FatBob, all, there's been a lot of very good points made in this thread but there's been a equal number of very good questions raised. I loved the cam comparison done by FM and had pretty much focused in on the woods 22X for my heavy 107 Freewheeler. I didn't even consider any SE parts since they comply with the Excessively Poor Acceleration doctrine, so how could they possible out perform anyone on anything? But on the other hand they were the ones that gave birth to the M8 and know it best.

I've got an Ness big sucker, CFR pipes and power vision with FM canned program on my bike and love the change so far in performance and sound. I"m looking around for a shop that will dyno a trike before I select a cam, but in the meantime I'm using my PV to log a bunch of 0-60mph, 0-80mph times and will compare those to runs after the cam is installed. I will compare same runs in hotter weather as well. Right now it's a pretty consistent 5.6 to 5.9 seconds for 0-60. That's with an occasional small/short wheelie on the line and a nice chirp in second. (it takes around 11 seconds to get to 80) . I bet an RK with 300 less pounds less weight would be at 60 in the high 4s. I think it will be interesting to see how x increase in HP TQ equates to improved mph/time (same rider, shifting,road and temp). Would still like to see some charts showing one on one comparisons with SE cams and aftermarket . Ron



Power vision log shows 0-60 mph in 5.7 seconds 107 freewheeler stage 1.

 

Looking forward to seeing your before/after times and report!

 

So here is the dyno sheet that Steve is talking about in this post:



So now if you want to kind of see how the 447 compares to an RS468 you would have to look at these two charts and extrapolate.





You have to note that the first chart runs are fifth gear runs and the other charts are sixth gear runs. I imagine the two TTS100 runs would be about the same if both were in the same gear.

So in the first chart the TTS100 made 7 more ft/lb. of torque and 6 more hp than the 447. In the second two charts the RS468 made 5 more ft/lb. of torque and 5 more hp. than the TTS100. So I would say all other things being equal, the RS468 will make about 10 more ft/lb. of torque and 10 more hp. than the SE8-447 in an M8 107.

 

Shifting puts a lot of error into the mix when testing. The best way we have found for Street comparisons is to do a run in one gear over the same road before and after. Start your run in 3rd gear for street testing as it shows you what really happening. With the trike steady at 1500 RPM in 3rd gear twist it WOT until 6000 RPM then let off. This one gear pull removes any clutch work and shift from what is going on. Then repeat the same test after and the difference is what you gained in power.

 

I'll do that, every helpful. I was surprised at how consistent my runs were but the others will be a good way to measure real percents of improvements ... watching out for engine temps, air temp and head winds. Thanks, Ron

 

Not sure what year and model trike your testing with but one thing to note is the rate at which the data is collected. Bikes with a 4 pin for the diagnostics port only have a very slow data rate. This can and does screw with results. Typically the PV collects data on those at about 2 HZ rate, this means you are only getting 2 samples every second of time. So the accuracy of your test cannot be any better than +/- 1 data sample or about +/- 1/2 second. The later bikes that use the 6 pin port the PV run about 12 HZ or 12 sample per second and the best you can still get is +/- 1 data sample. So keep that in mind along with your testing results.

 

Thanks Steve, I appreciate the detailed info. I checked and mine is the new 6 pin PV connector, but understand that still leaves room for error.. I'm hoping that my comparisons in acceleration performance will help give me a little bit more understanding of what a 15% bump in torque or hp really means were the rubber meats the road. Kind of like harley's marketing statement saying the new M8 bikes deliver a claimed 10 percent more torque (than 103?), which equals two to three bike lengths faster from 0–60 mph, and one to two lengths quicker in top-gear 60–80-mph roll-ons. I've done about 6 or 8 different PV auto tunes (narrow band) but I don't see (or feel) any difference in performance even though it bumped up a lot of the VE cells from the mid 90's to around the 110 mark. Given all I've read about the effects of heat on performance I'm thinking an external oil cooler may have more of an effect than a minor tune, especially since I live in Dallas. Lots to learn....

 

The SE8-447 stands up very well with a non EPA tuner, it may be worth using that cam and after warranty grab a better tuner, just a thought.
Peace.

 

I've got the 447 in a '17 Ultra with the heavy breather, Rinehart slipons, and the SE heavy breather. Will be putting on the Fullsac header (hopefully) in a week or two along with a dyno tune with the TTS. I'll try to get before and after charts.

 

So was interested to read about SS475; just had the SE447 put in my 19 RG 114. Already had Kromewerks 2/2, and ac and SE tuner (to keep warranty). I didn't notice much difference. My local guy claims if I let hime do the SS kit with 475 cam that the difference will be huge. Doesn't sound like it. I have a Thundermax tuner that I may use instead of SE tuner; hoping that helps. Just came off a 17 107 stage 4 that seemed much faster. Opinion if its worth changing tuner or cam without adding inches?