When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
The cams you listed for the most part like higher compression. I'd look real hard at the 222's if I were you. Either that or look into head work to help complement your cams. Last thing i would want in a bagger is a cam with a soft bottom end.
None of those cams are a good choice for your stage 1 96! Andrews 48 or woods 222s are very good in 96 bagger. Ya may be ok with 555s and a thinner head gasket if ya want a more aggressive woods cam without bore/pistons/headwork.
i like the 555, but went with a 107 build. As stated above, you need to determine what you want in performance. 555 comes on a tad later, but pulls hard all through. Not sure how it will work in a 96.
The cams you listed for the most part like higher compression. I'd look real hard at the 222's if I were you. Either that or look into head work to help complement your cams. Last thing i would want in a bagger is a cam with a soft bottom end.
Looks like I'm going with the 222. Thanks for all the advice
put the 254e in my 12 103 and IMO it lacked what I had with the 48H on my 96. So I talked to Gary Wallace at Andrews and although he recommended the 57H, I kinda went with the train of thought that no one else rides like I do so I went with the 48H again in the 103. I like it much better than the 254e.
What I did experience though is what has been described to me by Steve @ GMR in FT Worth and Dave (Mr Wizard) as too much cam for the clutch so I wound up having to change the stock clutch out to the Barnett +1, Hayden Chain Tensioner, ClutchWiz this past weekend.
So when you cam outperforms your clutch, then IMO that's a good sign.
put the 254e in my 12 103 and IMO it lacked what I had with the 48H on my 96. So I talked to Gary Wallace at Andrews and although he recommended the 57H, I kinda went with the train of thought that no one else rides like I do so I went with the 48H again in the 103. I like it much better than the 254e.
What I did experience though is what has been described to me by Steve @ GMR in FT Worth and Dave (Mr Wizard) as too much cam for the clutch so I wound up having to change the stock clutch out to the Barnett +1, Hayden Chain Tensioner, ClutchWiz this past weekend.
So, let me get this straight. Your '09 TC96 and '12 TC103 are both running Andrews 48H cam's, but the TC103 required a heavy duty clutch upgrade?
Hmmm... Were both bikes @ Stage 1 prior to the new cams?
The 96 and 103 are essentially the same bike. I don't understand why you would need a clutch upgrade on the 103. Can you explain this for me?
So, let me get this straight. Your '09 TC96 and '12 TC103 are both running Andrews 48H cam's, but the TC103 required a heavy duty clutch upgrade?
probably could have gotten away with the heavier clutch spring but why put my left hand through that?
Originally Posted by FenderGuy53
Hmmm... Were both bikes @ Stage 1 prior to the new cams?
96", yes. 103, no. 103 initially had the 254e and had no issue with slippage.
Originally Posted by FenderGuy53
The 96 and 103 are essentially the same bike. I don't understand why you would need a clutch upgrade on the 103. Can you explain this for me?
I don't know what to explain to you. It slipped, it was adjusted both internally and externally by myself as well as the dealer, right side ramp replaced by the dealer. Again probably could have gotten away with the spring but for how long and why torture my left hand that way with the heavier spring.
Barnett +1, Hayden chain tensioner to replace that ridiculous excuse of a stock chain tensioner, 480 spring, clutchwiz to lighten the load.. took me longer to drain and replace fluid than it did to change the parts.
From what i can tell the SE255 and 26H do about the same numbers, that is why i want the 48's....Don't get me wrong, the 26's made a BIG difference...
Go with the 48, you will love it. Don't do what a lot of us have done and think just because it cost $200 more it's better....that isn't always the case, trust me!
7 Surprising Harley-Davidson Products that Are Not Motorcycles
Slideshow: The bar-and-shield logo shows up on far more than motorcycles, some of the company's most unexpected products have nothing to do with riding.
Slideshow: From the troubled AMF years to modern misfires, these bikes earned reputations for reliability issues, questionable engineering, or disappointing performance.
Crazy Bunderbike Build Looks Amazing, But Is It Impossible to Ride?
Slideshow: The Swiss custom shop has taken a Harley Softail and stretched it into something so long and low that it looks closer to a rolling sculpture than a conventional motorcycle.
Engraved Rebellion: Inside Bundnerbike's Glam Rock II
Slideshow: A standard cruiser becomes an intricate metal canvas in the hands of a Swiss custom house known for pushing Harley-Davidson platforms far beyond their factory brief.
Slideshow: Harley-Davidson's challenges aren't abstract; they show up in dropping shipments, shrinking dealer traffic, and strategic decisions that aren't yet translating into growth.