Touring Models Road King, Road King Custom, Road King Classic, Road Glide, Street Glide, Electra Glide, Electra Glide Classic, and Electra Glide Ultra Classic bikes.
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

Jackpot Pro Touring vs Rinehart 3.5

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
  #1  
Old 04-23-2011 | 08:03 AM
racerx1's Avatar
racerx1
Thread Starter
|
Cruiser
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
From: Sussex, WI
Default Jackpot Pro Touring vs Rinehart 3.5

I'm in the process of upgrading my 2006 Street Glide from stock to Hillside's 98ci package. I am already planning to add FuelMoto's PCIII for tuning, but I am really debating what, if anything, to do about my pipes. I will be keeping the stock headers, but I can't decide to keep my Rinehart 3.5 slipons (about 3 years old) or get the new Jackpot Pro Touring slipons. My main concern is how much power am I giving away if I keep the Rineharts? How much louder are the Jackpots? Any thoughts?

Thanks, Paul
 
  #2  
Old 04-23-2011 | 08:21 AM
HD101st's Avatar
HD101st
Tourer
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
From: New York
Default

i just put 525 cams in mine and the rinehart 3.5 got a little louder but still sound great
i think that if you are increasing displacement sound will change i would wait and see what it sounds like and what kind of numbers you are producing before i go and purchase another pipe because you may find the perfect paring with what you have
and if not then you can buy the jackpots just my 2 cents
 
  #3  
Old 04-23-2011 | 09:08 AM
springer 03's Avatar
springer 03
Road Warrior
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,995
Likes: 2
From: Land of 10,000 lakes
Default

Keep the Rineharts. They are just fine.
 
  #4  
Old 04-23-2011 | 04:02 PM
racerx1's Avatar
racerx1
Thread Starter
|
Cruiser
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
From: Sussex, WI
Default

I'm happy with the sound of either pipes. I've just heard a lot of talk that the Rineharts cost a lot of power. I figure if I'm going through the effort of building the engine, I don't want to just give power away on the pipes. Especially I'm concerned about low end torque.
 

Last edited by racerx1; 04-23-2011 at 04:03 PM. Reason: added more info
  #5  
Old 04-23-2011 | 05:30 PM
springer 03's Avatar
springer 03
Road Warrior
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,995
Likes: 2
From: Land of 10,000 lakes
Default

Somebody's blowing smoke. I have the FM 107 with the 3.5 rineharts. Ask jamie how it did.
 
  #6  
Old 04-23-2011 | 06:00 PM
racerx1's Avatar
racerx1
Thread Starter
|
Cruiser
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
From: Sussex, WI
Default

Actually, Keith was the first person to say the Rineharts would be fine. Figured it never hurts to hear other opinions though.

Thanks
 
  #7  
Old 04-23-2011 | 06:41 PM
GAZRNR's Avatar
GAZRNR
Advanced
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
From: Atlanta, GA
Default

I have Rineharts on my 09 RG and just put jackpots on my 98 RK EFI. I like sound on both bikes with the jackpots being the quieter of the 2. When the rineharts need to be replaced I will go with another set of fuelmoto mufflers.
 
  #8  
Old 04-23-2011 | 10:18 PM
North Star's Avatar
North Star
Road Captain
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 551
Likes: 10
From: Toronto, Ontario
Default

I've never heard anyone say Rineharts lose power- unless your talking about true duals, as the consensus is that true duals lose power down low.

If you're just talking slip ons, the Rineharts have always been known to do well power wise.
 
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
stan60
Touring Models
3
10-28-2011 03:24 PM
BayBones
Softail Models
18
05-05-2011 06:06 PM
Gadgetech
Touring Models
51
11-11-2010 11:46 AM
Garemlin
Touring Models
15
10-10-2010 10:54 PM
oldman1004
Touring Models
14
04-19-2008 07:39 PM



Quick Reply: Jackpot Pro Touring vs Rinehart 3.5



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:25 PM.