Torque Cam and Heat
I have no problems with heat at all now, but I've taken some steps toward keeping engine temps at a sane level. Before installing Wards FCS fans last June my ET (FCHT, measured by the ECM with the Power Vision) rarely hit the EITMS threshold (290° ET) in summer traffic, and 230° was its peak oil temp. With the fans ET never exceeded 250° last summer, even in traffic, and oil temp has stayed ≤225°. Typical ET in summer (90-95° weather) has been 225-240° when moving, with OT staying at 205° or lower. The oil cooler helps, too, of course.
These numbers are also about what they were when the stock cams were installed, and I've always run 14.5-14.6:1 AFR in the cruise range. My tests show that cruise AFR set between 13.0-14.6 makes little difference in OT or ET, but affects gas mileage quite a bit.
The truth is that 255 cams do increase CCP more than most performance cams, all other factors being equal, and that would theoretically increase heat--more power, more heat--but this is the means to achieve the torque increase many of us want. More mixture is crammed into the cylinder, so more heat would be a side effect--but I just don't think the difference is significant over stock. I have a local friend with a 2009 Ultra Stage II and his OT stays <230°, but I don't have a way to check his ET.
I also agree with others on these cam threads that the 103 is a good candidate for a variety of cam choices, more than those of us with 96" engines have. The 204, Andrews 48H, Wood 222, as well as the runaway favorite 255, will give good results. Much of the choice depends on where you want to realize the power.
Last edited by iclick; Jan 11, 2013 at 05:54 PM.
Trending Topics
The Best of Harley-Davidson for Lifelong Riders






