Just have to mention what a darn good cam that is.
We like to use those in our 110"/113" engines, and the numbers aren't really that far from a LC 124" crate.
Super-broad insta torque, that also produces a great hp number. :up:
Finished another 110" yesterday for a Conn. client.
I believe the dyno report will be posted on our Facebook directly.
What's your lifter service recommendation for these >.650 lift cams?
The earlier 660SM was the same in that it was seldom talked about and therefore not used as often as say the 662-2 (which is a close performer). I ended up using it after many graph comparisons and statements about the better parking lot manners. I find it to be OEM quiet. I understand the 660 PS-2 is the same cam with some ramp work. The previous version was not at all noisy (to me) so the ramp changes may have had value to lifter life. A well respected builder in the N/W recommended I schedule lifters at 35,000 miles with any cam of 650+ lift. It's good advice I intend to follow. TR hasn't really said anywhere that I've seen why the changes occurred. I fully agree with the OP that the cams are real unsung heroes and performance is top shelf when supported with the right components.
Have made 130hp sae with my 1.9 head at 110" with the low lift version, tr577
How about in a 117.
Don't know what ramp changes were made with the 660ps2 but more exhaust duration was added. Same CL I believe.
Quote from: tdrglide on February 16, 2021, 08:53:43 AM
How about in a 117.
Don't know what ramp changes were made with the 660ps2 but more exhaust duration was added. Same CL I believe.
We generally use a Wood 9F, or T-Man 662-2 in our 117"-124"-131" Sport Touring combo's.
Fellow forum member from NH recently had us set him up with a 662-2 in his 117" recently,(pulled the anemic .585 from that engine) and the Thunderheader equipped engine went 135/143...sae....with a Borezilla, more yet could have been found.
I run the 662-2 in one of my personal bikes, 2013 FLHX 131".......162 ft/lbs at 3800.... :smile:
Those cams of both Wood, and T-Man work well.
Setting up a client currently with a 107"/ .660-PS-2.
This is the 660SM in a 120 with 2 different pipes on the same day. I would expect from all reports the PS-2 would be similar.
Gets up on the torque quick, and continues. :up:
Are you seeing the same or similar results from the PS-2 version?
I try to limit lift to .600 with touring builds that will see miles. There are many good choices in that range that will easily make 1.15:1 hp/cu in and more torque. These last and do not require frequent lifter maintenance.
OUR methods do not require that type of lifter maintenance whatsoever.
No different than an S&S crate with a .640. :bike:
What's the lifter maintenance schedule
Quote from: HD Street Performance on February 16, 2021, 08:46:50 AM
Have made 130hp sae with my 1.9 head at 110" with the low lift version, tr577
Yup I still have my old 107 making 127 with your heads 1.94 and a 660sm.
Love that combo. I can't see myself ever getting rid of the engine. Still in my homemade crate in the corner of the shop.
Scott, how would those cams stack up to the 662-2 in the 124 you built for me?
We'd need to pull compression out, and you'd loose power starting around 5k.
Quote from: HD Street Performance on February 16, 2021, 08:46:50 AM
Have made 130hp sae with my 1.9 head at 110" with the low lift version, tr577
577 was a fantastic cam. Wish they were still around.
Intake 20/50 exhaust 46/18 .577 lift 38 overlap
Quote from: HD Street Performance on March 17, 2021, 11:58:22 AM
Intake 20/50 exhaust 46/18 .577 lift 38 overlap
That HP103 might work as a replacement there... little more exhaust duration than the 577 though.
The LCs don't even match their specs on the S&S site. intake is 104.5 and exhaust 99.5 for a LSA of 102. 46 overlap. No thanks. :scratch:
Only explanation for the LC discrepancy could be asymetric lobes or lobes that start slow then ramp up after a preload. FWIW you can also find LC by .050 down from maximum lift on either side, taught to me by Harold Brookshire 40 years ago. If I was looking for an available cam in that class I would go to the Mackie 598, assuming it suited the builds other components.
Quote
Posted by: HD Street Performance
« on: March 20, 2021, 07:12:49 AM » FWIW you can also find LC by .050 down from maximum lift on either side, taught to me by Harold Brookshire 40 years ago.
that's how I been setting/checking LCs ever since building kz1000's, gs1100/1150s over 30 years ago...as long as lobes are symmetrical works great! When building those engines you have seperate intake/ex cams (dohc) so you use slotted cam sprockets and get to "set" the lobe center where you want it (if it'll clear). I sometimes still have to adjust my thought process when designing my builds since the most adjustment of cam timing is with an offset key since we can only advance/retard the cam timing as a whole being both intake/ex lobes are combined on a single cam. I suppose that's part of what some of the big shops custom grinds entail—their own preferred cam timing among the other typical areas to play with (lift, duration, ramps)
Engine "builders" these days don't even own a degree wheel..... :hyst:
Quote from: Hillside Motorcycle on April 02, 2021, 03:33:17 AM
Engine "builders" these days don't even own a degree wheel..... :hyst:
No need, everything these days is precision manufactured...
Half of these so call engine builders probably wouldn't even know how to use a degree wheel. They tell you don't need that.
i loved the 9FG with a +4 in a 11.3 comp 116" it was a beast ,
Quote from: Hossamania on April 02, 2021, 05:19:53 AM
Quote from: Hillside Motorcycle on April 02, 2021, 03:33:17 AM
Engine "builders" these days don't even own a degree wheel..... :hyst:
No need, everything these days is precision manufactured...
Yep, and Elvis is still alive.
I look at it as why rely on what should be if you check it on assemble then ya kno