Author |
Message |
![Top of page](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_top.gif) ![Previous message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_up.gif) ![Next message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_down.gif) ![Link to this message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/link-up.gif)
Vonsliek
| Posted on Sunday, June 11, 2006 - 01:49 am: |
|
any thoughts for race performance?! seems i recall reading abt smaller heads on bigger bottoms for increased high end flow on racetrack?! tyically under carbing a high revving, oversquare engine yields btr performance .. so, for efi hotrodded xl motors .. wldn't reducing a wee bit heads make for a better response for track racing? pauly. |
![Top of page](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_top.gif) ![Previous message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_up.gif) ![Next message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_down.gif) ![Link to this message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/link-up.gif)
M1combat
| Posted on Sunday, June 11, 2006 - 02:20 am: |
|
Aren't the heads the same? |
![Top of page](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_top.gif) ![Previous message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_up.gif) ![Next message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_down.gif) ![Link to this message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/link-up.gif)
Cyclonecharlie
| Posted on Sunday, June 11, 2006 - 10:49 am: |
|
I didn't think we had a high rev. motor? Our redline is most bikes "mid-range". |
![Top of page](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_top.gif) ![Previous message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_up.gif) ![Next message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_down.gif) ![Link to this message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/link-up.gif)
Josh_cox
| Posted on Sunday, June 11, 2006 - 10:52 am: |
|
The part numbers are exactly the same. So, you will see no difference. |
![Top of page](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_top.gif) ![Previous message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_up.gif) ![Next message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_down.gif) ![Link to this message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/link-up.gif)
Indy_bueller
| Posted on Sunday, June 11, 2006 - 11:46 am: |
|
It's the pistons that are different. |
![Top of page](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_top.gif) ![Previous message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_up.gif) ![Next message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_down.gif) ![Link to this message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/link-up.gif)
M1combat
| Posted on Sunday, June 11, 2006 - 11:46 pm: |
|
And the stroke... |
![Top of page](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_top.gif) ![Previous message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_up.gif) ![Next message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_down.gif) ![Link to this message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/link-up.gif)
Wademan
| Posted on Sunday, June 11, 2006 - 11:51 pm: |
|
The 9 has a shorter stroke allowing it to rev higher. The head will not affect anything. |
![Top of page](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_top.gif) ![Previous message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_up.gif) ![Next message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/mark_down.gif) ![Link to this message](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/icons/link-up.gif)
Deuceman
| Posted on Tuesday, June 13, 2006 - 11:22 am: |
|
If I am not mistaken, only the stroke is different between the two engines. I think the 9 is just a destroked 12. Somebody correct if I am wrong. |
|