For the last year+ I have been following, asking lots of questions (thanks to all of you who have answered), and going back and re reading ntraindavefl's thread on his 110 drop in/CR.575 build. I would like to attempt to build something similar for my 2011 Fat Boy Lo. Riding style is 2 up mostly back country roads in south eastern Ohio. I'm looking for TORQUE over a horsepower number.

My first thought was to copy as much of Dave's build as I could, but as most of you know the options when building an engine are almost endless. Here's where I'm at right now.

I really like the torque curves I have seen with the T-Man.625 cams. So I was thinking those with 110 drop in cylinders and appropriate headwork. With this much cam I am thinking I may need to use CVO heads and up the throttle body and manifold to a 58mm unit.

I was also considering boring to 107 and using the T-Man.590's with heads ported to match.

And the last combo I was thinking about was either the 110 drop in or bore to 107 and using the Cycle Rama .575 with appropriate headwork

I have had a couple of conversations with Scott, I could talk to that guy for hours. Also I have been messaging with Kirby, he's the one that got me looking at T-Man. I thank you both for your time, suggestions, patience and sharing your knowledge.

So now it's time to make a decision on which direction to go. What I would like to hear about is your experience with any of these parts, what worked? what didn't? what would you do different next time? things I may be overlooking??

I'm going to pull the cam chest back out of it this week and get a look at my crank run out, and determine how far I can go (if anywhere)

EDIT

CURRENT CONFIGURATION
SE 255 Cams
SE Ventilator Air Cleaner
V&H Big Shot Staggered
SEPST
Power Vision also

Going to install an SE comp with a Rivera Primo Game Changer Sprocket
possibly a 30 tooth pulley as well

 

It would help knowing your goal, i.e., how much torque are you aiming for? Seems to me that once you have that figured out, Scott or Kirby could lay out a build plan to meet that goal.

As for experience with any of the cams you listed, I am a fan of TMan's cams and have run his 590 in an all bore 107" motor but liked the 600SM better. I recently read a post on another forum from a fellow that had run the CR575 and the 600SM and was partial to the 600SM but did say that the CR575 had a bit more off idle but couldn't match the mid range up performance of the 600SM.

As for displacement, unless you plan on case boring, the 110" drop in cylinders/pistons is the way to go; go as big as you can without case boring.

IIRC, your TB is 46mm and can be bored to 50mm, which would help. Don't know if going to 58mm is going to help TQ that much, mostly a HP and higher rpm performance booster.

I would say 110" cylinders/pistons, cams of your choice, heads ported by porter of your choice to match up with cams and a T/B bored to 50mm and a decent exhaust; Propipe, Crossbacks or Bassani Pro Streets; should be a runner. Of course, good fuel management and tune.

 

This is gonna get good!

 

From thee dyno sheets I have seen on this site and others, I think 120 ft/lbs is achievable, most builds I have seen have been A motors, but I think it could be done in a Softail.


an all bore 107" motor
I have seen you post this before, not to be a smart a$$, but what do you mean by that?

Damn, now you have me looking at another cam. From the couple of charts I have seen on another site I can see where they would say that. The curve seems to "ramp" up in the middle pretty good, and to a nice number, what has me interested in the cams I mentioned is their relatively flat torque curve. With the 600SM's earlier intake closing I could run less static compression and that's something to think about.

I don't want to pull the engine and bore the case, crank run out still needs to be checked, if it is out too far to support a build like this then I will change the cams and maybe a mild street port on the heads. If it needs crank work then we will be talking about a different build altogether. I stuck a SE255's in at 1000 miles, there is nothing wrong except I've grown quite bored with it.

This is where a lot of the questions seem to come into play. There doesn't seem to be any definite rule as to when the throttle body needs work.

That's kinda where I'm at, I like not leaving any cubic inches behind, need to decide on a head porter and just follow their advice.

I will go back and edit my original post to show my current configuration but at this moment am running V&H Big Shot Staggered for exhaust. Exhaust is going to be an issue because I really dont care for the look of a 2 into 1 on a harley.

 

Tman 600sm has been nixed from production. Tom must have replaced it w something better.

 

I did not know. I will have to check that out. I hope something better; I sure like that cam. What about the 660SM?

 

Selecting a head porter and working up a build plan is the smart move. 120 is achievable from a 110" motor.

An "all bore" 107" motor is an "over square" motor which means bore diameter exceeds stroke. An all bore 107" motor is configured by a 4.125 bore and a 4" stroke. An "under square" 107" motor is configured by a 3.938" bore and a 4.375" stroke.

Actually, if you do some reading, you will see that the throttle body size contributes more to HP and the higher rpm range.

 

660sm still in line up. I only discovered the 600sm discontinued because I recommended it to my buddy doing a similar 110 bagger build and always liked the torque lines. He called tman to order it and no go. So he went with our second choice the 625.

 

[QUOTE=djl;

Actually, if you do some reading, you will see that the throttle body size contributes more to HP and the higher rpm range.[/QUOTE]

 

This is what's on their website, but i haven't talked to him yet

This is a cam that we designed and had ground in July of 2007 in a gear drive for 99-06 models. This cam worked very well, but did have some valve train noise. Now with the new silent ramp design, we decided to bring it back in a chain style. This cam will have great bottom end torque and will pull hard to the top of the rpm range. It will work with stock beehive springs. We suggest 10.1-10.2 compression.

The dyno runs I looked at were from 2012 & 2015. Yeah I guess it's gone again