Installed! Zipper Performance 587 Cam - 110 motor Dyna Low Rider S - Some notes and ask for help!
#1
Installed! Zipper Performance 587 Cam - 110 motor Dyna Low Rider S - Some notes and ask for help!
Hi all
I recently got my cams swapped. I think by default, the Dyna Low Rider S has the Screamin' Eagle SE-255.
To be honest, I am pretty underwhelmed by its performance... People told me that you cannot expect much, as the default cam in the LRS is already pretty good. The Dyno charts I find onlien suggest a big change in low end performance. This cam should work well with 110 motors though and it doesn't require change of other components (headers, etc).
I'll add some parapgraphs below, so it gets easier to answer questions or express opinions.
1. I didn't really test it fully, like doing full acceleration from 0-60 and checking how quick it is. But it requires more clutch involvement when starting off and in some gears, the max RPMs cap out at 4500 RPM now. Is that normal? I mean, default was like 5500-6000 RPMs if I remember correctly. I know, it's a low end torque cam, maybe this is expected.
2. People already suggested that even having a thundermax, a dyno tune (the rolling bench) is absolutely needed. Do you think I will unleash more power if I do that? I have it on the radar.
3. Is there maybe another thing I need to consider?
4. From a sound perspective, it sounds almost exactly as before. This is hard to judge though, as I had a Red Thunder exhaust before and now a MPRDS one (similar to Bassani).
5. Is it normal, that Thundermax is on constant autotune? I read, that if you do that with other tuners, the engine will run hotter. And mine was definitely hot as **** before the change. Summer hasn't arrived yet, so it's hard to say, but since my Oil pump also got upgraded and together with the heat shields, that might be a problem of the past.
I hope I can post videos soon.
Greetings
I recently got my cams swapped. I think by default, the Dyna Low Rider S has the Screamin' Eagle SE-255.
To be honest, I am pretty underwhelmed by its performance... People told me that you cannot expect much, as the default cam in the LRS is already pretty good. The Dyno charts I find onlien suggest a big change in low end performance. This cam should work well with 110 motors though and it doesn't require change of other components (headers, etc).
I'll add some parapgraphs below, so it gets easier to answer questions or express opinions.
1. I didn't really test it fully, like doing full acceleration from 0-60 and checking how quick it is. But it requires more clutch involvement when starting off and in some gears, the max RPMs cap out at 4500 RPM now. Is that normal? I mean, default was like 5500-6000 RPMs if I remember correctly. I know, it's a low end torque cam, maybe this is expected.
2. People already suggested that even having a thundermax, a dyno tune (the rolling bench) is absolutely needed. Do you think I will unleash more power if I do that? I have it on the radar.
3. Is there maybe another thing I need to consider?
4. From a sound perspective, it sounds almost exactly as before. This is hard to judge though, as I had a Red Thunder exhaust before and now a MPRDS one (similar to Bassani).
5. Is it normal, that Thundermax is on constant autotune? I read, that if you do that with other tuners, the engine will run hotter. And mine was definitely hot as **** before the change. Summer hasn't arrived yet, so it's hard to say, but since my Oil pump also got upgraded and together with the heat shields, that might be a problem of the past.
I hope I can post videos soon.
Greetings
Last edited by TrudleR; 05-20-2024 at 02:27 PM.
The following users liked this post:
Gtjerry (05-22-2024)
#2
This is from the Zippers web site:
The 587 cam was designed and optimized to be the best bolt-in cam for the Harley-Davidson® CVO® engines. The RS587 cam dramatically increases power and torque across the entire RPM range. Unlike other cams, the RS587 was designed to work with the larger valves and heavier springs that the CVO engines are equipped with
The 587 cam was designed and optimized to be the best bolt-in cam for the Harley-Davidson® CVO® engines. The RS587 cam dramatically increases power and torque across the entire RPM range. Unlike other cams, the RS587 was designed to work with the larger valves and heavier springs that the CVO engines are equipped with
#3
This is from the Zippers web site:
The 587 cam was designed and optimized to be the best bolt-in cam for the Harley-Davidson® CVO® engines. The RS587 cam dramatically increases power and torque across the entire RPM range. Unlike other cams, the RS587 was designed to work with the larger valves and heavier springs that the CVO engines are equipped with
The 587 cam was designed and optimized to be the best bolt-in cam for the Harley-Davidson® CVO® engines. The RS587 cam dramatically increases power and torque across the entire RPM range. Unlike other cams, the RS587 was designed to work with the larger valves and heavier springs that the CVO engines are equipped with
You would be the first person I know to have this opinion.
#4
The SE-255 cams closes intake valve at 25 degrees ABDC, and the RS587 at 35 degrees. This later closing will bleed of quite a bit of corrected compression, so it can be expected to lose some low end torque.
Are you sure the S110 has the same compression ratio as the CVO 110?
The SE-255 is a short duration, short overlap, early closing cam, clearly designed for low rpm power at the expense of max power at high rpms, and possibly also to keep emissions in check. The RS587 is a bit hotter, and I would expect it to give a nice power boost at higher rpms, but it really wants higher static compression to perform at its best.
The fact that your engine seems to run out of steam at 4500 rpm suggests that something is wrong. Did you re tune your efi to the new cams? More air in at high rpms will require more fuel.
Are you sure the S110 has the same compression ratio as the CVO 110?
The SE-255 is a short duration, short overlap, early closing cam, clearly designed for low rpm power at the expense of max power at high rpms, and possibly also to keep emissions in check. The RS587 is a bit hotter, and I would expect it to give a nice power boost at higher rpms, but it really wants higher static compression to perform at its best.
The fact that your engine seems to run out of steam at 4500 rpm suggests that something is wrong. Did you re tune your efi to the new cams? More air in at high rpms will require more fuel.
Last edited by SwedishMeatball; 05-21-2024 at 07:04 AM.
#5
The SE-255 cams closes intake valve at 25 degrees ABDC, and the RS587 at 35 degrees. This later closing will bleed of quite a bit of corrected compression, so it can be expected to lose some low end torque.
Are you sure the S110 has the same compression ratio as the CVO 110?
The SE-255 is a short duration, short overlap, early closing cam, clearly designed for low rpm power at the expense of max power at high rpms, and possibly also to keep emissions in check. The RS587 is a bit hotter, and I would expect it to give a nice power boost at higher rpms, but it really wants higher static compression to perform at its best.
The fact that your engine seems to run out of steam at 4500 rpm suggests that something is wrong. Did you re tune your efi to the new cams? More air in at high rpms will require more fuel.
Are you sure the S110 has the same compression ratio as the CVO 110?
The SE-255 is a short duration, short overlap, early closing cam, clearly designed for low rpm power at the expense of max power at high rpms, and possibly also to keep emissions in check. The RS587 is a bit hotter, and I would expect it to give a nice power boost at higher rpms, but it really wants higher static compression to perform at its best.
The fact that your engine seems to run out of steam at 4500 rpm suggests that something is wrong. Did you re tune your efi to the new cams? More air in at high rpms will require more fuel.
I asked around, looked at dyno charts (here on the forums too) and the RS587 was mentioned a lot and held in high regard, so I went for it. The guy doing the job (who does stuff like that often) didn't find it a bad idea to use that cam. I think the compression on my bike is 9.5 and going higher would mean changing headers, but I'm not sure.
#6
I'm not sure about anything. I'm not a mechanical engineer, I can do oil changes and mount a sissy bar, but that's about it.
I asked around, looked at dyno charts (here on the forums too) and the RS587 was mentioned a lot and held in high regard, so I went for it. The guy doing the job (who does stuff like that often) didn't find it a bad idea to use that cam. I think the compression on my bike is 9.5 and going higher would mean changing headers, but I'm not sure.
I asked around, looked at dyno charts (here on the forums too) and the RS587 was mentioned a lot and held in high regard, so I went for it. The guy doing the job (who does stuff like that often) didn't find it a bad idea to use that cam. I think the compression on my bike is 9.5 and going higher would mean changing headers, but I'm not sure.
"This setup will produce approximately 200psi cranking compression in an unmodified CVO engine."
For cams with intake closing of 35 deg in a 110" engine to reach 200 psi ccp, the static compression would need to be around 10.15:1 according to the Big Boyz calculator. The S 110" engine is not even close to that, and as far as I have been able to google, neither does the CVO 110". Something is wrong with the info from Zippers I think.
#7
I looked a bit more at Zippers info about the RS587, they claim:
"This setup will produce approximately 200psi cranking compression in an unmodified CVO engine."
For cams with intake closing of 35 deg in a 110" engine to reach 200 psi ccp, the static compression would need to be around 10.15:1 according to the Big Boyz calculator. The S 110" engine is not even close to that, and as far as I have been able to google, neither does the CVO 110". Something is wrong with the info from Zippers I think.
"This setup will produce approximately 200psi cranking compression in an unmodified CVO engine."
For cams with intake closing of 35 deg in a 110" engine to reach 200 psi ccp, the static compression would need to be around 10.15:1 according to the Big Boyz calculator. The S 110" engine is not even close to that, and as far as I have been able to google, neither does the CVO 110". Something is wrong with the info from Zippers I think.
Trending Topics
#8
Talk to @Hillsidecycle.com
I have a 12 CVO 110. They suffer from low compression. Plus the valve springs are too heavy. I had hillside rework my heads and install beehive springs. Bumped the compression up to 10.5:1. S&S 570 cams. Hits max torque at about 3200rpm and carries it out to redline. Absolute blast to ride. Unfortunately I think your mechanic and Zippers misled you.
I have a 12 CVO 110. They suffer from low compression. Plus the valve springs are too heavy. I had hillside rework my heads and install beehive springs. Bumped the compression up to 10.5:1. S&S 570 cams. Hits max torque at about 3200rpm and carries it out to redline. Absolute blast to ride. Unfortunately I think your mechanic and Zippers misled you.
#9
#10
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Pine Flat Dam/South Bay Area, CA
Posts: 11,570
Received 20,452 Likes
on
6,876 Posts
They want to eliminate the possibility of the engine is sumping. It is a completely reasonable request and a good place to start troubleshooting your issue.