When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Engine Mechanical TopicsDiscussion for motor builds, cams, head work, stripped bolts and other engine related issues. The good and the bad. If it goes round and around or up and down, post it here.
Sorry for the resurrection, but I decided to go with the 4" Rineharts, and without even tuning it, there's a massive difference in low end torque. Fuel Moto has my exact set up, with the Power Vision Tuner, making 95/112! But the kicker is, that it hit's 100lbs. at 2500 RPM's. I ordered the tuner, and will have it on Tuesday.
Don't get your hopes up for the same chart and even if you do achieve the same results, TQ starts falling off 3500rpms; most 48 cam dynos I have seen hit 100TQ by 2500 rpms and carry 100TQ+ out to near 4500 before falling off. I don't have any charts for a 103" Stage 1 plus 48 cams but do have a chart for a 96" Stage .75 (hi flow AC w/stock head pipe and slip ons) plus 48 cams to show what the 48 curve looks like. At 104TQ/93HP from a 96" motor, factor for additional cubic inches and the numbers would be 111TQ/100HP. Think about what those numbers would be with a full exhaust system and mild head work; a salty 96" motor.
JMHO but the $$ spent on another exhaust system would have been better spent on head work and more compression to wake up the 222 cams.
Don't get your hopes up for the same chart and even if you do achieve the same results, TQ starts falling off 3500rpms; most 48 cam dynos I have seen hit 100TQ by 2500 rpms and carry 100TQ+ out to near 4500 before falling off. I don't have any charts for a 103" Stage 1 plus 48 cams but do have a chart for a 96" Stage .75 (hi flow AC w/stock head pipe and slip ons) plus 48 cams to show what the 48 curve looks like. At 104TQ/93HP from a 96" motor, factor for additional cubic inches and the numbers would be 111TQ/100HP. Think about what those numbers would be with a full exhaust system and mild head work; a salty 96" motor.
JMHO but the $$ spent on another exhaust system would have been better spent on head work and more compression to wake up the 222 cams.
I totally agree with your comment on the 222 needing a boost in comp to get the best out of it. A stock 103"er is supposed to be at 9.6:1 But with just a mere .030 head gasket (which most can do at home) it would be enough to bring the ccp to 190 psi which is very good for the street with great manners... It's probably the most reliable ccp for the street.. Here's what my calculator puts it at... Not talking a high rpm drive train breaker but a modest amount of power that will last a long time.... Won't break your bank either...
From RB Racing calculator..
"Your engine summary is as follows: Bore 3.875 inches, stroke 4.375 inches, rod c-c length 7.66 inches, with a static compression ratio of 9.80 :1. Your camshaft specifications call for an inlet valve closing of 34 degrees ABDC (after bottom dead center).
Your chamber volume is 96.08 cc's. With this camshaft your dynamic, or effective stroke is 4.10 inches. Your dynamic compression ratio is 9.23 :1 corrected for cam timing, altitude, and rod length. Your dynamic cranking pressure, corrected for cam timing, rod length and altitude is 191.12 PSI. Your dynamic boost compression ratio, reflecting static c.r., cam timing, altitude, and 0 PSI is 9.23 :1."
Rode it today. It does have a lot more bottom end. Never really got over 3000rpms. I got a Dyno PV and a base map from Jamie for the 48h cam. I think when it warms up I'm going to have to get it tuned. It didn't run bad just can tell there's more on the table to be had. The potato idling is awesome.
Don't get your hopes up for the same chart and even if you do achieve the same results, TQ starts falling off 3500rpms; most 48 cam dynos I have seen hit 100TQ by 2500 rpms and carry 100TQ+ out to near 4500 before falling off. I don't have any charts for a 103" Stage 1 plus 48 cams but do have a chart for a 96" Stage .75 (hi flow AC w/stock head pipe and slip ons) plus 48 cams to show what the 48 curve looks like. At 104TQ/93HP from a 96" motor, factor for additional cubic inches and the numbers would be 111TQ/100HP. Think about what those numbers would be with a full exhaust system and mild head work; a salty 96" motor.
JMHO but the $$ spent on another exhaust system would have been better spent on head work and more compression to wake up the 222 cams.
I actually asked that very question to Bob, at Fuel Moto. He said that going to a higher compression, in that cam, would be throwing money away. He also said head work would not help it at all. I'm very happy with the power and the ride-ability now. The Power Vision tuner is a really sweet set-up. Also, I don't believe I could do much better with the exhaust choice. And, although I'm far from an expert, I've read in multiple threads, that it is almost impossible to get to the 100HP club, with a cam only change, on a 103." That being said, Fuel Moto does have a dyno chart, showing 104HP/122TQ, with level "B" heads and a 107"" big bore. All they will say about that is, "That was a special case". To find that Dyno chart, you have to go to the bottom of the page, after you pull up The heads page. There it show's 222's with Level "B" heads. But it is very vague.
Last edited by Bafflingbs; Dec 7, 2017 at 03:48 PM.
I totally agree with your comment on the 222 needing a boost in comp to get the best out of it. A stock 103"er is supposed to be at 9.6:1 But with just a mere .030 head gasket (which most can do at home) it would be enough to bring the ccp to 190 psi which is very good for the street with great manners... It's probably the most reliable ccp for the street.. Here's what my calculator puts it at... Not talking a high rpm drive train breaker but a modest amount of power that will last a long time.... Won't break your bank either...
From RB Racing calculator..
"Your engine summary is as follows: Bore 3.875 inches, stroke 4.375 inches, rod c-c length 7.66 inches, with a static compression ratio of 9.80 :1. Your camshaft specifications call for an inlet valve closing of 34 degrees ABDC (after bottom dead center).
Your chamber volume is 96.08 cc's. With this camshaft your dynamic, or effective stroke is 4.10 inches. Your dynamic compression ratio is 9.23 :1 corrected for cam timing, altitude, and rod length. Your dynamic cranking pressure, corrected for cam timing, rod length and altitude is 191.12 PSI. Your dynamic boost compression ratio, reflecting static c.r., cam timing, altitude, and 0 PSI is 9.23 :1."
I've really considered doing the gasket trick, and may still. But, at the moment, I'm super happy with how my bike rides now. The pipe change made a huge improvement. There's absolutely no lag down low now. I've really learned a valuable lesson on exhaust choices, and how everything works together. For what I wanted, I've finally achieved. Ride-ability! Thanks.
And, for the most part, I remain unconvinced, that the 48's are a better cam. But, if I were asked to narrow the list for a "Cam Only" upgrade, the short list would have the 222's, the 48's and the Cyclerama 570's.
I've really considered doing the gasket trick, and may still. But, at the moment, I'm super happy with how my bike rides now. The pipe change made a huge improvement. There's absolutely no lag down low now. I've really learned a valuable lesson on exhaust choices, and how everything works together. For what I wanted, I've finally achieved. Ride-ability! Thanks.
And, for the most part, I remain unconvinced, that the 48's are a better cam. But, if I were asked to narrow the list for a "Cam Only" upgrade, the short list would have the 222's, the 48's and the Cyclerama 570's.
Being happy with what you have is the most important attribute to any build... Glad to hear and yes the 222 will out perform the 48....
Rode it today. It does have a lot more bottom end. Never really got over 3000rpms. I got a Dyno PV and a base map from Jamie for the 48h cam. I think when it warms up I'm going to have to get it tuned. It didn't run bad just can tell there's more on the table to be had. The potato idling is awesome.
How does anyone ride without cracking 3K RPM?! Does forward propulsion even happen?
Interesting that the SE 255 wasn't on the list. I run a 48H, and have never ridden a 255 but I hear they have gobs of bottom end ... just allegedly fall off at 4K ...
I run the SE255 in my '07 Ultra, 96CI.
Very happy with the change from stock.
7 Surprising Harley-Davidson Products that Are Not Motorcycles
Slideshow: The bar-and-shield logo shows up on far more than motorcycles, some of the company's most unexpected products have nothing to do with riding.
Slideshow: From the troubled AMF years to modern misfires, these bikes earned reputations for reliability issues, questionable engineering, or disappointing performance.
Crazy Bunderbike Build Looks Amazing, But Is It Impossible to Ride?
Slideshow: The Swiss custom shop has taken a Harley Softail and stretched it into something so long and low that it looks closer to a rolling sculpture than a conventional motorcycle.
Engraved Rebellion: Inside Bundnerbike's Glam Rock II
Slideshow: A standard cruiser becomes an intricate metal canvas in the hands of a Swiss custom house known for pushing Harley-Davidson platforms far beyond their factory brief.
Slideshow: Harley-Davidson's challenges aren't abstract; they show up in dropping shipments, shrinking dealer traffic, and strategic decisions that aren't yet translating into growth.
