Exhaust System Topics New and old exhaust system discussions. Fitment issues to sound bites and suggestions. Post them here.
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by: Jekill and Hyde

SE255 Cams in 96 Twin Cam

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
  #1  
Old 09-05-2010, 07:42 AM
jfroehler's Avatar
jfroehler
jfroehler is offline
Stage IV
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Angry SE255 Cams in 96 Twin Cam

I installed SE255 cams in my 2008 Road Glide. It has V&H slip-ons, Fuelmoto breather and a Power Commander V installed.
Before the cams the engines dyno readings were 71 HP at 5500 rpm and 80 lbs of torque. After the cams were installed the HP went up to 73 and the torque did not change. I had my indie try a custom fuel map to see if he could not squeeze anything else out of the engine. The AFR is consistent across the board and everything is running fine. but no more torque.

Does anyone know why I didn't get the kick I thought I would from the new cams???
 
  #2  
Old 09-05-2010, 07:53 AM
TORQUEY's Avatar
TORQUEY
TORQUEY is offline
Ultimate HDF Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: East Coast
Posts: 5,159
Received 175 Likes on 127 Posts
Default

Though the total number of foot pounds of torque did not change (which is odd), what about the feel? Maybe there is greater torque down low, or up high, or the torque has a much wider spread, rather than 80 ft lbs. over a narrow range. That could change the feel of the bike tremendously. Perhaps you might step back a bit to see the whole picture. Incidentally, those same characteristics apply to horsepower readings as well. Just guessing here, of course...
 
  #3  
Old 09-05-2010, 08:17 AM
jfroehler's Avatar
jfroehler
jfroehler is offline
Stage IV
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

I don't feel any difference in the preformance. It certainly sounds different. The peak torque range was between 3500 and 4500 before cams and 4500 to 5500 after the cams were installed.

At this point I wish I had not paid all that money for little to no gain.
 
  #4  
Old 09-05-2010, 03:15 PM
MCSarge's Avatar
MCSarge
MCSarge is offline
Outstanding HDF Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 3,028
Received 446 Likes on 309 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by jfroehler
I don't feel any difference in the preformance. It certainly sounds different. The peak torque range was between 3500 and 4500 before cams and 4500 to 5500 after the cams were installed.

At this point I wish I had not paid all that money for little to no gain.
You moved the torque up the power band and added more top end power to the bike.
 
  #5  
Old 09-05-2010, 04:22 PM
shineybike's Avatar
shineybike
shineybike is offline
Road Captain
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Southern Maine
Posts: 576
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

You might want to check the timing on the cams. I had andrews 26's put in my 95" build. It was dyno'd and came up with low hp and tq numbers. The builder checked the cams and one was off a tooth. Once it was corrected it came up to the numbers i was expecting. It ran fine with the cams off but just didn't have the power.
 
  #6  
Old 09-05-2010, 04:46 PM
jfroehler's Avatar
jfroehler
jfroehler is offline
Stage IV
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Thanks,

I think that's what's wrong. The bike is running rough and popping through the exhaust. I'll take it back to the guys who installed them on Tueday.
 
  #7  
Old 09-05-2010, 05:24 PM
Mike's Avatar
Mike
Mike is offline
Ultimate HDF Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Centralia, Wa
Posts: 6,787
Received 36 Likes on 33 Posts
Default

Something's definitely not right. You should not only feel a big difference, the dyno chart should reflect that. Lots of stock 96s running around with 255s making 82/95 or even more. Cam timing, is a possible culprit, also check for wet sumping.
 

Last edited by Mike; 09-05-2010 at 05:54 PM.
  #8  
Old 09-05-2010, 08:03 PM
joe98's Avatar
joe98
joe98 is offline
Road Captain
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 694
Received 50 Likes on 37 Posts
Default

+ 1 on what Boogaludedude says. I have an 08 Street Glide that had the SE intake/filter, SE Super Tuner, and Bassani Megaphone slip ons w/stock head pipes. Initial dyno run was 68hp/80tq. I later installed Head quarters HQ-500 cams and had a excellent increase in tq and hp. Final numbers after dyno tuning were: 83hp/95tq. I was very pleased with the results to say the least. You definitely have something not right there. Good luck...
 
  #9  
Old 09-05-2010, 08:26 PM
N-gin's Avatar
N-gin
N-gin is offline
Road Captain
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: In Garage
Posts: 619
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Default

Agreed With the above. those cams should not show peak anything above 5000. A lot of people and dyno charts on these cams show that they run out of steam at 4500.
 
  #10  
Old 09-06-2010, 09:57 AM
Tn.Heritage's Avatar
Tn.Heritage
Tn.Heritage is offline
Grand HDF Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location:
Posts: 3,917
Received 183 Likes on 131 Posts
Default

The 255's are all about tq, you should have noticed a good bit of difference in that area alone, check for sumping first and then check timing.
 


Quick Reply: SE255 Cams in 96 Twin Cam



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:54 PM.