95 cu. in.
#1
95 cu. in.
thinking about going the 95 in. for my '05 EG. will i see any big change in fuel consumption with using the 204 cams and SE heads. i have prevously installed SE slip ons,SERT,air cleaner.usually ride two-up and the motor rarely sees 5000 rpm. thanks ahead of time. ps. any other cams suit my combination better?
#2
#3
Elite HDF Member
RE: 95 cu. in.
ORIGINAL: fizzy55
thinking about going the 95 in. for my '05 EG. will i see any big change in fuel consumption with using the 204 cams and SE heads. i have prevously installed SE slip ons,SERT,air cleaner.usually ride two-up and the motor rarely sees 5000 rpm. thanks ahead of time. ps. any other cams suit my combination better?
thinking about going the 95 in. for my '05 EG. will i see any big change in fuel consumption with using the 204 cams and SE heads. i have prevously installed SE slip ons,SERT,air cleaner.usually ride two-up and the motor rarely sees 5000 rpm. thanks ahead of time. ps. any other cams suit my combination better?
Steve
#6
RE: 95 cu. in.
I started off with stock 88 in was getting around 49-51 mpg,went with the stage 2 big bore 95",stock heads,203 cams,K&N hd-0800 filter,SE Pro slip on's (98 b's),SE racetuner, I'm getting between 38-41 mpg now depending on how i ride (my bike seldom see's anything over 3500 rpm). runs alot better,more pull on the hills. my build is very mild and just the amount of extra power i was looking for,wasnt looking to go any wilder. My upgrade was to solve a few engine problems i had,and more problems were found when they opened it up to do the stage 2, $1532.00 installed (back in 05'),$1365.00 in warrentee work done at same time,which was good for me,my warrentee would have run out by the time it came out of winter storage,so having the work done while in storage at the dealer was a goodsavings $$$for me.
my two cents worth
my two cents worth
#7
RE: 95 cu. in.
if you like the option of the 204 cam i say change out 2 things. make sure you get the high comp pistons, comectic 32 gaskets and go with the andrews cam. forget the number right now but iti is basiclly a 204 cam with just a bit more lift, did it with mine, left heads stock, ended up with approx 80 hp and 95 tq.
Trending Topics
#8
RE: 95 cu. in.
When I went from an 88 stage i to a 95 Stage IV I actually got better mileage!
I averaged 46, and got as high as 53
I did change carbs to a Mik 42, and I believe it was a very well matched set of components and a good tuner. SE perf heads/SE Flat tops / ANdrews TW31G/Dyna TC88-2 ignition/ COmetic gaskets /SE II slipons yielded 98hp/101 lbs ft, very flat torque. Later switched to V&H proppipe and picked up about 5 more. That cost me a fer mpg , but the motor ran better.
I averaged 46, and got as high as 53
I did change carbs to a Mik 42, and I believe it was a very well matched set of components and a good tuner. SE perf heads/SE Flat tops / ANdrews TW31G/Dyna TC88-2 ignition/ COmetic gaskets /SE II slipons yielded 98hp/101 lbs ft, very flat torque. Later switched to V&H proppipe and picked up about 5 more. That cost me a fer mpg , but the motor ran better.
#9
RE: 95 cu. in.
carb or efi .. what heads are you going to be running the performance heads or the htcc the 204 will work ok with that set up or you can run the 211 with them heads will give good all around power and tq.. we use alot of the 211 with performance heads and htcc heads if carb run stock with performace or htcc run the 42 carb .. dependingon the tuner you should see 90+ on both ends hp and tq..
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
XfasteddieX
Exhaust System Topics
1
09-16-2006 10:56 PM