So you had the same bike dyno'd at both places on the same day and got different results ?

 

Doesn't 204 cams have a 34 intake closing? odd indeed...

 

If you've got a 103" with the 54H I'd say your torque number is lower than to be expected. Had that on my prior bike and it was 112 with a slight bump in compression (10:1)

 

Actually, I'd like to see some comparision to the TW-222 and the TW5-6 cam that woods makes. It kind of looks like you're splitting hairs between the two cams.[/QUOTE]

Me too, I called and talked to Bob last week about cams. My bike is a 2011 Limited and I want it to pull as soon as I let the clutch out... He said the 222 is the deal so we'll see soon enough.

 

Lots of dishonesty out there. I'd not be surprised if the numbers presented were a touch higher then realistic for any build. They would be able to say there was a margine of expectation and your bike came up on the low side rather than the high side of that range. After all what proof have they offered that those numbers are consistently reachable? I hope it works out for you, but just because they boast higher then industry numbers does not mean much. I'd challenge that a bit to see why the industry does not share their success before I started buying that claim.

 

I don't think it's "splitting hairs" both are good midrange cams. The 222 will have the power band slightly to the left of the 5-6, that's all. Further, the 5-6 has too much lift for an everyday rider IMHO. I know others do it, but the 222 will be easier on the valve train, again IMHO.

Nothing odd about it. Lot's of cams are built with these similar specs. Makes for a great all around midrange cam. You'd see similar cams in stock TC's if Harley didn't have to deal with the EPA.


[/QUOTE]Me too, I called and talked to Bob last week about cams. My bike is a 2011 Limited and I want it to pull as soon as I let the clutch out... He said the 222 is the deal so we'll see soon enough.[/QUOTE]

I'd say the 222 would fit your needs nicely.

 

Actually, it is HD that is pro-active and voluntarily goes for the EPA bullshit, and spoon-feeds it to us.

They initiated the catalytic converter move, but thought/said to the EPA that all of the other motorcycle manufacturers had to follow suite.
This is according to an HD dealer.

 

yea those dealers would not lie lol. Harley only intitated the CC move because being air cooled they could not meet regs without it. no company HD included voluntarily goes for epa stuff, they are mandated too if they want to sell in the USA.

 

Subscribed

 

Please show me where in the world anyone has ever claimed to get anywhere near 100 Hp with stock cams. Aint gonna happen, not even close.

As far as the numbers we publish some need to take into consideration that we have spent years, many bikes, many components, and thousands of dyno runs developing specific combinations to come up with what we consider the best of the best of our testing and everything is relative to our dyno and conditions for that day.