Replace the cams with SE255s and retune. If stuck with OEM parts, the 255 (intake close @ 25*) is a torque cam, the 260 (intake close @ 55*) is not. You are looking at 4 hours of shop labor for the cam swap, plus $300 for the cams. If you can affford another $300-$400 or so and negotiate that price with the shop to R/R the heads, machine for and install compression releases, it will pay off in the long run by extending battery and starter life but there are plenty that run those cams without them. If short on funds and open to aftermarket cams, look at the Andrews 26 or the Woods 6; both will also give you what you want, compression releases not required and easier to tune.

 

This is one time I'll have to totally disagree with djl on an engine/cam recommendation.

Having HAD and RODE your exact engine combo and based on your stated desire to have the torque come on earlier and still pull hard at higher rpm; I strongly recommend you NOT install the SE255 cams. The 255s die off sharply above 4,500 rpm.

Another statement made earlier in this thread was that a cam change will most likely require you to change valve springs. Totally incorrect. Push rods? Yes, you will want to go with adjustable push rods to save from having to do a top down cam change. But the valve springs with the 110+ heads are more than adequate for cams up to .660 lift.

That said..... I highly recomment either the T-Man TR-590 or TR-625 as a replacement cam for this engine setup. I have had both these cams installed and they perform in a similar fashion. I did not have dyno runs on either cam but can tell you they both perform as well at higher rpms as the SE260, but more importantly, they perform very well at lower rpms for two-up riding. The TR-590 may have the edge at lower rpms.

We ride two-up quite a bit. Just recently we made our third trip down to the Hill Country area of Texas and rode the Three Sisters south of Kerrville. Those who have ridden the Trilogy will attest there are many low speed curves, steep grades and nice switch-backs....very challenging terrain. I was very please with the way my bike performed riding two-up.

The only difference in our engines is I am running the TMax TBW auto-tuner and the D&D Fat Cat 2 into 1.

I'm not going to quote dyno numbers as one person said, numbers from different times on different dynos are meaningless. But I can assure you my numbers are above 110/110 on any dyno.

Good luck with your decision. You will not be displease if you go with either of my recommendations.

Jim

 

The Wood 555 is a plg/play for his set-up.
The cam/compression will smack off the bottom, and that head will make that cam work it's heart out, on the top.
Fuel economy will jump up, and meaningless dyno numbers or not, you'll notice a HUGE increase, once tuned correctly.
All facts.
Scott

 

We will just have to agree to disagree HHH; have you actually ridden a 103 with 255s? Actually, most 255s, without headwork, will fall off just north of 4000 rpm but truth be told, I don't know many bagger guys that see 4000rpm very often; most ride between 2500 and 3500 and tha's where the 255 shines. The last 103 I put together for a friend made 109TQ/95HP. Made 100TQ by 2400rpm, peak from 2500-3500 and carried 100TQ out to 4400; doesn't get much better than that; a hoot to ride. The 255 is a monster torque cam and has put many a smile on many faces; however, compression releases are a nice to have with those cams but this guy didn't want them.

The cams you recommend are good hardware, I have run the TMan 590 in a 107 and am now running the 525 in the same bike and can't tell any difference below 4000rpms. However, the cams really need some headwork (even with the later heads) to achieve optimum performance; IMHO, pissing money away to run those longer cams without headwork.

Two things I took from Greybeards OP; he wants torque and he doesn't want to spend much money because he has already spent a fair amount. Well, he can do that with the 255s but he really should install CRs with those cams and if he can afford it, that's the way to go. If the $$ for the CRs get in the way, the other two cams mentioned will deliver what he wants. One cam I left out was the new Andrews 48 and, after giving it some more thought, the 48 is probably just what he needs. A little later intake, lower corrected CR and craning compression so it would work without CRs. It will pull down low like the 255 but will continue to pull past 4000rpms.

BTW, I ride the Three Sisters about twice a month; rode one of them yesterday, 100* by 3:00. If you can make it over to Leaky on a Tuesday, go by and see Chicken Earl. Best fried chicken I have eaten since my Grandma passed away years back. Earl is a welder by trade but fries chicken every Tuesday and sells it out of a trailer in downtown Leakey. Nothing fancy, eat outside at some lopsided tables; only sides are mashed potatoes, gravy and grean beans; I just eat the chicken. Jalapenos and bread are also available for the asking. Open from 11 to 7 or until the chicken is gone.

BTW, 337 south of Leakey is being repaved; lots of loose gravel and 336 south is also being repaved. I would stay off off them for a while.

 

I would recommend looking at some cam specs paying particular attention to intake close and overlap. The 260 has close at 55 and overlap at 52, those are top end numbers and it will hurt the bottom end. A 255 is 25 and 13 for the same measurements, that makes it a bottom end cam and there is less at the top relatively. A TW555 or TW6H looks like a compromise to keep a lot of the top but strengthen the bottom end. Just my reading of cam specs - never ridden anything with these cams so.....

 

interrested in the outcome since I'm planing to offer myself a 103 stage IV and also like the low rpm power...

thanks

 

To djl: Yes, I've rode a bagger with an SE255 in it. Pulls stong down low, but like you said, drops way off above 4,000. I've eaten at the restaurant you mentioned. I forgot it was called Chicken Earl's. Last time we were in Leakey, we found the place that was just south of the intersection that has the buffet for $8.95 where all the locals were parked outside.

That said, the OP rides a Fat Bob, not a bagger. So, he doesn't need all that the 255 would give him on the low. The OP also said he wanted to have power in that his perception of the SE260 was that it did not pull at high rpms. That HAS to be a pipe or tuning problem because that cam in my 103 State IV pulled very strong above 4,500 rpm and truly did not die until over 6,000.

I will agree that as long as the OP does not want to ever race, he can go with the 255 and get one very economically on the used market. The reason there are so many on the used market is HD is putting that cam in the new stock 103 engines. Many folks remove that cam not long after purchase and replace it with a cam that has more high rpm characteristics. Nuff said??

Jim

 

Like I said in my last, after further thought, the Andrews 48 would probably be a better choice for the OP. It will pull almost as hard off the bottom but will carry the torque out farther than the 255.

I am not familiar with the 260 and don't know how it should perform. However, looking at his dyno sheet, I wouldn't be happy with the tune.

 

If you decide to do a change, I would have to say either change your riding style (this is free...try it first) or go with Hillside's suggestion on the cam change. HHH is right on with the idea of a 255 pulling at low end, but your engine is set up for a cam with waaay more lift and I'm afraid you'll be quite disappointed in the runability if you use that cam. You might be able to make a 259e work if you wanted to stay with H-D. Either way...any change will cost you close to $1000 by the time you get cams, pull everything apart, check tolerances and re-dyno.

 

I don't do this very often but I owe the OP and HHH an apology; I must remove my foot from my mouth. I completely overlooked that the OP was running the 110+ heads, my bad. I must retract my remarks about the 255s being an acceptable cam for this configuration; not a compatible cam for this build.

I can now see what he isn't happy with the build and I agree that the bike is properly tuned but the tuner didn't have much to work with. The OP has combined some high performance components in a low compression motor. Letting the dealer sell him the Stage IV kit with the heads was his first mistake. Now the OP is in the position of putting lipstick on a pig.

I don't drink the Woods 555 cool aid but it would be a much better solution for the OPs problem and give the tuner something to work with.

If it were me, I would probably pull the heads, put them on Ebay and have my stockers ported; many more cam options that way, including the cams that HHH mentioned in a previous post as well as the Woods 6, S&S570 and Andrews 54.

Sorry guys, I just had my head up my *** and wasn't paying attention; thought we were talking 103 with stock heads.