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.
Love my 222's. Can tell a real difference from around 2100 on up. It pulls really hard at 3000. 96" with SE Heavy Breather, V&H Power Duals and unbaffled fishtails. I know but I like the way they sound.
Here's a Dyno of a Twin-cooled 103" with 48's. 10.0/1 compression and still not as strong as the 222's. So why is this cam so popular?
Ummmm....the 48 was better under the curve for most of the run. Also, different exhaust and different day. Why pay the woods tax for what may or may not be a better cam. No thanks. The 222 is good, but it's not worth the $$ over the 48.
The “Woods tax” got me at least an extra 5 HP, and at least 1 lbs. of TQ at 2,500 rpm’s. The 48’s best came on at 2,750 rpm’s. That’s with a free flowing 2-1-2 headpipe and mufflers that have a 2 1/8th” baffle. Not to mention a free’er flowing AC. Me? Yes, I’m glad I paid the additional $125.
And by the way, the 222’s were designed for stock compression as well. In fact, I was warned not to increase compression.
The Woods tax got me at least an extra 5 HP, and at least 1 lbs. of TQ at 2,500 rpms. The 48s best came on at 2,750 rpms. Thats with a free flowing 2-1-2 headpipe and mufflers that have a 2 1/8th baffle. Not to mention a freeer flowing AC. Me? Yes, Im glad I paid the additional $125. And by the way, the 222s were designed for stock compression as well. In fact, I was warned not to increase compression.
You are looking at peak numbers; not the best way to compare cams. To rhuff's point, the "area under the curve" tells the story; more with the 48 cam graph you posted previously. If one rode at WOT all the time, that extra 5HP might make a difference but the real difference is in how much "useable" TQ/HP is on tap across the whole power band. When are you going to post your dyno chart of have I missed that?
Both cams may be intended for "stock" static compression but the 48 has that advantage of the earlier intake close, higher CCP which usually translates to torque. So, the 48 will have the advantage over the 222 installed Stage I motors, all things being equal.
Does that mean the 48 is better than the 222? Maybe, depending on the intended goal of the user; it's all about how one rides the bike and where one wants the power. At the end of the day, if the user is happy, then whatever cam the user selected was probably the best cam.
Here's a Dyno of a Twin-cooled 103" with 48's. 10.0/1 compression and still not as strong as the 222's. So why is this cam so popular?
Since getting the above dyno completed with the 48's, I have been down to the Dragon and back and the bike ran exceptionally well. Engine temperatures were the same as my Stage 1, fuel mileage was ~40-41 mpg when traveling 10-15 mph over the posted speed limit or through the curvy mountain back roads (~44-45 mpg on one 200 mile stretch of highway only going 65 mph and taking it easy; don't ask why), and passing on the highway or riding semi-aggressively through the major bike loops in TN/NC, this Stage 2 setup gave me everything I asked of it.
The real comparison for me would have been if I could have kept my Stage 1 exhaust. Due to the low hanging Power Duals and hitting the front of the pipe pretty hard in a curve, I changed out my exhaust at the same time as my cams. The guy I sold my Stage 1 exhaust to (V&H PD, Crusher Mellows) and he had the same A/C (FM) and tuning device (PV) as I but he added the TW-222's. He sent me his dyno but the SAE was at 0 vice my Stage 2 being recorded at SAE 5. I understand from reading here that there is a difference in graphs between the two but will post it for what it is worth. The guy is really happy with the exhaust he purchased from me as well as the 222's (Same bike as mine, 2015 Limited).
For me, did I give up a little bit by forgoing the PD and Crushers over the FM 2-1-2 (using stock crushed crossover) and E-Series, or 48's over the 222's? Maybe but after chasing this unicorn and spending a lot $$$, I have a bike that runs awesome, can hear the music at highway speeds at 50% volume (with BT amp/speaker upgrade) with a full face helmet, and much safer taking tight righthand curves now that my header is back to stock height.
Good luck with your quest and post up your dyno sheet once you have it tuned. This has definitely been a learning experience for me.
2015 Limited, V&H Power Duals, Crusher Mellow, FM high flow A/C, Power Vision tuner, TW-222's for the chart below (SAE 0).
Last edited by 2015UltraLimited; Dec 11, 2017 at 11:02 AM.
You are looking at peak numbers; not the best way to compare cams. To rhuff's point, the "area under the curve" tells the story; more with the 48 cam graph you posted previously. If one rode at WOT all the time, that extra 5HP might make a difference but the real difference is in how much "useable" TQ/HP is on tap across the whole power band. When are you going to post your dyno chart of have I missed that?
Both cams may be intended for "stock" static compression but the 48 has that advantage of the earlier intake close, higher CCP which usually translates to torque. So, the 48 will have the advantage over the 222 installed Stage I motors, all things being equal.
Does that mean the 48 is better than the 222? Maybe, depending on the intended goal of the user; it's all about how one rides the bike and where one wants the power. At the end of the day, if the user is happy, then whatever cam the user selected was probably the best cam.
No time to dyno, and we’ve had foul weather. The dyno sheet I think you’re referring to, was done with the DNT’s in STD. I’ve posted a sheet from Fuel Moto (page 11), which shows torque higher and longer above 100lbs., when compared to the 48’s graph. That map has my exact set up and tuner and tune. I assume the graph would be nearly identical to mine, as I’ve experienced a huge difference in my low-end torque, power and how it runs. ie., no pinging, no decel Pop, cooler and better idling. Honestly, if anything, my numbers might be a tad higher. That tune was done on a 2011, I believe. The compression on the Rushmore’s is 9.7-1/ and 10/1 for the cooled heads. I think the twin cams prior to the Rushmore’s had 9.6-1.
Regardless of which cam is better, I am very happy now. But, That required a slip-on change. The Rinehart's made the biggest difference for me.
Last edited by Bafflingbs; Dec 11, 2017 at 02:48 PM.
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.
No snow, no salt........game on!
