Greetings,
I'm on a 2013 Switchback and installed Andews 57H cams a couple of years ago (S&S adjustable rods & Tappets, Timken Bearings). I'm using the V&H FP3 and SE air cleaners.
Some questions if you don't mind. While I'm sure a pro tuner would get the bike running optimally, I like to tinker and ideally, I'm looking for solutions that I can do myself. I "think" if I can get the below issues resolved, I'll be good to go. Having said that, I'm considering have a pro tune the bike. I'm in Bergen County, NJ and the closest tuner I know of is Black Hills in Rockaway, NJ.
- Since installation, I've gotten a heavy exhaust smell. Is there a way to alleviate that? I'm considering opening everything up to make sure pushrod lengths are correct. I'm pretty sure they are and used # of turn recommendations from S&S and some folks on this site.
- While nice in the mid to upper revs, I've felt I've lost some pull on the bottom end. Is this just tuning the bike better, or should I be looking at a different cam to get back a little low-mid zonk? Looking at Cycle Rama 570-2's. Do these tune easily?
- Considering putting in a thinner head gasket. Would this give me back some low end? I'm guessing this would also give a smidge for overall power as well?
- Since installation, bike runs a little rough in the low revs. I'm guessing better tuning would alleviate? Any FP3 experts out there for recommendations on optimal settings?
- Considering getting a different tuner. I love the user friendliness of the FP3 (Bluetooth to the IPhone), but doubt I'm getting optimal tuning as compared to a PV or TTS. For the home mechanic, are there advantages to either of these tuners for ease of use?
As mentioned, I've been riding with this setup for about 3 years now. I'd like to get the exhaust, less than smooth low rev performance and lack of low end hit resolved.
I'd schedule dyno time to measure what you have, and help you get where you want to be.
Probably not the best choice for a bolt-in cam. Andrews 48 might have served you better.
CR570-2 is also a great choice for a bolt-in.
Real dyno tune can make a world of difference as will the exhaust system, you don't mention what you're running. Mild builds favor a smaller baffle / exhaust opening to keep exhaust velocity high and aid in cylinder scavenging and fill.
Quote from: rigidthumper on January 29, 2019, 09:54:49 AM
I'd schedule dyno time to measure what you have, and help you get where you want to be.
great advice :up:
You bought the bike, you bought the parts now get the most out of that first investment with a real dyno tune.
Have you tried contacting Vance & Hines? They may be able to send you a tune. Your build isn't one that requires a $400+ tuner.
I for 1 use a Dobeck EJK on my 2007 ultra Yes I maybe leaving power on the table but it works for me like no decel pop, cooler running and decent MPG and it costed less than $250.
A $400+ tuner may be better especially if you intend to upgrade heads, compression, cams, or better exhaust.
As for Blackhills Ken I have used him before. Contact him and ask about your fuel pac . I know for sure he does power commander products and he is busy.
MIKE
Quote from: sfmichael on January 29, 2019, 09:56:11 AM
Quote from: rigidthumper on January 29, 2019, 09:54:49 AM
I'd schedule dyno time to measure what you have, and help you get where you want to be.
great advice :up:
First off, thanks for everyone's posts....
I'm running a V&H ProPipe w/ quiet baffle installed. Recommendations on a quieter exhaust than stock ProPipe would be appreciated as well.
First thing is the 57's like more compression than stock.10.3-10.5 to 1. Plus guys here will recommend getting a different tuning device other than the FP3.
Bump the compression to optimize the cam's ability, find a good tuner in your area, and follow his advice.
Hi, I have a 2014 Heritage and did exactly the same. 57H, se adjustables, FP3 and Big Shot Longs (not ideal for tuning). I fitted the cams a couple of years ago and using the FP3 had quite a good state of tune. It was a bit lumpy at low revs and had popping back on decel, but it was bearable. I contacted V & H re the lumpiness and they sent me a couple of downloads which seemed to help....... But it wasn't perfect and I got to the stage that I think you're at now. So I bit the bullet and had the heads ported, 30 thou head gaskets and Power Vision tuned at Dynojet in UK. I can't put a Dyno sheet on because it's DIN smoothing and isn't allowed on this forum, but it's 112 for Torque and 97 for HP. It now runs a lot smoother and pulls like a train...... But it cost me £1400 to do it..... I'd try V & H first with an amended map..... other than that, prepare to shell out some money (the PV licence and Dyno tune came to £450 alone!)
First I would contact V&H with your questions for a custom tune from them. If that doesn't solve your concerns then perhaps drop the nearly $1000 for a flash tuner and dyno tune by a competent tuner.
I'm very happy with my FP3 knowing that I left a little HP/TQ on the table. Driveablity is perfect for me.
A tune doesn't have to cost a grand with hardware...most shops charge $300-$500 for their time and dyno and a PV license can usually be bought for around $200
The actual hardware is optional
The 57's will benefit from more compression but if that's not in the cards then chose a pipe or baffle you can live with and get a real tune
If the OP doesn't want to pull the heads different cams like the CR570-2 and a tune would be an option. The 57's are gonna be a bit soft on the low end unless he bumps the compression.
I'll stick my neck out here, 57's in a 103 used to be as common as cow dung in a paddock, yep as a bolt in they are not perfect but even so they go ok tuned right, on that, I'm not a fan of the FP3 but it should be fine in this application, V&H have just released a manual for the FP3 that spells out how to use its functions, they also claim with there latest software that the unit is dyno friendly, their blurb not mine, so to the OP, get a copy of the manual and have a read, to me your bike sounds like it just needs a tune, do it yourself or dyno is up to you.
Edit, is you copy this text line into your browser it should take you to the manual....
https://fuelpak.vanceandhines.com/me..._2019_REVB.pdf
My opinion.
1- Those cams are great. They also leave room to make more power when "biko-boredom sets in.
2- Loose the Fuelpak, and let Blackhills Ken map the bike properly.
John
If it were my bike I wouldn't dish out the funds to go another bolt in route. You have a cam that can handle more than what your giving it. Spend extra on giving it what it wants instead, don't double up investing in another (bolt in) cam. Little head porting and cc'd to the best compression and tune it (not autotune). Your looking at similar investment vs. new cam install and you'll have a ride that delivers the torque earlier and carries out further than a bolt it can or would with stock heads. Headwork (along with cc to get the right compression) and it'll run great!
If your a do-it-yourselfer there is a lot of software out there to take advantage of and the power vision can do extensive data logging.
dont buy any cams or different tuner everything you have is fine
install the head gasket you have
you wont get much assistance about actually changing your map here as you can see from the replies
but if you like to fiddle around you can examine start-up, idle, cruise, high rpm areas and concentrate on one area at a time. Even it it takes a month to fiddle around with it.
spark plugs are a great indicator
doesnt matter what tuner you have they are loading to the ECM fuel and timing information to run an internal combustion engine
I fine the pro-pipe to be reasonably quiet and a good performer. You could wrap some extra fibreglass on baffle.
Was running the FP3 on my '12 Heritage with V&H Big Shot Staggered pipes and SE air cleaner. Ran very well. Then decided to do cams and went with the 57h's. I also ordered a PV with a pre-loaded tune. Bike ran good, but I knew it could be better. I emailed Dynojet and they sent me a different tune to try. That one was worse. I then reloaded the FP3 with the new cam info. It actually ran the best, but still wasn't quite right. Finally did a dyno tune with the PV. Night and day from the other tunes. Bike runs real strong now from the bottom to the top, very smooth and mpg's are back in the 40's again. The other tunes I was trying were only giving me low to mid 30's on mpgs. I did try some auto tunes with the PV from the original tune, but for what ever reasons, the bike was getting worse.
According to Andrews the 57's are very similar to the 54's. The 54's require a little more compression and worked great in a 103 that started out as a 96" but part of that was because the new pistons increased the compression. Andrews came out with the 57's when Harley went to the 103" engine in everything. The design change was supposed to compensate for the slightly lower compression. I put the 57's in a stock 2013 103" engine. It has not been dynoed but the new bike pulled as strong as my old 103" with the 54's. I use the Thundermax tuner. Maybe that is the difference. The torque and hp are increased across the board from 2500 rpm up. I have no rideability issues. No stumble, no pop, no nothing.
57 with 4 degrees and a dyno tune is a great combo. Wont break the bank .
Quote from: doctorevil on February 06, 2019, 06:39:55 PM
57 with 4 degrees and a dyno tune is a great combo. Wont break the bank .
I'd like to see the comparison of your idea vs an Andrews 48 straight up in the same 103"
Do you have the tune first set for 57h either by v&h or through the app? (I think a recent update allows more cam selections). Do you have a all current updates applied? Have you ran auto tune and finalaized tune after learning a good amount of squares?
I run fp3 on a 107 w/ se204 and it runs very well.
Quote from: 838 on February 06, 2019, 08:07:39 PM
Quote from: doctorevil on February 06, 2019, 06:39:55 PM
57 with 4 degrees and a dyno tune is a great combo. Wont break the bank .
I'd like to see the comparison of your idea vs an Andrews 48 straight up in the same 103"
The 48's will come a bit faster and probably more torque, then around 2,500-3,000 RPM the 57's should pass the 48's as they fall off. The 48's with less duration, earlier close and less lift should do better at low RPM. The one variable is compression, the 57's like more compression than stock.
He already has the 57. good cam for future upgrades.In lieu of the increasing compression now 4 degrees will increase the ccp. He can pay for his PV license and a gear have good riding bike. I enjoy teaching guys and finding solutions to save money. To answer your question the 48 has always felt seat of the pants an out of breath cam. The 10degrees in valve closing has a big effect how those two cams feel.
PoorUB :agree:
I have seen the 57s compared to the 54s many times, if you think they are similar just hold them up next to each other and look at the lobes, the 57 is MUCH more aggressive.
Quote from: doctorevil on February 06, 2019, 09:44:59 PM
He already has the 57. good cam for future upgrades.In lieu of the increasing compression now 4 degrees will increase the ccp. He can pay for his PV license and a gear have good riding bike. I enjoy teaching guys and finding solutions to save money. To answer your question the 48 has always felt seat of the pants an out of breath cam. The 10degrees in valve closing has a big effect how those two cams feel.
I have run them both, but I like to wind it up a bit every so often and the 48's just were kind of blah to me. I milled the heads and dropped in a set of 57's and they made me smile!
The only thing A 48 would do is pull a trailer.
Although no one will make the claim a 96 inch with 48 cams is a power house. It definitely is a couple notches better than a trailer pulling only bike. They work even better in a 103 inch. Good tune is the key to everything.
https://harleytechtalk.com/htt/index.php?topic=98936.msg1155981#msg1155981
I chuckled at the trailer reply myself. The 48 has about .050 more lift, over 20* more duration and over 30* more overlap than a stock cam. I'm recalling those figures from memory but no way that it wouldn't make a significant difference with the right accompanying components and a competent tune. Close to same intake closing as stock so cylinder pressure should remain high. Ballin' on a budget :wink:
"48...seat of pants...out of breath"
https://www.facebook.com/jandbperformance/photos/pcb.2517065334987407/2517065084987432/?type=3&theater
Not sure, but this build would hold its own against a lot of builds I've seen posted here.
A 103" with stock heads and compression, 48's pulling close to 120 FtLbs?? I am sorry, but I don't buy it! Very happy dyno!
I don't think it's so impossible. Let's look at some things. Numbers below are from the link below them, and I assume these are STD numbers.
Harley-Davidson Twin Cam (1584cc / 96" 45 degree single plug v-twin with F.I.) – 66hp & 82 ft lbs of torque
Harley-Davidson Twin Cam (1688cc / 103" 45 degree single plug v-twin with F.I.) – 83hp & 95 ft lbs of torque
http://boydcycles.com/hp/
So in estimation, the numbers below may be a close SAE number for torque.
96" @ 82 ft. lbs. x 0.96 = 79 ft. lbs.
103" @ 95 ft. lbs. x 0.96 = 91 ft. lbs.
My 96" with 48's @ 106 ft. lbs. So this is 79 ft. lbs. x 134% increase = 106 ft. lbs.
A 103" with 48's @ 119 ft. lbs. So this is 91 ft. lbs. x 134% increase = 122 ft. lbs.
It's not so impossible to see 119 ft. lbs. IMHO.
Jim Kennedy ran a dyno on a stock 103", really close to what the Boyd site shows. And as I said, I believe what they show is STD, Jim's is SAE.
https://harleytechtalk.com/htt/index.php?topic=79206.msg879317#msg879317
I missed the STD .
I looked back and it seems to me that most 48's with stock heads might get around 110 FtLbs, head work will get 120FtLbs. In general how much difference is there from STD to SAE readings?
Quote from: jsachs1 on January 30, 2019, 03:09:06 PM
My opinion.
1- Those cams are great. They also leave room to make more power when "biko-boredom sets in.
2- Loose the Fuelpak, and let Blackhills Ken map the bike properly.
John
:agree: Keeping the air fuel ratio proper is a good idea along with the timing , you can do some damage to the engine if its not right. To much investment for me not to want the engine running proper . I not a expert except on spending money on Harleys damn lol Having the engine built , heat cycled , then tuned on a dyno is the way I want it done
Quote from: Ohio HD on February 08, 2019, 03:34:14 PM
... I assume these are STD numbers.
What are STD numbers?
Best,
Jason
Correction factor. Dynojet allows the operator to show numbers as measured, or based off of a standard set of conditions.
Choices are Uncorrected, SAE, DIN, EEC,STD, or JIS.
There is a lot to read on the net about the standards set for reading HP and torque. As well on the HTT site there has been discussion and a few posts over the years.
http://harleytechtalk.com/htt/index.php?topic=50588.0
Quote from: rigidthumper on February 09, 2019, 07:32:40 AM
Correction factor. Dynojet allows the operator to show numbers as measured, or based off of a standard set of conditions.
Choices are Uncorrected, SAE, DIN, EEC,STD, or JIS.
Quote from: Ohio HD on February 09, 2019, 07:33:44 AM
There is a lot to read on the net about the standards set for reading HP and torque. As well on the HTT site there has been discussion and a few posts over the years.
http://harleytechtalk.com/htt/index.php?topic=50588.0
Ok, got it, thanks. I am quite familiar with SAE and DIN for measuring hp and torque, but had not heard of STD.
Jason
Glad I found this post! I just bought a 2006 with Screaming Eagle 2 into 1 (has the plates like a Super trap). K&N filter and Andrew's TW 26 cams. The bike is strong in lower revs, but gutless above about 4200 rpm. I've been considering auto tuners and have checked out claims and reviews. But I think after reading this thread a power commander 5 and a dyno run is in my futute
Since you're in Tennessee, I'd call these guys before even buying anything. Let them tune the bike and suggest the tuner type.
J&B Performance Cycles
https://www.facebook.com/pg/jandbperformance/about/?ref=page_internal
Quote from: Alexintenn on February 09, 2019, 11:14:03 PM
Glad I found this post! I just bought a 2006 with Screaming Eagle 2 into 1 (has the plates like a Super trap). K&N filter and Andrew's TW 26 cams. The bike is strong in lower revs, but gutless above about 4200 rpm. I've been considering auto tuners and have checked out claims and reviews. But I think after reading this thread a power commander 5 and a dyno run is in my futute
I ran the 26's in a 95". They need more compression than stock to really shine. I milled .030" off the heads and used a .030" head gasket. It certainly was not gutless at upper RPM.
Cams that require more compression are generally sluggish in the lower RPM's not upper. More compression helps everywhere, but a proper tune is needed. I think you just need to seek a competent tuner, and also do not buy a tuning devise until after you select the shop and listen to them.
Gonna call J&B Monday. Local shop in Knox (Cycle Stop) offered Dyonojet 5 and tuning for $550.
I just bought this bike and have already spent more than i meant too on crash bars, handlebars and lowering blocks. :idunno:
But his one is a keeper so it makes sense to get it running right. At 80 mph in 5th gear, I go WOT and it just slowly gains speed. I will finally pull a little over 100, but it takes awhile to get there. It just feels like it should do better. Makes me guess it could be way lean. Also runs a little rough at constant throttle at 50 or so and has some popping on decel.
Don't get me wrong, the bike runs pretty well, and I don't care if it is faster. I just want it to run the way the engine should.
J&B Will use a Power Vision, you can buy a license for around $200.00 I think, but they can tell you. They'll also get your tune optimized, AFR, timing, cold and hot starts, ETC. This way you also don't have an add on box that may fail later. Power commanders are older technology.
This is worth a look before you take it to tuner. No sense tuning if it's not sound.
http://harleytechtalk.com/htt/index.php?topic=35334.0