Not sure but if you're talking about mine, but he spent an unusual amount of time on mine by hand at the end because of the circumstances.
That said. It's a 107" running a max flow 55/58 with 5.3 injectors. It's doing 127/126 and 4.9 injectors would be big enough.
98hrfb is running a near identical build in a 110" with 4.9 injectors.

 

I am referring to yours. My tuner and I still believe 120/120 numbers are achievable from a 98" build. I have seen results of a 98" that did hit 120HP/107TQ, so it appears that 120HP is achievable. We spent some time post final tune reviewing all the dyno sheets of the various configurations tested trying to figure out what could have been done to hit 120/120. We believe that higher head flow and/or different cams might have done it.

4.9 injectors might have been big enough but hitting 85% duty cycle at 4000rpms was the reason for the larger injectors. I will leave the OPs choice of injectors up to him and his tuner.

 

Measure your intake ports on the cylinder head then order the HPI 55 with a port to match the heads. A smaller intake port is ok.. A larger intake port is not because it creates a shelf at the intake port on the cylinder head and disturbs the air flow pattern..

 

I didnt know you hit 85% at 4000rpm. How much was it at peak hp? Or did it go any higher?
That's approaching peak torque rpm of my 107.
I just know too big affects low end tunability.
I was going to do 4.9s myself after doing the math but went 5.3s after talking to I think Jason but msybe it was Don.
TBH I've never checked duty cycle of them to see where they're at.
The OP isn't in any danger of coming close to your 98 build. There's always that possibility with changes down the road and this is one reason people go bigger than necessary. The other is just not knowing the effect too big can have.
How big is too big? Couldn't tell you that either. I just know 4.9s are big enough in his build.

I don't know if there would be any benefit to a 55/58 max flow in his build either. I don't THINK it would hurt any and the cost is the same.
It maximizes mid and upper rpm power without hurting low end as opposed to a straight 55mm or 58mm in larger bore builds.
I went in depth in my research on this with HPI and I know it's Jason's go to up to 130 hp builds.
I think there's a 58/62 after that. Not sure if there's a smaller one. I don't remember.
​​​​​​My ports/runners are 1.8. Fwiw.
I'd be surprised if his level B heads are more than 1.760 or flow more than 300cfm.

 

I don't recall and I don't recall duty cycle of the 5.3 injectors after the switch. I wasn't sure about replacing the injectors but deferred to the tuner. We believe 120/120 is possible from 98" and may revisit next summer. I have minor regrets from not building another all bore 107 like I ran in my bagger but with better heads; more compression and Cyclerama 630 cams. I am thinking those cams and a set of WFO Larry's heads, purpose built for the 98" configuration, might hit 120/120. Or I might just by a 1200RT Beemer.

 

The problem is hitting the square numbers @ 120 I think. You could no doubt break the 120hp but will it also do the 120 torque? You get to a point where increasing one costs the other I think.
I think that's the point I'm at, and happy to be, with my 107. I think anything I did to gain in one would cost in the other. I've seen a few 107s with a little more HP but nowhere near the torque and vice versa. I think the 127/126 is as good as it gets in a 107 or awful close to it. I did everything possible from the start to make it so. Never seen a 130/130 107. At least none I could find and I've searched high and low. Not saying there isn't any but...

 

120/120 was just a target. We would have been happy with 118/122.

 

The closest I ever seen to anybody getting to 130 with a 107 was @target64 , A few years back he had a 107 that sounded like the nastiest ****ing motor I ever heard built by Hillside with a Thunderheader on it and dude probably best ****ing motor I ever heard honestly.. I believe he was running a 9F Woods and he hit 129 hp and 124 torque.. I could be wrong but maybe he'll pop in.. All I do remember was that was one bad *** ****ing motor...

 

So 2 more HP but 2 less peak torque than my 127/126. Was it an all bore 107 or a stroker?
Did you ever get yours on the dyno yet? I'm curious what it does with that exhaust.

 

Hello Everyone its been a while since I have been on the site. I built the engine it was originally stock 96er, to a 107 Scott Palmer bored my stock cylinders and had ordered the correct pistons for the setup, compression was set @ 11:1 and his brother did the Head work with 2.020 intake valves and 1.630 exhaust heads, intake runners were 1.800 with a matching HPI 55mm Throttle body with 5.3 injectors. The heads were flowing @ 302 cfm's . running S&S 585 cams with 1.725 rockers on intake valves making it a 615/585 setup. which R&R cycle has now in a set of cams. running a modified Thunder header which Dan Thayer had me tweek the baffles as he tuned the bike that day, two hours later it was on Scott Palmer's dyno and the number were the same . 129HP/125 TQ check out this video Target64