I had a set of 222's in my 2012 SG and they stopped pulling around 3800 rpm.


I just installed a set of t-man 555 torqster and they pull like the 222's and they pull longer. The 222's felt like they hit a brick wall at 3800 rpm.

255s are better than stock, which isn't saying much. They were designed as an epa legal upgrade (harley is great at upgrades). They have more starting and heat problems than stock. Nearly every dyno sheet I've seen has the torque line dropping way before 4000.
222 was designed as as bolt-in performance cam for stage 1 96. They don't have the starting or heat problems of 255s and make more power that carries a little farther to the right. They work pretty good in a 103 bagger.
Andrews 57 was designed for stage 1 103 and would be my pick if ya aren't doing headwork or bumping compression.

Shifting???

I think you just answered your own question. 255s are what you want.

Agree 100%!!!

Where did all this, fall on their face at 4,000 rpm, quit pulling at 3800 rpm stuff come from. They try to make people believe their bike is gonna quit running and die if you ever get it up to 4,000 rpm.

The 255's do a excellent job for their intended application. My bike certainly DOES NOT fall on its face at 4,000 rpm, nor does it quit pulling at 3,800 rpm, it pulls hard all the way to the rev limiter. The 255's are a great touring cam.

Granted, there are other cams that will make a little more power above 4,000 rpm, but just how much time do you spend above 4,000 rpm? I don't race my bike and more power and torque in the cruise range is what I wanted, the 255's delivered.

Just make sure you get the correct cam for your riding style.

There, I'll get off my soapbox. I just get tired of the 255's falling on their face at 4,000 comments. LOL

Really? I don't think so: http://www.fuelmotousa.com/harley/ex...128-79062.html
And
http://www.fuelmotousa.com/site/performance-cams.html
He just did a quick and dirty cam swap here to see how they performed against the TW555. They performed quite well in the same motor.

Go to the dyno charts on each. Now obviously he has a vested interest in the Night Prowler cams performing well in these tests but the dyno charts show that the SE255 cams do not roll off and have a ton of torque down low.

Not my 222's. They pull to redline easily.

Don't see any 255s in your links? Have no idea what you are trying to show??? Fuelmoto is big on woods cams? OK...

In the 2nd link (performance cams) scroll down to the 12th dyno chart. Woods 555 vs SE255 in 96".

You will see:
SE255 @ 86.80 HP and 99.97 TQ

Woods 555 @ 96.32HP and 103.23 TQ

Below 2600 RPM's the SE255 wins. Above 2600RPM's HP advantage to the Woods cams, but the SE255 holds its own with TQ.

I think they will do even better than that. Clearly looking at the dyno sheet it was a quick rough tune for comparison's sake. I think fine tuned you can probably squeak a few more horsepower and a few more ft lbs of torque out of the 255 cams.