TMan 625 In A 124?

[WhipLash96]

Anyone ever do it?

[hrdtail78]

Might have it's place in a high tq low rpm 124.

[les]

After talking to Terry (T-Man), he agreed with my plan to use his 660 PS cams.  This was on a 2011 Road King.  The compression was 10.8 static.  Terry said it would be a torque monster.  The dyno run got 148.6 torque.  Great running engine, and the guy who bought it (ran it hard) sheared the teeth off of third gear of a Baker Grudge Box.

[WhipLash96]

After talking to Terry (T-Man), he agreed with my plan to use his 660 PS cams.  This was on a 2011 Road King.  The compression was 10.8 static.  Terry said it would be a torque monster.  The dyno run got 148.6 torque.  Great running engine, and the guy who bought it (ran it hard) sheared the teeth off of third gear of a Baker Grudge Box.

What was the head set up? I'm making 140 ft lbs with a way smaller cam than the 660.. I like the cam that I have if I'm living on the Interstate.

[les]

After talking to Terry (T-Man), he agreed with my plan to use his 660 PS cams.  This was on a 2011 Road King.  The compression was 10.8 static.  Terry said it would be a torque monster.  The dyno run got 148.6 torque.  Great running engine, and the guy who bought it (ran it hard) sheared the teeth off of third gear of a Baker Grudge Box.

What was the head set up? I'm making 140 ft lbs with a way smaller cam than the 660.. I like the cam that I have if I'm living on the Interstate.

T-Man did the heads.

2.000" intake valves
1.610" exhaust valves
Twin Cam Pro-Touring Elite head porting

I also got T-Man's external breathers option in the heads and the .090" lightened steel piston wrist pins.

The flywheels were S&S 6SF3 4-5/8" stroke 3-piece (7.659" rods).

HPI 62mm throttle body, 6.2 grams/sec injectors, and their V2 air cleaner.

[WhipLash96]

I'm running SE 110 heads with stock valve sizes but nicely ported. 4.125 bore with 4.625 stroke pistons are .001 and .003 proud. Using a .040 head gasket and S&S 5mm TB

[WhipLash96]

After talking to Terry (T-Man), he agreed with my plan to use his 660 PS cams.  This was on a 2011 Road King.  The compression was 10.8 static.  Terry said it would be a torque monster.  The dyno run got 148.6 torque.  Great running engine, and the guy who bought it (ran it hard) sheared the teeth off of third gear of a Baker Grudge Box.

The 660 is my original choice but others are trying to talk me out of it. Sent a PM, would love to talk to you more about the 660.

[60Gunner]

Ok, I will say it...
What are you thinking whip?   In a 124 yet besides? 590s with your heads. 662-2 with Tman heads.
As for the 660, this is what happens with too much exhaust duration and the wrong pipe as I alluded to in another thread.
Now this is a 107 with the 660 but set up right as a stage 5 by Randy at Hyperformance. The Rush Wrath is the pipe.

[kd]

60Gunner, You said it but how is it relevant.  Comparing a 660 lift cam in a 107 to a 124?  The OP's choice of a 660PS (or SM) in a big block is a proven all around killer cam set with excellent street manners in that size engine.  Tom Reiser has discussed it with him and confirmed it's attributes.  How about pulling up a dyno sheet with a big block instead?  I don't mean one of 10 with mismatched components like exhaust or throttle body etc..     

[60Gunner]

60Gunner, You said it but how is it relevant.  Comparing a 660 lift cam in a 107 to a 124?  The OP's choice of a 660PS (or SM) in a big block is a proven all around killer cam set with excellent street manners in that size engine.  Tom Reiser has discussed it with him and confirmed it's attributes.  How about pulling up a dyno sheet with a big block instead?  I don't mean one of 10 with mismatched components like exhaust or throttle body etc..     

That's what I mean. Mismatched exhaust. Whip knows what I mean. The 660 will work great with the right throttle body and exhaust and heads/valve sizes.
I'm just concerned with him over exhausting with it with the perforated baffle in his D&D for one.
10° isn't a huge amount of added exhaust duration, but a little more than the 4 to 6 of most Tman cams. and he does have a smaller exhaust valve,1.610,in relation to his 2.08 intake so it will probably be fine. He can always change to a louvered baffle easy enough if need be.
Being a 124 does help I agree.
I know he's got it narrowed down to 2 cams, but probably going with Tman setting up his virgin heads.
He'll be fine either way, tho I know Terry is pushing the 662-2 as well.
My comparison was more to show what overexhausting can do.

[m1marty]

60Gunner, You said it but how is it relevant.  Comparing a 660 lift cam in a 107 to a 124?  The OP's choice of a 660PS (or SM) in a big block is a proven all around killer cam set with excellent street manners in that size engine.  Tom Reiser has discussed it with him and confirmed it's attributes.  How about pulling up a dyno sheet with a big block instead?  I don't mean one of 10 with mismatched components like exhaust or throttle body etc..     

That's what I mean. Mismatched exhaust. Whip knows what I mean. The 660 will work great with the right throttle body and exhaust and heads/valve sizes.
I'm just concerned with him over exhausting with it with the perforated baffle in his D&D for one.
10° isn't a huge amount of added exhaust duration, but a little more than the 4 to 6 of most Tman cams. and he does have a smaller exhaust valve,1.610,in relation to his 2.08 intake so it will probably be fine. He can always change to a louvered baffle easy enough if need be.
Being a 124 does help I agree.
I know he's got it narrowed down to 2 cams, but probably going with Tman setting up his virgin heads.
He'll be fine either way, tho I know Terry is pushing the 662-2 as well.
My comparison was more to show what overexhausting can do.

Have you found the 660 to be easy or difficult to tune? Tried it with different exhausts? Curious as to what exhaust you found to work well with a set up like that.

[60Gunner]

60Gunner, You said it but how is it relevant.  Comparing a 660 lift cam in a 107 to a 124?  The OP's choice of a 660PS (or SM) in a big block is a proven all around killer cam set with excellent street manners in that size engine.  Tom Reiser has discussed it with him and confirmed it's attributes.  How about pulling up a dyno sheet with a big block instead?  I don't mean one of 10 with mismatched components like exhaust or throttle body etc..     

That's what I mean. Mismatched exhaust. Whip knows what I mean. The 660 will work great with the right throttle body and exhaust and heads/valve sizes.
I'm just concerned with him over exhausting with it with the perforated baffle in his D&D for one.
10° isn't a huge amount of added exhaust duration, but a little more than the 4 to 6 of most Tman cams. and he does have a smaller exhaust valve,1.610,in relation to his 2.08 intake so it will probably be fine. He can always change to a louvered baffle easy enough if need be.
Being a 124 does help I agree.
I know he's got it narrowed down to 2 cams, but probably going with Tman setting up his virgin heads.
He'll be fine either way, tho I know Terry is pushing the 662-2 as well.
My comparison was more to show what overexhausting can do.

Have you found the 660 to be easy or difficult to tune? Tried it with different exhausts? Curious as to what exhaust you found to work well with a set up like that.

I haven't tuned any. I'm not a tuner. I just know what others have found with overexhausting and sluggish low end throttle response. I stay away from cams with too much exhaust duration or run them with 212 systems with smaller cans or louvered baffles.
Is that the case here with his setup? I don't know. It IS a concern worth considering tho.
I'm pretty sure my tuner here agrees about the exhaust duration but I'm not speaking for him. He already posted his thoughts.
Like I said, his relatively smaller exhaust valves  in his current heads will help tho. Be interesting to see how Tman sets up his virgin heads should he go that route. Maybe why Tman is pushing the 662-2?
Does he stay with the 58mm throttle body then? Or go 62? Or a 58/62?
I'm thinking the 58/62.
It's not a huge amount of added exhaust duration but enough to consider when choosing other components.
Remember, he doesn't want to lose hp but gain low end.

Add...the 625 is a stump puller. Especially in a 124. No way no how would I run that cam here. It has it's place but not in a 124.

After talking to Terry (T-Man), he agreed with my plan to use his 660 PS cams.  This was on a 2011 Road King.  The compression was 10.8 static.  Terry said it would be a torque monster.  The dyno run got 148.6 torque.  Great running engine, and the guy who bought it (ran it hard) sheared the teeth off of third gear of a Baker Grudge Box.

What was the head set up? I'm making 140 ft lbs with a way smaller cam than the 660.. I like the cam that I have if I'm living on the Interstate.

T-Man did the heads.

2.000" intake valves
1.610" exhaust valves
Twin Cam Pro-Touring Elite head porting

I also got T-Man's external breathers option in the heads and the .090" lightened steel piston wrist pins.

The flywheels were S&S 6SF3 4-5/8" stroke 3-piece (7.659" rods).

HPI 62mm throttle body, 6.2 grams/sec injectors, and their V2 air cleaner.

Well this sort of answers how Tman would set up the heads.
So maybe his current heads would be just fine too. Maybe better with his 2.08 intake? Normally by the time you hit 2.0 intake you're thinking 1.630 exhaust.
Just a matter of the right pipe or baffles in his D&D? 

[WhipLash96]

60Gunner, You said it but how is it relevant.  Comparing a 660 lift cam in a 107 to a 124?  The OP's choice of a 660PS (or SM) in a big block is a proven all around killer cam set with excellent street manners in that size engine.  Tom Reiser has discussed it with him and confirmed it's attributes.  How about pulling up a dyno sheet with a big block instead?  I don't mean one of 10 with mismatched components like exhaust or throttle body etc..     

That's what I mean. Mismatched exhaust. Whip knows what I mean. The 660 will work great with the right throttle body and exhaust and heads/valve sizes.
I'm just concerned with him over exhausting with it with the perforated baffle in his D&D for one.
10° isn't a huge amount of added exhaust duration, but a little more than the 4 to 6 of most Tman cams. and he does have a smaller exhaust valve,1.610,in relation to his 2.08 intake so it will probably be fine. He can always change to a louvered baffle easy enough if need be.
Being a 124 does help I agree.
I know he's got it narrowed down to 2 cams, but probably going with Tman setting up his virgin heads.
He'll be fine either way, tho I know Terry is pushing the 662-2 as well.
My comparison was more to show what overexhausting can do.

Have you found the 660 to be easy or difficult to tune? Tried it with different exhausts? Curious as to what exhaust you found to work well with a set up like that.

I haven't tuned any. I'm not a tuner. I just know what others have found with overexhausting and sluggish low end throttle response. I stay away from cams with too much exhaust duration or run them with 212 systems with smaller cans or louvered baffles.
Is that the case here with his setup? I don't know. It IS a concern worth considering tho.
I'm pretty sure my tuner here agrees about the exhaust duration but I'm not speaking for him. He already posted his thoughts.
Like I said, his relatively smaller exhaust valves  in his current heads will help tho. Be interesting to see how Tman sets up his virgin heads should he go that route. Maybe why Tman is pushing the 662-2?
Does he stay with the 58mm throttle body then? Or go 62? Or a 58/62?
I'm thinking the 58/62.
It's not a huge amount of added exhaust duration but enough to consider when choosing other components.
Remember, he doesn't want to lose hp but gain low end.

Add...the 625 is a stump puller. Especially in a 124. No way no how would I run that cam here. It has it's place but not in a 124.

After talking to Terry (T-Man), he agreed with my plan to use his 660 PS cams.  This was on a 2011 Road King.  The compression was 10.8 static.  Terry said it would be a torque monster.  The dyno run got 148.6 torque.  Great running engine, and the guy who bought it (ran it hard) sheared the teeth off of third gear of a Baker Grudge Box.

What was the head set up? I'm making 140 ft lbs with a way smaller cam than the 660.. I like the cam that I have if I'm living on the Interstate.

T-Man did the heads.

2.000" intake valves
1.610" exhaust valves
Twin Cam Pro-Touring Elite head porting

I also got T-Man's external breathers option in the heads and the .090" lightened steel piston wrist pins.

The flywheels were S&S 6SF3 4-5/8" stroke 3-piece (7.659" rods).

HPI 62mm throttle body, 6.2 grams/sec injectors, and their V2 air cleaner.

Well this sort of answers how Tman would set up the heads.
So maybe his current heads would be just fine too. Maybe better with his 2.08 intake? Normally by the time you hit 2.0 intake you're thinking 1.630 exhaust.
Just a matter of the right pipe or baffles in his D&D? 

Gunner, remember I said that my OL was pretty long along with the LSA (Current Cam)? That 660 would be a lot of fun.   I think I'm going to look further into that 58/62 Tb too.

[m1marty]

60Gunner, You said it but how is it relevant.  Comparing a 660 lift cam in a 107 to a 124?  The OP's choice of a 660PS (or SM) in a big block is a proven all around killer cam set with excellent street manners in that size engine.  Tom Reiser has discussed it with him and confirmed it's attributes.  How about pulling up a dyno sheet with a big block instead?  I don't mean one of 10 with mismatched components like exhaust or throttle body etc..     

That's what I mean. Mismatched exhaust. Whip knows what I mean. The 660 will work great with the right throttle body and exhaust and heads/valve sizes.
I'm just concerned with him over exhausting with it with the perforated baffle in his D&D for one.
10° isn't a huge amount of added exhaust duration, but a little more than the 4 to 6 of most Tman cams. and he does have a smaller exhaust valve,1.610,in relation to his 2.08 intake so it will probably be fine. He can always change to a louvered baffle easy enough if need be.
Being a 124 does help I agree.
I know he's got it narrowed down to 2 cams, but probably going with Tman setting up his virgin heads.
He'll be fine either way, tho I know Terry is pushing the 662-2 as well.
My comparison was more to show what overexhausting can do.

Have you found the 660 to be easy or difficult to tune? Tried it with different exhausts? Curious as to what exhaust you found to work well with a set up like that.

I haven't tuned any. I'm not a tuner. I just know what others have found with overexhausting and sluggish low end throttle response. I stay away from cams with too much exhaust duration or run them with 212 systems with smaller cans or louvered baffles.
Is that the case here with his setup? I don't know. It IS a concern worth considering tho.
I'm pretty sure my tuner here agrees about the exhaust duration but I'm not speaking for him. He already posted his thoughts.
Like I said, his relatively smaller exhaust valves  in his current heads will help tho. Be interesting to see how Tman sets up his virgin heads should he go that route. Maybe why Tman is pushing the 662-2?
Does he stay with the 58mm throttle body then? Or go 62? Or a 58/62?
I'm thinking the 58/62.
It's not a huge amount of added exhaust duration but enough to consider when choosing other components.
Remember, he doesn't want to lose hp but gain low end.

Add...the 625 is a stump puller. Especially in a 124. No way no how would I run that cam here. It has it's place but not in a 124.

After talking to Terry (T-Man), he agreed with my plan to use his 660 PS cams.  This was on a 2011 Road King.  The compression was 10.8 static.  Terry said it would be a torque monster.  The dyno run got 148.6 torque.  Great running engine, and the guy who bought it (ran it hard) sheared the teeth off of third gear of a Baker Grudge Box.

What was the head set up? I'm making 140 ft lbs with a way smaller cam than the 660.. I like the cam that I have if I'm living on the Interstate.

T-Man did the heads.

2.000" intake valves
1.610" exhaust valves
Twin Cam Pro-Touring Elite head porting

I also got T-Man's external breathers option in the heads and the .090" lightened steel piston wrist pins.

The flywheels were S&S 6SF3 4-5/8" stroke 3-piece (7.659" rods).

HPI 62mm throttle body, 6.2 grams/sec injectors, and their V2 air cleaner.

Well this sort of answers how Tman would set up the heads.
So maybe his current heads would be just fine too. Maybe better with his 2.08 intake? Normally by the time you hit 2.0 intake you're thinking 1.630 exhaust.
Just a matter of the right pipe or baffles in his D&D? 

Ahh, I thought you did the tuning. If not tuning, do you build stuff and then have a shop tune it for you?

[60Gunner]

60Gunner, You said it but how is it relevant.  Comparing a 660 lift cam in a 107 to a 124?  The OP's choice of a 660PS (or SM) in a big block is a proven all around killer cam set with excellent street manners in that size engine.  Tom Reiser has discussed it with him and confirmed it's attributes.  How about pulling up a dyno sheet with a big block instead?  I don't mean one of 10 with mismatched components like exhaust or throttle body etc..     

That's what I mean. Mismatched exhaust. Whip knows what I mean. The 660 will work great with the right throttle body and exhaust and heads/valve sizes.
I'm just concerned with him over exhausting with it with the perforated baffle in his D&D for one.
10° isn't a huge amount of added exhaust duration, but a little more than the 4 to 6 of most Tman cams. and he does have a smaller exhaust valve,1.610,in relation to his 2.08 intake so it will probably be fine. He can always change to a louvered baffle easy enough if need be.
Being a 124 does help I agree.
I know he's got it narrowed down to 2 cams, but probably going with Tman setting up his virgin heads.
He'll be fine either way, tho I know Terry is pushing the 662-2 as well.
My comparison was more to show what overexhausting can do.

Have you found the 660 to be easy or difficult to tune? Tried it with different exhausts? Curious as to what exhaust you found to work well with a set up like that.

I haven't tuned any. I'm not a tuner. I just know what others have found with overexhausting and sluggish low end throttle response. I stay away from cams with too much exhaust duration or run them with 212 systems with smaller cans or louvered baffles.
Is that the case here with his setup? I don't know. It IS a concern worth considering tho.
I'm pretty sure my tuner here agrees about the exhaust duration but I'm not speaking for him. He already posted his thoughts.
Like I said, his relatively smaller exhaust valves  in his current heads will help tho. Be interesting to see how Tman sets up his virgin heads should he go that route. Maybe why Tman is pushing the 662-2?
Does he stay with the 58mm throttle body then? Or go 62? Or a 58/62?
I'm thinking the 58/62.
It's not a huge amount of added exhaust duration but enough to consider when choosing other components.
Remember, he doesn't want to lose hp but gain low end.

Add...the 625 is a stump puller. Especially in a 124. No way no how would I run that cam here. It has it's place but not in a 124.

After talking to Terry (T-Man), he agreed with my plan to use his 660 PS cams.  This was on a 2011 Road King.  The compression was 10.8 static.  Terry said it would be a torque monster.  The dyno run got 148.6 torque.  Great running engine, and the guy who bought it (ran it hard) sheared the teeth off of third gear of a Baker Grudge Box.

What was the head set up? I'm making 140 ft lbs with a way smaller cam than the 660.. I like the cam that I have if I'm living on the Interstate.

T-Man did the heads.

2.000" intake valves
1.610" exhaust valves
Twin Cam Pro-Touring Elite head porting

I also got T-Man's external breathers option in the heads and the .090" lightened steel piston wrist pins.

The flywheels were S&S 6SF3 4-5/8" stroke 3-piece (7.659" rods).

HPI 62mm throttle body, 6.2 grams/sec injectors, and their V2 air cleaner.

Well this sort of answers how Tman would set up the heads.
So maybe his current heads would be just fine too. Maybe better with his 2.08 intake? Normally by the time you hit 2.0 intake you're thinking 1.630 exhaust.
Just a matter of the right pipe or baffles in his D&D? 

Ahh, I thought you did the tuning. If not tuning, do you build stuff and then have a shop tune it for you?

Yes. Or the owner has it tuned and let's me know how it did. If doing that I will generally break it in on the street with a good base map tho to be sure it gets "broke in right". 
I'll have it broke in in 30 miles on the street.

I've tuned them the hard way with a number of different tuners. I've got the software for the good SEPST, TTS, and PV.  And the Race Ignition tuner for carbed bikes as well as DTTs.  But I always recommend they put it on a dyno.

[838]

I'm running SE 110 heads with stock valve sizes but nicely ported. 4.125 bore with 4.625 stroke pistons are .001 and .003 proud. Using a .040 head gasket and S&S 5mm TB

What did your head porter recommended based on where you want your power delivered with their heads? I've had this conundrum before, re-used ported heads on a new setup. Called the head porter, told them my supporting parts and where I wanted the power... took the guessing out!

[WhipLash96]

I'm running SE 110 heads with stock valve sizes but nicely ported. 4.125 bore with 4.625 stroke pistons are .001 and .003 proud. Using a .040 head gasket and S&S 5mm TB

What did your head porter recommended based on where you want your power delivered with their heads? I've had this conundrum before, re-used ported heads on a new setup. Called the head porter, told them my supporting parts and where I wanted the power... took the guessing out!

My heads were ported by a very good friend of mine for free. There was (is) no need to do anything else to the heads as they have big a$$ intake valves and way more than enough spring in stock configuration to handle that cam that I am currently using.  Different story for when that changes.

[60Gunner]

 

Gunner, remember I said that my OL was pretty long along with the LSA (Current Cam)? That 660 would be a lot of fun.   I think I'm going to look further into that 58/62 Tb too.

Yeah, I think you'll be good. Maybe a baffle change in your pipe. Might be fine as is.

I think the 590 would be higher torque than hp. 140/150. They're 130/130 all day long in a 110. You're 14 cu.in. bigger. And a stroker at that.
The 660 a little closer to square. The 662-2 more square or a little more hp than torque.
Tbh, with the right supporting hardware, I don't think you'd be disappointed with any of them.
Even a crap cam set up right in a 124 will have plenty of grunt.

I'm a believer in the Max Flows. I think the 58/62 with any of them.  Match the runners with your ports.

[838]

Based on this post and your other post about a New setup it looks like you're looking to be in the power around 2750rpm so that your feeling loaded and ready for roll on passing when cruising at 70-75mph on the interstate and you want that roll on to pick up real fast like... your not bangin' the limiter only but once in a while on a back road...

Go with the 590!!! Torque for days, easy on the rest of the components and will still carry out far enough to pucker your keister when you need the rush!

I know where you're at with getting back on the bike too... I ride this same way now as well. It took time brother!!!

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

Getting your 2-1 dialed in would probably flatten that curve out where this one's still doing a little climbing between 2700-3k... that fullsac pipe was a big x-pipe... I don't even think he makes it anymore... great mufflers helped give it what it has!

[838]

Gunner, remember I said that my OL was pretty long along with the LSA (Current Cam)? That 660 would be a lot of fun.   I think I'm going to look further into that 58/62 Tb too.

Yeah, I think you'll be good. Maybe a baffle change in your pipe. Might be fine as is.

I think the 590 would be higher torque than hp. 140/150. They're 130/130 all day long in a 110. You're 14 cu.in. bigger. And a stroker at that.
The 660 a little closer to square. The 662-2 more square or a little more hp than torque.
Tbh, with the right supporting hardware, I don't think you'd be disappointed with any of them.
Even a crap cam set up right in a 124 will have plenty of grunt.

I'm a believer in the Max Flows. I think the 58/62 with any of them.

FYI I believe Jamie Long still makes a supertrapp style muffler, that fits the zilla, with a tunable disc setup...

[60Gunner]

After talking to Terry (T-Man), he agreed with my plan to use his 660 PS cams.  This was on a 2011 Road King.  The compression was 10.8 static.  Terry said it would be a torque monster.  The dyno run got 148.6 torque.  Great running engine, and the guy who bought it (ran it hard) sheared the teeth off of third gear of a Baker Grudge Box.

Would you mind sharing the paper? I'd Like to see the curve. What exhaust?

[kd]

After talking to Terry (T-Man), he agreed with my plan to use his 660 PS cams.  This was on a 2011 Road King.  The compression was 10.8 static.  Terry said it would be a torque monster.  The dyno run got 148.6 torque.  Great running engine, and the guy who bought it (ran it hard) sheared the teeth off of third gear of a Baker Grudge Box.

Would you mind sharing the paper? I'd Like to see the curve. What exhaust?

Following along here I am seeing what I believe is some confusion about the TMan 660 cams.  I didn't see where Tom Reiser (TMan) was pushing the OP to go 662-2 over the 660.  (who is Terry?) In fact it appears he suggested the opposite to the OP.  BTW, Tom Reiser has stated openly that he designed the 660 to be the 590's big brother.

I am using a 660SM in my 120.  I didn't tune it but I was in the booth every second it was on the drum.  The tuner, a highly capable individual, has tuned many similar combinations with this cam and said it was not a complicated tuning job (at least for him). To be clear, my MVA heads were dialed in specifically for the 660 from a recipe he developed with the tuner I was with.  The exhaust valves are larger  and the exhaust ports were reworked.  The 2 pipes it was tuned with over the same session were 2.55" and 3.0" baffles. (so much for over exhausting)  The HPI 62/64 TB w/ 6.2 injectors increased the 1.8 runner volume enough to smooth out the intake pulse.  It produces street and parking lot manners like (or better) than the 103 I replaced and is a quiet engine.  This engine has destroyed / stripped 3rd gear out of 2 OEM transmissions and the GrudgeBox is now coming out to go in on a warranty repair.  No shortage of power anywhere.

https://harleytechtalk.com/htt/index.php?action=dlattach;ts=1542728950;topic=99409.0;attach=81713

[60Gunner]

After talking to Terry (T-Man), he agreed with my plan to use his 660 PS cams.  This was on a 2011 Road King.  The compression was 10.8 static.  Terry said it would be a torque monster.  The dyno run got 148.6 torque.  Great running engine, and the guy who bought it (ran it hard) sheared the teeth off of third gear of a Baker Grudge Box.

Would you mind sharing the paper? I'd Like to see the curve. What exhaust?

Following along here I am seeing what I believe is some confusion about the TMan 660 cams.  I didn't see where Tom Reiser (TMan) was pushing the OP to go 662-2 over the 660.  (who is Terry?) In fact it appears he suggested the opposite to the OP.  BTW, Tom Reiser has stated openly that he designed the 660 to be the 590's big brother.

I am using a 660SM in my 120.  I didn't tune it but I was in the booth every second it was on the drum.  The tuner, a highly capable individual, has tuned many similar combinations with this cam and said it was not a complicated tuning job (at least for him). To be clear, my MVA heads were dialed in specifically for the 660 from a recipe he developed with the tuner I was with.  The exhaust valves are larger  and the exhaust ports were reworked.  The 2 pipes it was tuned with over the same session were 2.55" and 3.0" baffles. (so much for over exhausting)  The HPI 62/64 TB w/ 6.2 injectors increased the 1.8 runner volume enough to smooth out the intake pulse.  It produces street and parking lot manners like (or better) than the 103 I replaced and is a quiet engine.  This engine has destroyed / stripped 3rd gear out of 2 OEM transmissions and the GrudgeBox is now coming out to go in on a warranty repair.  No shortage of power anywhere.

https://harleytechtalk.com/htt/index.php?action=dlattach;ts=1542728950;topic=99409.0;attach=81713

So what size are the valves in these heads, intake and exhaust, and why the added 6° exhaust than the 590s? What's done on the intake side makes a difference and what's done on the exhaust side makes a difference and I get why dual pattern cams exist. The 62/64 TB  makes a difference too.
I'd still like to see the torque curve.

[Hilly13]

I bet you can hear that coming down the road KD 😁

[98fxstc]

I bet you can hear that coming down the road KD 😁

I think he posted a short video clip on here just after he got it back on the road.
Don't think it would be hijacking the thread if he put it up again   

[Hilly13]

I bet you can hear that coming down the road KD 😁

I think he posted a short video clip on here just after he got it back on the road.
Don't think it would be hijacking the thread if he put it up again   

Hell yes, I'd love see/ hear that 😁

[WhipLash96]

After talking to Terry (T-Man), he agreed with my plan to use his 660 PS cams.  This was on a 2011 Road King.  The compression was 10.8 static.  Terry said it would be a torque monster.  The dyno run got 148.6 torque.  Great running engine, and the guy who bought it (ran it hard) sheared the teeth off of third gear of a Baker Grudge Box.

Would you mind sharing the paper? I'd Like to see the curve. What exhaust?

Following along here I am seeing what I believe is some confusion about the TMan 660 cams.  I didn't see where Tom Reiser (TMan) was pushing the OP to go 662-2 over the 660.  (who is Terry?) In fact it appears he suggested the opposite to the OP.  BTW, Tom Reiser has stated openly that he designed the 660 to be the 590's big brother.

I am using a 660SM in my 120.  I didn't tune it but I was in the booth every second it was on the drum.  The tuner, a highly capable individual, has tuned many similar combinations with this cam and said it was not a complicated tuning job (at least for him). To be clear, my MVA heads were dialed in specifically for the 660 from a recipe he developed with the tuner I was with.  The exhaust valves are larger  and the exhaust ports were reworked.  The 2 pipes it was tuned with over the same session were 2.55" and 3.0" baffles. (so much for over exhausting)  The HPI 62/64 TB w/ 6.2 injectors increased the 1.8 runner volume enough to smooth out the intake pulse.  It produces street and parking lot manners like (or better) than the 103 I replaced and is a quiet engine.  This engine has destroyed / stripped 3rd gear out of 2 OEM transmissions and the GrudgeBox is now coming out to go in on a warranty repair.  No shortage of power anywhere.

https://harleytechtalk.com/htt/index.php?action=dlattach;ts=1542728950;topic=99409.0;attach=81713

I have been emailing back and forth with Brandon occasionally for over a year and he consistently brings up the 662. That's just not a cam that I'm interested in. The 662 just doesn't fit me fo4 the type of riding I do.

[WhipLash96]

Based on this post and your other post about a New setup it looks like you're looking to be in the power around 2750rpm so that your feeling loaded and ready for roll on passing when cruising at 70-75mph on the interstate and you want that roll on to pick up real fast like... your not bangin' the limiter only but once in a while on a back road...

Go with the 590!!! Torque for days, easy on the rest of the components and will still carry out far enough to pucker your keister when you need the rush!

I know where you're at with getting back on the bike too... I ride this same way now as well. It took time brother!!!

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

Getting your 2-1 dialed in would probably flatten that curve out where this one's still doing a little climbing between 2700-3k... that fullsac pipe was a big x-pipe... I don't even think he makes it anymore... great mufflers helped give it what it has!

You are right on about what it is that I am looking for. 😎

[60Gunner]

Whip knows the 590s will get it done. Sounds like the 660s will too with the right head work and throttle body to justify and make the added exhaust duration work. It would seem his existing heads and valve sizes would work well too but a change to the 62/64 Max flow TB. Or would the 58/62 work better with his pipe?
I'm not so sure about a 3" baffle being best. It might work but is it best?

Here's why I wonder and want to know what works best. Not just what works.

I talked to someone at Tman, don't remember his name, several times about my build and what heads they would use and what I could expect on the dyno.
All I'm saying is I'm doing 7-8hp and slughly more peak torque than they saw with the 590s in a 107 and what I was told I could expect with their Elite pro touring heads, 58mm TB, and 2in1 exhaust. Their recommendations.
I'm just tying to figure out why. What part of my build is different that made the difference?
I suspect, and at the time even talked about the 55/58 max f!ow with this person from Tman, and he seemed to agree. I see a max flow being used  here now.
What about my heads is different as far as intake to exhaust flow?
I was told their Thumper heads were a little overkill on the intake valve but I don't recall the sizes of their two different heads now.
Don't take this the wrong way. Everyone that knows me knows I believe in Tman cams and what they do.
I'm just trying to see what's different here and what makes the 660s and their 10° added exhaust duration work best like I did with the 590s and their 4° exhaust duration.
I think the TB is part of it. Intake to exhaust valve ratio? Ports? Pipes?
I want to know the difference between les's build and kd's and see both torque curves to see what makes the 660s work better with their exhaust duration. Not why they don't. Follow me? :wink

I've got my flow sheet showing intake AND exhaust every step of the way. Not just max at .600 or .700 lift. It shows average of the two overall  too.
Maybe we all can learn something here.
Obviously I did something right with the 590s in a 107.  I want to know what made the difference.
I like to know why something works not just that it does.
:

[kd]

Whip knows the 590s will get it done. Sounds like the 660s will too with the right head work and throttle body to justify and make the added exhaust duration work. It would seem his existing heads and valve sizes would work well too but a change to the 62/64 Max flow TB.
I'm not so sure about a 3" baffle being best. It might work but is it best?

I talked to someone at Tman, don't remember his name, several times about my build and what heads they would use and what I could expect on the dyno.
All I'm saying is I'm doing 7-8hp and a little more peak torque than they saw with the 590s and what I was told I could expect with their Elite pro touring heads, 58mm TB, and 2in1 exhaust.
I'm just tying to figure out why. What part of my build is different?
I suspect, and at the time even talked about the 55/58 max f!ow with this person from Tman, and he seemed to agree. I see a max flow being used  here now.
What about my heads is different as far as intake to exhaust flow?
I was told their Thumper heads were a little overkill on the intake valve but I don't recall the sizes of their two different heads now.
Don't take this the wrong way. Everyone that knows me knows I believe in Tman cams and what they do.
I'm just trying to see what's different here and what makes the 660s and their 10° added exhaust duration work best like I did with the 590s and their 4° exhaust duration.
I think the TB is part of it. Intake to exhaust valve ratio? Ports? Pipes?
I want to know the difference between les's build and kd's and see both torque curves to see what makes the 660s work better with their exhaust duration. Not why they don't. Follow me? :wink

I've got my flow sheet showing intake AND exhaust every step of the way. Not just max at .600 or .700 lift. It shows average of the two overall  too.
Maybe we all can learn something here.
Obviously I did something right with the 590s in a 107.  I want to know what made the difference.
I like to know why something works not just that it does.
:

 

http://www.bigboyzheadporting.com/tccams.htm

[838]

Based on this post and your other post about a New setup it looks like you're looking to be in the power around 2750rpm so that your feeling loaded and ready for roll on passing when cruising at 70-75mph on the interstate and you want that roll on to pick up real fast like... your not bangin' the limiter only but once in a while on a back road...

Go with the 590!!! Torque for days, easy on the rest of the components and will still carry out far enough to pucker your keister when you need the rush!

I know where you're at with getting back on the bike too... I ride this same way now as well. It took time brother!!!

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

Getting your 2-1 dialed in would probably flatten that curve out where this one's still doing a little climbing between 2700-3k... that fullsac pipe was a big x-pipe... I don't even think he makes it anymore... great mufflers helped give it what it has!

You are right on about what it is that I am looking for. 😎

https://harleytechtalk.com/htt/index.php/topic,114701.0.html

This is my "sport touring" ride... it's a decent dyno (it was sumping ) but this one flat rips in the partial throttle areas you're looking for.

I figured I'd rack gunners brain a little more cause that 570 has a ton of exhaust duration as well 😂!!!

[60Gunner]

Whip knows the 590s will get it done. Sounds like the 660s will too with the right head work and throttle body to justify and make the added exhaust duration work. It would seem his existing heads and valve sizes would work well too but a change to the 62/64 Max flow TB.
I'm not so sure about a 3" baffle being best. It might work but is it best?

I talked to someone at Tman, don't remember his name, several times about my build and what heads they would use and what I could expect on the dyno.
All I'm saying is I'm doing 7-8hp and a little more peak torque than they saw with the 590s and what I was told I could expect with their Elite pro touring heads, 58mm TB, and 2in1 exhaust.
I'm just tying to figure out why. What part of my build is different?
I suspect, and at the time even talked about the 55/58 max f!ow with this person from Tman, and he seemed to agree. I see a max flow being used  here now.
What about my heads is different as far as intake to exhaust flow?
I was told their Thumper heads were a little overkill on the intake valve but I don't recall the sizes of their two different heads now.
Don't take this the wrong way. Everyone that knows me knows I believe in Tman cams and what they do.
I'm just trying to see what's different here and what makes the 660s and their 10° added exhaust duration work best like I did with the 590s and their 4° exhaust duration.
I think the TB is part of it. Intake to exhaust valve ratio? Ports? Pipes?
I want to know the difference between les's build and kd's and see both torque curves to see what makes the 660s work better with their exhaust duration. Not why they don't. Follow me? :wink

I've got my flow sheet showing intake AND exhaust every step of the way. Not just max at .600 or .700 lift. It shows average of the two overall  too.
Maybe we all can learn something here.
Obviously I did something right with the 590s in a 107.  I want to know what made the difference.
I like to know why something works not just that it does.
:

 

http://www.bigboyzheadporting.com/tccams.htm

No offense but this tells me nothing but projected compression based on the IVC of a cam. A nice tool for the beginning stage of looking for a cam.
But as you know, two cams with identical intake events can have totally different results. Likewise, two cams with significantly different intake events can have near identical results.
This was shown in that thread from 2014 with max effort builds and exhaust lobe shape and designs and the radical S&S 635HO.
Two cams with like 8° different intake valve events and different compression had nearly the exact same torque curve and numbers in the same bike/build. Why?

[kd]

Whip knows the 590s will get it done. Sounds like the 660s will too with the right head work and throttle body to justify and make the added exhaust duration work. It would seem his existing heads and valve sizes would work well too but a change to the 62/64 Max flow TB.
I'm not so sure about a 3" baffle being best. It might work but is it best?

I talked to someone at Tman, don't remember his name, several times about my build and what heads they would use and what I could expect on the dyno.
All I'm saying is I'm doing 7-8hp and a little more peak torque than they saw with the 590s and what I was told I could expect with their Elite pro touring heads, 58mm TB, and 2in1 exhaust.
I'm just tying to figure out why. What part of my build is different?
I suspect, and at the time even talked about the 55/58 max f!ow with this person from Tman, and he seemed to agree. I see a max flow being used  here now.
What about my heads is different as far as intake to exhaust flow?
I was told their Thumper heads were a little overkill on the intake valve but I don't recall the sizes of their two different heads now.
Don't take this the wrong way. Everyone that knows me knows I believe in Tman cams and what they do.
I'm just trying to see what's different here and what makes the 660s and their 10° added exhaust duration work best like I did with the 590s and their 4° exhaust duration.
I think the TB is part of it. Intake to exhaust valve ratio? Ports? Pipes?
I want to know the difference between les's build and kd's and see both torque curves to see what makes the 660s work better with their exhaust duration. Not why they don't. Follow me? :wink

I've got my flow sheet showing intake AND exhaust every step of the way. Not just max at .600 or .700 lift. It shows average of the two overall  too.
Maybe we all can learn something here.
Obviously I did something right with the 590s in a 107.  I want to know what made the difference.
I like to know why something works not just that it does.
:

 

http://www.bigboyzheadporting.com/tccams.htm

No offense but this tells me nothing but projected compression based on the IVC of a cam. A nice tool for the beginning stage of looking for a cam.
But as you know, two cams with identical intake events can have totally different results. Likewise, two cams with significantly different intake events can have near identical results.
This was shown in that thread from 2014 with max effort builds and exhaust lobe shape and designs and the radical S&S 635HO.
Two cams with like 8° different intake valve events and different compression had nearly the exact same torque curve and numbers in the same bike/build. Why?

IMO Your response contradicts your previous (cam spec) exhaust duration comments and throws them into the dumper.  You have to go one way or the other.  It is as you know dependent on included components so quite irrelevant. 

I don't know if you realize this or not but the OP had a specific question about usability of a certain cam in a 124. The conversation has veered way off course and is probably best and have more utility in it's own thread discussing cam spec aspects with that subject heading.  I probably wouldn't have entered the conversation if I hadn't noticed the muddy water.  Posters need to feel their contributions won't be spirited away from the intended subject matter or they won't bother posting.  Something to consider.

[60Gunner]

Based on this post and your other post about a New setup it looks like you're looking to be in the power around 2750rpm so that your feeling loaded and ready for roll on passing when cruising at 70-75mph on the interstate and you want that roll on to pick up real fast like... your not bangin' the limiter only but once in a while on a back road...

Go with the 590!!! Torque for days, easy on the rest of the components and will still carry out far enough to pucker your keister when you need the rush!

I know where you're at with getting back on the bike too... I ride this same way now as well. It took time brother!!!

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

Getting your 2-1 dialed in would probably flatten that curve out where this one's still doing a little climbing between 2700-3k... that fullsac pipe was a big x-pipe... I don't even think he makes it anymore... great mufflers helped give it what it has!

You are right on about what it is that I am looking for. 😎

https://harleytechtalk.com/htt/index.php/topic,114701.0.html

This is my "sport touring" ride... it's a decent dyno (it was sumping ) but this one flat rips in the partial throttle areas you're looking for.

I figured I'd rack gunners brain a little more cause that 570 has a ton of exhaust duration as well 😂!!!

The 570 with stock heads will NOT do so well with that pipe. Bumping compression AND increasing intake flow changes this. It's also why some change rocker ratio on the intake side only to increase lift. It works well with the 570s and that exhaust duration.

[60Gunner]

Whip knows the 590s will get it done. Sounds like the 660s will too with the right head work and throttle body to justify and make the added exhaust duration work. It would seem his existing heads and valve sizes would work well too but a change to the 62/64 Max flow TB.
I'm not so sure about a 3" baffle being best. It might work but is it best?

I talked to someone at Tman, don't remember his name, several times about my build and what heads they would use and what I could expect on the dyno.
All I'm saying is I'm doing 7-8hp and a little more peak torque than they saw with the 590s and what I was told I could expect with their Elite pro touring heads, 58mm TB, and 2in1 exhaust.
I'm just tying to figure out why. What part of my build is different?
I suspect, and at the time even talked about the 55/58 max f!ow with this person from Tman, and he seemed to agree. I see a max flow being used  here now.
What about my heads is different as far as intake to exhaust flow?
I was told their Thumper heads were a little overkill on the intake valve but I don't recall the sizes of their two different heads now.
Don't take this the wrong way. Everyone that knows me knows I believe in Tman cams and what they do.
I'm just trying to see what's different here and what makes the 660s and their 10° added exhaust duration work best like I did with the 590s and their 4° exhaust duration.
I think the TB is part of it. Intake to exhaust valve ratio? Ports? Pipes?
I want to know the difference between les's build and kd's and see both torque curves to see what makes the 660s work better with their exhaust duration. Not why they don't. Follow me? :wink

I've got my flow sheet showing intake AND exhaust every step of the way. Not just max at .600 or .700 lift. It shows average of the two overall  too.
Maybe we all can learn something here.
Obviously I did something right with the 590s in a 107.  I want to know what made the difference.
I like to know why something works not just that it does.
:

 

http://www.bigboyzheadporting.com/tccams.htm

No offense but this tells me nothing but projected compression based on the IVC of a cam. A nice tool for the beginning stage of looking for a cam.
But as you know, two cams with identical intake events can have totally different results. Likewise, two cams with significantly different intake events can have near identical results.
This was shown in that thread from 2014 with max effort builds and exhaust lobe shape and designs and the radical S&S 635HO.
Two cams with like 8° different intake valve events and different compression had nearly the exact same torque curve and numbers in the same bike/build. Why?

IMO Your response contradicts your previous (cam spec) exhaust duration comments and throws them into the dumper.  You have to go one way or the other.  It is as you know dependent on included components so quite irrelevant. 

I don't know if you realize this or not but the OP had a specific question about usability of a certain cam in a 124. The conversation has veered way off course and is probably best and have more utility in it's own thread discussing cam spec aspects with that subject heading.  I probably wouldn't have entered the conversation if I hadn't noticed the muddy water.  Posters need to feel their contributions won't be spirited away from the intended subject matter or they won't bother posting.  Something to consider.

Whip and I had this conversation in private. I know what he wants and we pretty much agree on most of this.
I'm not sure how my response changes my position on exhaust duration tho. It works great to balance intake and exhaust...to a point. Like anything else, too much isn't good tho. It helps evacuate exhaust from the combustion chamber and improve scavenging. Too much and you're sucking the incoming charge right out the exhaust valves and pipes.
I want to know what/where crosses that line and why the added 6° works here compared to most Tman cams. and with what valves/TB and pipe characteristics.
I'm pretty sure Whip does too.
It should move back to his other thread tho. The 625 isn't even on his radar really at this point and it's why I questioned what he was thinking here. That's when we took it private. Others have continued here by asking  questions related to the 660. Not 625. I responded.

We can take it back to a private conversation. I figured everyone would benefit and learn from it tho. Myself included.
My bad if it's not allowed here tho.

[838]

FYI. I was not recommending the 570 cam for the OP's application. Only showing a bike with a torque curve that represents the power location for his (and my) riding styles. If I did my 117 above as a 124" with all else being same... I'd use a TR590

This was also the conundrum I spoke of earlier in this thread. I called the head porter, told him what else I had and he told me to roll the 570 at 10.2-10.3:1 with his heads.

[WhipLash96]

FYI. I was not recommending the 570 cam for the OP's application. Only showing a bike with a torque curve that represents the power location for his (and my) riding styles. If I did my 117 above as a 124" with all else being same... I'd use a TR590

This was also the conundrum I spoke of earlier in this thread. I called the head porter, told him what else I had and he told me to roll the 570 at 10.2-10.3:1 with his heads.

FYI. I was not recommending the 570 cam for the OP's application. Only showing a bike with a torque curve that represents the power location for his (and my) riding styles. If I did my 117 above as a 124" with all else being same... I'd use a TR590

This was also the conundrum I spoke of earlier in this thread. I called the head porter, told him what else I had and he told me to roll the 570 at 10.2-10.3:1 with his heads.

I wonder what that 590 would do on stilts?

[838]

FYI. I was not recommending the 570 cam for the OP's application. Only showing a bike with a torque curve that represents the power location for his (and my) riding styles. If I did my 117 above as a 124" with all else being same... I'd use a TR590

This was also the conundrum I spoke of earlier in this thread. I called the head porter, told him what else I had and he told me to roll the 570 at 10.2-10.3:1 with his heads.

FYI. I was not recommending the 570 cam for the OP's application. Only showing a bike with a torque curve that represents the power location for his (and my) riding styles. If I did my 117 above as a 124" with all else being same... I'd use a TR590

This was also the conundrum I spoke of earlier in this thread. I called the head porter, told him what else I had and he told me to roll the 570 at 10.2-10.3:1 with his heads.

I wonder what that 590 would do on stilts?

I asked this question in the AFR/Tuning section a while back, to see if anyone had real world results with that (I didn't get any replies). I'm tearing down a 117 and the guy who ported the heads told me to run a 1.725" (intake side only) if I ran the 590 on his heads. Mine is an older 590ps not his newest version.

[Hilly13]

The old 590's have a TDC lift of .209" with stock rockers, what would it be with 1.725"?

[Ohio HD]

"Approximately" 0.222".

Measurements at the intake valve with the head on the motor will give the true value.
 

[Hilly13]

"Approximately" 0.222".

Measurements at the intake valve with the head on the motor will give the true value.
 

Thanks Ohio, so intake lift would be .603" then is that right?

[Ohio HD]

"Approximately" 0.222".

Measurements at the intake valve with the head on the motor will give the true value.
 

Thanks Ohio, so intake lift would be .603" then is that right?

About 0.626".

[Ohio HD]

Take either or both the TDC lift and total lift and divide them by 1.625. Then take the new value and multiply it by 1.725.

0.209 ÷ 1.625 = 0.129
0.129 x 1.725 = 0.222"

0.590 ÷ 1.625 = 0.363
0.363 x 1.725 = 0.626

[838]

It would also increase intake duration a bit.

[Hilly13]

Take either or both the TDC lift and total lift and divide them by 1.625. Then take the new value and multiply it by 1.725.

0.209 ÷ 1.625 = 0.129
0.129 x 1.725 = 0.222"

0.590 ÷ 1.625 = 0.363
0.363 x 1.725 = 0.626

Arr, copy that, i was looking at it all wrong 👍

[838]

https://harleytechtalk.com/htt/index.php/topic,83861.msg947632.html#msg947632

This is a tr625 in a 124" with a zilla 🤷‍♂️... looks alright!

[Ohio HD]

Another sheet that looks to give a decent torque curve, but also pulls the HP up higher uses the R&R 615.


https://harleytechtalk.com/htt/index.php/topic,96108.0.html


You cannot view this attachment.

[Hilly13]

That's an interesting torque curve!

[838]

That's an interesting torque curve!

I would like to see that r&r 615 one with a different pipe. From what I've seen Joe Lyons can pretty much make anything work though that pipe was trouble for most iirc!

[harpwrench]

https://harleytechtalk.com/htt/index.php/topic,102526.0.html

Same bike, r&r 615 with wrath, swapped to 630i. Note 2.25" baffle

[Hilly13]

That's an interesting torque curve!

I would like to see that r&r 615 one with a different pipe. From what I've seen Joe Lyons can pretty much make anything work though that pipe was trouble for most iirc!

Fair call on the pipe, the RH is not exactly a go to for most. But look at its second wind towards the end, it was on the way down then held and carried, i dunno enough to know how that comes about.

[Hilly13]

https://harleytechtalk.com/htt/index.php/topic,102526.0.html

Same bike, r&r 615 with wrath, swapped to 630i. Note 2.25" baffle

That's wicked 👍
I want one 😁

[speedzter]

Damn, getting me all itchy to change Cams .
I really need to bite the bullet and get me a set of 9B valve bashers .

[838]

https://harleytechtalk.com/htt/index.php/topic,102526.0.html

Same bike, r&r 615 with wrath, swapped to 630i. Note 2.25" baffle

I'd like to see this combo still with the 615, just for a comparison.

[harpwrench]

https://harleytechtalk.com/htt/index.php/topic,102526.0.html

Same bike, r&r 615 with wrath, swapped to 630i. Note 2.25" baffle

I'd like to see this combo still with the 615, just for a comparison.

The red line on the link I posted is the 615 with the wrath

[838]

I know there's no magic cam... buy that 630i is pretty magical. Low compression, high compression, multiple exhaust systems and head combos... near 150tq at under 200ccp on this one...

I really wanna ride one at 117"-124" to see how it feels when the rubber hits the road. But it appears to be the king of the ring for big block twin cams.