Woods WM8-22XE cam in 114 questions

[pauly]

Hi,

I'm still researching what cam to put in my 23 FLHTK, and thought I'd settled on the Woods WM8-22XE, until I suddenly came across a number of reviews describing a big dip in torque between 2000-3000RPM. If it was just one review, I'd put it down to a bad tune or similar, but it's more than one and was only partially resolved by messing with exhaust baffles.

I was also looking at the S&S 465C, or the Andrew's AP465B, but much of what I'd read and watched had steered me to the woods.

Here's the thing - besides an SE alloy intake manifold (I ain't having no plastic inlet manifold), and adjustable pushrods, and S&S premium tappers, this bike will stay stock. Stock exhaust (yes really), and stock air filter. I'll be tuning it with TTS.

So, could you people that know more than I about these things, please offer your experience and advice, particularly on the real world differences between these cams, and the constraints of using stock exhaust and air filter?

Thanks
Pauly

[rigidthumper]

I was unimpressed with the S&S465 in a couple different tries. The AP465B outperformed in a 114 bagger with good intake & exhaust components.

[Hossamania]

In all those reviews noting the dip in power, wee any of them using the stock exhaust? You mentioned they tuned the dip out changing baffles, you've already got them.

I was unimpressed with the S&S465 in a couple different tries. The AP465B outperformed in a 114 bagger with good intake & exhaust components.

Changing exhaust components doesn't seem to be an option.

[pauly]

Hi Rigidthumper,
Thanks for that. What's your opinion on how the cams would fare with stock exhaust?

Thanks
Pauly

[pauly]

Hi Hoss,

Thanks for the reply. Yeah correct. Nobody uses the stock exhaust (I used to be the same), so I'm wondering how they would affect these cams. I've would never have considered stock exhausts but I'm really enjoying being quiet for a change.

Thanks
Pauly

[Hossamania]

One cam that wasn't mentioned in either thread was the RS 468. Not sure how it works in the 114,  it it's a nice cam with good lope in the 107.

[Hossamania]

Unless you can find some testing results on these cams using stock exhaust, you might be the guinea pig.
You could try and contact the manufacturers directly and see what they think.

[rigidthumper]

#s would be down above 4000 due to the restrictive intake & exhaust, but still an improvement over stock.

[pauly]

I was gonna press "like",but I hate being a Guinea pig! 😅
Starting to lean towards the Andrew's...

Thanks (yet again)
Pauly

[DTTJGlide]

Did you look at the 114 cam tests by Fuel Moto at the top of this page?

[pauly]

Hi Dttjglide,
Yes I have watched this and many others numerous times, but thanks for pointing it out. My concern is the stock exhausts, and how this may change the results significantly for some cams.

Thanks
Pauly

Did you look at the 114 cam tests by Fuel Moto at the top of this page?

[DTTJGlide]

As rigidthumper says the performance down low shouldn't be changed below 4K rpms & might even be slightly better with a more restrictive exhaust. The 22XE is a good cam & I think you would be happy with it, my personal recommendation would be the CR480MT, it's a revised version of the CR480 with the MT standing for MaximumTorque, without losing much on the topend. It's shown on the FuelMoto 117 bolt-in cam test & it should have the same curve on your 114. It has the highest tq number in that test & is the highest & almost steady from 3K to 4K, a lot of people have been happy with it.

[pauly]

Hi Dttjglide,

Thanks for that. I was thinking that maybe down low would be fine with the stock exhausts, but it's great to hear it from someone else!
I'll look at the CR480MT cam a little closer.

Thanks
Pauly