Victory Motorcycle Forum banner

1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
294 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
For winter upgrades, my builder and I have been talking about my options. We talked about doing RPW Thor or Bassani Pro Street exhaust, Quick Shift module, and nitrous plus upgraded clutch. After thinking about possible places to mount the bottle and thinking about how much I hated refilling bottles on my cars, I mentioned just doing a turbo. Turns out he is a Trask dealer and can get the kit for cost if he does the install. So...

If you guys were going the forced induction route, what (if anything) would you do engine wise to maximize the setup? Lower compression pistons? Beefier rods/rod bolts? The bike has to run on premium pump gas and I really don't want to run a meth/alky kit. Not necessarily interested in peak power but huge power from 2,500-5,500rpm.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
294 Posts
Discussion Starter #3

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,901 Posts
I definitely prefer the Aerocharger kit (especially with the upgraded intercooler). I'll check to see what the difference in cost is going to be.
Imagine what 8 psi of boost would do for your bike.... instant, no lag boost.

I'm not a forced induction guy, I like naturally aspirated power, but for $5 grand the turbo is a good option. You could have your power ready to rock over a weekend.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
294 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
That's exactly what I'm thinking. Turbo motors typically have a big fat torque curve and are usually pretty docile around town. I'm trying to avoid having to a bike that makes all its power above 4,500rpm and tempermental around town. How strong are the factory bottom ends of our engines in stock form? From what I've read it seems that 8psi is max with factory compression on pump gas. I'd like to know how far I can push it.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,901 Posts
If you're not happy with the power at 8 psi (140/170), you should be in therapy. The stock bottom end is strong enough to handle that. Have you seen the crank in these things? The pistons will come apart before the crank fails.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
294 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
You've got a good point. 140hp/170tq is plenty. I've seen pictures/videos of the internals of our bikes but never in person. I did happen to see this blog that shows what a built motor with one of their kits will put out...

http://aerocharger.wordpress.com/tag/2003-victory-vegas/
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
547 Posts
If only someone would make a kit for the cross bikes (hint, hint).
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,901 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,646 Posts
To call an apple an apple. The Aerocharger claims are based on a 05-07 100" bike. That engine has a higher base CR, and better heads then the 08 used in the Trask test. To get a similar cyl pressure the 08 has to run 10psi, and Joe's clutch was blowing out as it crossed the 130FtLb mark; during those tests.
That said the Trask looks awesome in person, and the pipe out of the turbo looks more like it belongs. Also not a big fan of the intake location of the Aerocharger unit
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,901 Posts
The new bikes make less compression but the heads flow better, so that should actually be an advantage in a turbo application. Easier to control detonation. You can't run 10 psi on the older bikes without seriously retarding the timing, right?

Greg's bike is an older V-92 big-valve motor if I'm not mistaken. He also has bigger throttle bodies on it than stock. It is also not some "kit", he plumbed that turbo himself.
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Top