday! :)

Being new to the harley scene i was supprised at the difference in the big twin sportster performance . Last week i blew away my bud on his 110 screming eagle . There are fast big twins but they are not stock after riding one i'm not sure i would ever want one . My buddy gave over 20g's for his and in order to compete with a little sporty it would take alot more money .
One guy said he could blow away any 1200 sportster on the planet thats a joke i saw one at the dragstrip here turn a low 9 in the 1/4 .

What about vrods anyone race them ? My buddy has one and we don't race because he thinks my bike will give him a run for his money and so do I.

What about vrods anyone race them ? My buddy has one and we don't race because he thinks my bike will give him a run for his money and so do I.

No - it won't...

No - it won't...

:laugh LOL :laugh

You got to love the bench racers

All I've ever heard from BT riders is something like, "that's the fastest Harley I've ever seen"

That was when my bike was stage one. Now it's kind of embarrassing. I usually try now to let it rip all the way because it makes me feel kind of like an a hole if it's one of my friends. If it's a stranger I don't care.

I have to dissagree somewhat Linkin, Its not quite as simple as redline/shift-redline/ shift. If you race that way I'll beat ya !..LOL

Knowing your bike is the secret, And knowing where the power/torque is..

Sorry Phone rang ! Anyway shifting at the right time is key, And that wont even be the same RPM in every gear ! Have to agree with that one.

rotating mass has a huge effect on acceleration..... lightweight rear tire, rim, belt/chain, sprocket, clutch and flywheel........ if you can save 25lbs on those parts you can add a 25lbs lead weight on the seat and it will still be a boat load quicker.......

and wheelie bars help too
http://xlforum.net/photopost/data/500/7_sec_xl-1.JPG

http://xlforum.net/photopost/data/500/7_sec_xl-3.JPG

Ww

What about vrods anyone race them ? My buddy has one and we don't race because he thinks my bike will give him a run for his money and so do I.

I've never raced a water boy. That might be pretty close. My 85 hp 460 lb bike against a 110hp 700lb? bike.

I know stage one water boys run in the low 11's.

I've never raced a water boy. That might be pretty close. My 85 hp 460 lb bike against a 110hp 700lb? bike.

I know stage one water boys run in the low 11's.

A bud of mine has a Vee, weight is 640lb and 120hp out the box. His is so far not out of the box it is not funny. We were pulling at 100mph and I heard him drop a cog and blew by me like I was stood still. When we came to a stop he had a grin from ear to ear and said that he ran out of cojones at 140 with it still pulling hard.......:wonderlan.

BTW my Dyna stage 1 is a might quicker than my stage 1.5 Sporty,and top end the Dyna rules.I think that may be a stability thing.

MCN says

01 Vrod - 619 lbs wet, 103 rwhp, 11.38 1/4, top speed 137 mph
05 Street Rod - 636 lbs wet, 102 rwhp, 12.07 1/4, top speed 134 mph

the closest to Veights solidmount sporty that they tested

96 1200S - 520 lbs wet, 56 rwhp, 13.54 1/4, top speed 107 mph

MCN says

01 Vrod - 619 lbs wet, 103 rwhp, 11.38 1/4, top speed 137 mph
05 Street Rod - 636 lbs wet, 102 rwhp, 12.07 1/4, top speed 134 mph

the closest to Veights solidmount sporty that they tested

96 1200S - 520 lbs wet, 56 rwhp, 13.54 1/4, top speed 107 mph

sorry not stock 1300cc needs a dyno test for rwhp

MCN says

01 Vrod - 619 lbs wet, 103 rwhp, 11.38 1/4, top speed 137 mph
05 Street Rod - 636 lbs wet, 102 rwhp, 12.07 1/4, top speed 134 mph

the closest to Veights solidmount sporty that they tested

96 1200S - 520 lbs wet, 56 rwhp, 13.54 1/4, top speed 107 mph

I think I could handle a 12 flat water boy, but not one running an 11.38

Out on the street though, one thing I've learned is,

"There's many a slip twixt a cup and a lip."

sorry not stock 1300cc needs a dyno test for rwhp

Well, potentially that's a very different thing.

Only one way to find out...

But one question 1300? Thought the biggest kits available were 1250?

I think I could handle a 12 flat water boy, but not one running an 11.38

Out on the street though, one thing I've learned is,

"There's many a slip twixt a cup and a lip."

Well, as much fun as bench racing is, you hit the nail on the head, at the end of the day unless the bikes are just completely horribly mis-matched, it comes down to the rider NOT THE BIKE.

ima jump in on the bt debat. i go to mmi in orlando and im taking harley davidson. we all get out at the same time and every guy wants to race every night and we get out at 11:30 so we dont have to worry about cops or traffic so every night i have 7 redlights and 8 miles to run. one of those redlights are exac. a mile, now i have a 03 sporty was an 883 and i would take my whippins but i put revtech cylinders and weisco reverse dish 10.5:1 pistons and put some lead in her coffee. now she runs like a raped ape. 3 nights ago a guy from class that has a bt96 on a dyna with v&h drags a a stage one setup wanted to race the whole way..............now i know my bike very well and can drive the pis outta it and i could barley pull from that bt but i still did.....when we came to the one mile spot he tried to come back and get me on top end but a lil twist of the wrist i kept the gap steady so all in all everyone is right its deff weight to power bc me i weigh 165 and the other guy 180 so we arnt heavy.............but the good lil ole sporty kept on truckin with the big girl

Well, potentially that's a very different thing.

Only one way to find out...

But one question 1300? Thought the biggest kits available were 1250?



Well, as much fun as bench racing is, you hit the nail on the head, at the end of the day unless the bikes are just completely horribly mis-matched, it comes down to the rider NOT THE BIKE.

Bone Im not sure about "kits" and maybe you are just reffering to whats available for your Sporty... but starting in 07 your stock out of the box Dyna Street Bob is close to 1600 cc's (1584 I think) without a kit, and weighs in at around 80 lbs heavier than a 1200 Custom. So Im going to have to agree with you, that in a race between a Sporty and a 96ci Dyna.. it would come down to the rider.

Bone Im not sure about "kits" and maybe you are just reffering to whats available for your Sporty...

I'm pretty familiar with the TC88 and TC96, as well as the 1340 EVO BT, I'm asking the poster who said his 1993 Sporty is a 1300cc what he used to get it there - I thought that 1250 was pretty much the biggest you could go with stock cases on an EVO sportster (solid or rubber).

I'm pretty familiar with the TC88 and TC96, as well as the 1340 EVO BT, I'm asking the poster who said his 1993 Sporty is a 1300cc what he used to get it there - I thought that 1250 was pretty much the biggest you could go with stock cases on an EVO sportster (solid or rubber).

I thought he was talking about the vrod was 1300cc.

I thought he was talking about the vrod was 1300cc.

Could be - :dunno

MCN says

01 Vrod - 619 lbs wet, 103 rwhp, 11.38 1/4, top speed 137 mph
05 Street Rod - 636 lbs wet, 102 rwhp, 12.07 1/4, top speed 134 mph

the closest to Veights solidmount sporty that they tested

96 1200S - 520 lbs wet, 56 rwhp, 13.54 1/4, top speed 107 mph

These weights are not wet weight, they're dry weights. A vrod is 670-680 lbs wet

A rubber mount Sportster is about 580 lbs wet.

My bike is about 460 lbs wet.

These weights are not wet weight, they're dry weights. A vrod is 670-680 lbs wet

A rubber mount Sportster is about 580 lbs wet.

My bike is about 460 lbs wet.


Hey I may not like a lot of things about MCN, but their specs are usually believable - i.e. they weigh their test bikes.

The PDF says WET WEIGHTS (want me to email it to you? or you can usually download a pretty current version of it on their website).

And more importantly a 96 1200S isn't a rubbermount.

As for the Vrod - yeah, CURRENT wet weights are listed as 670-673, but those models are 01 and 05 - the 01 had the smaller fuel cell right? and the 05 was the STREET ROD, which had mid-mounts and other different components - so I wouldn't ASSume their specs are wrong.

Hey I may not like a lot of things about MCN, but their specs are usually believable - i.e. they weigh their test bikes.

The PDF says WET WEIGHTS (want me to email it to you? or you can usually download a pretty current version of it on their website).

And more importantly a 96 1200S isn't a rubbermount.

As for the Vrod - yeah, CURRENT wet weights are listed as 670-673, but those models are 01 and 05 - the 01 had the smaller fuel cell right? and the 05 was the STREET ROD, which had mid-mounts and other different components - so I wouldn't ASSume their specs are wrong.

I believe you but MCN got it wrong. On the Harley web site those weights are listed as dry weights.

I believe you but MCN got it wrong. On the Harley web site those weights are listed as dry weights.

Again - see my points - we're not talking current models.

The 01 probably had the smaller fuel cell.

The 05 was a different model.

The current Harley website means NOTHING compared to both of those.


EDIT - I've got a copy of MotorCyclist here too

02 HD V-rod - WET WEIGHT is listed as 620 lbs, also lists 109.3 hp and 74.3 ft. lbs. torque

Same list gives the 04 XL1200R WET WEIGHT as 584 which sounds right

MCN says

01 Vrod - 619 lbs wet, 103 rwhp, 11.38 1/4, top speed 137 mph
05 Street Rod - 636 lbs wet, 102 rwhp, 12.07 1/4, top speed 134 mph

the closest to Veights solidmount sporty that they tested

96 1200S - 520 lbs wet, 56 rwhp, 13.54 1/4, top speed 107 mph

My buds Vee is an 08, with the 1150cc motor and bigger fuel capacity?

Dry weight is going to be about the same.

Again - see my points - we're not talking current models.

The 01 probably had the smaller fuel cell.

The 05 was a different model.

The current Harley website means NOTHING compared to both of those.


EDIT - I've got a copy of MotorCyclist here too

02 HD V-rod - WET WEIGHT is listed as 620 lbs, also lists 109.3 hp and 74.3 ft. lbs. torque



That's got to be dry weight.

That's got to be dry weight.

Yes, I'm sure it's much more likely that TWO FRIGGIN SEPARATE PUBLICATIONS WHO INDEPENDANTLY TEST/WEIGH/DYNO BIKES GOT THEIR WET WEIGHTS WRONG than it is that you are just mistaken and the Vrod gained some pork over the past decade. :frownthre :doh :p

620 lbs would put the dry weight about 16 lbs lighter than current vrods. That's beliveable. What you're talking about is they've gained 50 lbs. That's kind of hard to believe.

620 lbs would put the dry weight about 16 lbs lighter than current vrods. That's beliveable. What you're talking about is they've gained 50 lbs. That's kind of hard to believe.

Now OTOH if you tell me they have different frames, or engines that's different. My question is what accounts for the extra 50 lbs?

620 lbs would put the dry weight about 16 lbs lighter than current vrods. That's beliveable. What you're talking about is they've gained 50 lbs. That's kind of hard to believe.

Now OTOH if you tell me they have different frames, or engines that's different. My question is what accounts for the extra 50 lbs?

I don't make the news, I just report it.

I've never followed the Vrods that closely, just not that interested in them.

BUT, fuel DID go under the seat or something like that right?

And they DID have to change the frame to accomodate for the larger fuel cell on later models.

Not to mention other things being equal a larger fuel cell is going to mean more WET WEIGHT just because of the obvious right?

Also, as I noted, the Street Rod was a mid-mount version with different brakes and different suspension - so again, there are a bunch of components that were swapped out.

Maybe most importantly we should note that since 2001-03 - MOST bikes in Harley's line-up gained weight, maybe there is more to it than just the 04 rubbermounting.

We recently found out just how ridiculously heavy the rubbermount Sporty wheels are, maybe that's part of the weight issue? Maybe they or their supplier made a change to the wheel material that just corresponded with some of the chassis redesigns?

:dunno

Who cares... I don't ride to see how fast I can get from one stop light to another.. I ride because of the freedom of being on a bike...
Although I totally wasted a geo metro the other day...

...
Although I totally wasted a geo metro the other day...
:roflblack:roflblack:roflblack:roflblack:roflblack :roflblack

Nice KILL man!

Maybe most importantly we should note that since 2001-03 - MOST bikes in Harley's line-up gained weight, maybe there is more to it than just the 04 rubbermounting.

We recently found out just how ridiculously heavy the rubbermount Sporty wheels are, maybe that's part of the weight issue? Maybe they or their supplier made a change to the wheel material that just corresponded with some of the chassis redesigns?

:dunno

You're probably right. All the Harley's have been on weight gaining trend for a while now.

MCN says

01 Vrod - 619 lbs wet, 103 rwhp, 11.38 1/4, top speed 137 mph
05 Street Rod - 636 lbs wet, 102 rwhp, 12.07 1/4, top speed 134 mph

the closest to Veights solidmount sporty that they tested

96 1200S - 520 lbs wet, 56 rwhp, 13.54 1/4, top speed 107 mph
I have the magazines to back up the numbers Bone listed above.
He's right on the money.
I haven't been to the track since the V-Rod was originally released.
Most of the guys racing V-Rods at that time were running in the mid 12's in the 1/4 mile.
Obviously the 11.38 the magazine reported was achieved by a pro rider.
They also adjust the times and mph to compensate for weather condition when tested.
They do that so you can compare the results of different bikes tested in different conditions more accurately.



Who cares... I don't ride to see how fast I can get from one stop light to another.. I ride because of the freedom of being on a bike...
Although I totally wasted a geo metro the other day...
That's bad-ass dude! :smoke

Iw as looking at the torque specs for the 02 V-Rod that someone had listed above.. 109 hp and only 74 ft pound of torque at the rear wheel? seems like the could have upped the torque a little, of course that was one of the deciding factors for me when I bought my Street Bob... it has the highest amount of rear wheel tourque of any of the Harleys.. I had mine dynoed out a 78 Hp (or was that 87 hp?) (oh well Ill have to look wen I get home..lol) and 91 ft pounds of torque at the rear wheel... and with a twist on the ole grip, it will shit an get!! I wasnt "racing" so to speak, but one of my buds thought he'd be real cool and blow by me on his Nightster.... we were running about 65 to start with... so I just gave it a twist and left him so far behind I dont think he even tried to catch up..

Iw as looking at the torque specs for the 02 V-Rod that someone had listed above.. 109 hp and only 74 ft pound of torque at the rear wheel? seems like the could have upped the torque a little

Nah, it's tuned for high hp, that said 74 ft. lbs. on that bike is nothing to sneeze at, especially considering the hp.

Iw as looking at the torque specs for the 02 V-Rod that someone had listed above.. 109 hp and only 74 ft pound of torque at the rear wheel? seems like the could have upped the torque a little, of course that was one of the deciding factors for me when I bought my Street Bob... it has the highest amount of rear wheel tourque of any of the Harleys.. I had mine dynoed out a 78 Hp (or was that 87 hp?) (oh well Ill have to look wen I get home..lol) and 91 ft pounds of torque at the rear wheel... and with a twist on the ole grip, it will shit an get!! I wasnt "racing" so to speak, but one of my buds thought he'd be real cool and blow by me on his Nightster.... we were running about 65 to start with... so I just gave it a twist and left him so far behind I dont think he even tried to catch up..

As it already has fairly high compression, the V-Rod motor would mostly take more cubes to make a higher torque figure. The motor makes it's higher HP by being designed to be wound out to higher rpm than our bikes.