Feb 13, 2015, 01:41 PM
Last edit by: IB Advertising
Everything Breakout! Find out everything you need to know! Some topics include:
• Customizing you bike
• Seats
• Risers
• And much more!
For more information check out these threads:More Threads
• Customizing you bike
• Seats
• Risers
• And much more!
For more information check out these threads:More Threads
The Everything Breakout Thread
Road Captain
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 631
Likes: 26
From: Rome (Italy)
Has anyone fitted the daymaker headlight to the billet casing on there Breakout as Harley says it doesn't fit, which isn't quite true as I have done it tonight, only query I have is you can just see the retaining ring inside and was wondering if anyone has come up with a solution how to hide it
The fitting issue of Daymaker with Billet Headlight Shell has been added recently since when I did this mod there were no restrictions.
Anyway this is my current setting and haven't found any acceptable solution to hide the retaining ring you're mentioning...
Tourer
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 390
Likes: 1
From: Omaha
I said screw the stock headlight, grabbed an older Fatboy housing off of Ebay (7" instead of stock 5 3/4"), and grabbed a JW Speaker Evo 2 headlight. Same company that makes the Daymaker, just an updated version. For half the price.
Advanced
Joined: Aug 2016
Posts: 60
Likes: 10
From: Wisbech Cambs.
If you look at the right side you can see the retaining clip, the only way I can see this working is to measure the space between the light and the bezel edge and maybe make a couple of spacers to insert behind the light to hold the light firmly in place.
6th Gear
Joined: Sep 2016
Posts: 12
Likes: 1
From: Pineville La.
Found some Breakout riser extensions on ebay
Harley,fatboy,sportster,dyna,and custom handle bar riser extensions
( 322137221257 )
mrtsperformancemachine
If anyone is looking for breakout riser extensions i found these on ebay and ordered mine he can machine them for you in 1 1/2".
( 322137221257 )
mrtsperformancemachine
If anyone is looking for breakout riser extensions i found these on ebay and ordered mine he can machine them for you in 1 1/2".
Outstanding HDF Member
Joined: Jun 2014
Posts: 3,185
Likes: 189
From: 90210
Got the Andrews 57h cams removed and the 48h cams installed. Nice way to spend a Saturday afternoon. just rebuilt my tune file for the Powervision with a 48h-optimized base file sent to me from Dynojet. test start and ride tomorrow morning.
In case anyone is wondering- I pulled the 57h cams out because they were lowering my dynamic compression too much due to the later intake valve close. this was expected when I installed them but I didn't think it would be that noticeable on an otherwise stock motor, and with the 30/70 belt pulleys.
With just me riding solo it's not tht noticeable and bike runs quite good, but going 2-up with 120lbs of missus on the back does make it apparent that some grunt is lost below 3k rpm. The 48h cams have an intake close event 1 degree sooner than stock so should bump the compression up just a hair above what it was with the stock cams.
In case anyone is wondering- I pulled the 57h cams out because they were lowering my dynamic compression too much due to the later intake valve close. this was expected when I installed them but I didn't think it would be that noticeable on an otherwise stock motor, and with the 30/70 belt pulleys.
With just me riding solo it's not tht noticeable and bike runs quite good, but going 2-up with 120lbs of missus on the back does make it apparent that some grunt is lost below 3k rpm. The 48h cams have an intake close event 1 degree sooner than stock so should bump the compression up just a hair above what it was with the stock cams.
Road Warrior
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 1,956
Likes: 75
From: CA
Sounds cool. Got a pic?
Outstanding HDF Member
Joined: Jun 2014
Posts: 3,185
Likes: 189
From: 90210
got some tuning runs in today with the 48h cams. there is no comparison, it runs stronger in all areas versus the 57h cams. but that goes to reason with the 48h cam's earlier intake close (29) keeping the compression up where it should be and coming on closer to 2k rpm.
I thought it might run out of steam up top but I was holding it WFO up through 5k rpm shift points, 4th, 5th, 6th and it was still pulling great as the speedo was walking past 100mph. that's when I let off. with a smile.
I'd expect the same good results from the 57h cam but only with a bit more compression added to the stock motor- e.g. running some .030 head gaskets. Or, if for some reason your stock motor is on the higher side of stock compression tolerances then you'd probably be ok with the 57h. For my stock motor, static compression, and tested dynamic compression after the 57h install, the 57h just bled off too much compression during operation to keep the grunt down low. this is due to the later intake close event of (38). the only fix here is to raise compression, get a 4 degree cam advance gear so the 57h's close the intake valve sooner, or get different cams that are already cut to close the intake valve sooner. I chose the 48h's because they had the better intake valve close specs I was looking for, along with the other good characteristics of a mild drop in performance cam.
For reference, the stock 103 cams have an intake close event of 30. As you close the intake valve later (larger number), the operating compression of the motor will become lower. This is ok with high compression motors and in many cases it is needed to keep operating compression within tolerable street build limits, but it can be 'not so good' with stock compression most of the time.
Anyway the 48's are staying in. Bike pulls like a monster now and it's plain obvious TQ went way up over the 57h. Whomever said the 48h is not for the 103" and it is only for the 96" motors, is plain wrong. It's a seriously kick *** cam in a stock 103" and if the 57h is not doing it for you, give this one a consideration instead of the SE204.
I thought it might run out of steam up top but I was holding it WFO up through 5k rpm shift points, 4th, 5th, 6th and it was still pulling great as the speedo was walking past 100mph. that's when I let off. with a smile.
I'd expect the same good results from the 57h cam but only with a bit more compression added to the stock motor- e.g. running some .030 head gaskets. Or, if for some reason your stock motor is on the higher side of stock compression tolerances then you'd probably be ok with the 57h. For my stock motor, static compression, and tested dynamic compression after the 57h install, the 57h just bled off too much compression during operation to keep the grunt down low. this is due to the later intake close event of (38). the only fix here is to raise compression, get a 4 degree cam advance gear so the 57h's close the intake valve sooner, or get different cams that are already cut to close the intake valve sooner. I chose the 48h's because they had the better intake valve close specs I was looking for, along with the other good characteristics of a mild drop in performance cam.
For reference, the stock 103 cams have an intake close event of 30. As you close the intake valve later (larger number), the operating compression of the motor will become lower. This is ok with high compression motors and in many cases it is needed to keep operating compression within tolerable street build limits, but it can be 'not so good' with stock compression most of the time.
Anyway the 48's are staying in. Bike pulls like a monster now and it's plain obvious TQ went way up over the 57h. Whomever said the 48h is not for the 103" and it is only for the 96" motors, is plain wrong. It's a seriously kick *** cam in a stock 103" and if the 57h is not doing it for you, give this one a consideration instead of the SE204.
Last edited by LA_Dog; Sep 26, 2016 at 12:00 AM. Reason: fixed typo on 57h cam intake clsoe event - 38 not 42
got some tuning runs in today with the 48h cams. there is no comparison, it runs stronger in all areas versus the 57h cams. but that goes to reason with the 48h cam's earlier intake close (29) keeping the compression up where it should be and coming on closer to 2k rpm.
I thought it might run out of steam up top but I was holding it WFO up through 5k rpm shift points, 4th, 5th, 6th and it was still pulling great as the speedo was walking past 100mph. that's when I let off. with a smile.
I'd expect the same good results from the 57h cam but only with a bit more compression added to the stock motor- e.g. running some .030 head gaskets. Or, if for some reason your stock motor is on the higher side of stock compression tolerances then you'd probably be ok with the 57h. For my stock motor, static compression, and tested dynamic compression after the 57h install, the 57h just bled off too much compression during operation to keep the grunt down low. this is due to the later intake close event of 42. the only fix here is to raise compression, get a 4 degree cam advance gear so the 57h's close the intake valve sooner, or get different cams that are already cut to close the intake valve sooner. I chose the 48h's because they had the better intake valve close specs I was looking for, along with the other good characteristics of a mild drop in performance cam.
For reference, the stock 103 cams have an intake close event of 30. As you close the intake valve later (larger number), the operating compression of the motor will become lower. This is ok with high compression motors and in many cases it is needed to keep operating compression within tolerable street build limits, but it can be 'not so good' with stock compression most of the time.
Anyway the 48's are staying in. Bike pulls like a monster now and it's plain obvious TQ went way up over the 57h. Whomever said the 48h is not for the 103" and it is only for the 96" motors, is plain wrong. It's a seriously kick *** cam in a stock 103" and if the 57h is not doing it for you, give this one a consideration instead of the SE204.
I thought it might run out of steam up top but I was holding it WFO up through 5k rpm shift points, 4th, 5th, 6th and it was still pulling great as the speedo was walking past 100mph. that's when I let off. with a smile.
I'd expect the same good results from the 57h cam but only with a bit more compression added to the stock motor- e.g. running some .030 head gaskets. Or, if for some reason your stock motor is on the higher side of stock compression tolerances then you'd probably be ok with the 57h. For my stock motor, static compression, and tested dynamic compression after the 57h install, the 57h just bled off too much compression during operation to keep the grunt down low. this is due to the later intake close event of 42. the only fix here is to raise compression, get a 4 degree cam advance gear so the 57h's close the intake valve sooner, or get different cams that are already cut to close the intake valve sooner. I chose the 48h's because they had the better intake valve close specs I was looking for, along with the other good characteristics of a mild drop in performance cam.
For reference, the stock 103 cams have an intake close event of 30. As you close the intake valve later (larger number), the operating compression of the motor will become lower. This is ok with high compression motors and in many cases it is needed to keep operating compression within tolerable street build limits, but it can be 'not so good' with stock compression most of the time.
Anyway the 48's are staying in. Bike pulls like a monster now and it's plain obvious TQ went way up over the 57h. Whomever said the 48h is not for the 103" and it is only for the 96" motors, is plain wrong. It's a seriously kick *** cam in a stock 103" and if the 57h is not doing it for you, give this one a consideration instead of the SE204.
Road Warrior
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 1,626
Likes: 310
From: "Old Hangtown" Placerville Ca.
got some tuning runs in today with the 48h cams. there is no comparison, it runs stronger in all areas versus the 57h cams. but that goes to reason with the 48h cam's earlier intake close (29) keeping the compression up where it should be and coming on closer to 2k rpm.
I thought it might run out of steam up top but I was holding it WFO up through 5k rpm shift points, 4th, 5th, 6th and it was still pulling great as the speedo was walking past 100mph. that's when I let off. with a smile.
I'd expect the same good results from the 57h cam but only with a bit more compression added to the stock motor- e.g. running some .030 head gaskets. Or, if for some reason your stock motor is on the higher side of stock compression tolerances then you'd probably be ok with the 57h. For my stock motor, static compression, and tested dynamic compression after the 57h install, the 57h just bled off too much compression during operation to keep the grunt down low. this is due to the later intake close event of 42. the only fix here is to raise compression, get a 4 degree cam advance gear so the 57h's close the intake valve sooner, or get different cams that are already cut to close the intake valve sooner. I chose the 48h's because they had the better intake valve close specs I was looking for, along with the other good characteristics of a mild drop in performance cam.
For reference, the stock 103 cams have an intake close event of 30. As you close the intake valve later (larger number), the operating compression of the motor will become lower. This is ok with high compression motors and in many cases it is needed to keep operating compression within tolerable street build limits, but it can be 'not so good' with stock compression most of the time.
Anyway the 48's are staying in. Bike pulls like a monster now and it's plain obvious TQ went way up over the 57h. Whomever said the 48h is not for the 103" and it is only for the 96" motors, is plain wrong. It's a seriously kick *** cam in a stock 103" and if the 57h is not doing it for you, give this one a consideration instead of the SE204.
I thought it might run out of steam up top but I was holding it WFO up through 5k rpm shift points, 4th, 5th, 6th and it was still pulling great as the speedo was walking past 100mph. that's when I let off. with a smile.
I'd expect the same good results from the 57h cam but only with a bit more compression added to the stock motor- e.g. running some .030 head gaskets. Or, if for some reason your stock motor is on the higher side of stock compression tolerances then you'd probably be ok with the 57h. For my stock motor, static compression, and tested dynamic compression after the 57h install, the 57h just bled off too much compression during operation to keep the grunt down low. this is due to the later intake close event of 42. the only fix here is to raise compression, get a 4 degree cam advance gear so the 57h's close the intake valve sooner, or get different cams that are already cut to close the intake valve sooner. I chose the 48h's because they had the better intake valve close specs I was looking for, along with the other good characteristics of a mild drop in performance cam.
For reference, the stock 103 cams have an intake close event of 30. As you close the intake valve later (larger number), the operating compression of the motor will become lower. This is ok with high compression motors and in many cases it is needed to keep operating compression within tolerable street build limits, but it can be 'not so good' with stock compression most of the time.
Anyway the 48's are staying in. Bike pulls like a monster now and it's plain obvious TQ went way up over the 57h. Whomever said the 48h is not for the 103" and it is only for the 96" motors, is plain wrong. It's a seriously kick *** cam in a stock 103" and if the 57h is not doing it for you, give this one a consideration instead of the SE204.
Last edited by Rocker B; Sep 25, 2016 at 11:11 PM.