I talked to a guy named Tony
He said for my 2016 Ultra, 103, That I should go with 555's for rushmore bikes
Told him I'm in it for low RPM torque and top end not so much

I thought these needed a bump in CR and shined more in the mid/upper RPM's
Any thoughts?

 

The cycle rama 570-2 is a good cam for the 103.

 

If you're going bolt in and sticking with Woods, I'd do 222 if you want low end torque. Personally, unless you get one of these bolt in cams tuned by a competent tuner, I'd just leave the rushmore cam in the bike. Or use a Andrews 48, save some coin, and avoid the woods tax.

 

A Wood TW-5-6 would push good torque.
Another very good, totally un-sung cam is an S&S MR103.
Scott

 

I installed the CR 570 an put the .030 head gasket in an I'm happy with the way my bike pulls. I had the 555 in my slim an it was good but I might not have gotten the most out of it since it was tuned with a canned tune from the FP3. My CR 570 has a canned tune via a power vision an a Fuel Moto supplied tune. This spring I plan on taking the bike to Roeder's an getting a dyno tune, I don't have any numbers right now.

 

The TW-555's do indeed build broad power and are a very popular grind for the 103's. All depends on your main objectives, the other components you are running on the bike, as well as any future plans you would like like the cam to fit into as well.
For those interested we are about 3/4 of the way thru our "Twin Cam 103 super cam comparo" and we are getting ready to post results in the next couple weeks here> https://www.hdforums.com/forum/touri...m-testing.html
We bought a 103" bike and have tested 15 bolt in cams from various brands, we have a handful of cams left and we will be publishing all of the data. Stay tuned

 

i know that this is an okd thread but I just installed these in my 2014 SG to add to the power duals and SVT. The low RPM performance stayed about the same? But it oulls hard from about 2700rpm and performs awesome. Thats what I was looking for as I do alot of highway. Id go with the woods 22x if your looking the lower torque.

 

I think people's definition of good low end torque is a bit skewed by the masses to the point they lose out on well rounded performance. There's certainly nothing wrong with the low end of cams like the 555s or 570s in a stock 103 and have something that carries out a little better. The difference in low end torque and 3° IVC when looking at the tw5-6 is also minute when considering duration and 8° more overlap of the 570s or 555s that lends to better cylinder fill at low rpms. I did 90+ torque at 2200rpm with the 570s in a stock 103. Sure wouldn't want any earlier ivc than the 37° of the 5-6.







​​

 

that’s technical info obviously intended for the mechanics in the house. The butt dyno says the 555 pulls much harder in the mid-high rpm range, where as the 22x pulls hard immediately but also dies earlier in the rpm range.

 

That's just it. What do you consider high rpm? Because they don't pull high rpm. Cams like that are done by 5800rpm. A workable rpm range being 1800(too low imo) to 6800. Any lower or higher being unhealthy and/or dangerous. The cams in question make power from 2800 on the low end to 5800 on the high end. Dead nuts middle and an ideal street cam. And they can still operate down to 2000 to 2200 satisfactorily just not as strong. Meaning you can accelerate just not full throttle. But they are absolutely done making power at 5800. Hardly a high rpm cam.
In the case of the 5-6s Scott mentioned, they're power band is 100-200rpm lower leaning closer to a low mid.

​​​​​