Author Topic: 95", 96", or 103". Will a 95" perform better?  (Read 10135 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline 00FHHRCI

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 92
  • Country: 00
  • Owensboro, KY
95", 96", or 103". Will a 95" perform better?
« on: Sunday, September 12, 2010. 06:44:26 AM. »
Greetings,

I have a 2000 Roadking classic with a 95", 203 SE cams with a 5 speed tranny.  I was looking at the new Roadking classics that come with a 103" and 6 speed tranny.  I believe the only difference between the factory 103" with stock cams and my 95" is the crank and the SE 203 cams.  Is this correct?  What is the difference between a 95" and stock 96"?  Will a stock 103" run better than my 95"?  I was curious and would like some input before I consider a possible trade.

Thanks,

James

Offline 05FLHTC

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 4537
Re: 95", 96", or 103". Will a 95" perform better?
« Reply #1 on: Sunday, September 12, 2010. 07:03:25 AM. »
Ride one, nothing factory is gonna pull away from what you have with any significance. The 103 from the factory is a dog and the $36K CVO 110 still has some serious reliability issues, that may or may not have been addressed  :nix:
« Last Edit: Sunday, September 12, 2010. 07:05:46 AM. by 05FLHTC »
Illinois the Corruption Capitol of USA

Offline glens

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 3173
Re: 95", 96", or 103". Will a 95" perform better?
« Reply #2 on: Sunday, September 12, 2010. 07:10:35 AM. »
Basically the only difference is the crank throw otherwise, but there are a lot of small detail differences.  If you ride a new one you'll probably like the handling so much better that you'll be willing to get into the engine a bit on your new bike.  Though I have to say, as a former Road King Classic owner, that the 6-gallon tank looks a bit too bulbous on that bike for my taste.

Offline JBarrettB

  • Site Supporter
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1123
  • Country: us
  • Just fix it right and be done with it.
Re: 95", 96", or 103". Will a 95" perform better?
« Reply #3 on: Sunday, September 12, 2010. 07:15:31 AM. »
Keep that 2000 model bike. In terms of quality it is far superior to the newer 96ci 6 speed bikes.
JMHO.
The 96ci is manufactured using the SE 103 wheel set and a 1450 bore piston.

JB
CAUTION: Comments may be sarcastic, clarification available upon request.

Offline 05FLHTC

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 4537
Re: 95", 96", or 103". Will a 95" perform better?
« Reply #4 on: Sunday, September 12, 2010. 07:28:30 AM. »
Keep that 2000 model bike. In terms of quality it is far superior to the newer 96ci 6 speed bikes.
JMHO.
The 96ci is manufactured using the SE 103 wheel set and a 1450 bore piston.

JB

 :agree: TOTALLY!
Illinois the Corruption Capitol of USA

Offline wfolarry

  • Site Supporter
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1645
  • Country: 00
  • What's that?
    • Larry's Motorcycle & Machine Inc.
Re: 95", 96", or 103". Will a 95" perform better?
« Reply #5 on: Sunday, September 12, 2010. 08:02:15 AM. »
The 95 is a better motor IMO. But if the new ones handle better maybe you can put a 120 in it. Then you would have the power to go with the handling.

Offline clay_mover

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 206
  • Country: 00
  • Hazel Park, MI
    • My Current Harleys
Re: 95", 96", or 103". Will a 95" perform better?
« Reply #6 on: Thursday, September 16, 2010. 03:13:35 PM. »
My 2006 95", andrews 21 cam,supertrapp 2into 1 bike runs much stronger than my stock 2008 police roadking with a 103" motor.
I'd rather be Judged by Twelve than Carried by Six!

Offline Jeffd

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 6478
Re: 95", 96", or 103". Will a 95" perform better?
« Reply #7 on: Thursday, September 16, 2010. 03:32:30 PM. »
ditto on my previous mild 04 egc 95 (26G's 2.1 etc) would leave my 2011 RGU 103 for dead especially from 3500rpms on up.  I think the new one is comparable until about that point but then really falls flat in comparison.

Offline 7hogs

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1392
  • Country: 00
  • 117" 662-2 58 HPI Tmax
Re: 95", 96", or 103". Will a 95" perform better?
« Reply #8 on: Thursday, September 16, 2010. 03:56:00 PM. »
95 built will out perform the stock 96 or 103 with that being said I have built up three 95", one 103, one 107 that is now a 117


The ride quality of the new bikes are more stable than my others and 103 pulls hard all the way through the tq band. 54H, 030 head gasket, Stock heads, Super Meg 2 into 1, 198 ccp. Motor is quite. Not sure about the quality of the tranny yet but time will tell

Again the ride quality is way better through corners almost feels like a Softail.

JMO

Offline BAKON

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 2087
  • Country: us
  • Pittsburgh
Re: 95", 96", or 103". Will a 95" perform better?
« Reply #9 on: Thursday, September 16, 2010. 04:37:58 PM. »
Differences in a 2000 Rk and a 2011;
Different Fuel Injection system (MM or Carb to Delfi)
New Frame,
new motor mounts,
new tranny,six speed,
new six gallon tank,
new cam tensioners,
new oil pump,
new tires,
new brakes,
new radio (if you had one),
new shocks,
new lights,
new heads ( 2005 saw improvement, 2006 some more)
new pipes,
new gauges and functions,
new swingarm,
new axle sizes (your changed in 2002 also)
ABS,
heavier compensator,
auto primary adjuster,
heavier stator,

Maybe if you had a black 2000, and were getting another black 2011, they would have something similar besides the handle bars..

A 95 will run better than a stock 96 but just a 203 cam is not enough for the 103 with pipes and air cleaner (tuned of course). A really built 95 will beat all the factory set ups except the VROD.
« Last Edit: Thursday, September 16, 2010. 04:43:02 PM. by BAKON »
wasting time

Offline hd06myway

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1694
Re: 95", 96", or 103". Will a 95" perform better?
« Reply #10 on: Thursday, September 16, 2010. 04:46:16 PM. »
Your 95" is a big bore stage II (cam) bored from a 88", a 103" big bore will be comparable and get even more power apples to apples (stage II to Stage II), a 96" is closer to an 88" (sames heads, cylnds but longer stroked flywheel), about 10% more TQ. bottom line, if your comparing a 95" to a 96" or a 103" factory stock, the 95" will clean eithers clock.  For that matter, a 95" tuned to maximum capabilty will make even more power than a factory stock 110" er.
« Last Edit: Thursday, September 16, 2010. 04:50:24 PM. by hd06myway »

Offline bigfoot5x

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1028
Re: 95", 96", or 103". Will a 95" perform better?
« Reply #11 on: Thursday, September 16, 2010. 05:57:03 PM. »
Bakon really nailed it with all of the changes  between an old and new bike as well as the way the different engine sizes run. The advantage to a 103 as I see it is that the engine is already as big as you would want to go without splitting the cases. A cam change is all it needs for a decent upgrade. No more boring and new pistons like we always have to do with an 88 or 96. So you are already closer to where you might want to be without spending a ton of money. The only other thing is comparing the compression ratios. Your 95 or if you build your own 103 will most likely have more compression than stock which will improve the efficiency of all the cubic inches so you see a better power increase than simply changing cams. I think if I had a stock 103 I'd have to increase the compression to go along with a better cam. But really, if you enjoyed making your 88 into a 95 then you will probably not leave the 103 as it is anyway.

Offline Scurvy

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 740
  • Country: 00
  • Bleh
Re: 95", 96", or 103". Will a 95" perform better?
« Reply #12 on: Thursday, September 16, 2010. 09:49:05 PM. »
ditto on my previous mild 04 egc 95 (26G's 2.1 etc) would leave my 2011 RGU 103 for dead especially from 3500rpms on up.  I think the new one is comparable until about that point but then really falls flat in comparison.
You forgot to mention you had some headwork done... regardless, the SE air cleaner, supermeg, and the TTS mastertune really woke my 2010 up. Should really dance after I put in a set of andrews 54H cams.
'05 FXST, '10 FLHTP, '77 FXE
Clinton, MT

Offline Hillsidecyclecom

  • Retired
  • Full Member
  • Posts: 6588
  • Country: 00
  • Munnsville, N.Y., between Syracuse, & Utica.
    • www.hillsidecycle.com
Re: 95", 96", or 103". Will a 95" perform better?
« Reply #13 on: Friday, September 17, 2010. 02:50:54 AM. »
If a 95, 96, 103, and 107 were all modified with the same percentile of cylinder head mods per cubic inch requirements, and the appropriate cam/compression, t/body, and exhaust size to compliment the given sizes, the power output would be the 95 being last, and the 107 being first. Can't beat the cubes.
But shear displacement/swept volume, alone, doesn't get the job done. :smile:
Scott
"If I parrot or google information, folks will suspect I really know."

Offline Jeffd

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 6478
Re: 95", 96", or 103". Will a 95" perform better?
« Reply #14 on: Friday, September 17, 2010. 04:10:42 AM. »
ditto on my previous mild 04 egc 95 (26G's 2.1 etc) would leave my 2011 RGU 103 for dead especially from 3500rpms on up.  I think the new one is comparable until about that point but then really falls flat in comparison.
You forgot to mention you had some headwork done... regardless, the SE air cleaner, supermeg, and the TTS mastertune really woke my 2010 up. Should really dance after I put in a set of andrews 54H cams.

I have a SE a/c and tuner coming hopefully it will help a bit.

Offline Bladesmith

  • Site Supporter
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1183
  • Country: us
Re: 95", 96", or 103". Will a 95" perform better?
« Reply #15 on: Friday, September 17, 2010. 11:09:19 PM. »

  Very interesting post...I have a 95" with an SE204 with stage 1 and V&H pipes...got all my ideas from HTT [thanks guys]
   Next Sat. I get pocession of the 103" Ultra Limited that I won in a raffle...
    Besides stage 1 what should I do..and what about 2 into 1 as compared to stock duals with slipons...thanks
"A patriot loves his country all the time,and its leaders when they deserve it"

Offline Scurvy

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 740
  • Country: 00
  • Bleh
Re: 95", 96", or 103". Will a 95" perform better?
« Reply #16 on: Saturday, September 18, 2010. 08:11:38 AM. »

  Very interesting post...I have a 95" with an SE204 with stage 1 and V&H pipes...got all my ideas from HTT [thanks guys]
   Next Sat. I get pocession of the 103" Ultra Limited that I won in a raffle...
    Besides stage 1 what should I do..and what about 2 into 1 as compared to stock duals with slipons...thanks
I went 2 into 1 for two reasons: to get rid of the catalytic converter and to drop some weight on the bike, and accomplished both. If I could remove the cat from the stock header, I'd seriously consider going back to duals because it really looks a lot nicer IMO. The other thing is get yourself a tuning setup that works with your ECM and O2 sensors like the SE race tuner or the TTS Mastertune. I chose the Mastertune.
'05 FXST, '10 FLHTP, '77 FXE
Clinton, MT

Offline MIKEL

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 388
  • Country: us
Re: 95", 96", or 103". Will a 95" perform better?
« Reply #17 on: Saturday, September 18, 2010. 08:27:17 AM. »
I have a 2000 RKC and I think over the winter I am going to 95. If the funds are there maybe stroke it to 107. I know a few people with newer bikes 2003 and up and there biggest complaint is vibration at idle. I know it is most likely the press fit throw away crankshafts. I would like a newer bike but those cranks leave a lot to be desired.

                                                                        MIKE

Offline Max Headflow

  • Site Supporter
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17594
  • Country: tr
  • Not Admin
Re: 95", 96", or 103". Will a 95" perform better?
« Reply #18 on: Saturday, September 18, 2010. 08:35:12 AM. »
Differences in a 2000 Rk and a 2011;
Different Fuel Injection system (MM or Carb to Delfi) - good thing 02 up.. carbs good earlier
New Frame,  - big deal
new motor mounts,  -- for those that have problems with vibes.
new tranny,six speed,  -- clunky and noisy
new six gallon tank,  -- about 2 gallon more than bladder...
new cam tensioners, -- may be good
new oil pump, - big deal
new tires,  - hey, you can buy new tires for older HDs
new brakes,  - nice
new radio (if you had one),  - when? can you hear it?
new shocks,  -- front is better  rear the same old POS
new lights,  -- 07  don't seem much brighter
new heads ( 2005 saw improvement, 2006 some more)  - 05s sucked - 06 up are easier to get good number out of.
new pipes, - that they could stuff a cat into
new gauges and functions,  -  better?
new swingarm, - assume 02 up
new axle sizes (your changed in 2002 also)
ABS,
heavier compensator - ? old one worked better
auto primary adjuster - got that nice zip sound going dwon the road..
heavier stator - may be good..


Max
Aka Mousinator, Another Wasted Minute With Max,
No Collar to the Bone

Offline Jeffd

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 6478
Re: 95", 96", or 103". Will a 95" perform better?
« Reply #19 on: Saturday, September 18, 2010. 09:00:43 AM. »
New Frame,  - it is a big deal

new tranny,six speed,  -- mine is not clunky and noisy
new six gallon tank,  -- about 2 gallon more than bladder...if it were 8 gallons.
new cam tensioners, -- may be good compared to what?
new oil pump, - big deal compared to old one.
new tires,  - hey, you can buy new tires for older HDs but tough to fit a bigger rear and would need a new front wheel to put the bigger one on front.
new brakes,  - nice and worth it.

new shocks,  -- front is better  rear the same old POS when it is worn out but should be replaced with a better one in the future.




ABS, is pretty good.

heavier stator - may be good..


Max
Report to moderator    Logged

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I made my own additions to your summary based on my previous 04 compared to my 2011.  Only 2000 miles on my 11 compared to 80,000 on my 04.

I have no idea what that report to modeator logged is.  It showed up when I it the quote button.
« Last Edit: Saturday, September 18, 2010. 09:03:10 AM. by Jeffd »

Offline 02roadcling

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 3804
  • Country: us
  • GMR98"SBChead204CV40 ThndrhdDTT3.37VPC112.94/96.25
Re: 95", 96", or 103". Will a 95" perform better?
« Reply #20 on: Saturday, September 18, 2010. 09:08:51 AM. »
Max
Report to moderator    Logged

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I made my own additions to your summary based on my previous 04 compared to my 2011.  Only 2000 miles on my 11 compared to 80,000 on my 04.

I have no idea what that report to modeator logged is.  It showed up when I it the quote button.

Max to the principals office. NOW  :hyst:
02roadcling
NW corner of Washington

Offline se

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 931
  • JD's Cycle Works
Re: 95", 96", or 103". Will a 95" perform better?
« Reply #21 on: Saturday, September 18, 2010. 09:10:06 AM. »
save your money on the new harley if you want a good handling bike with power look at the new BMW . 163 HP.
specialize in Harley Davidson high performance engines and Dyno tuning

Offline Jeffd

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 6478
Re: 95", 96", or 103". Will a 95" perform better?
« Reply #22 on: Saturday, September 18, 2010. 09:16:30 AM. »
save your money on the new harley if you want a good handling bike with power look at the new BMW . 163 HP.

Yes indeed.  Pretty nice and not a bad price.

Offline prodrag1320

  • Premium Vendor
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3261
  • Country: 00
  • AHDRA & AMRA national champion & record holder
    • vee twin racing
Re: 95", 96", or 103". Will a 95" perform better?
« Reply #23 on: Saturday, September 18, 2010. 09:29:45 AM. »
CONGRATS ON THE BIKE RAFFLE!! leaves a WHOLE lot of coin for upgrades!!!!
www.veetwinperformance.com
NITRO P/D HARLEY 7.14 @ 189/4.49 @ 167

Offline BAKON

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 2087
  • Country: us
  • Pittsburgh
Re: 95", 96", or 103". Will a 95" perform better?
« Reply #24 on: Saturday, September 18, 2010. 11:53:32 AM. »
If Max thinks the 2010 or 2011 is not improved over the 2000 tell him to say hi to Bin Laden who is hiding under the same rock. :nix:
wasting time