FYI, for anyone looking for bagger cams...
Thread Starter
|
Road Master
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,038
Likes: 26
From: Fort Worth, Texas
FYI, for anyone looking for bagger cams...
Okay guys and gals the deal is I was pleased with the 07 flht performance with the fullsac duals, older screamin eagle slip ons, screamin eagle air filter and a properly mapped pc III. However, I wanted a little more roll power will running around 70 mph so I searched for a good cam. I ended up selecting the Andrews 26H for the 07 96" motor, I also kept it a chain drive instead of changing to gear drive since I have read the tensioners and oiling system was a better design on the 07's. The Andrews comes highly recommended for baggers and 2up operation and start to pull about 1800 rpm. The S&S 510 cams tend to come on late at 3000 rpm or so, much later than I wanted in the cruise area. Others stated that Andrews 37s tend to ping a lot.
So, the only change to the bike ended up being the Andrews 26H cam period....
I had the pc map built for the bike yesterday at Sabins in Dallas and as Jim stated, "someone forgot to tell the bike it has new cams". The dyno numbers are pretty much the exact same, same curve. I only had, at peak performance, .3 hp and 1 torque point gain. But looking at the graph it has about a 3 point torque gain at 3000 rpm.
Am I upset, NO. I only have the cost of the cams, gaskets and a dyno into this small build/change ($350 total) and the numbers did not drop from original dyno back in Feb. I was wanting more but like I said in the beginning, I was not unhappy with the performance just was looking for a little more on roll on. The seat of the pants does feel different but that may just be the fact I know I put work into the bike someone else may not notice it. This is only info for the people searching a cam swap and what real numbers will bring comparing only the cam differences.
[/align]
So, the only change to the bike ended up being the Andrews 26H cam period....
I had the pc map built for the bike yesterday at Sabins in Dallas and as Jim stated, "someone forgot to tell the bike it has new cams". The dyno numbers are pretty much the exact same, same curve. I only had, at peak performance, .3 hp and 1 torque point gain. But looking at the graph it has about a 3 point torque gain at 3000 rpm.
Am I upset, NO. I only have the cost of the cams, gaskets and a dyno into this small build/change ($350 total) and the numbers did not drop from original dyno back in Feb. I was wanting more but like I said in the beginning, I was not unhappy with the performance just was looking for a little more on roll on. The seat of the pants does feel different but that may just be the fact I know I put work into the bike someone else may not notice it. This is only info for the people searching a cam swap and what real numbers will bring comparing only the cam differences.
[/align]
Ultimate HDF Member
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,939
Likes: 3
From: TX
RE: FYI, for anyone looking for bagger cams...
hmmm...... that's quite interesting. [&:]
The only slight difference in the run traces is that the old run used a lower smoothing factor than the new run, which gives it a more bumpy look (vs. the smooth look of the new one) and the result is slightly higher numbers based on the "peaks". Even so, that may only be another one or two ft/lbs of torque.
I am very surprised at the results here.....[sm=confused06.gif]
Jason ~ What were the weather conditions like when ya did the run previously? I know it was hot & humid yesterday, as I all but melted cleaning my bike yesterday afternoon.
The only slight difference in the run traces is that the old run used a lower smoothing factor than the new run, which gives it a more bumpy look (vs. the smooth look of the new one) and the result is slightly higher numbers based on the "peaks". Even so, that may only be another one or two ft/lbs of torque.
I am very surprised at the results here.....[sm=confused06.gif]
Jason ~ What were the weather conditions like when ya did the run previously? I know it was hot & humid yesterday, as I all but melted cleaning my bike yesterday afternoon.
Extreme HDF Member
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 10,449
Likes: 46
From: Roswell, GA
RE: FYI, for anyone looking for bagger cams...
The numbers are very surprising; only 70 hp?
Ambient air temp will make a big difference. My friend, "pirateye" on this forum, tuned his HQ 95" motor in March in 60 degree ambient air, then tuned it again a few weeks ago in 99 degree ambient air temp and saw a 10 hp and torque loss--and he's an outstanding tuner.
Ambient air temp will make a big difference. My friend, "pirateye" on this forum, tuned his HQ 95" motor in March in 60 degree ambient air, then tuned it again a few weeks ago in 99 degree ambient air temp and saw a 10 hp and torque loss--and he's an outstanding tuner.
Outstanding HDF Member
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,282
Likes: 52
From: DFW
RE: FYI, for anyone looking for bagger cams...
No offense intended, but I can hardly see this as a reccomendation for new cams on a stock motor. Frankly I have never seen "just cams" do much for any stock motor, and this supports that even further. I don't know what the lift or duration is for the 26H's or the stock HD cams, but by this dyno chart, and due to the fact that Sabin know's what he is doing typically, they must be very similar.
Extreme HDF Member
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 11,615
Likes: 50
From: Baton Rouge, LA
RE: FYI, for anyone looking for bagger cams...
ORIGINAL: BOARGAURD
Okay guys and gals the deal is I was pleased with the 07 flht performance with the fullsac duals, older screamin eagle slip ons, screamin eagle air filter and a properly mapped pc III. However, I wanted a little more roll power will running around 70 mph so I searched for a good cam. I ended up selecting the Andrews 26H for the 07 96" motor, I also kept it a chain drive instead of changing to gear drive since I have read the tensioners and oiling system was a better design on the 07's. The Andrews comes highly recommended for baggers and 2up operation and start to pull about 1800 rpm. The S&S 510 cams tend to come on late at 3000 rpm or so, much later than I wanted in the cruise area. Others stated that Andrews 37s tend to ping a lot.
So, the only change to the bike ended up being the Andrews 26H cam period....
I had the pc map built for the bike yesterday at Sabins in Dallas and as Jim stated, "someone forgot to tell the bike it has new cams". The dyno numbers are pretty much the exact same, same curve. I only had, at peak performance, .3 hp and 1 torque point gain. But looking at the graph it has about a 3 point torque gain at 3000 rpm.
Am I upset, NO. I only have the cost of the cams, gaskets and a dyno into this small build/change ($350 total) and the numbers did not drop from original dyno back in Feb. I was wanting more but like I said in the beginning, I was not unhappy with the performance just was looking for a little more on roll on. The seat of the pants does feel different but that may just be the fact I know I put work into the bike someone else may not notice it. This is only info for the people searching a cam swap and what real numbers will bring comparing only the cam differences.
[/align]
Okay guys and gals the deal is I was pleased with the 07 flht performance with the fullsac duals, older screamin eagle slip ons, screamin eagle air filter and a properly mapped pc III. However, I wanted a little more roll power will running around 70 mph so I searched for a good cam. I ended up selecting the Andrews 26H for the 07 96" motor, I also kept it a chain drive instead of changing to gear drive since I have read the tensioners and oiling system was a better design on the 07's. The Andrews comes highly recommended for baggers and 2up operation and start to pull about 1800 rpm. The S&S 510 cams tend to come on late at 3000 rpm or so, much later than I wanted in the cruise area. Others stated that Andrews 37s tend to ping a lot.
So, the only change to the bike ended up being the Andrews 26H cam period....
I had the pc map built for the bike yesterday at Sabins in Dallas and as Jim stated, "someone forgot to tell the bike it has new cams". The dyno numbers are pretty much the exact same, same curve. I only had, at peak performance, .3 hp and 1 torque point gain. But looking at the graph it has about a 3 point torque gain at 3000 rpm.
Am I upset, NO. I only have the cost of the cams, gaskets and a dyno into this small build/change ($350 total) and the numbers did not drop from original dyno back in Feb. I was wanting more but like I said in the beginning, I was not unhappy with the performance just was looking for a little more on roll on. The seat of the pants does feel different but that may just be the fact I know I put work into the bike someone else may not notice it. This is only info for the people searching a cam swap and what real numbers will bring comparing only the cam differences.
[/align]
Since I would like to see a low-end and mid-range TQ increase, I'm not seeing it play out in the two cases I've seen so far. HP is not an issue for me, as I rarely have the engine about 4k RPM's anyway, and I don't care who can out-drag me. I'm interested in how fast the bike can pass an 18-wheeler without downshifting.
What I would like to see now is a chart for a 96" motor with an Andrews 21H installed. It comes on quicker, with HP tapering off quicker as well, but I doubt if TQ would be higher than the 26H.
[IMG]local://upfiles/4327/7B231ADC9C6740BFAB75056C1AB210E2.jpg[/IMG]
Ultimate HDF Member
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,294
Likes: 33
From: Po-Dunk Looziana
RE: FYI, for anyone looking for bagger cams...
I really appreciate you posting this info open mindedly.Enlightening on a cam only install.
Trending Topics
Road Warrior
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,539
Likes: 7
From:
RE: FYI, for anyone looking for bagger cams...
Dyno Numbers can be anything the operator wants them to be. We run a Chassis dyno three Days a week for a Well Know NASCAR Race Team, and can give you any number you want.
Maximun numbers are entertaining to view, and argue about, however, trends are what we look at.
Ride Em Carry Em
Maximun numbers are entertaining to view, and argue about, however, trends are what we look at.
Ride Em Carry Em
HD Forum Stories
The Best of Harley-Davidson for Lifelong Riders
8 Best Harley-Davidson Motorcycles Ever
Pouria Savadkouei
10 Worst Harley-Davidson Motorcycles Ever
Pouria Savadkouei
Killer Custom's Jail Break Is The Breakout That Refused to Blend In
Verdad Gallardo
Crazy Bunderbike Build Looks Amazing, But Is It Impossible to Ride?
Verdad Gallardo
Harley-Davidson Reveals Super Cool Cafe Racer Concept
Verdad Gallardo
Engraved Rebellion: Inside Bundnerbike's Glam Rock II
Verdad Gallardo
10 Motorcycles You Should Never Buy
Joe Kucinski
10 Things Harley-Davidson Needs to Fix in 2026
Verdad Gallardo
Southpaw Super Glide: A Left-Hand-Drive 1979 Harley FXE Built to Fit the Rider
Verdad Gallardo
Thread Starter
|
Road Master
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,038
Likes: 26
From: Fort Worth, Texas
RE: FYI, for anyone looking for bagger cams...
ORIGINAL: GliderXXX
No offense intended, but I can hardly see this as a reccomendation for new cams on a stock motor. Frankly I have never seen "just cams" do much for any stock motor, and this supports that even further. I don't know what the lift or duration is for the 26H's or the stock HD cams, but by this dyno chart, and due to the fact that Sabin know's what he is doing typically, they must be very similar.
No offense intended, but I can hardly see this as a reccomendation for new cams on a stock motor. Frankly I have never seen "just cams" do much for any stock motor, and this supports that even further. I don't know what the lift or duration is for the 26H's or the stock HD cams, but by this dyno chart, and due to the fact that Sabin know's what he is doing typically, they must be very similar.
Outstanding HDF Member
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,282
Likes: 52
From: DFW
RE: FYI, for anyone looking for bagger cams...
ORIGINAL: BOARGAURD
No offense taken, as I am not recommending this setup to anyone, to each their own. I just wanted to let the real numbers show. While the 26's have been proven in the 88 in motors, it is definatly different in the 96 in configuration. And I am not blaming anyone who recommended me to use them, but if I were to do it all again I would look into something else. When I decided on this cam it was all on hear say and could not find anyone who had just done cams alone in my configuration. Well, here are the numbers for what it is worth.
ORIGINAL: GliderXXX
No offense intended, but I can hardly see this as a reccomendation for new cams on a stock motor. Frankly I have never seen "just cams" do much for any stock motor, and this supports that even further. I don't know what the lift or duration is for the 26H's or the stock HD cams, but by this dyno chart, and due to the fact that Sabin know's what he is doing typically, they must be very similar.
No offense intended, but I can hardly see this as a reccomendation for new cams on a stock motor. Frankly I have never seen "just cams" do much for any stock motor, and this supports that even further. I don't know what the lift or duration is for the 26H's or the stock HD cams, but by this dyno chart, and due to the fact that Sabin know's what he is doing typically, they must be very similar.