[maubuchon]

It cranks right on the numbers for a 203. It will like the 45 intake close of the S&S 585G plus the added duration on the exhaust. Happy and a lot of fun. CCP will drop 10ish, not a bad thing. A Dtt TC88 would be a better ignition choice and timing could be tuned.

Don, I am sorry this is going on so long, but won't the 585's be beyond the I think .575 limit of the stock SE head springs? Maybe the dealer upgraded those too, but I don't think so. In which case I would have to change springs, which correct me if I'm wrong, requires head removal.

 

[Uncle Salty]

I just now for the first time ever checked my CCP with a new Harbor Freight compression tester, and an old Snap-On 308 tester. Both testers gave identical readings of 203 psi front, 206 psi rear. I am in California and only 91 octane available.

That's pretty dang close to what it should be. I like a little less compression on a touring bike incase I get stuck out on the road without a good source of fuel. If the leak down is good and everything else is in good shape, a little larger cam should be golden. I cannot say which one as I don't have the experience as others. Don has a good rep and I'd say his advice would be hard to beat.

 

[Hoges]

Spring Coil Bind

 

[Don Dorfman]

Are your heads drilled and plugged for compression releases? Many but the most early of those heads had them. This will save starter drives and ring gears. I wouldn't touch either of those feuling cams, not a statement of the brand, based on the lc and lsa. A tman 590ps2 will do it all.

 

[maubuchon]

Are your heads drilled and plugged for compression releases? Many but the most early of those heads had them. This will save starter drives and ring gears. I wouldn't touch either of those feuling cams, not a statement of the brand, based on the lc and lsa. A tman 590ps2 will do it all.

That does look like a great cam for my motor. However the 16952-99 SE heads that I have from the year 2000 are not drilled for compression releases, and their original springs are rated for .575 lift. To change springs or add compression releases, I would need to remove the heads. I think you are telegraphing to me to bite the bullet and take the heads off.

 

[Don Dorfman]

Well you can trust the internet and the advertised number in the catalogue or me, your choice. I measure them. I know what the springs are, I have thrown away and scrapped hundreds of them. They are safe to .600+. Coil bind is 1.100 verified. 1.835" installed height-.600 gross lift-.060 safety margin = 1.175". You don't have to pull the heads and with the cam I mentioned the cranking compression will drop 10 lbs, a good thing. I would change the igntion box to a TC88. This can be programmed with a start cranking delay.

Based on the carbon I see if it were mine I would want to pull the heads, clean everything, and bare minimum replace the valve seals. Porting is not needed but replacing the guides with tighter fitting bronze manganese guides and viton seals will control oil much better. A Serdi valve job that is concentric and proper angles will enhance flow a little and seal best. So taking the heads off is not 100% needed but will assure a better result. Of course at that time then there are the cylinders to measure and they more than likely are not true and straight. This is all a top end overhaul or not if you don't want to open that box right now.

 

[maubuchon]

Well you can trust the internet and the advertised number in the catalogue or me, your choice. I measure them. I know what the springs are, I have thrown away and scrapped hundreds of them. They are safe to .600+. Coil bind is 1.100 verified. 1.835" installed height-.600 gross lift-.060 safety margin = 1.175". You don't have to pull the heads and with the cam I mentioned the cranking compression will drop 10 lbs, a good thing. I would change the igntion box to a TC88. This can be programmed with a start cranking delay.

Based on the carbon I see if it were mine I would want to pull the heads, clean everything, and bare minimum replace the valve seals. Porting is not needed but replacing the guides with tighter fitting bronze manganese guides and viton seals will control oil much better. A Serdi valve job that is concentric and proper angles will enhance flow a little and seal best. So taking the heads off is not 100% needed but will assure a better result. Of course at that time then there are the cylinders to measure and they more than likely are not true and straight. This is all a top end overhaul or not if you don't want to open that box right now.

OK, I get it now that you splain it to me that way. I realize you know way more I do, and you are right, there is either a lot of conflicting information or just a lack of information out here in the real world where I live. But that's why I came to this site. Thanks so much for you help and patience, I got the answers I was looking for, I think I can figure it from here.

 

[maubuchon]

Tman 590G, Andrews 67G, S&S 585G. None of these will have the manners down low, due to increased overlap, of the 203s but will offer 10+ hp increase, assuming good engine health and proper tune and pipe.

Well, this is where I am now. Among the Tman 590G, Andrews 67G, and the S&S 585G, I am leaning toward the Andrews 67G camshaft. I did some ciphering, and I might be giving up a little power to the other two cams, but I'm not sure how much or where in the powerband.

What I might be gaining from the Andrews with a smaller .570 lift but longer duration and overlap, should be easier starting, and a quieter, more reliable valve train. My cold cranking compression should drop from 205 to maybe 191 psi, which is probably a good thing.

Also, although other cams with higher lift may not cause coil bind in the SE heads, maybe there could be issues with accelerated spring fatigue, or insufficient spring pressure. That subject has not been brought up yet in this thread.

And, the Andrews 67 is almost identical to the SE 257, which was one of the top performance cams in the 2001 parts and accessories catalog. Someone at the factory must have thought this cam was a good match for their top SE cylinders, pistons, and heads from that era, which is what I already have. But my current SE 203 cam was the only performance cam available in the 2000 parts and accessories catalog, which could explain why I was never offered the SE 257 option when my dealer built my engine in 2000.

So, Andrews 67G is what I'm thinking, is my thinking correct?
(Edit: But I still like the S&S 585 and the Tman 590, so still deciding, at least I've narrowed it down from 3000 cams to 3)