[jayleav]

Motorcycle USA posted this on their Facebook page.......

http://www.motorcycle-usa.com/4/17183/Motorcycle-Article/Indian-Chief-Thunder-Stroke-111-Dyno-Chart.aspx

 

[bigfoot]

Thanks for the posting of Indian's 111 numbers.

Now would someone post the stock 106 numbers so we can compare, apples to apples?

 

[Brentt]

I believe that's the flatest torque curve I've ever seen. No wonder it pulls so
Hard from any speed. I noticed in my demo ride the power was almost linear
And now I know why.

 

[iabob]

Thanks for the posting of Indian's 111 numbers.

Now would someone post the stock 106 numbers so we can compare, apples to apples?

The Vic is better. A stock 106 in a cruiser hits 97 ft/lbs at 2500 and carries it flatter than the Indian all the way to 4500 where it begins to fall. But it drops off slower resulting in a peak 84 hp. A stock 106 in a Vision, a little better intake, hits 100 lt/lbs at 2500 and drops a litle more than the cruiser, peak hp 83.5. I cant post pictures from iPad here but here's a link to the graphs on Lloyd's site:
http://www.lloydz.com/dyno.asp

p.s. Riding the Indian it sure felt like it had more giddyup than a stock Cross or Vision. So now I'm curious what the gear ratios are...

 

[Hey_Yu]

Thanks for the posting of Indian's 111 numbers.

Now would someone post the stock 106 numbers so we can compare, apples to apples?

Let's get real. Compare these numbers to a rare stock H-D product on the same dyno on the same day. That's apples to apples!

 

[iabob]

Let's get real. Compare these numbers to a rare stock H-D product on the same dyno on the same day. That's apples to apples!
 

Not same day, but same dyno:
http://www.motorcycle-usa.com/10/13329/Motorcycle-Article/2012-Harley-Davidson-Fat-Bob-Comparison.aspx

 

[Redmule]

Now this what I'm talking about a v-twin with some serious horsepower, KTM super duke 1290R. Put this engine in touring bike!!! This is probably my next around town bike. A standard with 180hp, 106lbs torque and 417lbs. Indians 111 inches and 73hp? lame and can't understand why these bikes always weigh half a ton?

 

[jayleav]

To be honest.... I was somewhat disappointed with those numbers. With a boast of 119 lb/ft advertised I was expecting at least 110 at the tire.

 

[jayleav]

Not same day, but same dyno:
http://www.motorcycle-usa.com/10/13329/Motorcycle-Article/2012-Harley-Davidson-Fat-Bob-Comparison.aspx

I'd sooner see a 2014 bagger's numbers at the back tire. They have an improved air cleaner and hotter cams.

 

[DarksideX]

I'd sooner see a 2014 bagger's numbers at the back tire. They have an improved air cleaner and hotter cams.

A stock 110' CVO but not the same dyno. Couldn't seem to get the link to work so you'll have to copy/paste into the address bar.

http://www.fuelmotousa.com/site/blog/fuel-tuner/2014-harley-cvo-limited-twin-cooled-110-completely-stock.html

And a 103'

http://www.fuelmotousa.com/site/blog/fuel-tuner/2014-flhtk-twin-cooled-103-completely-stock.html

 

[Hey_Yu]

To be honest.... I was somewhat disappointed with those numbers. With a boast of 119 lb/ft advertised I was expecting at least 110 at the tire.

119 @ the crank vs 100 at the rear tire. Consider a 15% loss through the drive train and this is about right.

 

[spider]

The problem I have with dyno's results are they change with the weather.
Tempurature, altitude, tire pressure, operator the list goes on.
Althought they are a great tool for getting the max performance from your motor anything beyond that is merely bragging rights.
Was that run posted SAE or STD ?
What do we know about the dyno operator ?
What gear was the bike run in ?

Now when Lloyd or Rylan get an opportunity to run one of these babys I would feel better about the results, they may not be higher but I believe they would be more accurate and unbiased.

Until then my butt dyno says my Vintage rocks, pulls like a freight train and makes me smile.

 

[Half_Crazy]

<span style='font-size: small;'><span lang=''>For comparison</span></span>

This is why everything HD was changed to 103'...
http://www.motorcycle-usa.com/10/992/Motorcycle-Article/2008-H-D-Ultra-Classic-vs--Victory-Vision.aspx

 

[Half_Crazy]

The problem I have with dyno's results are they change with the weather. Tempurature, altitude...

That's what the correction factors are for... weather conditions/elevation

Although they are a great tool for getting the max performance from your motor anything beyond that is merely bragging rights

This statement is totally false. If you understood how dyno tuning is done (in the Dynojet/Power Commander procedure) you would never say that again.

Was that run posted SAE or STD? What do we know about the dyno operator? What gear was the bike run in?

Doesn't matter. They test all bikes they review the same way... same correction factors... same dyno... the gear closest to 1:1... to be as apples to apples as possible when using THEIR E-ZINE reviews as the standard of camparison. It is no different than Cycle World, Motorcycle Online, Motorcyclist, or any other publication.

 

[Half_Crazy]

119 @ the crank vs 100 at the rear tire. Consider a 15% loss through the drive train and this is about right.

Exactly! No surprises here.... I expected more HP than this, but considering it's done at 4500 rpm, the peak number is not so terrible when compared to other cruiser engines with pushrods or without.

 

[spider]

That's what the correction factors are for... weather conditions/elevation


This statement is totally false. If you understood how dyno tuning is done (in the Dynojet/Power Commander procedure) you would never say that again.


Doesn't matter. They test all bikes they review the same way... same correction factors... same dyno... the gear closest to 1:1... to be as apples to apples as possible when using THEIR E-ZINE reviews as the standard of camparison. It is no different than Cycle World, Motorcycle Online, Motorcyclist, or any other publication.

Not the first time I was schooled here.
My main point is on any givin day the r&eacute;sults could change, people should not worry so much and enjoy the feeling you get when you are riding.

 

[Half_Crazy]

Since we are discussing it:
SAE: Corrected to 29.23 inHg, 0% humidity, and 77&deg;F
STD: Corrected to 29.92 inHg 0% humidity and 77&deg;F
The difference in numbers will be ~2.6xxxx% (STD being higher)

In the Dynojet world... the engine's A/F ratio is adjusted at the following throttle positions:
2%, 5%, 10%, 20%, 40%, 60%, 80% and 100%
And in 250 rpm increments at each throttle position... on a table that looks like this:

With a sepatate table for each cylinder. Fuel can be increased or decreased in each cell. That covers the tuning part...

The dyno itself is just a meausing device, no different than a yardstick or tape measure. It simply allows a reapeatable and consistant means of measuring the output of the engine, allowing you to see if the changes you made were beneficial or not.

People say 'you can't ride a dyno chart'... but in reality when you open the throttle you are LITERALLY riding the dyno chart.
Or they say 'what's important is how the bike feels on the road'... but that will be directly related to how well it is tuned and how efficiently it converts gasoline and air into forward motion, whether the throttle is at 5% or 100%.

 

[scottn57]

Seems pretty healthy against both the 103 HD and 106 Freedom.

 

[Catalac]

I think the dyno result is totally in line with what i felt on the demo ride. Pulls hard from low down to 3000-3500. Motor seemed weak on the top end to me which the dyno run confirms. I'm 90% certain I will go stage one, hopefully that opens up the top end. Don't forget where 90% of the riding is done 1500-3500??

 

[Xlr8]

<span>'At 2100 rpm, you&rsquo;ve already got 94.94 lb-ft of torque to play with.'

Do profesional writers not even take English class anymore? Or they just don't care?

Pretty good numbers by the way.

</span>