Cam suggestions for 95 " TC

[SwedishMeatball]

Greetings from Sweden,

I have a 2002 FXD, TC88 engine with the following modifications:

• 95" bore with Wiseco +4.6cc pistons
• S&S super stock heads with 1.94" intake and 1.575" exhaust valves, 79cc chambers
• HSR 42 carb
• S&S grand national 2-1-2 pipes
• Dynatek ignition module

Static compression is around 10.5:1 according to big boyz calculator. The heads have a big 1.78" intake port with a little shark fin vane in the bottom of the port. Valve springs support 0.650" lift.

I am currently running Andrews 55 gear drive cams, it runs fine but I have gotten the impression that the 55's is an "old" design, and that there might be better options out there.

So, here comes the question, are there cams that would provide a significant improvement over the Andrews 55's with my engine setup?

I would love to have a bit more torque at lower rpms, but mainly I'm looking for maximum mid range power, 3000-5000 rpms.

From my own Googling the Wood TW6H seems like a good candidate but I'm very open to other suggestions.You cannot see attachments on this board.

[RoadKingKohn]

Greetings from Sweden,

I have a 2002 FXD, TC88 engine with the following modifications:

• 95" bore with Wiseco +4.6cc pistons
• S&S super stock heads with 1.94" intake and 1.575" exhaust valves, 79cc chambers
• HSR 42 carb
• S&S grand national 2-1-2 pipes
• Dynatek ignition module

Static compression is around 10.5:1 according to big boyz calculator. The heads have a big 1.78" intake port with a little shark fin vane in the bottom of the port. Valve springs support 0.650" lift.

I am currently running Andrews 55 gear drive cams, it runs fine but I have gotten the impression that the 55's is an "old" design, and that there might be better options out there.

So, here comes the question, are there cams that would provide a significant improvement over the Andrews 55's with my engine setup?

I would love to have a bit more torque at lower rpms, but mainly I'm looking for maximum mid range power, 3000-5000 rpms.

From my own Googling the Wood TW6H seems like a good candidate but I'm very open to other suggestions.You cannot see attachments on this board.

They are going to want to know what type of riding you do most of the time.

[Hossamania]

I run almost the same setup as you on a RoadKing, I really like the 55 cams. I've thought about changing, but honestly have no idea which way to go. I too would like a little more low end, but I like the top end rush too much to give it up. I hit redline, 6100 rpm, often, that last 1000 rpm is a riot!
Nice hotrod you have there, I would think your low end loss is much less than mine due to less weight.

[SwedishMeatball]

I run almost the same setup as you on a RoadKing, I really like the 55 cams. I've thought about changing, but honestly have no idea which way to go. I too would like a little more low end, but I like the top end rush too much to give it up. I hit redline, 6100 rpm, often, that last 1000 rpm is a riot!
Nice hotrod you have there, I would think your low end loss is much less than mine due to less weight.

Yes the bike is not so heavy, and at only 95 cui I know I can never get tractor like low end torque

I think the engine runs the smoothest and with least vibrations from 3000 to 5000 rpm so I would like to maximize the power there.
Normally you would first choose a cam and then have the heads ported to suit it, but here its the other way around, I already have the heads and I want to find cams that are a good match.

The heads are a bit peculiar, with big 1.94" intake valve and a big intake port, but only 1.575" exhaust. According to S&S the heads flow 163 cfm on the intake and 112 on the exhaust @10, so there is a bit of uneven ratio going on.

They also have small combustion chambers with a slightly unusual shape, and as a result quite wide squish bands.


I have tried to get some more info from S&S but they are not very interested, I think their main focus is on the M8 engines these days. 

So if anyone have experience with these heads and know what cams work good I would be very thankful

[harpwrench]

I would ask t-man what he thinks his 625ps would do for it

[Ohio HD]

I doubt that you'll see a "significant" difference in power just by changing to another set of cams.

In my opinion to see a change you also need to increase the compression. The three cams below I think would give you a noticeable increase at say 11:1 compression.

Andrews 60

Feuling 594

S&S 625

Keep in mind, not all cams are available in early TC with gear drive. Also you may have to relieve the case for some higher lift cams. 

Also, all heads will flow much more through the intake than the exhaust.

[Ohio HD]

I would ask t-man what he thinks his 625ps would do for it

That may be a good route, the earlier intake closing would give more cylinder pressure.

[speedzter]

I've used Wood Tw8's in a very similar setup - 95"
~10.5:1 45mm Mik.
Worked extremely well.

[Hilly13]

That set up with the right cam could go 1.1+HP per cubic inch with the ducks lined up, torque peak around 3200-3600 HP@6200, later closing cam, not a popular approach around here.

[Mi Infidel]

Fueling 574. I run the 543 in my 95" @ 10.5:1 with stock 2006 heads and it does a great job too. Depends where you want your power. I dropped a 29 tooth front pulley in and that made a huge difference too.

[calgary56]

I ran both the SE203 and SE204 cams in my 95", I loved those SE203's, excellent idle sound, torque FOREVER, but she'd run out of legs about 180 kph (112 mph) I know I've hit 200 kph with them, but would take a bit. I've been told HD doesn't make the SE203's anymore, although I can find new ones on-line (Amazon etc.). The SE204's were pretty close, not as excellent an idle sound, but still pretty good, lots of TORQUE where you want it, down low, but the bigger bikes would start to pull away over 180 kph.

I have an S&S 111" now, came with 585 cams, gobs of power, but at high rpm, I don't ride quite like the A-hole I used to, so over 180 kph+ isn't important, getting there still is though ..... I would take a hammer to this to get my old 95" SE203 cam engine back (might have to have that combo built again, when this engine bites the dust)

[838]

T-man 590?

[jsachs1]

Greetings from Sweden,

I have a 2002 FXD, TC88 engine with the following modifications:

• 95" bore with Wiseco +4.6cc pistons
• S&S super stock heads with 1.94" intake and 1.575" exhaust valves, 79cc chambers
• HSR 42 carb
• S&S grand national 2-1-2 pipes
• Dynatek ignition module

Static compression is around 10.5:1 according to big boyz calculator. The heads have a big 1.78" intake port with a little shark fin vane in the bottom of the port. Valve springs support 0.650" lift.

I am currently running Andrews 55 gear drive cams, it runs fine but I have gotten the impression that the 55's is an "old" design, and that there might be better options out there.

So, here comes the question, are there cams that would provide a significant improvement over the Andrews 55's with my engine setup?

I would love to have a bit more torque at lower rpms, but mainly I'm looking for maximum mid range power, 3000-5000 rpms.

From my own Googling the Wood TW6H seems like a good candidate but I'm very open to other suggestions.You cannot see attachments on this board.

You should be close to max with your combo. I would clip the heads, to give you 11.00:1. Use .030" thick head gaskets, and you should see a decent pick up in low end torque. The TW55 cams are great cams, and will work well in your combo.
John

[SwedishMeatball]

Greetings from Sweden,

I have a 2002 FXD, TC88 engine with the following modifications:

• 95" bore with Wiseco +4.6cc pistons
• S&S super stock heads with 1.94" intake and 1.575" exhaust valves, 79cc chambers
• HSR 42 carb
• S&S grand national 2-1-2 pipes
• Dynatek ignition module

Static compression is around 10.5:1 according to big boyz calculator. The heads have a big 1.78" intake port with a little shark fin vane in the bottom of the port. Valve springs support 0.650" lift.

I am currently running Andrews 55 gear drive cams, it runs fine but I have gotten the impression that the 55's is an "old" design, and that there might be better options out there.

So, here comes the question, are there cams that would provide a significant improvement over the Andrews 55's with my engine setup?

I would love to have a bit more torque at lower rpms, but mainly I'm looking for maximum mid range power, 3000-5000 rpms.

From my own Googling the Wood TW6H seems like a good candidate but I'm very open to other suggestions.You cannot see attachments on this board.

You should be close to max with your combo. I would clip the heads, to give you 11.00:1. Use .030" thick head gaskets, and you should see a decent pick up in low end torque. The TW55 cams are great cams, and will work well in your combo.
John

Thanks, that's great info.


I already have 0.030" head gaskets, would using a 2 or 4 degree advance key be an alternative to get a bit more corrected compression or will that have negative side effects?

[SwedishMeatball]

I would ask t-man what he thinks his 625ps would do for it

I asked T man, they first suggested their 580 cam but since that one is not available gear drive they said the 625 would work fine too, but moving the power band a bit higher. 


The 625 has 4 degree earlier ivc than my current cams so there should actually be a bit more even at low rpms 

Thanks for the suggestion 

[SwedishMeatball]

Greetings from Sweden,

I have a 2002 FXD, TC88 engine with the following modifications:

• 95" bore with Wiseco +4.6cc pistons
• S&S super stock heads with 1.94" intake and 1.575" exhaust valves, 79cc chambers
• HSR 42 carb
• S&S grand national 2-1-2 pipes
• Dynatek ignition module

Static compression is around 10.5:1 according to big boyz calculator. The heads have a big 1.78" intake port with a little shark fin vane in the bottom of the port. Valve springs support 0.650" lift.

I am currently running Andrews 55 gear drive cams, it runs fine but I have gotten the impression that the 55's is an "old" design, and that there might be better options out there.

So, here comes the question, are there cams that would provide a significant improvement over the Andrews 55's with my engine setup?

I would love to have a bit more torque at lower rpms, but mainly I'm looking for maximum mid range power, 3000-5000 rpms.

From my own Googling the Wood TW6H seems like a good candidate but I'm very open to other suggestions.You cannot see attachments on this board.

You should be close to max with your combo. I would clip the heads, to give you 11.00:1. Use .030" thick head gaskets, and you should see a decent pick up in low end torque. The TW55 cams are great cams, and will work well in your combo.
John

Oh now I get it, you were actually part in developing the TW55 right? 


I have seen a Dyno chart on another page of a 95" with your heads, TW55 and Mikuni 42 that had 115 hp and a very nice curve.

I guess the difference between that build and mine is mainly in the heads. Do you remember what the specs on those heads were, valve sizes and flow?

My heads flow 274 cfm @ .600" lift

[Coff 06]

I believe the point he's trying to make is mill the heads and get the compression up where the cam shines.Otherwise you will never know the true potential of the cam.Sometimes the.030 hg and 2-4* advance gears are just a bandaid for what really needs to be done.JMO.    Coff 06

[Hilly13]

What's the current set up make if I may ask?

I'm thinking around 100/100 or close to?

[harpwrench]

Greetings from Sweden,

I have a 2002 FXD, TC88 engine with the following modifications:

• 95" bore with Wiseco +4.6cc pistons
• S&S super stock heads with 1.94" intake and 1.575" exhaust valves, 79cc chambers
• HSR 42 carb
• S&S grand national 2-1-2 pipes
• Dynatek ignition module

Static compression is around 10.5:1 according to big boyz calculator. The heads have a big 1.78" intake port with a little shark fin vane in the bottom of the port. Valve springs support 0.650" lift.

I am currently running Andrews 55 gear drive cams, it runs fine but I have gotten the impression that the 55's is an "old" design, and that there might be better options out there.

So, here comes the question, are there cams that would provide a significant improvement over the Andrews 55's with my engine setup?

I would love to have a bit more torque at lower rpms, but mainly I'm looking for maximum mid range power, 3000-5000 rpms.

From my own Googling the Wood TW6H seems like a good candidate but I'm very open to other suggestions.You cannot see attachments on this board.

You should be close to max with your combo. I would clip the heads, to give you 11.00:1. Use .030" thick head gaskets, and you should see a decent pick up in low end torque. The TW55 cams are great cams, and will work well in your combo.
John

Thanks, that's great info.


I already have 0.030" head gaskets, would using a 2 or 4 degree advance key be an alternative to get a bit more corrected compression or will that have negative side effects?

Advancing the exhaust lobe has side effects, it could be better or could make it feel like a turd as far as part throttle drivability. Retarding the cams can actually make it feel better all the way around, even with less ccp, in my experience, depending on what the pipe is doing with the exhaust port. I'm not suggesting you do that, just saying that exhaust timing something you need to figure out when you're dialing in cams. It can be the difference between a ripper and a yawner. Random cam suggestions just based on intake closing and ccp shouldn't be given much weight.

[jsachs1]

If it were mine, again, I would pump the compression up to 11.00:1. I feel that is as good as it will get without cleaning up the heads. I would NOT mess with any advance key.
John

[SwedishMeatball]

If it were mine, again, I would pump the compression up to 11.00:1. I feel that is as good as it will get without cleaning up the heads. I would NOT mess with any advance key.
John

Thanks for great info.

If I remove the heads for milling I could of course have them cleaned up too. Are the valve sizes of 1.94 and 1.575 good or should I change anything while at it?

It also good to know these cams work well at 11:1, my long term plan is to do either a 4.5" stroke or 4.125" bore upgrade to 106", and both those will produce 11:1 with flat top pistons.

[SP33DY]

Deleted

[turboprop]

Greetings from Sweden,

I have a 2002 FXD, TC88 engine with the following modifications:

• 95" bore with Wiseco +4.6cc pistons
• S&S super stock heads with 1.94" intake and 1.575" exhaust valves, 79cc chambers
• HSR 42 carb
• S&S grand national 2-1-2 pipes
• Dynatek ignition module

Static compression is around 10.5:1 according to big boyz calculator. The heads have a big 1.78" intake port with a little shark fin vane in the bottom of the port. Valve springs support 0.650" lift.

I am currently running Andrews 55 gear drive cams, it runs fine but I have gotten the impression that the 55's is an "old" design, and that there might be better options out there.

So, here comes the question, are there cams that would provide a significant improvement over the Andrews 55's with my engine setup?

I would love to have a bit more torque at lower rpms, but mainly I'm looking for maximum mid range power, 3000-5000 rpms.

From my own Googling the Wood TW6H seems like a good candidate but I'm very open to other suggestions.You cannot see attachments on this board.

Never been a fan of Dyna's (Barf), but have to say that I really like how you have done yours. It looks really good.

I like that Woods 6 cam. One thing to think about  with cams is when it runs out of air as it pertains to the type of bike and its application. Your naked bobber will be rode like a bagger would be, and that is the perspective of many of the responders here. Like when they say the cam will run out of air at 112 mph. So what. How much sustained riding do you plan to do on a naked bike?

I am a little envious of you riding around Europe on that bobber. Very cool. Cheers!

TP

[No Cents]

  call Wes Brown at Cycle-rama and tell him your goal. (727)546-0889
He will have the cams you need.

[WhipLash96]

I would give the S&S 570 a hard look. I ran that cam in my 01 bagger with a 98". That cam likes a little more compression which it sounds you have covered. Although I wasn't using Super Stock heads, I was using a 1.94" intake and 1.625" exhaust. I would not go larger than an 1.750" diameter head pipe or larger than a 3" muffler though.  I swapped mufflers to a 4" and that cam fell off.

[Adam76]

I would give the S&S 570 a hard look. I ran that cam in my 01 bagger with a 98". That cam likes a little more compression which it sounds you have covered. Although I wasn't using Super Stock heads, I was using a 1.94" intake and 1.625" exhaust. I would not go larger than an 1.750" diameter head pipe or larger than a 3" muffler though.  I swapped mufflers to a 4" and that cam fell off.

I know this is an old post, but the 570 cams come up quite a bit when folks are looking for cam upgrades.... I  ran them in a 95" build at 200ccp and I still found them sluggish below 3000rpm.

Is there a way to get the 570s to kick in with earlier TQ ?

Thanks

[838]

I would give the S&S 570 a hard look. I ran that cam in my 01 bagger with a 98". That cam likes a little more compression which it sounds you have covered. Although I wasn't using Super Stock heads, I was using a 1.94" intake and 1.625" exhaust. I would not go larger than an 1.750" diameter head pipe or larger than a 3" muffler though.  I swapped mufflers to a 4" and that cam fell off.

I know this is an old post, but the 570 cams come up quite a bit when folks are looking for cam upgrades.... I  ran them in a 95" build at 200ccp and I still found them sluggish below 3000rpm.

Is there a way to get the 570s to kick in with earlier TQ ?

Thanks

Yup... more cubes!

If you Look in the dyno section it looks like it starts to become more torque oriented at about 107. I run this cam at 10.3:1 In a 117 and it's a tractor... real fun setup it's in the dyno section. It was sumping in that run too... builder error (me 🤦‍♂️)...

Cubic inches changes the cam characteristics...

Upping CCP might help some, the old rule on the 570 was around 10.1 but that's under 190ccp and guys are rolling 205-210ccp street bikes all the time now (with a good tune) don't know why you couldn't with the 570... pipe choice might help a bit,