Bonneville America Forums Forums General Motorcycle Forums Other Bikes Harley 883 Stock Dyno numbers

I posted this over on Rat, but was so surprised at the numbers, I thought I share it here too.

I ran accross this on Hot Bikes website & thought it would be interesting since it is the most similar HD in price & engine size to our bike.
I never see much about their stock numbers, so I was surprised when I found this.

Chart one is the stock run. Boy, it sure is put'n down the power!

Chart two is the run after installing an S&S "Quick Setup Kit" which runs about $500.
The kit includes:
S&S Air Filter
S&S Chrome Filter Cover
Jet Kit
S&S Performance SlashCut Pipes

well, they got nuttin...

Just Another reason to be Thankful for our bikes!

Much smaller P-twin would be a more fair comparison on the mechanicals. We don't do so well then. 71hp for a Ninja 650.

The V-twins never really made much HP they made up for it in torque. The 883 is simply lacking in both areas.

Is anyone really surprised?

Got numbers for the 1200?

13HP and 6# torque gain is respectable for $500. Sure did flatten those curves out too!

Per your question John, 1200 Harley is over 70HP and over 60lbs of torque or reversed, I forget.

Many members here say they beat and some say spank the 1200 Sportster. I can't get close and ride next to them several times a month. They have much more thump than my America under 80 MPH.

You are right Phil. We don't get 13 more horses for $500.00, thats for sure.

I was just looking at some dyno runs on a sportster forum and the avarage for a 1200 with the normal mods (air intake, pipes, ignition) was about 74ish Hp and 72ish Torque. Factor in the sportsters extra 40 pounds and extra $2156 price tag over the speedmaster...



6 more Hp and 24 more ft/lbs of torque than my bike out of 413 more cc's (those specs are based on my bikes performance) doesn't seem that impressive.

I think someone needs to stage some races and settle this once and for all. Of course, there needs to be straight line drags as well as a twisty road course. And the riders probably need to swap bikes and rerun each phase. And ideally you'd have a stock version of each bike plus a "stage one" Sportster and a Freaked TBA.

Sounds good, but which Hardly rider would volunteer such a stunt

Cyle World November 2004 edition. 1200 Snortster vs. 900 Thruxton.

Dyno Numbers & Performance stats.

Sportster: 0-60mph 4.4 sec.
1/4mi 13.25 sec. @100.15mph
Top speed 117mph
HP: 59.8 bhp@5800rpm
TQ: 69.4 ft-lbs@3550rpm

Thruxton: 0-60mph 4.8 sec
1/4 mi. 13.59 sec. @99.41mph
Top speed 117mph
HP: 56.5 bhp@7200rpm
TQ: 45.8 ft-lbs.@3000rpm
Both bikes were in stock form. I personally have absolutely no problem running with my friends 1200 sporty. My Speedmaster is an 03 790 with T-bike pipes, Freak, and rejetted. Just thought I would put my two bits worth in.

I have one friend with a 883 and another with a 1200. Both have updated exhast systems along with similar mods as mine. I have no trouble leaving the 883 but can't keep up with the 1200.

Sportsters have 10 more horses than those numbers now, so does the Thruxton.

A stock America cannot beat a Thruxton. The America stock 1/4 mile time is 14s.

I am very willing to accept Cycle Worlds professional rider times for the Sporty in 2004 with 10 less horses at 13.25.

Do the math. Stock Sportster vs. Stock America the Sporster wins.

Freak Pipes, jets on the America/Speedmaster vs. Stage 1 on the Sportster the Sportster wins.

The bike has 40% more displacement. They are not comparable bikes. The 883 is the comparable bike for us. There is no embarrassment there.

Apparently though, the parallel twin is more efficent than a v-twin. Although right now my 1200 friend can out run me, my 790 is not far behind. I think that after I'm able to get the 904 BB installed, it may be a lot different picture. I think my 904 would outrun his 1200.

It's a lot more efficent. Well, air cooled V-twin vs. air cooled parallel twin that is. See, there's a bit of a design flaw with an air cooled V-twin, the back cylinder doesn't get the same cooling that the front cylinder gets so both cylinders have to be babied down so the back cylinder doesn't get over heated. That's not the case with a parallel twin, since both cylinders get the same cooling you can maximize performance from both cylinders creating a more efficent motor. The cooling factor goes right out the window if the engines are liquid cooled but since neither the sportster or the America / speedmaster are liquid cooled that's neither here nor there.

A huge difference is that the Triumph engines are a much more modern design.
Dual overhead camshafts, four valves per cylinder makes for less power loss in the valve train and a much smoother flowing intake and exhaust. As well as a higher revving engine.

I think that maybe there is some confusion as to the Hp data that I posted. These are rear wheel dyno numbers. The 69hp for the thruxton and the 70hp for the sporty that you are reffering to are the advertised stock numbers at the crank. You can usually deduct 15 to 20% from the advertised crank hp. for power train losses. The hp.& torque numbers at the back wheel are best used for comparisons.

Advertised HP, like advertised weight, is measured at the tip of the ad writer's tongue and is subject to change.

BTW, has anyone actually weighed their bike?
The 504lb(dry) listed for a Speedmaster must be, what, maybe 535lb with all fluids?

None of it matters other than 1/4 mile times. The Cycle World numbers in my opinion settle it for 2004 at least. Our bikes out of the box do 14s not 13.25.

Use my pipes and get a kazillion billion more horses, just send me $800.00. Vendors should have to show performance in seconds not stacked BS dyno numbers.

Example: We took a Speedmaster with stock pipes and it ran under 3 runs an average 13.8 seconds. We installed our pipes and it ran 13.4 seconds. Then you can decide if .4 seconds is worth $800.00 bucks. or 3 seconds being worth $4,000.00 bucks.

Marketers no longer make valid assertions they just sell stuff. I tend to believe Cycle World. They seem to be pretty impartial.

Fist off, the before chart shows that the engine was running really poorly. Second, since they included a jet kit, there is no question that it was a carburetted version. Chances are really good that it was not an early 4 speed, so it is very likely that it was one of the seriously detuned EPA designed bikes.
My OL had a 4 speed 1200 and the only carburetted Sportster I saw that could keep up with it was my much modified '76 XLCH.
I often take all our bikes down to the truckstop and back to keep them limber. I use the telephone junction box about 1/8 mile down the paved road that deadends at the far end of my horse pasture for a marker to test the running condition of each bike. All of the bikes have modified intake and exhaust systems, stock gearing and no internal engine changes. Here are the usual speeds as I pass the junction box:
03 America - 75
05 Lowrider - 70 (5 speed 88 inch twin)
07 XL1200L - 75 (5 speed 74 inch twin)
07 Night Train - 78 (6 speed 96 inch twin)
07 Roadking - 72 (6 speed 96 inch engine)

But, those are speedometer readings, and the Triumph tends to read a bit high. As for cornering, the Sportster feels a little more nimble, but that could be because the bars are narrower. In a hardcore race, I expect the America would do better because the Sportster sits a few inches lower and would start dragging things sooner. Of course, the big twins were intended to simply be comfortable road bikes and are not designed to race up the mountainside.

The speedometers get a bit strange at that level. I know mine is 10% off at 80 being an actual 72. Harley has similar issues.

Your unofficial observations would put the 96 in Harleys faster than us. We don't like that news GB

I think the good news for us is, we are faster than the Harley in our class and keep up with the rest of them except a V-Rod with is really not a Harley

Well, you have to consider though, the engine is twice as big on a bike that is less than 50% heavier. And, with the stock intake and exhaust, they aren't near that quick.

My oldest boy has a 2003 1200cc anniversary Edition Sportser. This was back when Harley was still publishing horsepower numbers for their bikes. His listed at 57 Bhp as stock. My 2004 TBA was listed at 61 Bhp. He has a stage one kit on his Harley and I have Specialty Spares Slash Cuts and a Freak on my TBA. He weighs in at about 175# and I am about 225#. I can out run him on his Sportster any day of the week. Starting from a roll on in 1st gear I pull away steadily. My TBA dyno's at almost 63 HP at the rear wheel after installing the Freak. Local Triumph Dealer said that that was 5 HP more than any bike they had setup with free flowing exhaust and air filter. Cannot remember what the torque came in at after the Freak, but I have the chart from the dyno and can post the numbers if anyone is interested. Can also give my exact setup as I have it written down in my garage if anyone would want the jet sizes and so on.

Jim

Considering his Sportster is running stage 1 so is 13.00 seconds or so, your bike is now mid to high 12s with 800 bucks in mods.

Thats pretty amazing. Have you switched riders, per chance, and done it? If you are in the 12s that great because I don't think the big bores are in the 11s yet. Thats a lot of push for a little money.

A 260lb rider on an 06 slightly modded Sporty did 13.1.
click here

Here is a stock speedmaster at 14.5

We have switched riders and my son blows me away on the TBA. I hate to switch though as he doesn't want to give my TBA back. His Sporty vibrates way too much.