Ok, more checks competed, knocked off the list. The cams seem to run smoothly. I taped them up and didn't see any contact. I put a thin coat of oil around the cam lobe path and when taped up, the tape was clean.
One thing I thought was off, while I'm waiting for the cam support plate to come in tomorrow, I thought id change the oil. So, I frained everything from the rear, let it sit for an hour to drain everything. Next I went to remove the filter, when I did, no oil came out of the filter when I removed the old one. No oil drained out of the feed to the filter either. When I looked at the filter, it looked clean inside. I've put 1300 miles on since the 500 mile oil change. Is there any way oil wasn't circulating through the filter? Wouldn't it have overheated? Just thought it was weird that I didn't have any oil mess coming out of the filter.

 

Yes, it is possible that oil was circulating without filtration and you can have oil pressure and no oil filtration so now we have to figure out why. You could not have rolled up 1300 miles with no oil circulating through the motor.

Your OP was a complaint about the build being down on power but now the "whirring/squealing" noise and "no oil in the filter" are on the table. First things first though would point me to dealing with the lack of oil in the filter and the noise; power issue will have to wait until those issues are resolved. You have eliminated sumping and have confirmed that the motor makes good compression, so put the power issue aside for the moment.

Let's look at the "no oil in filter" issue first. Are you still running the OEM cam plate? What oil filter are you running? What oil pressure did you have at hot idle and cruise for the 1300 miles you rolled up on the motor before pulling the cam plate?

The noise issue(s) I suspect are related to the gear drive cams. Did your tech check crank runout before installing the gear drive kit? Do you know what the runout measurement was? A "whirring" noise is a common characteristic of gear driven cams; however, if the whirring noise is really loud, the gear lash is likely too tight. If the gears are too loose, they will make a "clacking" noise. So, checking inner and outer gear lash will determine of over or under size gears are necessary to correct the gear noise.

 

So, I finished up the install of the MR103 cams, SE cam plate and oil pump, and Bassani Pro-Street exhaust and got her in for ANOTHER dyno run. I didn't think it was even possible, but I actually LOST power....92 hp and 96 torque (dyno sheet attached.) The blue line is with the 583GE cams, stock cam plate, and V&H Big Radius, the red is the latest run. I'm so ****** right now I can't even think straight. What else could possibly be sucking the power out of this motor? Poor head work (S&S 89cc) or pistons? Any help is appreciated.

 

BamBam, this is indeed a disappointment. So sorry. A few things I can point out, but please forgive any indelicacies in my response below as I'm almost as frustrated for you as you are:

1) Why are you messing around with these mouse cams? The MR103 has a lame 33* close and an even lamer 226* intake duration. You're riding a softail, not a bagger. I lost track of the the thread for a while when you said you ordered the MR103s, thought that the decision was between the 570's and the 585's as HD Bobber, qtr racer, and djl recommended. Further, the MR103 has a 252* exhaust duration, which means that it is likely over-exhausting when coupled with the MR103's short intake duration, killing your bottom end. The Pro-Streets have been documented to tame the over-exhausting of the 585's, so the MR103's must be even worse in this respect. Looks to me like the MR103's have the over-exhausting tendency of the S&S 585's (or worse) without its strong points (great top end). For goodness sakes, get some cams with a 38-42* intake close, an intake duration in the 240*+ range, and exhaust duration in the high 240's or low/mid 250's, and lift from .570" to .615". Suggest you consider the R&R 615 if you can get static compression in the 10.5-10.8 static CR/195-200 psi CCP range.
2) The AFR on your latest graph is lean across the board, especially from mid to top RPM. Hurts power and can be dangerous for the motor. IME, the Pro Streets like a slightly rich AFR. Find a REALLY GOOD TUNER!
3) We still don't know what your true compression ratio/CCP is because of the EZ start cams. Low compression will make for a weak, unresponsive motor. This alone could explain the majority of the dismal dyno numbers, especially on the bottom. CCP should be between 195-200 psi. I suspect that it far below that based on your dyno sheet. Possible causes are: poor ring sealing, too thick head gasket, too large combustion chamber, wrong CR pistons, too much deck height, valves not sealing. IMO, the super-conservative S&S procedure for motor breakin almost guarantees a sub-optimal ring seal. With modern machining technology, extensive heat cycling and babying the motor for a bizillion miles is antiquated, unnecessary, and even detrimental as it squanders the short available run time after initial start up to optimally seat the rings.
4) IF the CCP is actually in the 195-200 psi range (how to know for sure with the EZ start cams?), the primary suspect for holding back your top end numbers is the heads. To get really good top-end HP, the intakes needs to flow at least 275 cfm @ .575" to .600" lift at 28in. Hg with the exhaust flowing about 80% of that or a little more. Others have reported much better dyno results using your S&S 106" setup, so, for now, I would focus more on validating the correct compression and getting some more appropriate cams.

To give you an idea what the Pro Streets can do with proper compression and cams, I attached the dyno graph for my 95" build, 198.5 CCP, Edelbrock Performer RPM heads (>275cfm @ .600" lift), Crane 296 cams (very similar to the R&R 615 or the S&S 585 with 1.725 rocker ratio), using the Pro Streets. This pull was in 4th gear and before extensive tuning to eliminate the way over-rich AFR, numbers should be significantly better now. Your numbers could be 10% better than mine (125hp/120+ ft lbs) with the right compression, head flow, and cams.

BamBam, I'm not trying to dog you, my friend, just trying to help you get to the root of the problem.

EDIT: Found this thread on how to do compression test with EZ start cams:
http://harleytechtalk.org/htt/index....c,82446.0.html

 

Dyna, no need to be delicate brother, I've got thick skin, seems I've got a thick head too. I keep listening to the "techs" at S&S, which is clearly a bad idea. They are the ones that pushed me in the direction of the MR103's. Clearly a mistake on my part. Bottom line, I've learned my lesson and I appreciate your input. Now that I've got the procedure to comp test her properly (I'll prob go the exhaust push rod route, I think it would be more accurate). I've thought that the CR is too low as well, we'll see. The kit ships with a .045" head gasket. Could I increase the CR with a .030" gasket if need be? If not, what is the best way to increase the CR? Once I've got a decent CR, I guess it will be time to sell another set of cams and pick up a set of 570's or 585's depending.....right?

 

The easiest way to check compression with the EZ start cams is the second way presented in the thread dynawg1 linked. Fire the motor on one cylinder with the tester in the other; haven't tried this way yet but will at the next opportunity.

As I said in #58, according to your previous compression test results of 150/160 is consistent with a CCP (sea level) right at 205psi with 89cc heads, flat top pistons, OEM head gasket and 583 cams. The EZ start cams bleed off 20%-30% of CCP. 75% of a calculated CCP of 205 is 154psi which is in striking distance of the 150-160 you measured. On that basis, it would appear that CCP was about right, in that configuration. The only unknown is the dome volume of the kit pistons. I have assumed -3cc because typically aftermarket pistons have larger valve reliefs to accommodate the larger valves that are often installed in ported heads; 3cc is the max I have seen. But, you now know how to check compression accurately so that will either confirm what I think we already know, or not.

The 10psi difference, (in the 583 configuration) does not indicate that cam timing is off but you have since installed new cams so when you check compression again, if the difference between cylinders is 15-20psi, cam timing could also be an issue. Even with the MR103 cams, which I agree are a poor choice with the 26* split duration, you should see 190 CCP and you should have seen better than 92/96 numbers with the MR103 cams.

The difference between a .045"and .030" head gasket is marginal and at this point, not worth making the change, mainly because you have not verified actual CCP.

Since you have had the cam chest open again and changed cams, you should check again for sumping to eliminate that as a possible power drag.

Those BR pipes are not helping the low end. What gear is your tuner using to record data? Is he truly tuning or loading/tweaking a map? How long did it take for the tuner to complete the tune? Were you there during the tune? While I agree with dynawg1's observation that the AFR is lean, I don't believe the AFR is lean enough to make a big difference in peak numbers nor do I believe that the AFR is lean enough to cause motor damage. I would be more concerned about checking the AFR at partial throttle and cruise before making any adjustments at WOT.

You don't have a kit of parts that plays well together yet; S&S heads are OK but it would have been smarter to have yours ported; wrong cams; wrong exhaust; good fuel management system and cannot comment on the capability of the tuner. I would not have changed anything until I had verified compression; you need to establish a baseline and make one change at a time. At this point, I would verify compression, verify no sumping and if that checks out, change pipes to a 2:1 pipe of your choice and return to the dyno with the MR103 for a couple of pulls and see what you get.

Don't get caught up with comparing your dyno numbers with dynawg1's numbers or any one else's numbers. Even comparing the results of a similar build can be misleading. Peak numbers in the range of 115TQ/110HP are typical for a 107" build with headwork, cams and good exhaust; 125HP/120TQ is an unrealistic target for your current combination of parts.

 

If it were my motor (which admittedly it is not) and, especially, if it was so far down on power, I would not depend on interpolated CCP numbers, but instead, find out exactly what the actual CCP is as a first step and then work backwards using the BigBoyz calculator to see what your static CR is so you can get a better baseline. Short of CC'ing the heads and measuring your deck height, that's the closest you can get to approximating your static CR. Proper cam choice is based on knowing what the motor's actual static CR is. You can also see the effect of the .030" vs .045" headgaskets on your static & corrected compression and CCP using that method.

There is nothing wrong with the pipes you have. From what I have seen, the Big Radius may have a slight edge on the bottom, but the Pro Streets kill them, and other pipes I have personally tried (including the RB Racing LSR and V&H Pro Pipe 2>1s), from 4-6k+. The Pro Street's powerband is somewhat different than a 2>1, tilted slightly toward higher RPM, but will keep the torque curve high, up to and beyond 6k, thus delivering top HP with the right cams (see prior post and perhaps adding the T-Man 590's and maybe the Andrews 67s). With the right compression (9.25 to 9.5 corrected CR). they will have a strong, smooth torque curve on the bottom (no 2>1 low-RPM torque dip) and wick up quickly with your relatively light softail once you get the cams, heads, and tuning sorted. Plus, you avoid the 10-20+lb. weight penalty of the heavier 2>1s.

Plenty of 107's out there producing 120/120 range with a well sorted motor, but djl may be right about your specific setup, dunno.

 

Well, dynawg1 and I will have to agree to disagree on your pipes. As many dyno runs as I have watched, not sheets read at random, but being right there watching the pulls, the BR pipes are among the worst performers I have seen with the exception of drag pipes. They are hurting your low end and the first change I would make would be the pipes before changing anything else. The right exhaust can make a huge difference in performance.

Of course, the OP should check CCP; I was not suggesting otherwise but I am suggesting that the OPs CCP is not that far off based on interpolated numbers; of course I could be proven wrong when you actually test compression. You have said in a previous post that the S&S head volume is 89cc
As I pointed out, the one unknown is the dome volume of the piston; I am guessing and would really like to know. Any calculations are still going to be questionable because of that unknown.

A .030" head gasket will add about .3 points to static CR; .2 points in corrected CR and 5 points in CCP which is why I don't think it is worth the time and effort to change head gaskets at this point. Forget about static; it's just a number and the motor never sees static CR. You need to be looking at corrected CR in the range dynawg1 has suggested and/or CCP; I would even stretch the upper limit to 9.6. I like to see CCP about 190 in a street motor but there are plenty running 195-200; I just don't think the higher CCP is necessary to make reasonable numbers and the lower CCP is easier on the motor and other components. The difference in corrected CR and CCP between a .045" and .030" head gasket is marginal but keeping squish between .030" and .035" is desirable and a more important reason for a thinner head gasket than increasing compression.

While I agree that there are 107s that see 120/120 numbers, 115TQ/110HP is typical. Don't worry about numbers; you can't ride a dyno sheet. You can dyno your bike on one dyno one day and another dyno the next and the numbers will be different. There are "happy" dynos and "stingy" dynos and numbers will often depend on the dyno and the operator as much as the build.

I totally agree with dynawg1 that the OP is pissing in the wind without knowing true compression; hard to make decisions without that information. I do like the TMan cams and the 590 is one of my favorites as well as the 600SM; TMan's new 577 has had some good reports as well. I think the Andrews 67 would not be a good fit for your configuration but, like I said, it's hard to make any decisions without knowing true compression.

 

djl - we AGREE on the BR pipes BamBam installed Pro Streets. I know you are "undecided" on them, but, for now, I think we can agree that our friend should focus on the other things you articulated so well.

 

My bad, I missed the pipe change. I wish the OP would not have changed cams and pipe at the same time. A pipe or cam change only and a couple of pulls would have revealed something that might have been helpful in sorting out the OPs motor. In situations like this, changes should be made one step at a time. A full tune is not required to verify the effect of the change, just a couple of pulls will tell the story.

I know you like the Pro Streets and you are right, I believe there are better choices and I will tell you why. As a point of reference, I just scrolled through 150 dyno sheets on another forum and found two with the Pro Streets; both were 124" builds; empirical data that clearly shows the Pro Streets are not a popular choice. However, I did find it curious that the three 124" builds all ran Bassani pipes; two with Pro Streets and one with the RRII. In and of itself, the data doesn't mean that the Pro Streets don't perform but it does support that the Pro Streets are not often selected for performance motor upgrades. Which begs the question of why they are not often selected and that is a question I cannot answer. However, the data would point me to the other pipes that are more often selected with results that have been recorded as a basis for considering an alternative.

A long winded way of saying that I can't say whether the Pro Streets are the right pipe for the OP or not; they have worked out well for your particular configuration. However, by relying on available data I am quite comfortable recommending other systems for the OP's consideration. A moot point now that the OP has installed the Pro Streets but just wanted to clarify the reason why I am undecided about the Bassani Pro Street pipes.

I am anxious to see accurate compression data; maybe when we have that, we can help the OP sort out his motor.