Hi does anyone have any experience with this cam? I have a 110 with head work and 10.7 c a tuner highly recommended this cam. Also heard the woods 777 but was wondering if there'd be a huge difference between the two.
I was told not to go above 10.3 using the TTS-150. I'm using the 150 with the 117" HD kit and it works good for me and my 1k lb touring pig. 132tq, 111hp. Real world riding is impressive, I do like the DD7 that I paired it with also.
I used the 150 @ 10.5:1, on a 4.085" bore 4.375 stroke 115 (.025" over 113 motor), that made 132 TQ 124 HP.
IIRC, Dave at JDs has used that cam ~10.5, and Paul at High Desert has used it @10.6.
One is hot rod one us torque, one works at 10:1 the other at 10.6. I set the 150 up at 10.6 and it cranked 217.
Quote from: rigidthumper on December 12, 2019, 05:55:05 AM
I used the 150 @ 10.5:1, on a 4.085" bore 4.375 stroke 115 (.025" over 113 motor), that made 132 TQ 124 HP.
IIRC, Dave at JDs has used that cam ~10.5, and Paul at High Desert has used it @10.6.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
These things he says :chop:
SteveCole was the one that told me to stay at 10.3 or below. My build now, using the HD kit, ccp is 213 by my gauge @ 20', my stock 110" ccp was 222 by this gauge, not sure this gauge is spot on. But stay tuned I have a set of brand new heads being worked over for these cams as we speak. I'm not doing this to try and squeeze more power but my last head job didn't exactly end with a happy ending. :sheep:
:chop:
If happy ending means low on power then consider this cam as a replacement for the SE255, it just is in the party a little later. It takes more duration to make power numbers equal to the torque number. 215 + ccp is not impossible but is needing a great tune.
Quote from: HD Street Performance on December 12, 2019, 05:56:45 AM
One is hot rod one us torque, one works at 10:1 the other at 10.6. I set the 150 up at 10.6 and it cranked 217.
That's pretty impressive and must be fun to ride! I was told by a tuner at 10.7 comp the 150 will work great.
Quote from: TN on December 12, 2019, 08:50:24 AM
SteveCole was the one that told me to stay at 10.3 or below. My build now, using the HD kit, ccp is 213 by my gauge @ 20', my stock 110" ccp was 222 by this gauge, not sure this gauge is spot on. But stay tuned I have a set of brand new heads being worked over for these cams as we speak. I'm not doing this to try and squeeze more power but my last head job didn't exactly end with a happy ending. :sheep:
Interesting id be curious to see how that works out for you. My heads have been worked for my 110. Local tuner highly recommended the 150 and said at 10.7 comp it will work great.
:chop:
Quote from: HD Street Performance on December 12, 2019, 09:48:30 AM
If happy ending means low on power then consider this cam as a replacement for the SE255, it just is in the party a little later. It takes more duration to make power numbers equal to the torque number. 215 + ccp is not impossible but is needing a great tune.
Ive looked at dyno charts on the 777 and most of them looked like power was always less than tq number.
Quote from: HD Street Performance on December 12, 2019, 09:48:30 AM
If happy ending means low on power then consider this cam as a replacement for the SE255, it just is in the party a little later. It takes more duration to make power numbers equal to the torque number. 215 + ccp is not impossible but is needing a great tune.
Having a happy ending was humor about paying for a quality head job and not feeling satisfied. The whole job was botched. I'm just a parts changer myself and a Appalachian American to boot. I see no need to state what the problem was on the heads in question.
OK sorry your build didn't work out and hope you have it dialed in now.
Consider the TTS150 a torque move, the Wood 777 a little more toward performance but still very strong torque when the compression ratio is adjusted up from what the 150 or stock cam wants. At 110 and 10.7 I have had great luck with a Tman 590 or Comp TC3103
Quote from: TN on December 12, 2019, 08:50:24 AM
SteveCole was the one that told me to stay at 10.3 or below. My build now, using the HD kit, ccp is 213 by my gauge @ 20', my stock 110" ccp was 222 by this gauge, not sure this gauge is spot on. But stay tuned I have a set of brand new heads being worked over for these cams as we speak. I'm not doing this to try and squeeze more power but my last head job didn't exactly end with a happy ending. :sheep:
:chop:
10.3:1 is no doubt a happy place for these cams. I would say they tuned easy and the motor is very responsive. rigidthumper is just expressing that they can be taken to a higher level with success. At that point the HP and torque levels rise some more. I have my 117 rebuild set at 10.6:1 with the 150 cams.
I will be very curious to see how that works out. Over the years it has been done, a short cam with good heads on a big motor at top of the chart compression and every time they hit hard from down low and mid rpms. Personally I like to move up with duration proportionally as the cubes grow. Always open to see what others do and learn. I do not prescribe to the good cam bad cam prevailing philosophy. To me most of them are good if parked in the right build combination.
In comparison to it's self Don, not being compared to other cams of different design.
Cams give no free lunch, they perform in the RPM ranges they're designed for when matching components are used.
I think the point I was making is the TTS 150 is a performance grind in a 96" motor and its' timing remains the same when the cubic inches grow to 117" but the feeding requirements grew ~20% assuming the same VE. Now it is a pure torque move. This 117 may hit mid to high 140s for torque and come on hard and fast. The breathing potential of the good heads allow for more cylinder fill in the short fill time, in theory, and make up the gap up top.
All of this is playing out with the M8s now. Without getting too far in the weeds with 4 valve and other theory the M8 heads move a lot of air as do a reworked set of CVO castings on a twin cam. The M8s are a large motor too and can do quite well with ~20° less duration than a similar twin cam. Look at CVOsJoe 126", 160/152 with a 244° cam.
TTS-150 was designed for 110" and larger motors. 110" and under the TTS-100 is what's recommended.
I've checked these every way to Sunday, and in the motor on a stand as well. They're a bit different is all I'll say.
[attach=0]
This is what is from the TTS website.
"Developed for 88-117 CID with stock heads and pistons. Not recommended for compression over 10.5:1."
I hope you understand I am not saying it is a huge mistake and I am more curious to see how it comes out then decide. We are discussing nuances not big issues. I use the cam and recommend it daily. That said I also use at least 4 other brands and grinds all over the place depending on the specifics of the build.
We will see, the results will say more than us.
I know what it says there. My conversation about these was with Steve at Cincy a few years ago.
You can of course mix all types of cams / motor combinations for various desired results. These are not designed for high end performance, but then they aren't without some upper performance within the designed RPM ranges. These are designed for the 90% of the RPM range everyone sees on the street.
I have several sheets from various sources that depict what to expect based on motor builds. They aren't mine so I don't post them.
I will talk to Steve Cole and find more out directly.
Appreciate the discussion and wish you good luck on the build.
I talked with Steve about this cam and he said it's been tuned successfully up to 10.8:1. But, from what I gathered during our conversation, 10.2-10.5 range depending on who's tuning, local temperature and fuel quality. Those numbers were without any discussion of head work.
Been doing some more reading and others suggest the Tman 625ps2 for a 110 w/ 10.7 c. is great cam. Has anyone here used it
Quote from: mickblues on December 14, 2019, 10:09:59 PM
Been doing some more reading and others suggest the Tman 625ps2 for a 110 w/ 10.7 c. is great cam. Has anyone here used it
Yep.
That works well.
660PS works better yet...10.6 cr...in a 110".
This is a dyno of my budget heads at 10.7:1, 110", 58mm tb RSD pipes. About 10 deg more duration and about same lift as the 150.
Why not?
Quote from: HD Street Performance on December 16, 2019, 05:34:23 AM
This is a dyno of my budget heads at 10.7:1, 110", 58mm tb RSD pipes. About 10 deg more duration and about same lift as the 150.
Why not?
Is this with the tr590???
Quote from: rigidthumper on December 12, 2019, 05:55:05 AM
I used the 150 @ 10.5:1, on a 4.085" bore 4.375 stroke 115 (.025" over 113 motor), that made 132 TQ 124 HP.
IIRC, Dave at JDs has used that cam ~10.5, and Paul at High Desert has used it @10.6.
How does it ride?
The guy who has that engine ( installed June of 18) has put 21K on it, mid west to Cali twice, bunch of trips to Colorado, couple to Texas- now he wants a 124 with the same setup ( If some is good, more must be better :) )
Quote from: rigidthumper on December 20, 2019, 10:05:07 AM
The guy who has that engine ( installed June of 18) has put 21K on it, mid west to Cali twice, bunch of trips to Colorado, couple to Texas- now he wants a 124 with the same setup ( If some is good, more must be better :) )
:hyst: :hyst: I wonder how many people told him to "just go 124 and get it over with the first time" ? It is said here often when posters ask for build advice of lesser sizes. :wink: