Wild Things TC-46D in 107 Need advice

[CowboyTutt]

I'm considering this camshaft for my 107 upgrade with 1.9 intakes, 1.625 exhaust and 1.75 ports. Intake flow is 269 cfm at 600 lift at 28 inches. Current exhaust which I think will work fine is a V&H Pro Pipe HO. Bike is a 09 Dyna Street Bob with modified suspension and 3.15 final drive ratio. TB will probably be to modify my SE50mm and still use the JET stack from Johnson Engine Technology that features a 1 1/8th velocity stack and filter combo. The WT cam with its late valve closing and significant overlap I think will need a lot of compression. I will probable have the heads cut down 2cc's from 84 to 82 with a CP piston +3 radiused dome (pretty much a flat top). I think I will even add singh grooves to the heads this time as it seems they do not hurt.

Do any engine builders have experience with this cam or perhaps something similar? Any advice for compression using CA 91 octane fuel. I'm at sea level.

Thanks for any input.

-Tutt

[nw_guy4_fun]

The cam can work. The CFM flow of the head is normal for that valve size but if you want that cam to work better what the exhaust side is doing (or not doing) will be more of a hinge point. Set the compression up high side or the build will be a little soft. If I was sending out a set of heads for this build it would be different from what you have there, custom suited to what works best with that cam. Airflow velocity schemes wouldn't be anything I mess with either. The EFI motors have a dry intake Go up from that 50, it's too small.

[CowboyTutt]

Thanks Don, I was wondering if the TB might be too small at that point. I did notice an improvement with the v-stack but only by my "seat of the pants" dyno. HP Inc. makes a 55mm that works with their own v-stack that I was also considering. My friend has both in the shop being installed right now but they don't seem to be in any hurry.

I think my heads are designed around the "80% ratio" theory which may be obsolete now. Since my intake is limited by the valve size somewhat I was thinking the additional cam intake duration would help while my exhaust port should be sufficient.
I don't have the exhaust flow numbers apparently for my heads but will get them tomorrow. Maybe there is some improvement that can be made to my exhaust side if it needs it.

The Big Boys calculator only takes into consideration intake valve closing that I can tell, and not overlap so I would agree that I need more compression then might be suspected. I will call Kury tomorrow and see if I can get a hold of someone there with a recommendation for CA pump gas as well.

If you have another camshaft that you think might be similar and more optimal for my build I'm willing to consider it. Chris Rivas has a new cam identical to a Woods 9F but about 585 lift that I was also considering at one time. I just thought the additional intake duration and lift of the Kury cam might be better.

Thanks my friend!

-Tutt

[nw_guy4_fun]

Burley is the man here let him call the shots

[CowboyTutt]

Don, I spoke to Earl today. He ran the WT cam through his simulator with my heads and he did not like it at all. It was down 20 ft lbs at 3000 rpm with my heads. He liked my alternative idea of the S&S 585 cams with higher roller rockers on the intake side, but even better he has had very good results with the SE 263E cam, my TB, exhaust and heads. So we will be setting up the new engine for that cam I think. It made good peak numbers but also had better low end TQ than the WT cam.

That being said, I think the WT cam works REALLY WELL with their WT heads. Just not so well with my set-up.

Thanks for the input. I will decide on a TB tomorrow.

-Tutt