[JimGnitecki]

Those of you who have owned, or at least ridden, both a Victory with a 100 cubic inch engine and a 106 cubic inch engine: How did Victory use the extra cubes?

- More low rpm power?
- More high rpm power?
- Or, spread across the power band?

Jim G

 

[gibson]

113 lb-ft of torque from the Freedom 106 (1731cc) Twin 109 on the 100. Depends on what you are looking at, A bagger or a cruiser.

 

[JimGnitecki]

113 lb-ft of torque from the Freedom 106 (1731cc) Twin 109 on the 100. Depends on what you are looking at, A bagger or a cruiser.

I did not realize that the engine power and torque differ on the cruisers versus the baggers. I am considering a Vegas 8-Ball.

Jim G

 

[Luciferiad]

Well, my comparo is a bit muddied by a few variables. But I'll toss it in anyway. Let me start with said variables:

1) The 100 in Lacy's Vegas has the Stage 1 flash, Stage 1 exhaust, and a K&N air filter.
2)The Vegas weighs like 100 pounds less than my XR.
3)The Vegas is like a narrow-bladed knife cutting through the air, even with the flyscreen on it. 85 MPH+30 MPH headwind STILL = 45 MPG. Awesome...and annoying. The XR is like a...dirigible. With a plexiglas sail attached to the front.
4)I have been led to believe the touring bikes have different cams than the cruisers. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I imagine that would skew a direct comparison of the 2 motors.

That said, here are my observations:

A) The Vegas FEELS quicker. Noticeably. Off idle and at a roll.
B)The Vegas seems comfortable going 35 in 2nd gear, where my XR sounds more frantic. I don't know if it's just the engine noise on the Vegas is drowned out by the pipes, or my XR is extra noisy, or what.
C)The Vegas pulls MUCH harder from 35 in second gear than I have ever experienced on the XR.
D)The Vegas consistently returns fuel economy in the mid to high 40s, even at high speed. It frequently cracks 50 MPG. My Vulcan 900 didn't get mileage that good. The Vegas probably weighs less than that did, too, tho.
E)The XR lugs noticeably below 2000 RPM. The Vegas...I can't tell. It accelerates smoothly and quickly from a 3 MPH parking lot creep in 2nd gear to like 60 MPH, no hesitation.
F)I'm convinced that, if she were motivated, I could not stop Lacy from running right by me while accelerating onto the interstate or something.

 

[half_crazy]

113 lb-ft of torque from the Freedom 106 (1731cc) Twin 109 on the 100. Depends on what you are looking at, A bagger or a cruiser.

That factory claim crankshaft power bullshit don't mean nuthin. The 100" made 75/92 and the 106" makes 80/94 (Baggers).

The 100 has a higher rod to stroke ratio and a higher rev limit. The additional displacement came from stroking from 102mm to 108mm (bore is the same 101mm).

Bigger bore does 2 things you don't get from a stroker. 1) un-shrouds the valves, and 2) more surface area for the combustion to push on. Combined with a higher rod ratio and a higher rev limit... if it was me, I would have done a bore increase rather than a stroker... but I'm just a dumb-ass.

 

[DMacHammer]

I agree the 100 rev’d fast and then the 106 but put it in a bagger for a true comparison.

 

[JimGnitecki]

This is good info. Anyone got rear wheel horsepower dyno curves for the 100 versus the 106?

Jim G

 

[half_crazy]

I agree the 100 rev’d fast and then the 106 but put it in a bagger for a true comparison.

The 100" was never in a bagger. The Vision was the first tourer in 2008 (106") and the Cross bikes always had the 106".

The Kingpin 'tour' had the 100", but calling that a bagger is a stretch.

 

[Billyrides]

Well, my comparo is a bit muddied by a few variables. But I'll toss it in anyway. Let me start with said variables:

1) The 100 in Lacy's Vegas has the Stage 1 flash, Stage 1 exhaust, and a K&N air filter.
2)The Vegas weighs like 100 pounds less than my XR.
3)The Vegas is like a narrow-bladed knife cutting through the air, even with the flyscreen on it. 85 MPH+30 MPH headwind STILL = 45 MPG. Awesome...and annoying. The XR is like a...dirigible. With a plexiglas sail attached to the front.
4)I have been led to believe the touring bikes have different cams than the cruisers. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I imagine that would skew a direct comparison of the 2 motors.

That said, here are my observations:

A) The Vegas FEELS quicker. Noticeably. Off idle and at a roll.
B)The Vegas seems comfortable going 35 in 2nd gear, where my XR sounds more frantic. I don't know if it's just the engine noise on the Vegas is drowned out by the pipes, or my XR is extra noisy, or what.
C)The Vegas pulls MUCH harder from 35 in second gear than I have ever experienced on the XR.
D)The Vegas consistently returns fuel economy in the mid to high 40s, even at high speed. It frequently cracks 50 MPG. My Vulcan 900 didn't get mileage that good. The Vegas probably weighs less than that did, too, tho.
E)The XR lugs noticeably below 2000 RPM. The Vegas...I can't tell. It accelerates smoothly and quickly from a 3 MPH parking lot creep in 2nd gear to like 60 MPH, no hesitation.
F)I'm convinced that, if she were motivated, I could not stop Lacy from running right by me while accelerating onto the interstate or something.

Change the year of the Vegas to 2006 and I could have easily written the exact same words. Of course there is a weight issue involved, but after riding the 100, even being a "fast isn't fast enough" kind of guy (Prior to this bike, I owned a ZX14), I was very happy with the 100 in the Vegas. Of course there is always more, but that more wouldn't be something that the factory would offer anyway.