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:

95 cu. in.

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
  #1  
Old 12-10-2006 | 01:06 PM
fizzy55's Avatar
fizzy55
Thread Starter
|
Advanced
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 67
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default 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  
Old 12-10-2006 | 01:20 PM
bountyhunter's Avatar
bountyhunter
Banned
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 3,499
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
From: CANADA
Default RE: 95 cu. in.

The possible component choices and combos for a 95 builds are endless...from mild to hi comp wild. SE heads and 204's are on the mild side. Do some research...go wilder...get it right the first time!
 
  #3  
Old 12-10-2006 | 01:24 PM
maineultraclassic's Avatar
maineultraclassic
Elite HDF Member
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,722
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 4 Posts
From: Biddeford, Maine
Default 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?
If the tune is done right after the build, your milage should still be about the same. Your motor will be working less to achieve the same as before, so with the proper tune you should remain around 40-45mpg.

Steve
 
  #4  
Old 12-09-2007 | 09:22 PM
chuckk01's Avatar
chuckk01
Cruiser
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From:
Default RE: 95 cu. in.

test

[IMG]local://upfiles/46155/17EAE21CC2394270A165E98584372844.jpg[/IMG]
 
  #5  
Old 12-09-2007 | 09:31 PM
chuckk01's Avatar
chuckk01
Cruiser
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From:
Default RE: 95 cu. in.

test2
 
  #6  
Old 12-10-2007 | 04:33 AM
BirchwhiteHD's Avatar
BirchwhiteHD
Road Master
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,000
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From: NH
Default 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
 
  #7  
Old 12-10-2007 | 04:41 AM
sewerat's Avatar
sewerat
Road Master
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes on 2 Posts
From: Brooksdale, ON
Default 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.
 
  #8  
Old 12-10-2007 | 05:26 AM
nidan's Avatar
nidan
Road Warrior
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,291
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
From:
Default 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.
 
  #9  
Old 12-11-2007 | 10:40 AM
GLHD's Avatar
GLHD
Intermediate
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
From:
Default 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..
 
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
papaduke187
Motorcycle Parts For Sale-Misc. Parts
0
01-04-2018 11:22 AM
SleepyBagger
Engine Mechanical Topics
32
06-17-2015 09:21 AM
tdd77
Touring Models
10
04-06-2010 09:58 AM
HogGlider
Exhaust System Topics
12
09-26-2007 06:13 PM
XfasteddieX
Exhaust System Topics
1
09-16-2006 10:56 PM



Quick Reply: 95 cu. in.



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:21 PM.