March 29, 2024, 01:54:35 AM

News:


Tman 662-2 or CR630i

Started by 838, August 15, 2021, 08:47:59 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

838

These two look similar based on specs. Any experts have anything to say about the operating differences between these two grinds, ramps, low speed manners. 10.8:1 l, 124" w/good supporting parts?

I remember long ago the 662-2 was considered "on and hot" all the time. But it looks like tr changed the profile a bit. The CR630i also looks different than the original specs I had.

Don D

Neither or either. Who knows? Cams don't work by themselves.  What is the build and goal.

No Cents

  I've ran both cams that you have in question.
The CR630i's are still in my bike and I have no plans on trying anything different.  :wink:
  I can't speak for a newer grind profile of the 662-2's. The older grind is what I'm speaking of.
08 FLHX my grocery getter, 124ci, wfolarry 110" heads, Burns pipe, 158/152 sae

Don D

Add a Mackie 598 or tman 680 to the list. Depends on lots of factors, you know, you are not new.

838

Was mainly looking at the valve train reliability due to ramps and/or lift differences. Also general rideability differences assuming both are set up with their own optimal components (195-200ccp). Not thinking dyno graphs.

harpwrench

I run a Mackie 598 retarded 2, timing events are real close to the original 662-2. At 10.8 it's very well mannered but still kinda hot-roddy, at 11.1 it starts getting snotty and more light-switchy but it's good

Don D

The dm598 is better for what you want and is not hard on parts.

m1marty

Big fan of the Mackie 598 here. Have used it quite a bit over the years to include 2 of my own bikes. Quiet valve train and makes the #s
OFFO

Don D

If you want to go for it use Mackies 630

838

August 20, 2021, 09:44:12 AM #9 Last Edit: August 20, 2021, 09:55:33 AM by 838
Quote from: m1marty on August 19, 2021, 08:05:03 PM
Big fan of the Mackie 598 here. Have used it quite a bit over the years to include 2 of my own bikes. Quiet valve train and makes the #s

We live about 60min from Mackie and he doesn't wanna run a Mackie combo. I'm waiting on money to build up a 124" for my, personal, touring softail that will use the 598 though 👍.

Any other suggestions for reliable, rideable power? Only other things I know of the bike are it has a wrath pipe with the loud baffle (3"???) and he "has a guy" to do the headwork 🤷‍♂️.

Most of this info is for my own knowledge. He most likely will do the 662-2, but I'm always curious to know the choices of experienced individuals 👍

838

Quote from: harpwrench on August 18, 2021, 09:14:52 PM
I run a Mackie 598 retarded 2, timing events are real close to the original 662-2. At 10.8 it's very well mannered but still kinda hot-roddy, at 11.1 it starts getting snotty and more light-switchy but it's good

Why the 2* retard?

harpwrench

It liked it better, is the short answer. I suspect its related to the TDC overlap event (exhaust augmented cylinder fill)

kd

Quote from: 838 on August 20, 2021, 09:44:12 AM
Quote from: m1marty on August 19, 2021, 08:05:03 PM
Big fan of the Mackie 598 here. Have used it quite a bit over the years to include 2 of my own bikes. Quiet valve train and makes the #s

We live about 60min from Mackie and he doesn't wanna run a Mackie combo. I'm waiting on money to build up a 124" for my, personal, touring softail that will use the 598 though 👍.

Any other suggestions for reliable, rideable power? Only other things I know of the bike are it has a wrath pipe with the loud baffle (3"???) and he "has a guy" to do the headwork 🤷‍♂️.

Most of this info is for my own knowledge. He most likely will do the 662-2, but I'm always curious to know the choices of experienced individuals 👍


If your buddy has "kinda" settled on the Tman 662-2 he may be interested in the 660 PS2.  There are some dyno sheets on here for comparison of the power band. It is known for it's great parking lot manners while performing as well as the 662-2 (almost identical to it).  He may soon get tired of managing the cocked and loaded low RPM feel the 662-2 is known for.  A true hot rodder will be more tolerant but as a daily rider in traffic the PS2 will be easily managed. I am using the predecessor 660SM in a 11.3:1 120 and it is OEM quiet (indicating easy ramps) and lacks nothing in power anywhere.  It's a favorite of Scott at Hillside too.
KD

838

August 20, 2021, 04:16:54 PM #13 Last Edit: August 20, 2021, 04:24:09 PM by 838
Quote from: kd on August 20, 2021, 02:16:11 PM
Quote from: 838 on August 20, 2021, 09:44:12 AM
Quote from: m1marty on August 19, 2021, 08:05:03 PM
Big fan of the Mackie 598 here. Have used it quite a bit over the years to include 2 of my own bikes. Quiet valve train and makes the #s

We live about 60min from Mackie and he doesn't wanna run a Mackie combo. I'm waiting on money to build up a 124" for my, personal, touring softail that will use the 598 though 👍.

Any other suggestions for reliable, rideable power? Only other things I know of the bike are it has a wrath pipe with the loud baffle (3"???) and he "has a guy" to do the headwork 🤷‍♂️.

Most of this info is for my own knowledge. He most likely will do the 662-2, but I'm always curious to know the choices of experienced individuals 👍


If your buddy has "kinda" settled on the Tman 662-2 he may be interested in the 660 PS2.  There are some dyno sheets on here for comparison of the power band. It is known for it's great parking lot manners while performing as well as the 662-2 (almost identical to it).  He may soon get tired of managing the cocked and loaded low RPM feel the 662-2 is known for.  A true hot rodder will be more tolerant but as a daily rider in traffic the PS2 will be easily managed. I am using the predecessor 660SM in a 11.3:1 120 and it is OEM quiet (indicating easy ramps) and lacks nothing in power anywhere.  It's a favorite of Scott at Hillside too.

With the 46* intake close it would have to run at 10.6:1... maybe 10.8 tops... I have a Rivas 584 set I offered up to him but he wants that 10.8:1 mark at close to 200ccp. I also have an old set of tman 590ps cams and some 1.725" intake rockers I told him he could use. Best I could find to achieve both 10.8:1 and 200ccp is a woods 9f +4 or 9B +2. I don't know if advancing the tman cams would be good cause the new profiles already have pretty late exhaust closing events and a lot of exhaust duration. There's a few graphs off the cr630i at 10.8:1 that look great.

kd

Quote from: 838 on August 20, 2021, 04:16:54 PM
Quote from: kd on August 20, 2021, 02:16:11 PM
Quote from: 838 on August 20, 2021, 09:44:12 AM
Quote from: m1marty on August 19, 2021, 08:05:03 PM
Big fan of the Mackie 598 here. Have used it quite a bit over the years to include 2 of my own bikes. Quiet valve train and makes the #s

We live about 60min from Mackie and he doesn't wanna run a Mackie combo. I'm waiting on money to build up a 124" for my, personal, touring softail that will use the 598 though 👍.

Any other suggestions for reliable, rideable power? Only other things I know of the bike are it has a wrath pipe with the loud baffle (3"???) and he "has a guy" to do the headwork 🤷‍♂️.

Most of this info is for my own knowledge. He most likely will do the 662-2, but I'm always curious to know the choices of experienced individuals 👍


If your buddy has "kinda" settled on the Tman 662-2 he may be interested in the 660 PS2.  There are some dyno sheets on here for comparison of the power band. It is known for it's great parking lot manners while performing as well as the 662-2 (almost identical to it).  He may soon get tired of managing the cocked and loaded low RPM feel the 662-2 is known for.  A true hot rodder will be more tolerant but as a daily rider in traffic the PS2 will be easily managed. I am using the predecessor 660SM in a 11.3:1 120 and it is OEM quiet (indicating easy ramps) and lacks nothing in power anywhere.  It's a favorite of Scott at Hillside too.

With the 46* intake close it would have to run at 10.6:1... maybe 10.8 tops... I have a Rivas 584 set I offered up to him but he wants that 10.8:1 mark at close to 200ccp. I also have an old set of tman 590ps cams and some 1.725" intake rockers I told him he could use. Best I could find to achieve both 10.8:1 and 200ccp is a woods 9f +4 or 9B +2. I don't know if advancing the tman cams would be good cause the new profiles already have pretty late exhaust closing events and a lot of exhaust duration. There's a few graphs off the cr630i at 10.8:1 that look great.


I believe 10.8 is a suggested mid level for both cams.  If you want more, add compression.   When I stated my compression (+205 CCP) it was a purposeful build to hit 145 to 150 and it did. He hasn't got his heads done yet so he's golden. No matter what he choses he has options.  At some point he'll have to be honest with himself and make some decisions though.  He's the one that will have to live with what he does.  We are all throwing out suggestions and if he is following all of the responses his poor head will be swimming.  His goals as you state them seem to be pretty simple.  Reliable, rideable power.  I guess the question is how much power and at what cost.  BTW, over 200# compression is very tunable so his margin is plus or minus depending on what the cam he choses needs to give him what he wants.

The TMan cams seem to have his attention. Probably good choices. Calling Tom Reiser will go a long way to answering questions on those cams.  He's known to be honest and steer callers right. Tell him what you have ready to go.  Your buddy will have to be honest about his goals though.


 
KD

838

August 20, 2021, 07:44:16 PM #15 Last Edit: August 20, 2021, 08:18:34 PM by 838
Quote from: kd on August 20, 2021, 05:41:28 PM
Quote from: 838 on August 20, 2021, 04:16:54 PM
Quote from: kd on August 20, 2021, 02:16:11 PM
Quote from: 838 on August 20, 2021, 09:44:12 AM
Quote from: m1marty on August 19, 2021, 08:05:03 PM
Big fan of the Mackie 598 here. Have used it quite a bit over the years to include 2 of my own bikes. Quiet valve train and makes the #s

We live about 60min from Mackie and he doesn't wanna run a Mackie combo. I'm waiting on money to build up a 124" for my, personal, touring softail that will use the 598 though 👍.

Any other suggestions for reliable, rideable power? Only other things I know of the bike are it has a wrath pipe with the loud baffle (3"???) and he "has a guy" to do the headwork 🤷‍♂️.

Most of this info is for my own knowledge. He most likely will do the 662-2, but I'm always curious to know the choices of experienced individuals 👍


If your buddy has "kinda" settled on the Tman 662-2 he may be interested in the 660 PS2.  There are some dyno sheets on here for comparison of the power band. It is known for it's great parking lot manners while performing as well as the 662-2 (almost identical to it).  He may soon get tired of managing the cocked and loaded low RPM feel the 662-2 is known for.  A true hot rodder will be more tolerant but as a daily rider in traffic the PS2 will be easily managed. I am using the predecessor 660SM in a 11.3:1 120 and it is OEM quiet (indicating easy ramps) and lacks nothing in power anywhere.  It's a favorite of Scott at Hillside too.

With the 46* intake close it would have to run at 10.6:1... maybe 10.8 tops... I have a Rivas 584 set I offered up to him but he wants that 10.8:1 mark at close to 200ccp. I also have an old set of tman 590ps cams and some 1.725" intake rockers I told him he could use. Best I could find to achieve both 10.8:1 and 200ccp is a woods 9f +4 or 9B +2. I don't know if advancing the tman cams would be good cause the new profiles already have pretty late exhaust closing events and a lot of exhaust duration. There's a few graphs off the cr630i at 10.8:1 that look great.


I believe 10.8 is a suggested mid level for both cams.  If you want more, add compression.   When I stated my compression (+205 CCP) it was a purposeful build to hit 145 to 150 and it did. He hasn't got his heads done yet so he's golden. No matter what he choses he has options.  At some point he'll have to be honest with himself and make some decisions though.  He's the one that will have to live with what he does.  We are all throwing out suggestions and if he is following all of the responses his poor head will be swimming.  His goals as you state them seem to be pretty simple.  Reliable, rideable power.  I guess the question is how much power and at what cost.  BTW, over 200# compression is very tunable so his margin is plus or minus depending on what the cam he choses needs to give him what he wants.

The TMan cams seem to have his attention. Probably good choices. Calling Tom Reiser will go a long way to answering questions on those cams.  He's known to be honest and steer callers right. Tell him what you have ready to go.  Your buddy will have to be honest about his goals though.




He uses a local guy, retired dyno operator that now road tunes bikes on the side using a Daytona twin scan WEGO. He's good (and was great on the dyno as well) but caps his limits at 10.8 for static and/or 205ccp.

TR recommend the 662-2 but I don't think the 660 came up because of the 10.8:1/200ccp compression that was being sought after. I've seen a dyno of the 660sm at 10.3:1 in a 120". It was like 144/127 with a broad curve... it would probably do real good at 10.6 or more.

kd

August 20, 2021, 08:39:09 PM #16 Last Edit: August 20, 2021, 08:49:33 PM by kd
Here is another one with 11.1 / 205 CCP.  The blue is the Dragula 1 but 2.55 baffle.  Most consider the Dragula  identical to the Wrath.
KD

04 SE Deuce

Quote from: 838 on August 20, 2021, 07:44:16 PM
He uses a local guy, retired dyno operator that now road tunes bikes on the side using a Daytona twin scan WEGO. He's good (and was great on the dyno as well) but caps his limits at 10.8 for static and/or 205ccp.

Would that be Bill G.?

838

Quote from: 04 SE Deuce on August 20, 2021, 10:36:46 PM
Quote from: 838 on August 20, 2021, 07:44:16 PM
He uses a local guy, retired dyno operator that now road tunes bikes on the side using a Daytona twin scan WEGO. He's good (and was great on the dyno as well) but caps his limits at 10.8 for static and/or 205ccp.

Would that be Bill G.?

I wish he was still tuning. He was about 40min from me. My buddy rides a cvo 117" with a set of Dons heads and the 259E at 11:1 tuned by bill. It's been rippin hard for a decade!

838

Weird twist. I think it's going to be an HP103 s&s at 10.8:1. SE58mm with 6.2 injectors. Ported 110" heads and the rush wrath. I suggested a new 2.5" baffle replacing the 3" that he has now.

m1marty

Quote from: 838 on August 22, 2021, 02:20:26 PM
Weird twist. I think it's going to be an HP103 s&s at 10.8:1. SE58mm with 6.2 injectors. Ported 110" heads and the rush wrath. I suggested a new 2.5" baffle replacing the 3" that he has now.
Well...that should be interesting. I would suggest the 2.55 baffle.
OFFO

838

Quote from: m1marty on August 22, 2021, 09:53:41 PM
Quote from: 838 on August 22, 2021, 02:20:26 PM
Weird twist. I think it's going to be an HP103 s&s at 10.8:1. SE58mm with 6.2 injectors. Ported 110" heads and the rush wrath. I suggested a new 2.5" baffle replacing the 3" that he has now.
Well...that should be interesting. I would suggest the 2.55 baffle.

I agree.  I'm trying to talk him in to taking it to a dyno operator up north. Selfishly I want to see the numbers  :bike:

If not, I'm sure I'll have a chance to ride it, and I have a handful of high power TC baggers to compare it with 👍.

kd

August 23, 2021, 02:15:36 PM #22 Last Edit: August 23, 2021, 03:03:22 PM by kd
Quote from: 838 on August 23, 2021, 11:56:01 AM
Quote from: m1marty on August 22, 2021, 09:53:41 PM
Quote from: 838 on August 22, 2021, 02:20:26 PM
Weird twist. I think it's going to be an HP103 s&s at 10.8:1. SE58mm with 6.2 injectors. Ported 110" heads and the rush wrath. I suggested a new 2.5" baffle replacing the 3" that he has now.
Well...that should be interesting. I would suggest the 2.55 baffle.

I agree.  I'm trying to talk him in to taking it to a dyno operator up north. Selfishly I want to see the numbers  :bike:

If not, I'm sure I'll have a chance to ride it, and I have a handful of high power TC baggers to compare it with 👍.

It will no doubt be interesting.  I think the reliable "power" part of his stated goals will be missed.   :unsure:  He'll likely be a shifting son of a gun.

What S&S says: 

HP103: For the rider who really wants the most top end horsepower. Easily make 100 horses from a stock engine with S&S intake and exhaust. Ideal for lighter bikes and racing applications where getting the most horsepower from a stock engine is imperative.

"bolt-in cam set designed for stock or mildly modified touring bikes".

"Designed as bolt in cams for engines with 103 and stock 9.7:1 compression up to 10.5:1".



HP103      

      Open Close    Lift   Duration   TDC Lift
INT   20   49   .575      249      .199
EX   45   26   .575      251      .206



KD

838

August 23, 2021, 03:27:43 PM #23 Last Edit: August 23, 2021, 03:32:27 PM by 838
Quote from: kd on August 23, 2021, 02:15:36 PM
Quote from: 838 on August 23, 2021, 11:56:01 AM
Quote from: m1marty on August 22, 2021, 09:53:41 PM
Quote from: 838 on August 22, 2021, 02:20:26 PM
Weird twist. I think it's going to be an HP103 s&s at 10.8:1. SE58mm with 6.2 injectors. Ported 110" heads and the rush wrath. I suggested a new 2.5" baffle replacing the 3" that he has now.
Well...that should be interesting. I would suggest the 2.55 baffle.

I agree.  I'm trying to talk him in to taking it to a dyno operator up north. Selfishly I want to see the numbers  :bike:

If not, I'm sure I'll have a chance to ride it, and I have a handful of high power TC baggers to compare it with 👍.

It will no doubt be interesting.  I think the reliable "power" part of his stated goals will be missed.   :unsure:  He'll likely be a shifting son of a gun.

What S&S says: 

HP103: For the rider who really wants the most top end horsepower. Easily make 100 horses from a stock engine with S&S intake and exhaust. Ideal for lighter bikes and racing applications where getting the most horsepower from a stock engine is imperative.

"bolt-in cam set designed for stock or mildly modified touring bikes".

"Designed as bolt in cams for engines with 103 and stock 9.7:1 compression up to 10.5:1".



HP103      

      Open Close    Lift   Duration   TDC Lift
INT   20   49   .575      249      .199
EX   45   26   .575      251      .206

I remain optimistic. Those explanations are relevant for a bolt-in in a stock 96"-103" but this bike will have 28-21 more cubes and a whole point more compression than a stock 103". I know nothing about the profile of this cam, but the those timing events and duration above  look appropriate for a 10.8:1 124" touring build to me... I've only seen one dyno sheet for a built 106", it almost created 120/120 and the curve looked pretty good down low. We'll see... it does have a lot of overlap 🤷‍♂️.




Don D

August 23, 2021, 04:24:01 PM #24 Last Edit: August 23, 2021, 04:49:04 PM by HD Street Performance
We now know the cubic inches. Sorry if I missed that elsewhere if it is in the thread. The cam does work much differently at 124 VS 103". Remember "Combination" of parts.
A 45 exhaust open has all the look and feel of a hot running 124 with that much compression to me unless it is backed up 4 degrees. There are a lot better cams out there that don't need adjustment. It is not a bad cam or a bad cam manufacturer. just not a good match for the rest of the parts still with guesswork about what was done to the heads. The cam is a bit of a wrong choice, just not optimal. Look at how odd the timing is. The cam is retarded and has -2.5° ground in. It has a bit more overlap than is needed with capable heads and about a 105-106 LSA would work better. You pick the brand. You keep referencing lobe profile, better yet if you have access to a camdoctor and are measuring the seat to seat timing VS duration at .053, otherwise just talking points.

harpwrench

20/49
50/22
According to S&s site

Hossamania

Quote from: HD Street Performance on August 23, 2021, 04:24:01 PM
We now know the cubic inches. Sorry if I missed that elsewhere if it is in the thread. The cam does work much differently at 124 VS 103". Remember "Combination" of parts.
A 45 exhaust open has all the look and feel of a hot running 124 with that much compression to me unless it is backed up 4 degrees. There are a lot better cams out there that don't need adjustment. It is not a bad cam or a bad cam manufacturer. just not a good match for the rest of the parts still with guesswork about what was done to the heads. The cam is a bit of a wrong choice, just not optimal. Look at how odd the timing is. The cam is retarded and has -2.5° ground in. It has a bit more overlap than is needed with capable heads and about a 105-106 LSA would work better. You pick the brand. You keep referencing lobe profile, better yet if you have access to a camdoctor and are measuring the seat to seat timing VS duration at .053, otherwise just talking points.

And that is the fun of seeing different builds! Some work, some don't, some surprise.
If the government gives you everything you want,
it can take away everything you have.

838

Quote from: HD Street Performance on August 23, 2021, 04:24:01 PM
We now know the cubic inches. Sorry if I missed that elsewhere if it is in the thread. The cam does work much differently at 124 VS 103". Remember "Combination" of parts.
A 45 exhaust open has all the look and feel of a hot running 124 with that much compression to me unless it is backed up 4 degrees. There are a lot better cams out there that don't need adjustment. It is not a bad cam or a bad cam manufacturer. just not a good match for the rest of the parts still with guesswork about what was done to the heads. The cam is a bit of a wrong choice, just not optimal. Look at how odd the timing is. The cam is retarded and has -2.5° ground in. It has a bit more overlap than is needed with capable heads and about a 105-106 LSA would work better. You pick the brand. You keep referencing lobe profile, better yet if you have access to a camdoctor and are measuring the seat to seat timing VS duration at .053, otherwise just talking points.

I've noticed a lot of cams have been "re-designed" by the manufacturer(s) and most have added more exhaust duration and a later exhaust opening event. Would this be done to cool things down?

kd

August 23, 2021, 05:42:56 PM #28 Last Edit: August 23, 2021, 06:21:26 PM by kd
Quote from: harpwrench on August 23, 2021, 04:48:13 PM
20/49
50/22
According to S&s site

I posted mine above from the S&S site.  :nix:

added later:

:oops:

It appears I used the Fuelmoto site specs when I was looking for a 124 comparison in Jamie's test dyno sheet examples.
KD

kd

Quote from: 838 on August 23, 2021, 03:27:43 PM
Quote from: kd on August 23, 2021, 02:15:36 PM
Quote from: 838 on August 23, 2021, 11:56:01 AM
Quote from: m1marty on August 22, 2021, 09:53:41 PM
Quote from: 838 on August 22, 2021, 02:20:26 PM
Weird twist. I think it's going to be an HP103 s&s at 10.8:1. SE58mm with 6.2 injectors. Ported 110" heads and the rush wrath. I suggested a new 2.5" baffle replacing the 3" that he has now.
Well...that should be interesting. I would suggest the 2.55 baffle.

I agree.  I'm trying to talk him in to taking it to a dyno operator up north. Selfishly I want to see the numbers  :bike:

If not, I'm sure I'll have a chance to ride it, and I have a handful of high power TC baggers to compare it with 👍.

It will no doubt be interesting.  I think the reliable "power" part of his stated goals will be missed.   :unsure:  He'll likely be a shifting son of a gun.

What S&S says: 

HP103: For the rider who really wants the most top end horsepower. Easily make 100 horses from a stock engine with S&S intake and exhaust. Ideal for lighter bikes and racing applications where getting the most horsepower from a stock engine is imperative.

"bolt-in cam set designed for stock or mildly modified touring bikes".

"Designed as bolt in cams for engines with 103 and stock 9.7:1 compression up to 10.5:1".



HP103      

      Open Close    Lift   Duration   TDC Lift
INT   20   49   .575      249      .199
EX   45   26   .575      251      .206

I remain optimistic. Those explanations are relevant for a bolt-in in a stock 96"-103" but this bike will have 28-21 more cubes and a whole point more compression than a stock 103". I know nothing about the profile of this cam, but the those timing events and duration above  look appropriate for a 10.8:1 124" touring build to me... I've only seen one dyno sheet for a built 106", it almost created 120/120 and the curve looked pretty good down low. We'll see... it does have a lot of overlap 🤷‍♂️.

I was not being critical. I truly meant it would be interesting to see the outcome from a set of cams that were so obviously intended for less stroke and bore.  Those are 2 influential conditions aside from the significantly extra cubic inches.  The compression build time and exhaust clearing characteristics will be so much different from a shorter stroke and smaller bore.  The head porting and exhaust will be critical components of making the build work. I would say he's blazing a trail not yet travelled (that I could find).  He could probably use component examples of a couple of other cams that are common like the CR575 to guide him closer.  I'll be following his progress if you share what you can with us.
KD

m1marty

Please keep us posted as to the end results. I stand by the DME598 suggestion but very curious as to what his cam choice ends up doing.
This convo brings to mind two separate bikes I've dealt with this year. One was a 120R, TH-X exhaust, Latus 57mm etc. Customer was talked in to a TTS175 cam by another shop. I just tuned it.
2nd is another customer that was adamant about using 57s with a 4° sprocket in his 16 Electra.
Neither of those recipes are something *I* would have personally picked. End of the day, both bikes run great and customers are extremely happy. Maybe the same will happen for this guy?
[attach=0,msg1393658]  [attach=1,msg1393658]
OFFO

Don D

Residual heat and lack of a complete blowdown causes pumping losses and detonation. A high compression motor burns quicker and needs a earlier opening exhaust event, not necessarily added duration.  The symptoms manifest in the real world not on a dyno, long grade on a hot day resulting in detonation. With efi it can be dealt with to a certain degree by the tuner after logging. These are not the flate rate tooners, the good guys.

838

Quote from: kd on August 23, 2021, 05:54:59 PM
Quote from: 838 on August 23, 2021, 03:27:43 PM
Quote from: kd on August 23, 2021, 02:15:36 PM
Quote from: 838 on August 23, 2021, 11:56:01 AM
Quote from: m1marty on August 22, 2021, 09:53:41 PM
Quote from: 838 on August 22, 2021, 02:20:26 PM
Weird twist. I think it's going to be an HP103 s&s at 10.8:1. SE58mm with 6.2 injectors. Ported 110" heads and the rush wrath. I suggested a new 2.5" baffle replacing the 3" that he has now.
Well...that should be interesting. I would suggest the 2.55 baffle.

I agree.  I'm trying to talk him in to taking it to a dyno operator up north. Selfishly I want to see the numbers  :bike:

If not, I'm sure I'll have a chance to ride it, and I have a handful of high power TC baggers to compare it with 👍.

It will no doubt be interesting.  I think the reliable "power" part of his stated goals will be missed.   :unsure:  He'll likely be a shifting son of a gun.

What S&S says: 

HP103: For the rider who really wants the most top end horsepower. Easily make 100 horses from a stock engine with S&S intake and exhaust. Ideal for lighter bikes and racing applications where getting the most horsepower from a stock engine is imperative.

"bolt-in cam set designed for stock or mildly modified touring bikes".

"Designed as bolt in cams for engines with 103 and stock 9.7:1 compression up to 10.5:1".



HP103      

      Open Close    Lift   Duration   TDC Lift
INT   20   49   .575      249      .199
EX   45   26   .575      251      .206

I remain optimistic. Those explanations are relevant for a bolt-in in a stock 96"-103" but this bike will have 28-21 more cubes and a whole point more compression than a stock 103". I know nothing about the profile of this cam, but the those timing events and duration above  look appropriate for a 10.8:1 124" touring build to me... I've only seen one dyno sheet for a built 106", it almost created 120/120 and the curve looked pretty good down low. We'll see... it does have a lot of overlap 🤷‍♂️.

I was not being critical. I truly meant it would be interesting to see the outcome from a set of cams that were so obviously intended for less stroke and bore.  Those are 2 influential conditions aside from the significantly extra cubic inches.  The compression build time and exhaust clearing characteristics will be so much different from a shorter stroke and smaller bore.  The head porting and exhaust will be critical components of making the build work. I would say he's blazing a trail not yet travelled (that I could find).  He could probably use component examples of a couple of other cams that are common like the CR575 to guide him closer.  I'll be following his progress if you share what you can with us.

I don't mind critical at all. I'm always trying to learn more and that's what I like about this site!!I'm told that him and the head porter came to this decision together. I'm curious to see the outcome myself. He may not have dyno numbers, but I'll have a few 140/140 TC builds to compare it with after I ride it 👍. I'll keep updating this as it comes along.

838

Quote from: HD Street Performance on August 24, 2021, 08:02:16 AM
Residual heat and lack of a complete blowdown causes pumping losses and detonation. A high compression motor burns quicker and needs a earlier opening exhaust event, not necessarily added duration.  The symptoms manifest in the real world not on a dyno, long grade on a hot day resulting in detonation. With efi it can be dealt with to a certain degree by the tuner after logging. These are not the flate rate tooners, the good guys.

What about using a 259E? 124" at 10.8ish??? I've seen them do great in 117's. Not asking about cams outside the context of all the parts working together.

donk_316

Quote from: 838 on August 26, 2021, 11:55:30 AM

What about using a 259E? 124" at 10.8ish??? I've seen them do great in 117's. Not asking about cams outside the context of all the parts working together.

The 259E cam is great but since it's a SE cam, it gets pushed to the side almost automatically. It's pretty damn close to the cams discussed in this thread.
2017 FXSE w/117"

Don D

Quote from: 838 on August 26, 2021, 11:55:30 AM
Quote from: HD Street Performance on August 24, 2021, 08:02:16 AM
Residual heat and lack of a complete blowdown causes pumping losses and detonation. A high compression motor burns quicker and needs a earlier opening exhaust event, not necessarily added duration.  The symptoms manifest in the real world not on a dyno, long grade on a hot day resulting in detonation. With efi it can be dealt with to a certain degree by the tuner after logging. These are not the flate rate tooners, the good guys.

What about using a 259E? 124" at 10.8ish??? I've seen them do great in 117's. Not asking about cams outside the context of all the parts working together.
It seems to get the job done OK only if the compression is high enough. It is a reincarnation of the SE251 which used to be a grind that worked well in modified motors. Remembering Ed Ederdelyi

838

Quote from: HD Street Performance on August 24, 2021, 08:02:16 AM
Residual heat and lack of a complete blowdown causes pumping losses and detonation. A high compression motor burns quicker and needs a earlier opening exhaust event, not necessarily added duration.  The symptoms manifest in the real world not on a dyno, long grade on a hot day resulting in detonation. With efi it can be dealt with to a certain degree by the tuner after logging. These are not the flate rate tooners, the good guys.

20/49
50/22

These are the actual specs on the cam the 45/26 On the exhaust was a misnomer.

kd

Sorry I wasn't clear enough in post 28.    :embarrassed:  I posted the wrong exhaust spec.  I got it from a site other than S&S.
KD

838

Quote from: kd on August 29, 2021, 05:14:22 AM
Sorry I wasn't clear enough in post 28.    :embarrassed:  I posted the wrong exhaust spec.  I got it from a site other than S&S.

It's posted differently on several different sites. I don't know which is correct. I told him to call s&s and get the specs from one of their techs...

98fxstc

It may be the Seller has tweaked the cam specs and that fact has not been advertised or the advertising has not been updated.
I got some cams and the specs on the paper in the box were different than the advertised specs. The explanation I got from the Seller was that there were minor adjustments to the specs during development and whatever was on the paper in the box were the actual specs for those cams. ??

838

Got an update. It's going to be a woods tw9b

turboprop

Quote from: 838 on September 16, 2021, 04:44:08 PM
Got an update. It's going to be a woods tw9b

I really like the 9b. Funny to see all the different twists and turns this thread has taken. This is going in a heavy bike with a big block?
'We' like this' - Said by the one man operation.

838

September 17, 2021, 08:10:31 AM #42 Last Edit: September 17, 2021, 10:41:25 AM by 838
Quote from: turboprop on September 17, 2021, 06:51:46 AM
Quote from: 838 on September 16, 2021, 04:44:08 PM
Got an update. It's going to be a woods tw9b

I really like the 9b. Funny to see all the different twists and turns this thread has taken. This is going in a heavy bike with a big block?

Yes. Road Glide, 124" 10.8:1. I had these 9B's for my personal 117" that I never used.

I've never ridden a bike with a 9B, Don suggested them for me for my 117" based on my riding style (at 11.2:1 with a 4* advance), but my 117 is running well and I don't plan on touching it (famous last words)... I'm excited to ride this one.

Coff 06

September 17, 2021, 04:27:22 PM #43 Last Edit: September 17, 2021, 04:33:55 PM by Coff 06
On his recommendations.I have the 9b in my 98" FXSTS at 11.25 w/+4* and Don's Pro Street heads.
123/118 It's a blast to ride.Switched from a 2-2 to a 2-1 Python 3 .Power is always there and almost angry.
Good luck with the build          Coff 06
06 FX Springer, 98",11/1,9B+4*,HPI 55/58 /5.3inj,HDSP Pro Street heads,123/118

planemech

Ive run the old version 662-2 and the 630i in the same motor and agree with NoCents. Mine was a 117 at the time, -2s were like a lot of opinions here, on or off. Kinda annoying in switch back corners. 630i felt faster even though they showed about 5/5 less power/tq and were a lot smoother. I did loose about 5 lbs CCP so if that had been corrected the numbers probably would have been really close. Currently running the 630i in a 124 at 11.3:1 and have been really happy with them. Power everywhere I need it and smooth.

838

Quote from: m1marty on August 19, 2021, 08:05:03 PM
Big fan of the Mackie 598 here. Have used it quite a bit over the years to include 2 of my own bikes. Quiet valve train and makes the #s

Breaking in a 124" B motor right now with a 598 at 10.8:1. It's only tuned to 4500 and 60% throttle. It plays real nice in these low rpms, and can still get going real quick rolling on short shifting. I can tell it wants it's neck rung though! Quietest valve train I've herd, quieter than my personal 117" CR595i build (which I didn't think would be possible). 95 degree weather when I rode it and ET on the PV never went over 240* either. I'm doing a 124" B motor myself and I'm going to duplicate the setup on this one. I'll have more info in a few days.

Don, you were spot on. The 598 will suit my needs very nicely 👍👍.

Don D

When I get calls that is where the topic usually starts and ends, cams. Any more I avoid the topic as it just isn't the only important element and I want to be sure the customer realizes that. When I get there parts here we can get serious about it.
Well good news or bad news depending on which bike wins is either you or your buddies bike will be faster.
I know a guy that can help with yours.

m1marty

Quote from: 838 on September 23, 2021, 03:25:07 PM
Quote from: m1marty on August 19, 2021, 08:05:03 PM
Big fan of the Mackie 598 here. Have used it quite a bit over the years to include 2 of my own bikes. Quiet valve train and makes the #s

Breaking in a 124" B motor right now with a 598 at 10.8:1. It's only tuned to 4500 and 60% throttle. It plays real nice in these low rpms, and can still get going real quick rolling on short shifting. I can tell it wants it's neck rung though! Quietest valve train I've herd, quieter than my personal 117" CR595i build (which I didn't think would be possible). 95 degree weather when I rode it and ET on the PV never went over 240* either. I'm doing a 124" B motor myself and I'm going to duplicate the setup on this one. I'll have more info in a few days.

Don, you were spot on. The 598 will suit my needs very nicely 👍👍.
As I've posted a few times- I'm a big fan of that cam. It has consistently been a winner for me and every single build has a dead quiet valve train to boot.
OFFO

838

Quote from: HD Street Performance on September 23, 2021, 06:06:32 PM
When I get calls that is where the topic usually starts and ends, cams. Any more I avoid the topic as it just isn't the only important element and I want to be sure the customer realizes that. When I get there parts here we can get serious about it.
Well good news or bad news depending on which bike wins is either you or your buddies bike will be faster.
I know a guy that can help with yours.

Run it at 11.25:1? Marty, have you tuned one with that compression?

I've completely derailed my own thread 🤦‍♂️

m1marty

Quote from: 838 on September 24, 2021, 06:21:38 PM
Quote from: HD Street Performance on September 23, 2021, 06:06:32 PM
When I get calls that is where the topic usually starts and ends, cams. Any more I avoid the topic as it just isn't the only important element and I want to be sure the customer realizes that. When I get there parts here we can get serious about it.
Well good news or bad news depending on which bike wins is either you or your buddies bike will be faster.
I know a guy that can help with yours.

Run it at 11.25:1? Marty, have you tuned one with that compression?

I've completely derailed my own thread 🤦‍♂️
I have one in a 113 Dyna at a tick over 11:1. No issue. I have set them at 10.5 to 11+
I stay pretty conservative (195-200 +/-) for most of my customers.
OFFO

838

Heads flowed 345 @28" for the 124" with the woods 9B. SE58mm TB, rush wrath exhaust with 2.5" baffle, SE heavy breather.

Should it up to a 3" baffle?

5.3 or 6.3 injectors?

turboprop

Quote from: 838 on September 29, 2021, 04:14:18 PM
Heads flowed 345 @28" for the 124" with the woods 9B. SE58mm TB, rush wrath exhaust with 2.5" baffle, SE heavy breather.

Should it up to a 3" baffle?

5.3 or 6.3 injectors?

Has been a while since this page has seen a big block build with 9b cams. I am really anxious to see how this turns out as I am thinking of changing the cams in my blue FXR with the twin cam 124 with Red Shift 657 cams. Nothing wrong with the current build, just curious.
'We' like this' - Said by the one man operation.

838

Quote from: turboprop on September 30, 2021, 06:27:01 AM
Quote from: 838 on September 29, 2021, 04:14:18 PM
Heads flowed 345 @28" for the 124" with the woods 9B. SE58mm TB, rush wrath exhaust with 2.5" baffle, SE heavy breather.

Should it up to a 3" baffle?

5.3 or 6.3 injectors?

Has been a while since this page has seen a big block build with 9b cams. I am really anxious to see how this turns out as I am thinking of changing the cams in my blue FXR with the twin cam 124 with Red Shift 657 cams. Nothing wrong with the current build, just curious.

657 goes a bit lower on the compression, correct? 10.5-6 or so?

This build had a compression cap of 200. I liked the idea of advancing the 9B 4* and running it at 10.6:1, this ones going in straight at 10.8:1 though...

turboprop

Quote from: 838 on September 30, 2021, 07:13:02 AM
Quote from: turboprop on September 30, 2021, 06:27:01 AM
Quote from: 838 on September 29, 2021, 04:14:18 PM
Heads flowed 345 @28" for the 124" with the woods 9B. SE58mm TB, rush wrath exhaust with 2.5" baffle, SE heavy breather.

Should it up to a 3" baffle?

5.3 or 6.3 injectors?

Has been a while since this page has seen a big block build with 9b cams. I am really anxious to see how this turns out as I am thinking of changing the cams in my blue FXR with the twin cam 124 with Red Shift 657 cams. Nothing wrong with the current build, just curious.

657 goes a bit lower on the compression, correct? 10.5-6 or so?

This build had a compression cap of 200. I liked the idea of advancing the 9B 4* and running it at 10.6:1, this ones going in straight at 10.8:1 though...

Seems about right. The 124 in question was setup on the high side. I think it landed close to 10.8.
'We' like this' - Said by the one man operation.

RTMike

We did a Jim's 131 a few years ago and used the RS 657 with 10.25 comp.the bike pulled freight train.With custom pistons,head and throttle body work the numbers were high 140s.

No Cents

  George Bryce designed a pretty hot set of cams for these bigger inch twin cams with an early intake closing that makes a ton of power all the way across the board.  :wink:
  It might be worth your effort to give him a call.
08 FLHX my grocery getter, 124ci, wfolarry 110" heads, Burns pipe, 158/152 sae

C-Cat

Quote from: 838 on September 29, 2021, 04:14:18 PM
Heads flowed 345 @28" for the 124" with the woods 9B. SE58mm TB, rush wrath exhaust with 2.5" baffle, SE heavy breather.

Should it up to a 3" baffle?

5.3 or 6.3 injectors?
That's a lot of air flow. What size intake valve? Heads like that you could run a lot more cam with more compression and utilize the 3 inch baffle. I'd definitely run 6.2 injectors regardless.
124ci. 07 Streetbob 161/145
110ci. '11 Roadglide  129/127

838

Quote from: C-Cat on September 30, 2021, 07:18:53 PM
Quote from: 838 on September 29, 2021, 04:14:18 PM
Heads flowed 345 @28" for the 124" with the woods 9B. SE58mm TB, rush wrath exhaust with 2.5" baffle, SE heavy breather.

Should it up to a 3" baffle?

5.3 or 6.3 injectors?
That's a lot of air flow. What size intake valve? Heads like that you could run a lot more cam with more compression and utilize the 3 inch baffle. I'd definitely run 6.2 injectors regardless.

This build was capped at 10.8:1 and/or 200ccp (for heat and questionable fuel requirements). I believe they are 2.150" valves. Long haul thumper, 2-up mostly. When solo he rides with a local club that cruises 85mph pretty aggressive passing/splitting. And needs the midrange grunt to keep with the lighter bikes. I rode with these guys a while back. Put my 140/136 117" through the ringer!

kd

Quote from: 838 on October 01, 2021, 08:16:21 AM
Quote from: C-Cat on September 30, 2021, 07:18:53 PM
Quote from: 838 on September 29, 2021, 04:14:18 PM
Heads flowed 345 @28" for the 124" with the woods 9B. SE58mm TB, rush wrath exhaust with 2.5" baffle, SE heavy breather.

Should it up to a 3" baffle?

5.3 or 6.3 injectors?
That's a lot of air flow. What size intake valve? Heads like that you could run a lot more cam with more compression and utilize the 3 inch baffle. I'd definitely run 6.2 injectors regardless.

This build was capped at 10.8:1 and/or 200ccp (for heat and questionable fuel requirements). I believe they are 2.150" valves. Long haul thumper, 2-up mostly. When solo he rides with a local club that cruises 85mph pretty aggressive passing/splitting. And needs the midrange grunt to keep with the lighter bikes. I rode with these guys a while back. Put my 140/136 117" through the ringer!

My experience using a similar (probably identical) exhaust (Dragula 1) and a similar cam (660SM) in a 120 cranking at 205 CCP was the 3" dropped the torque up to about 3700 RPM. And  It did help up to 6250 but the torque loss in the 2000 - 3000 range was significant.  The 3 baffle can be obnoxious and very hard on the ears if it is run without a silencer.  The 2.5" baffle was table top flat and the 3" only gave out 5 and 5 at peak difference.  Having said all that, the fact you can just change the baffle to test it, it may not be too expensive to find out.
KD

Raleigh111

October 19, 2021, 01:45:18 AM #59 Last Edit: October 19, 2021, 01:59:03 AM by Raleigh111
This is my 120 with 9b 11-1 or so 200 ccp with just twin cam shelf ported heads, nothing like you have. She scoots down low. 145tq out of 120 i was impressed. It is not on and off feel, just feels on all the time.  It likes being at or tic above 200ccp. I tried it at 190 and could tell the difference at or above 200ccp, i think it ended up 205.
Harleys are addicting and im out of money. Accepting donations! 120 132hp 146tq

838

Quote from: Raleigh111 on October 19, 2021, 01:45:18 AM
This is my 120 with 9b 11-1 or so 200 ccp with just twin cam shelf ported heads, nothing like you have. She scoots down low. 145tq out of 120 i was impressed. It is not on and off feel, just feels on all the time.  It likes being at or tic above 200ccp. I tried it at 190 and could tell the difference at or above 200ccp, i think it ended up 205.

Looks good. This one should come in right at 200ccp.

What's your plan for the 124" you're building now?

Raleigh111

Quote from: 838 on October 20, 2021, 09:31:38 AM
Quote from: Raleigh111 on October 19, 2021, 01:45:18 AM
This is my 120 with 9b 11-1 or so 200 ccp with just twin cam shelf ported heads, nothing like you have. She scoots down low. 145tq out of 120 i was impressed. It is not on and off feel, just feels on all the time.  It likes being at or tic above 200ccp. I tried it at 190 and could tell the difference at or above 200ccp, i think it ended up 205.

Looks good. This one should come in right at 200ccp.

What's your plan for the 124" you're building now?

Continuing to derail your thread :)
Same boat as you with cams. looking hard at the 598. Have a 595i and 4 gear and like the specs of 22 50 on intake but not so sure about 53 13 on exhaust with the 4 gear. Closest thing that i know works is the 9b with 50 20 on exhaust. May just go back to the 9B? Don massaging twin cam heads, jackpot xxx because i had them, 58se 5.3, rekluse, oil cooler fans, Dont care so much about HP just want to see 140tq around 3000rpm. Comp and squish is the little hurdle with stock heads. What I am really on the fence about is this stupid exhaust baffle. Not sure if I should open up the left side?

http://harleytechtalk.com/htt/index.php?action=dlattach;ts=1634488109;topic=116509.0;attach=106905;image

Harleys are addicting and im out of money. Accepting donations! 120 132hp 146tq

Don D

The 595i is a great cam just not for peak torque numbers. It's not so much about the lc, open and close points, as it is the lsa. That doesn't change by advanced
or retarded timing. A closer lsa with a little more overlap would hump the torque up. Pistons may need to be dished if static compression is too high. KB dished 117" pistons will work in a 124" with mods. At 124" I also am concerned about blow down effectiveness. If not they run hot. A little lower ccp and timing overhead for available octane is a best plan. There are a half a dozen cams that will work great for what your goal is.

838

October 21, 2021, 09:51:35 AM #63 Last Edit: October 21, 2021, 10:04:35 AM by 838
https://harleytechtalk.com/htt/index.php/topic,108862.msg1296724.html#msg1296724

This is my 117 with dons heads and the 595i. It's got a great combo of parts and runs at 212ccp front and rear on CA pump gas. Game changer sprocket installed now too. It likes the gearing change. Not my long haul touring bike either though. It can do it in the cooler months out here, but I've got a thumper I ride for the longer trips where fuel quality could get dicey.

My thumper 117" is going to need a top end refresh at some point, currently it's at 10.25:1 with an s&s 570, I'll bump the compression when I replace the cylinders and I have an old TR590 set that I may try out at 200ccp when the time comes. I've wanted to see how  a 124" with moderate compression (<10.8:1) would run for a thumper motor with the 590, set up right.

I just helped finish up a 124" with the DME598, 10.8:1, Boarzilla, HPI58 with 6.4 injectors. It's only tuned to 4500rpm and 60% throttle for now (1000 mile break in tune). I should have more on that one soon.

838

https://harleytechtalk.com/htt/index.php/topic,109007.msg1304409.html#msg1304409

Don did the heads for this one.

Don, do you think setting this at 200ccp or less would just soften the low end, or cause a slight drop in aggregate tq across the range?

Raleigh1111 this looks similar to the parts combo you have as well.

Don D

October 21, 2021, 10:25:23 AM #65 Last Edit: October 21, 2021, 10:29:53 AM by HD Street Performance
It is not fair to compare the builds when so many parts are not the same and especially the pipe. A wider LSA cam engine can tolerate more compression all things being equal. With duals a baffle such as this style can be very effective and does offer some tunability. You lose low end with lower compression but it can be recaptured with added timing unless it is just grossly low. The overall result is a cooler running engine. You have to talk about loss of aggregate torque in the context of the cam, static CR, and the pipe to get anywhere. It is too easy to take data out of the context of it all.

838

Quote from: HD Street Performance on October 21, 2021, 10:25:23 AM
It is not fair to compare the builds when so many parts are not the same and especially the pipe. A wider LSA cam engine can tolerate more compression all things being equal. With duals a baffle such as this style can be very effective and does offer some tunability. You lose low end with lower compression but it can be recaptured with added timing unless it is just grossly low. The overall result is a cooler running engine. You have to talk about loss of aggregate torque in the context of the cam, static CR, and the pipe to get anywhere. It is too easy to take data out of the context of it all.

Is there a 2-1-2 type header that is capable of 140+hp with a good set of mufflers? Crusher Mellows?

rigidthumper

The Wagner exhaust supposedly would get you there?
I know the Fullsac DX/Crusher mellows will support 140TQ, given a big enough engine, I'm not sure about 140 HP though.
Ignorance is bliss, and accuracy expensive. How much of either can you afford?

Don D

Actually to add to what Robin said I have seen the V&H power duals and Khrome Werks head pipes both support those numbers. I recall a 120r I helped with made over 150hp with Wegners setup. But those are no longer in production. In the process of helping with a 124" build now with Hurricanes, 12:1, 64mm TB, and he will use the Wegner dual exhaust but probably different mufflers. Goal is 160 square or at least that hp with a very respectable torque curve. This is a touring bike and gets ridden miles. Cam will likely be custom, TBD.

838

Quote from: HD Street Performance on October 22, 2021, 05:24:37 AM
Actually to add to what Robin said I have seen the V&H power duals and Khrome Werks head pipes both support those numbers. I recall a 120r I helped with made over 150hp with Wegners setup. But those are no longer in production. In the process of helping with a 124" build now with Hurricanes, 12:1, 64mm TB, and he will use the Wegner dual exhaust but probably different mufflers. Goal is 160 square or at least that hp with a very respectable torque curve. This is a touring bike and gets ridden miles. Cam will likely be custom, TBD.

And aren't the Khrone Werks and the S&S power duals the same pipe?

Don D

Vance and Hines power duals are different, the S&S duals are made by Khrome Werks

838

Quote from: HD Street Performance on October 22, 2021, 07:01:27 AM
Vance and Hines power duals are different, the S&S duals are made by Khrome Werks

Iirc the s&s duals o2 sensor locations looked funky for their 18mm locations. Is this true of both them and Khrome Werks?


Don D


Raleigh111

October 22, 2021, 07:23:11 AM #73 Last Edit: October 22, 2021, 07:57:43 AM by Raleigh111
Quote from: 838 on October 21, 2021, 06:35:01 PM
Quote from: HD Street Performance on October 21, 2021, 10:25:23 AM
It is not fair to compare the builds when so many parts are not the same and especially the pipe. A wider LSA cam engine can tolerate more compression all things being equal. With duals a baffle such as this style can be very effective and does offer some tunability. You lose low end with lower compression but it can be recaptured with added timing unless it is just grossly low. The overall result is a cooler running engine. You have to talk about loss of aggregate torque in the context of the cam, static CR, and the pipe to get anywhere. It is too easy to take data out of the context of it all.

Is there a 2-1-2 type header that is capable of 140+hp with a good set of mufflers? Crusher Mellows?
The jackpot xxx pipe has done it and that is what i am trying to achieve. The collector flows better then standard 2-1-2. I have not seen much past 142 with it. I am going to try and use the jackpot muffs and trying to decide to drill out left side baffle as it is restricted. Talked with a few guys at fuel moto and they said not to drill it out. I will post another pic. I started a thread on it but no one has really replied to it.  Here is the link with a few pics. I just got ride of a old original set of crusher mellows:(. They were dinged up from a crash. Would of sent them to you for testing.  Done some testing and reading on lsa basics also. The narrow lsa will make better tq less hp in general.  Wider will add hp but loose tq. Too narrow lsa you can have issues with idle and vacuum and efi for that matter but talking small block chevys also, same principals thou.

Some 2-1-2 xxx pipe numbers on 124s FYI  with 9b cam or custom FM Cam
136-144
139-142
139-139
141-146
141-148
140-149
131-153
137-144
Harleys are addicting and im out of money. Accepting donations! 120 132hp 146tq

Don D

Why not make the decision at the dyno session and be equipped to change them.

harpwrench

V&H HO stainless duals, supertrapp megashot are a couple large x-pipes
Casey Wegner can make one if you're very patient

838

Quote from: HD Street Performance on October 22, 2021, 07:01:27 AM
Vance and Hines power duals are different, the S&S duals are made by Khrome Werks

Do the s&s have the same capability as the KW (is it the same pipe)?

Don D

I have not had the two in my hand to comment accurately.

838

Quote from: HD Street Performance on October 22, 2021, 11:06:37 AM
I have not had the two in my hand to comment accurately.

Do you know if the KW pipe was making these numbers with the flattened crossover pipe? Or was this modified to an open crossover?

838

Quote from: rigidthumper on October 21, 2021, 07:25:11 PM
The Wagner exhaust supposedly would get you there?
I know the Fullsac DX/Crusher mellows will support 140TQ, given a big enough engine, I'm not sure about 140 HP though.

Have you ever used the cobra "power port" 2-1-2? Looks like a KW or S&S but with bigger pipes including a full size crossover? Rush and Dragos also make these style. I emailed Frank and he said it could pull 140 with "his mufflers", but he's never tried with any others. I'm guessing if his mufflers can do it, so can the mellows. D&D guys said not to use their 2-1-2 for this level of power (gotta appreciate their honesty) 👍.

Raleigh111

Quote from: 838 on October 23, 2021, 08:43:14 AM
Quote from: rigidthumper on October 21, 2021, 07:25:11 PM
The Wagner exhaust supposedly would get you there?
I know the Fullsac DX/Crusher mellows will support 140TQ, given a big enough engine, I'm not sure about 140 HP though.

Have you ever used the cobra "power port" 2-1-2? Looks like a KW or S&S but with bigger pipes including a full size crossover? Rush and Dragos also make these style. I emailed Frank and he said it could pull 140 with "his mufflers", but he's never tried with any others. I'm guessing if his mufflers can do it, so can the mellows. D&D guys said not to use their 2-1-2 for this level of power (gotta appreciate their honesty) 👍.
Good info. Has anyone taken apart the crushers mellows? I wonder if the left side baffle has a restriction in it like the fuel moto ones? I had mine apart but it was many moons ago now they are gone. 
Harleys are addicting and im out of money. Accepting donations! 120 132hp 146tq

Ohio HD

What I was taught by Stave Cole and has always rang true, is that the left side is restricted because on decal there's more reversion due to less equal flow since the right side is almost a straight shot out. The reason its restricted is to prevent decel popping on that side.

YMMV depending on what exhaust system is used. The above is an in general occurrence with HD 2-1-2 systems.

kd

Quote from: Ohio HD on October 23, 2021, 12:39:32 PM
What I was taught by Stave Cole and has always rang true, is that the left side is restricted because on decal there's more reversion due to less equal flow since the right side is almost a straight shot out. The reason its restricted is to prevent decel popping on that side.

YMMV depending on what exhaust system is used. The above is an in general occurrence with HD 2-1-2 systems.

:up:  Steve was previously an engineer for Hedman Headers and knows exhaust well.
KD

Raleigh111

Quote from: Ohio HD on October 23, 2021, 12:39:32 PM
What I was taught by Stave Cole and has always rang true, is that the left side is restricted because on decal there's more reversion due to less equal flow since the right side is almost a straight shot out. The reason its restricted is to prevent decel popping on that side.

YMMV depending on what exhaust system is used. The above is an in general occurrence with HD 2-1-2 systems.
Thanks for that bit of info OHIO! I had no idea.
Harleys are addicting and im out of money. Accepting donations! 120 132hp 146tq

kd

Quote from: kd on October 23, 2021, 03:32:56 PM
Quote from: Ohio HD on October 23, 2021, 12:39:32 PM
What I was taught by Stave Cole and has always rang true, is that the left side is restricted because on decal there's more reversion due to less equal flow since the right side is almost a straight shot out. The reason its restricted is to prevent decel popping on that side.

YMMV depending on what exhaust system is used. The above is an in general occurrence with HD 2-1-2 systems.

:up:  Steve was previously an engineer for Hedman Headers and knows exhaust well.

Not that it's important but this morning i realized I may have been having a false memory event.   :embarrassed:  When Steve told me where he worked on exhaust systems, it could have been "Doug's Headers".   :doh:  Now I am confused.
KD

Raleigh111

Quote from: 838 on October 22, 2021, 04:08:55 PM
Quote from: HD Street Performance on October 22, 2021, 11:06:37 AM
I have not had the two in my hand to comment accurately.

Do you know if the KW pipe was making these numbers with the flattened crossover pipe? Or was this modified to an open crossover?

I will have a full size crossover on mine and play with the left side baffle restriction in the next month or 2 on the dyno and let you know how it turns out. I settled on the DM598 cam .
Harleys are addicting and im out of money. Accepting donations! 120 132hp 146tq

Don D

That's exactly the definition of "tuning" not who is or isn't knowledgeable or whom got what results with the same pipe and a totally different build. Let the engine tell you.

Arseclown

Quote from: Raleigh111 on October 24, 2021, 06:32:27 AM
Quote from: 838 on October 22, 2021, 04:08:55 PM
Quote from: HD Street Performance on October 22, 2021, 11:06:37 AM
I have not had the two in my hand to comment accurately.

Do you know if the KW pipe was making these numbers with the flattened crossover pipe? Or was this modified to an open crossover?

I will have a full size crossover on mine and play with the left side baffle restriction in the next month or 2 on the dyno and let you know how it turns out. I settled on the DM598 cam .

Curious about your selection (or want for testing) of the Mackie 598 cam. What sort of bike, what sort of riding and what comp would you run it at?

And lastly what is it about this cam that makes you want to use/test it as opposed to all the others commonly used.

Only asking as ive had it in my short list for a dyna 117ci with 10.8 comp and I don't mind having conservative Ccp

Raleigh111

Quote from: Arseclown on October 24, 2021, 10:45:58 PM
Quote from: Raleigh111 on October 24, 2021, 06:32:27 AM
Quote from: 838 on October 22, 2021, 04:08:55 PM
Quote from: HD Street Performance on October 22, 2021, 11:06:37 AM
I have not had the two in my hand to comment accurately.

Do you know if the KW pipe was making these numbers with the flattened crossover pipe? Or was this modified to an open crossover?

I will have a full size crossover on mine and play with the left side baffle restriction in the next month or 2 on the dyno and let you know how it turns out. I settled on the DM598 cam .

Curious about your selection (or want for testing) of the Mackie 598 cam. What sort of bike, what sort of riding and what comp would you run it at?

And lastly what is it about this cam that makes you want to use/test it as opposed to all the others commonly used.

Only asking as ive had it in my short list for a dyna 117ci with 10.8 comp and I don't mind having conservative Ccp
124 motor,closer lsa like 9b, hump the tq curve up on left, not a big lift, long life, quiet valve train, 10-8 - 11-1 in 13 road glide touring bike.
Harleys are addicting and im out of money. Accepting donations! 120 132hp 146tq

m1marty

I've done quite a few builds with the 598. They flat out work and work well. It's one of my favorite cams to use in bikes set up more towards the "hot rod" end of the spectrum. Really shine at the 200ccp +/- mark. This is of course with good supporting parts.
OFFO

838

I just finished a 124" with a 598 in a cross country touring softail. I agree with the "hot rod" label, but what I really like is it's tame in the 2500-3000 range. I cruise at 80 mph on the highway and it's locked and loaded at 3k for touch of the throttle passing power. Cruising slower 70mph in 5th same idea. This one is only tuned to 4500rpm and 60% throttle for a few more miles. I have a feeling once I get a chance to grab a handful of throttle and drop gears for more aggressive riding it's going to be a wild one. Perfect combo for a touring bike that likes to rev out too. This ones 10.8:1 compression just a click under 200ccp. It could take more compression, but I don't see why you'd need it for a touring bagger.