V-Twin Forum banner

1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
714 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I am looking at several different cams for my bike:

06 Street Glide EFI
Stage II Big Bore 95" Flat Tops w/203 Cams
SE Performance Heads
10-1CR w/ Compression Releases
V&H True Duals w/ Ovals
SERT

It has over 195 Static Compression with the 203's @ 18/36 Intake timing. The 203's are there only cause they were part of the Stage II Big Bore build I had done prior to taking delivery.

Bike runs good actually with lot's of low end power and good in fact up to around 3800 RPM where it starts to slow it's pull. I have not tuned the bike yet with these cams and not sure I will based on my next decision.

My numbers pre SE Heads w/ the 203's was 78HP and 86ft/lb with 80ft/lb @ 2500 and 85ft/lb @ 3000. I can feel a significant difference now, as mentioned don't know the numbers.

I've gotten some good advice from several cams and I'm looking into each one. At this point I'm looking for opinions or real world experience with these two Cams; Woods TW 6 (not H) and the Andrews 31 H. One of the main things I DON"T want to happen is to push the power band up above the 2500 level with either of these cams, and it doesn't appear I would.

I've spoken to Bob Woods and in fact ran his TW 5-G's on my last bike and he promoted TW 6 all the way.
I've also spoken to Andrews re: their choice for my build and it was an unfaltering TW 31 vs the TW 37, largely due do the larger intake timing numbers of the 31 (10/46). vs (18/38) on the TW 37. The torque hit's lower at 2000 and reportedly holds it's head up real nice through 5K.

For the Woods TW6 all looks good with a bit higher duration at 240/240 vs 236/240 on the TW 31, but not much, same lift @ .510, 20/40 Intake timing Woods vs 10/46 Intake timing Andrews.

With all that, any opinions on the best money spent for my peformance needs, (plenty of torque coming on as low as possible, and lasting as long as possible) between these cams. I do realize there are several other contenders in this class, but I'm curious to hear opinions and particularly real world examples of these two cams.

Thanks
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
304 Posts
What are ya trying to achieve with a cam change? I'm running a TW-6 with and the rest is in my signature below. My dyno run is posted in the forum also so you can check it out. The bike is strong, but a guy in our club has the 203 and he's keeping up...it depends who gets off the light first as to who's out front. Exhaust makes a difference too...I may be losing torque with my Rineharts but it'll run out a little farther than the others.

I'd bet since you don't have a dyno print out that you've never had a quality EFI tuning. Did you do a Power Commander, SERT or the Harley Stage Map? The Harley Stage Maps are inadequate.

First thought: Get it tuned properly and you'll be amazed.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
714 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Prophet...thanks. I have had at least three custom tunes on this bike, one with a very good tuner. Thats where I got the 78 and 86 numbers, I had a Fatcat on the bike for a short while and had it tuned (SERT by the way) and got 83/86, no real change in torque or it's curve, but more HP. It did feel stronger at high rpms with the Fatcat, just never could get used to the pipes.. I had a similar build before on another bike with SE Heads Flat Tops Woods 5G and a Thunderheader. I'm pretty familiar with the various exhaust options and tuning.
Funny you asked "what am I trying to achieve" or something to that order...thats what the Andrews guy asked me today. Specifically he said "what is it you don't like about that cam?" As I told him, I wasn't totally unhappy, but I did think my cranking compresson was too high for the build with those cams, and he agreed it was a bit high. I also find the 203's start to weaken after about 3500rpm in their pulling power. I don't like that. My old 5G's never quit pulling.
You're right..probably should have another tune with the 203's, I just never was serious enough about keeping them to spend the $400 or so. I"m surprised you don't find the TW6's to be superior to the 203's but hey maybe that's the way it is:) Not exactly an endorsement to drop the coin for Woods cams again at that price with real world experience like you're observing. Thanks again for the feedback.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
746 Posts
The timing on the 31 I think will put your effective/dynamic/corrected or what ever the heck everyone wants to call it a little low with the 46 deg intake close for my taste..the woods with a 40deg close would come on stronger down low I think.

Im putting the 31 in my 103 and my Static is 10.36:1 with effective of 9.2:1 your abit lower static

I show your would be around (both corrected) 9.0:1 with the andrews
and approx 9.28:1 with the woods cam....thats at sea level

I see your in Dallas so thats about 500 ft above sea level so thats about the numbers you would see
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,508 Posts
Cams

We use the entire gamet of Bob Wood grinds in a variety of applications, but if we were handcuffed into having only one cam to work with, it, in fact it would be the #6 grind. Period. It is the most versitale cam out there. We commonly see 100hp and 110 ft/lbs with a stock cv carb and our heads in 95" builds.
Our EFI tuner, www.joescyclerepair.com, has recorded as high as 105 hp and 116 ft/lbs with certain exhausts.(95")
80" Evos----80 hp/90 ft/lbs
88"---------95 hp/103-4 ft/lbs
103"------113 hp 125-7 ft/lbs
117"------115 hp/140-142 ft/lbs
Set up correctly, they hit like a hammer off idle, and pull all the way to around 5500.
Scott
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
304 Posts
JagmanR said:
Prophet...thanks. I have had at least three custom tunes on this bike, one with a very good tuner. Thats where I got the 78 and 86 numbers, I had a Fatcat on the bike for a short while and had it tuned (SERT by the way) and got 83/86, no real change in torque or it's curve, but more HP. It did feel stronger at high rpms with the Fatcat, just never could get used to the pipes.. I had a similar build before on another bike with SE Heads Flat Tops Woods 5G and a Thunderheader. I'm pretty familiar with the various exhaust options and tuning.
Funny you asked "what am I trying to achieve" or something to that order...thats what the Andrews guy asked me today. Specifically he said "what is it you don't like about that cam?" As I told him, I wasn't totally unhappy, but I did think my cranking compresson was too high for the build with those cams, and he agreed it was a bit high. I also find the 203's start to weaken after about 3500rpm in their pulling power. I don't like that. My old 5G's never quit pulling.
You're right..probably should have another tune with the 203's, I just never was serious enough about keeping them to spend the $400 or so. I"m surprised you don't find the TW6's to be superior to the 203's but hey maybe that's the way it is:) Not exactly an endorsement to drop the coin for Woods cams again at that price with real world experience like you're observing. Thanks again for the feedback.
I will say that my TW-6 is just warming up at 3500. It's a lively one out to the 5K range. My ccp is around 200 with the +4 gear. No pinging or anything but hard on the starter so I use compression releases
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,508 Posts
Advance keys/gears

We always run 'em straight up.
 

·
wildbillnc
Joined
·
117 Posts
The wood tw6 gets my vote check out this torque curve It is iunder Dyno's forum under finally got a decent tune
 

·
IronButt
Joined
·
6,364 Posts
Both are good cams. I have had great luck with both. The 31 is a smoother power builder than the 6. Not to say that you will not get the power from the 6. Just when you look at the overall curve the 31 is smoother overall. You enough compression to support either cam. You are not going to see any huge gains with your set up from one cam to the next. money wise the andrews is less money than a woods. I do not think you can go wrong with either cam. If you add more head work later the woods would be the better choice.

We have used the 31 in many SE builds, with the standard SE performer head ( out of the box) and the build always makes the 100/100 mark every time.

The woods 5 or 6 in that same combo does just about the same as well. Add a good set of ported heads and the woods will edge out the andrews.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
Has anyone looked at the Andews 32g vs the wood TW6, the 32 has same timing but is a high lift version .570 lift, with a -2 to -4 deg retard it looks good on paper to me.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
714 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
WILDBILLNC said:
The wood tw6 gets my vote check out this torque curve It is iunder Dyno's forum under finally got a decent tune

Wild Bill...not finding the dyno forum you mentioned. Where would I view your dyno. Great looking bike btw!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
714 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
Wild Bills Dyno

Thanks for the link TxChop.

Wild Bill...now that's what I'm talkin about:):yes:

For under 10CR and .510 lift, that is a beautiful tune!
That is very weird regarding the 1st and 2nd tune though. Almost hard to believe someone could screw up that bad, particularly the second one!!
Did you have the Fatcat on for all three dyno's?

Whenever I see a Fatcat dyno, I almost have to give 1/3 or better of the credit to the pipe. Nothing else I've seen gives that straight up "torque line" as I call it...cause there ain't no curve:) I had one on my SG for about a month...took it off and sold it cause I liked my duals and felt like they actually pulled harder down low. They always had an annoying slurping sound is the best way I can describe it when going through the gears. In fact my dyno's pretty much confirmed there wasn't much difference...but they stayed up high and never dropped to 5K. I think that pipe needs compression to really perform outside of just my Stage II 95" old build. Now I'm thinking the duals have to go after I decide which cams to go with. I may very well go with another Fatcat for a dyno chart like that with TW 6's!

Thats a very nice endorsement for the Wood TW6!
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,508 Posts
Tuners

JagmanR said:
Thanks for the link TxChop.

Wild Bill...now that's what I'm talkin about:):yes:

For under 10CR and .510 lift, that is a beautiful tune!
That is very weird regarding the 1st and 2nd tune though. Almost hard to believe someone could screw up that bad, particularly the second one!!
Did you have the Fatcat on for all three dyno's?

Whenever I see a Fatcat dyno, I almost have to give 1/3 or better of the credit to the pipe. Nothing else I've seen gives that straight up "torque line" as I call it...cause there ain't no curve:) I had one on my SG for about a month...took it off and sold it cause I liked my duals and felt like they actually pulled harder down low. They always had an annoying slurping sound is the best way I can describe it when going through the gears. In fact my dyno's pretty much confirmed there wasn't much difference...but they stayed up high and never dropped to 5K. I think that pipe needs compression to really perform outside of just my Stage II 95" old build. Now I'm thinking the duals have to go after I decide which cams to go with. I may very well go with another Fatcat for a dyno chart like that with TW 6's!

Thats a very nice endorsement for the Wood TW6!
You should see what www.joescyclerepair.com does with that cambo.
Have seen 106 hp 115 ft/lbs. with our heads.
 

·
wildbillnc
Joined
·
117 Posts
Yes I had the Fat Cat on for all tunes I also have a set of Rienhardt true duals but they did not have the torque down as low although they did 1hp more on top end I agree with scot from Hillside that there is some more to be had in Torque and Hp but will have to wait for more money as I don't think anyone close to me could do any better would love to get it to Doc and see what he could do with it!!! I am sure that there is more because I have an full size print out of the AFR and it shows a little left on table. You will never go wrong with a Wood TW6!!!:)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
714 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
Hillsidecycle.com said:
You should see what www.joescyclerepair.com does with that cambo.
Have seen 106 hp 115 ft/lbs. with our heads.
Are you talking about the Night Train dyno? Damn...!
I'm thinking "your" Heads might be part of the key, but now have to settle with the SE out the box Heads:) Hey I do have a set of 06 Heads right off the bike:)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
714 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
WILDBILLNC said:
Yes I had the Fat Cat on for all tunes I also have a set of Rienhardt true duals but they did not have the torque down as low although they did 1hp more on top end I agree with scot from Hillside that there is some more to be had in Torque and Hp but will have to wait for more money as I don't think anyone close to me could do any better would love to get it to Doc and see what he could do with it!!! I am sure that there is more because I have an full size print out of the AFR and it shows a little left on table. You will never go wrong with a Wood TW6!!!:)
You don't how many times I wish I could let Doc work his majic. He's on to sharing the wealth with others now though:) I'm feeling good about the TW6 order at this point.
 

·
I paid.........did you??
Joined
·
2,301 Posts
WILDBILLNC said:
The wood tw6 gets my vote check out this torque curve It is iunder Dyno's forum under finally got a decent tune
That is a great dyno right there...........that bike must be a blast to ride.

Steve
 

·
wildbillnc
Joined
·
117 Posts
Yes it is, however I haven't been able to ride for last three weeks because I had emergency back surgery hope to get back on it soon can't hardly wait:thumbsup:
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top