In another thread we were discussing Supertrapp Fatshots. I was sending my bike to the dyno (yesterday) to confirm my PCV map was not running lean (I had a suspicion) and I want to compare the affects on the torque curve by changing the number of disks on the mufflers. What I was also curious to see was how much TQ and HP I gained with the recent cam install. To make a very long story short, the shop didn’t have a clue what they were doing and they did a pathetic job on the tune.

I did get a dyno sheet (attached) that provides an indication of how my bike runs (with a very bad tune) with true duals and Andrews 26 cams. The sheet shows a dyno run (blue line) with all disks removed from the mufflers – yeah, the idiots dynoed the bike without the disks installed so they could insert the O2 sensor (Did I say it was a very bad tune?). The red line is a dyno run with the disks installed indicating the mufflers are tunable by adjusting the number of disks. Unfortunately, the bike is probably now running rich because it is no longer running straight pipes. Auuugh

I want to point out to those self proclaimed cam experts on the forums that say Andrews 26 cams reduce low end torque – you don’t know what you are talking about so stop misinforming everyone. The same goes for the experts (Sometimes the same guy) that say true duals reduce low end torque over the stock 2-into-1 exhaust. Even with a bad (pathetic) tune the dyno sheet indicates a significant increase over the torque produced by stock cams and exhaust.

I also have a dyno sheet for a tune (An excellent tune that time.) before installing the Andrews cams. With the true duals and stock cams the torque is the same as this sheet at 2000 rpm – still an improvement over stock. This indicates I didn’t lose any low end torque with the true duals.

To be clear, I’m not saying true duals and Andrews cams are the best, I’M SAYING THEY ARE AN IMPROVEMENT OVER STOCK.

I have a lot of disks installed (16) so the dyno sheet indicates to me that I can tune the low end torque if I reduce the number of disks to increase back pressure. This will also have an impact on the higher rpm TQ and HP. The torque curve suits my riding style so I’ll keep the number of disks at 16. I’m not one of those that wants to increase torque below 2000 rpm. At 2K your top speed is going to be 55 mph in 6th gear – you might as well walk, not to mention the damage done by constantly lugging your bike. In the real world you need to go faster than 55 and you might even want to pass someone some day. Peak torque at 3000 rpm is perfect for me. More importantly, a flat torque curve is what I want and this combination delivers it, even if it could be tuned better.

 

I completely agree with you. I have the TTS with 26H cams and Rinehart true duals.
I took my bike to Doc at the HDMD tuning Center and my numbers are 88hp and 98 tq. My bike runs great and I have had no problems at all. It may not be as powerful or as fast as some builds I read about on here, but it pulls great and runs smooth and has never given me any heat issues. Just my .02

 

Your dyno sheet shows the torque loss at the very beginning. See the stock run climb straight up? Then see the little dip in the other runs? That is the dip in torque they are talking about and it is caused by the rear pipe. I doubt anyone can feel that dip but the numbers guys seem to make a big deal over it.
Glad you are happy! I love mine as well.
My #'s are 93 ft. lbs and 87 HP with my PCIII. and 26 cams.V&H dresser duals and Rineharts

Mark

 

I have to agree on both counts. I think the 26's are a great cam for 96. Also agree about the bad tune. It looks like on run 5 he came off the brake at 1000 rpm and the other run he started his sampling at 1500. The bike must have been shakin' the dyno.

 

Andrews TW26 cams bolted into a stock TC96 with identical Stage 1 upgrades and a competent tune for both configurations will very likely reduce TQ on the low-end. Call Andrews and ask them. The same holds true for TD's vs. either stock head-pipes or 2-into-1's installed with otherwise identical hardware (AC, compression, etc.). I don't know of anyone who has stated that the TW26 produces inferior low-end TQ numbers when equipped with a Stage 1 exhaust compared to a stock engine with stock exhaust. I certainly never have and never would. Almost anything would out-perform a pure-stock bike in both HP and TQ.

I'm not denigrating the TW26, as it is an excellent cam for a TC96 if you like the characteristics it produces. The same goes for any other cam set on the market.

 

andrews are good cams! i like mine

 

For some reason the tuner couldn't understand that tuning the bike with all the disks removed will make for a very rich condition when the disks are put back on the bike. My eyes water from the exhaust fumes now.

Everything about this tune was inconsistent and a waste of time and money, although it did confirm my bike was running very lean, which is what I primarily wanted the dyno for (I wasn't chasing dyno numbers - that would just be a bonus.).

You have to know something is wrong when they call you to ask how to setup their software. If this ever happens to you, get you bike out of there as fast as you can.

 

I don't need to ask Andrews, I have the proof Andrews 26 cams increase low end torque on my bike. Reread my post - Stage 1 and TDs = more TQ and HP than stock (As per the dyno.). Add the Andrews cams and the numbers only get larger (As per the dyno.). Note, just to be clear I'm not talking butt dyno here, these are Dyno Jet dyno results.

Just for laughs I did ask Andrews when I was shopping for cams and they said "I would get a TQ and HP increase with these cams".

 

Did your stock dyno run have Stage 1 upgrades? You implied you were comparing the 26 results with a stock bike with stock mufflers, and if so that wouldn't be a good comparison of the cam's performance improvement alone. Where is the stock dyno chart?

Yes, you will get a TQ and HP increase, but IMO not in the low-end (<2500 rpms). Ask them again but qualify it as "no TQ loss in the low-end." They told me the same thing, but when I qualified the question as above I was told, "We don't have a cam that will do what you want." If you did get an increase across the board, could you show us a dyno chart reflecting it? I'm really interested in your project and am trying to understand the facts. I just can't see how a cam with a 35° intake close and longer duration can produce more low-end TQ without a compression increase.

 

I know this is a older thread,, but I just though I'd add what was questioned in this one...

Proof that the Andrews 26 cams does make better TQ across the sheet...

While researching the 21's VS 26's I came across this thread..

I do have my stock base sheet of my 07 96''er and also the after stg1 and 26 cams done.

U can see for Ur-self the 10%-20% increase across the sheet is for real..

Here is my 07 Heritage pre stg 1 dyno sheet.





Here is my dyno sheet after install of stg1, SERT, 26H cams and dyno.




I added this just to show other that I did get a big improvement in the 2k-3k rpms with the 26's.

Stock at 2250rpms I got about 74#'s and after I got about 84#'s.. In my book that's almost 15% better..

Mostly I can feel a major diff in the bike at 2200-2300 rpm's by the way she pulls.

Best result I like is now 6th gear is useful.. I can ride in 6th at 60 mph easy and passing better and faster than I used Pre-cams while ridding in 5th at 55mph.

Plus where as my best fuel mileage used to be riding in 5th at 55, netted avg of 42, Now I can ride 60 in 6th and get 45-48 mpg all day long. Also the cams helped cool the oil temp another 15*.

So IMO doing the cams was a WIN, WIN, WIN final results.



.





.