103 Torque

Discussion in 'Engine, Fuel and Exhaust' started by davidjdorn, Sep 23, 2012.

  1. davidjdorn

    davidjdorn New Member

    Harley specs say 100 ft/lb torque on 2012 103ci dyna, is that at the crank or at the rear wheel?
  2. Jack Klarich

    Jack Klarich Guest

    Welcome to The Forum, that is a VERY good question. In real terms it SHOULD be done at the crank without any drive hooked up but that would not give actual numbers at the rear wheel on a dyno when the bike is put thru its gears JMO
  3. dolt

    dolt Senior Member

    Don't know for sure about the specs posted on the H-D website. The SE Performance catalog shows the 103 Stage II upgrade with 255 cams peaking at 96TQ at the rear wheel. So I am not sure how the stock 103 makes 100TQ at the rear wheel.
  4. Rod Stewart

    Rod Stewart Active Member

    My 95 inch with SE203 cams makes 100 ftlbs on the dyno, which is of course at the rear wheel.
    So I can see a stock 103 with cats and restrictive mufflers and stock cam maybe making mid-90's at the rear wheel. 100 seems like a stretch for an off the showroom floor bike, unless its at the crank.

  5. Breeze3at

    Breeze3at Well-Known Member

    Almost all manufacturers use "at the crankshaft" figures for hp and torque. Mostly because it's about 15% higher than rear wheel, and they like to s-t-r-e-a-t-c-h, figures in their favor.
  6. R_W_B

    R_W_B Senior Member

    Not sure on the Harley, I know some of the Metrics publicily admit their torque ratings are lab controlled conditions at the crank. The actual street condition OEM EPA constricted rear wheel torque is much less on a Kawasaki than their advertised ratings.
  7. Bodeen

    Bodeen Well-Known Member Staff Member Moderator Contributor

    And just how do we know this Mr. RWB? :s
  8. Redfish-Joe

    Redfish-Joe Senior Member

    He stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night!:lolrolling:lolrolling:lolrolling
  9. Bodeen

    Bodeen Well-Known Member Staff Member Moderator Contributor

    Now that's funny Joe! :)
  10. R_W_B

    R_W_B Senior Member

    Because an aquaintance of mine runs a race shop down round Hollywood Florida and he gave me the rear wheel dyno stats on his Kawa Voyager and they were much less than the advertised stats of 108 ft lbs.

    He also told me that kawa admitted to him their stats are taken under controlled conditions. As far as Harley stat conditions I don't know. From my personal seat gravity I'd guess the HD stats are closer to rear wheel than my Kawa 1700 bagger is. But it's hard to judge since my bagger weighs 830 lbs as compared to the 650lbs of my old Street Bob. The Street Bob with it's nearly 200lbs less weight, V&H's pipes, Doebeck TFI and SE Big Air, accelerated noticably stronger than my zero miles unbroken in, and completely EPA strangled Kawa Nomad. But it sure did not ride as nice.

    Maybe HD will say yay or nay if you ask around enough. They might be more forthcoming with it than they were their battery stats. Awhile back when I tired to find the amp hours and cold crank amps for the HD battery, but they simply were not available anywhere online or at the HD site. The local HD shop told me they did not have those stats but they were good batteries. So I did some research of my own and bought a Deka battery with 18ah and plenty of cca to suit me. When I got it, it was identical in size, shape etc to the battery that came from HD. Penn Manufacturing makes batteries for HD, Deka is owned by Penn Manufacturing. Of course it was $50 less than the local HD battery.

    But to the OP I wouldn't worry what the stats are based on. Test ride any bike you are interested in (and even some you ain't to compare). If it ain't enough then there is always (while it's yet legal) the EPA freedom items put out by aftermarket folks.