I did the Cam thing first and then broke down and did the 103! I should have done the 103 first I would have saved $$$$$

 

If you are satisfied, then all is well, but......I think your numbers are low.. When I made my cam choice, I was told and have read, that the se211 was the biggest set of cams with the best torque for a big bike without doing a 103 kit. I am pleased with the torque..(2600-4800) it's a beast!! Some will say that the se255 cams are designed for the 103 bb kit and larger, not a 96. So the result will not be as well. Seeing your numbers compaired to the 103 stage 2 dyno chart in the SE catalog, your torque can be way better with a 103 kit. But again... If your satisfied, that's all that matters..

 

How much more did it cost you to go back and get the 103?

 

I bet theyre quoting keeping your stock pushrods and pulling your rockers. If you cut the rods and install new ones, the job should take between 1-3 hrs depending how difficult the pipes are being. Fair book should be 3-4 hrs.

 

Because I did the wrenching myself it was not to bad but I had to get New Seals and different Cams for the 103, I recouped some funds by reselling the old Cams.

 

The "right now" comment can be emphasized. Someone PM'd me a while ago stating that his dealer told him the 255's would make his bike "unrideable" because of the increased throttle response in the low-end. I had to chuckle, as I hadn't heard that before from anyone, much less anyone who actually rode a bike with these cams for more than 10 min. What I can tell you is that they take a few hours to get used to, as the throttle response is, as you stated, "right now" and you'll jerk around for a while 'til your wrist gets accustomed to the difference between the soft response of the stock cams and the 255's.

I considered the 103 and full Stage II options and consulted with Jamie at Fuel Moto. He told me the 103 kit alone (no cams) would not bump HP/TQ much, maybe 3-4 for both. The cams alone in a stock TC96, however, will do more for TQ (~10 increase) than HP (4-5), and since I worship low-end TQ that's the route I took.

This is another point that can't be over-emphasized. Dropping a cam into a stock bike can result in less power where you ride, forcing you to downshift frequently to get into the power band. The problem is compression, and there are very few cams available that will retain or increase the low-end without a compression and/or displacement increase.

I didn't want to get that invasive with my upgrade for several reasons. For one, the cost and another that I had a good-running bike already and didn't want to fix what wasn't broken. If I wanted more after a cam upgrade, which isn't that invasive, I could do it and only lose the time it took me to disassemble the rocker components. As it is, I won't be making any more performance upgrades to this bike, as it is just what I wanted. I rarely give this bike more than half-throttle for anything.

Yep, been there, done that. I once cammed a Chevy 350 small-block and found that I also needed a high-stall-speed TQ-converter to get the RPM's up into the cam's band. It did work out fine in the end, but didn't help gas mileage or the pocketbook.

I think the two might be fairly equal in peak-HP, but where the cammed bike will shine is the TQ in the low-end and midrange. Like Mike Stedman said, they are awesome down low, and I suspect the cammed bike will easily pull the uncammed 103 up to about 4500 rpm. However, in a *****-to-the-wall drag race where RPM's stay above 5000, I think it would be close.

What is your compression now? If you have flat-tops installed now you should have a real TQ monster with the cam upgrade.

 

They are low, and most TC96+255 combos run low-80's for HP, at or near 100 for TQ with a very flat TQ curve from 2000-5000 rpms. I saw one that was dynoed at 85/104, which is the best I've seen. These low numbers may be a matter of tuning on a non-Dynojet dyno, as some can show low numbers like this by design. The dyno guys out there can offer more info on this, I'm sure.

 

When I did my stage 1 it laid down better numbers than that.

 

It's funny when I hear that adding a performance cam always shifts the torque curve. Keep in mind, the EPA cams require compromises for emissions that mild performance cams do not. Often times, you can end up with a much broader torque curve, not just shifting it to the right or to the left. Of course you can overcam leaving you wanting at low revs without the headwork, compression and other flow items that don't allow you to take "advantage" of the caracteristics of that wild cam. Just be honest with you're riding style, match your cams with your other componants to optimize what you have. Even with my SE204's, I wonder as I'm climbing the top of the rev band, should I have gone bigger? After a careful review with the way I ride (which is pretty agressive, but not ***** out and I still like 6th gear) it works pretty well and should work well as I increase displacement with the addition of minor head work.

 

Correct. As I stated in my other post - I have run mine several times (dead stop, and 10 mph roll-on) against a 103 with a stage 1. I believe the cams in this 103 (2004 SEEG) are the SE 203's.

I pulled the 103 down low, and was able to pull ahead through the first 2.5 gears. After that, this guy was able to slowly reel me in - but never got ahead of me. This was ***** to the walls 1/4 mile type runs. I was shifting around 5200-5400, and he was shifting at 6200.