Help with Cam choice
With the change in cams, the difference was very pronounced. Seat of the pants and on the dyno sheet. The bike no longer strained at higher speeds and the overall characteristics of the powerband improved. The stock cams are required due to EPA to be full of compromises. The high flow air cleaner, the exhaust and tune made a lot of difference but the cam change woke it up to the point that my clutch started slipping at full throttle in 6th gear above 90 mph. All I'm saying, the cams do make a difference.
Not in NE Florida, but a bit further South in Clermont (Minneola). Doc's Performance Tuning 352-404-6999. The man (Doc Weaver), is a master with the TTS and has a dyno on site. Been there, been to his school, got my T-shirt and tuned my 2011 Tri-Glide (lol). I am in SW Florida and really can't help you. Doc can do it and do it right, do yourself a favor and give him a call or Google up his website.
Last edited by Buddy WMC; May 26, 2011 at 09:58 AM.
Good bolt-in cam choices for a stock (Stage 1) TC96 are few and far between unless you don't mind sacrificing low-end torque. Two that do well in this environment are the SE255 and Andrews 48H, both of which will enhance low-end and midrange torque, and to a lesser degree peak-HP. They are not stellar top-end cams and are designed to work well in a heavy bagger where power is desired where you are now, not after one or two downshifts.
I think most anything else will give you good midrange and top-end, how much depending on the grind, at the expense of some loss in the low-end. I can tell you that I've had the TC96/255 setup for >2 years now and I have no plans to do any more performance upgrades. There's more than enough power for my needs at <½ throttle and <4000 rpms, but YMMV.
I think most anything else will give you good midrange and top-end, how much depending on the grind, at the expense of some loss in the low-end. I can tell you that I've had the TC96/255 setup for >2 years now and I have no plans to do any more performance upgrades. There's more than enough power for my needs at <½ throttle and <4000 rpms, but YMMV.
Check with Scott here on forums as Hillsidecycle.com; he gave me excellent advice on my 04 RK and I'm very happy with the results. Fuel Moto has great reviews here on forums and their warranty surpasses others, including manufacturers (they add a full year +future download maps)...Unbeatable IMHO.
Good bolt-in cam choices for a stock (Stage 1) TC96 are few and far between unless you don't mind sacrificing low-end torque. Two that do well in this environment are the SE255 and Andrews 48H, both of which will enhance low-end and midrange torque, and to a lesser degree peak-HP. They are not stellar top-end cams and are designed to work well in a heavy bagger where power is desired where you are now, not after one or two downshifts.
I think most anything else will give you good midrange and top-end, how much depending on the grind, at the expense of some loss in the low-end. I can tell you that I've had the TC96/255 setup for >2 years now and I have no plans to do any more performance upgrades. There's more than enough power for my needs at <½ throttle and <4000 rpms, but YMMV.
I think most anything else will give you good midrange and top-end, how much depending on the grind, at the expense of some loss in the low-end. I can tell you that I've had the TC96/255 setup for >2 years now and I have no plans to do any more performance upgrades. There's more than enough power for my needs at <½ throttle and <4000 rpms, but YMMV.
Totally agree. Also, call Bob Woods, he's happy to talk about his cams and has has been very generous with his advice and expertise.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
mastery
Touring Models
10
Oct 17, 2009 09:43 PM








