[BlueRidgeIC.com]

I know that my '04 Screamin' Eagle catalog listed the (non CNC ported) HTCC head as being compatable with flat top pistons but the '05 and '06 catalogs say this combination in N/A.

Since I want to eventually run a cam that is more for low and mid range such as the 37G, I don't want to use the HTCC pistons which have a 10.5:1 compression ratio. Anybody have any comments on the use of flat top pistons in this head?

Thanks,

Frank

 

[mghilliard]

Consider the HD 251 cam and HTCC pistons. I run the SE High tourque build, with these components on my '04 FLHRCI. Plenty of pull at all RPM's. It comes with the compression releases. Never had a problem starting.

 

[nidan]

I talked to Andrews and Woods when I was looking at HTCC , they recommended : 31G,44G or 50G and Woods TW5G , The HTCC heads from what I've been told require the HTCC pistons .

 

[compressor#v]

Nidan, do not run flattops with HTCC heads. They have multiple quench angles and require the matching pistons. If you want to run flattops consider different heads.

 

[HDMD88]

Nidan, do not run flattops with HTCC heads. They have multiple quench angles and require the matching pistons. If you want to run flattops consider different heads.

@gree: Compressor is correct....

 

[kjtrot]

I am sort of in the same situation with my build. I am considering changing to a different cam and perhaps pistons.
The reason is that the valve train noise is a little unnerving to me for a daily rider.
The build consists of the following in a 06 RKC:
SE 95" BB, HTCC 10.5 to 1 pistons, HTCC CNC ported heads, SE 251 cam, SERT. Running Dino oil at present. Going to Syn 3 for the winter.

I know realize after spending many hours reading this forum there other / better builds out there for less money. Live and learn!

Will any of the Andrews or Woods cams listed earlier give a
better tq. curve than the SE251 and make less valve train noise?
Will the pistons be an issue as stated in the original thread.
Perhaps some more knowledgeable folks like Doc and others can shed some light on this.
Thanks

 

[HDMD88]

I am sort of in the same situation with my build. I am considering changing to a different cam and perhaps pistons.
The reason is that the valve train noise is a little unnerving to me for a daily rider.
The build consists of the following in a 06 RKC:
SE 95" BB, HTCC 10.5 to 1 pistons, HTCC CNC ported heads, SE 251 cam, SERT. Running Dino oil at present. Going to Syn 3 for the winter.

I know realize after spending many hours reading this forum there other / better builds out there for less money. Live and learn!

Will any of the Andrews or Woods cams listed earlier give a
better tq. curve than the SE251 and make less valve train noise?
Will the pistons be an issue as stated in the original thread.
Perhaps some more knowledgeable folks like Doc and others can shed some light on this.
Thanks

The wood line of cams are the torque monsters in the industry...the TW6H, TW8, TW9B, and TW5 will all work with the HTCCported head and pistons. The main thing I see with the HTCC Ported heads are the valve spring pressures....the heads are designed for upper rpm motors with large lift and long duration cams and can rev to 7000 rpm. If you have to keep these heads and use a....lets say....TW6H cam you should lower the spring pressure to 175 to 180 lbs at installed height. That will lessen the valve noise and be much easier on the valve train.
There are some Andrews cams are a better performers in the lower rpm range than the S/E line too. A good cam from Andrews for those heads would be the 60...even then the HTCC heads are over sprung for that cam too.
Good Luck

 

[BlueRidgeIC.com]

Doc,

I can understand why the Wood's TW9b and TW8 (with intake closing around 50 degrees) could be run with HTCC CNC ported heads and 10.5:1 ratio but I'm surprised the TW6H and the TW5 (with intake closing aroound 40 degrees) would run with these heads. Wouldn't detonation be a problem at these compression ratios? I notice a number of members run these combinations but I personally, I would think spark knockw would be a problem. Thanks.

Frank

 

[HDMD88]

Doc,

I can understand why the Wood's TW9b and TW8 (with intake closing around 50 degrees) could be run with HTCC CNC ported heads and 10.5:1 ratio but I'm surprised the TW6H and the TW5 (with intake closing aroound 40 degrees) would run with these heads. Wouldn't detonation be a problem at these compression ratios? I notice a number of members run these combinations but I personally, I would think spark knockw would be a problem. Thanks.

Frank

Frank the TW5 was designed just for the HTCC 10.5:1 compression. Now the HTCCPorted heads have bigger ports...that shouldn't be a problem, its better to under cam than it is to over cam.
I personally run 10.8:1 with the TW6H with no detonation problems in all the builds I do with it.

 

[nidan]

I had no intention of running flat tops with HTCC heads. I bought the flat tops after I decided against HTCC . I decided on going with either SBC or Dewey for headwork and keeping the compression @ 9.8 for a variety of reasons. One of my objectives is to not have the motor look like anything but stock, as it's a CVO bike . Plus it's more fun if they don't know what you have "just a stage I and a good tuner" lol

 

[Totenkopf]

One of my objectives is to not have the motor look like anything but stock, as it's a CVO bike . Plus it's more fun if they don't know what you have "just a stage I and a good tuner" lol

Exactly what I'm doing. A sleeper. fun ain't it?!? The only thing that gives me away is the exhaust note at idle doesn't sound stock.

 

[b-footn]

Sleepers are fun on a ride with others on a country road. Passing vehicles with other bikes, I am sort of pushing others on the pass.:thumbsup: