Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[snowrider13]

Does anyone know the specs on the TTS100 cam?

[Dan_Lockwood]

I appreciate that people want to improve performance within reason.  I have an '09 SERG and I purchased my TTS Mastertune from Steve along with a pair of his 2" baffles and his dyno proven map.  At that time he was just doing baffles and cat-less stock pipes.  I gutted my headers and used his KIT.  The bike has always ran great and has "enough" performance for the wife and I.

It sounds great, but my wife wanted a bit more sound.  I found a guy with Steve's 2.5" baffles for sale and bought them.  The bike has more sound and my wife likes that.  I know I'm shooting myself in my foot with the 2.5" over the original 2", but honestly, the bike still runs great, "feels" great and gets 45 + mpg.  I did the 30t sprocket upgrade and that alone doubled my stage 1 performance in my mind.

I gutted my header pipe myself and did the install of the baffles and the TTS map from Steve.  It's been 6 years now, but I think I have less than $600 invested for a bike that I'm very happy with.  I've thought about cams, but this winter I know that I'll be changing out the lifters and pushrods, preemptive maintenance.  I think I can find a brand new takeout set of stock 110" SE cams to use with the new lifters so no retuning will be necessary.

So as most have said, they're not chasing numbers, but more and more money is being spent for not much of an improvement.

It's like speakers at home, you have cheap speakers are "okay" but you want more.  Then you buy a set of $300 speakers that sound WAY better.  Now you want more and you spend $1500 and they sound just a "bit" better.  The next step probably to triple that amount for improvements that most people cannot hear.  I'll admit that I'm a speaker snob and I do fall into this category, but I stopped at the triple the price.   

All of this reminds me of some very old days gone by when my parents and I had a marina in mid Michigan.  It was the early seventies and we sold snowmobiles, as there was and still is plenty of snow to go around.  Back then most did not have speedometers, we just rode them.  Everyone was racing out on the lakes and back roads for bragging rights.  People were very happy with their sleds and loved to ride.  Then we started to sell speedos as an accessory.  Now those same people that were very happy with their sleds knew how SLOW they were actually going and started to complain about their lack of performance.  It was a down hill ride from that point on.  Speed, speed, speed, that's all they wanted.  They could only go fast maybe 10% of the time they rode, but they wanted more. 

Times haven't changed much as we're all wrapped up in how the dyno sheet looks and not how happy we actually are with the way the bike runs.  Don't get me wrong, getting rid of the added EPA heat with tuners, exhaust etc is a good thing and it brings with it moderate improvements in performance.  I think the majority of us are pretty happy with what we have and those initial tweaks to drop the temps are all we need.

North Star, I feel for you very much.  You're happy now, but the price you've paid has not been cheap.

After writing the above, I stopped to think about myself and how I've done things over my life for performance, or at least in my mind.  If we were talking about streetrods right now, I would be the one that's showing my dyno sheet as streetrods HAVE to have HP to be a fun ride.  That's my opinion only and many will disagree with me on that count.  But my last streetrod, a '40 Willys Coupe with a blown 392" hemi, had to have HP.  In my mind I've always pictured Willys coupes with blown hemis, there is no other way to do them.  Of course there are many other ways to power them, but not in my mind.  I spent almost $15k on a '57 motor to be rebuilt.  I think I'm a case of the pot calling the kettle black for which I apologize if I've hit a nerve with anyone.  But my feelings on my Harley are true to my statements above.  Although I now realize that Harleys are other people's blown Willys coupes, I get that!

Sorry for boring the bejesus out of everyone this morning.   

[HD Street Performance]

The SE 255 and TTS cams are so close, you really aren't letting the motor breath and the Rineharts are too big. Switch to 2" baffle cvo recores and the dip goes away with no hp take away.
Put a cam in it with a little more duration and it will pick up.
Did it occur to you that when they did the valve work valves got sunk? That affects the compression, drops it if the heads are not milled to bring back the chamber volume to original.

[HD Street Performance]

Does anyone know the specs on the TTS100 cam?

*** Max Heaflow Max Pro Profiler ***
Profiler Resolution Measurement: 3.6° Crankshaft Rotation Steps
Rocker Ratio:                    1.625
Recorded:                        3/21/2015

Recorded:              @ 5:06:07 PM | @ 8:37:05 PM   @ 8:00:26 PM | @ 8:57:10 PM

Cam Name / Model:             SE255 | TTS100                SE255 | TTS100

Report for:                   FrontExhaust                   RearExhaust
Tappet 0.053" opens at:  49.6° BBDC | 41.9° BBDC       49.7° BBDC | 41.0° BBDC
Tappet 0.053" closes at:  6.2° ATDC | 15.5° ATDC        6.3° ATDC | 16.9° ATDC
Duration                     235.8° | 237.4°               236.0° | 237.9°
Lobe Center                  111.7° | 103.2°               111.7° | 102.1°
Lobe  lift                    0.339 | 0.340                 0.339 | 0.340
Valve lift                    0.551 | 0.552                 0.550 | 0.553
Valve TDC Lift                0.113 | 0.163                 0.113 | 0.170

Report for:                    FrontIntake                    RearIntake
Tappet 0.053" opens at:   8.3° BTDC | 7.1° BTDC         8.3° BTDC | 6.1° BTDC
Tappet 0.053" closes at: 23.9° ABDC | 19.8° ABDC       24.7° ABDC | 21.3° ABDC
Duration                     212.2° | 206.9°               213.0° | 207.4°
Lobe Center                   97.8° | 96.4°                 98.2° | 97.6°
Lobe  lift                    0.338 | 0.350                 0.338 | 0.350
Valve lift                    0.548 | 0.569                 0.548 | 0.569
Valve TDC Lift                0.128 | 0.122                 0.128 | 0.117

Cam Lobe LSA                 104.7° | 99.8°                105.0° | 99.8°
Cam Lobe Overlap              14.5° | 22.5°                 14.6° | 23.0°

[North Star]

I doubt the Fullsac X is the culprit, you modified the muffs and RH's are not known for helping tourqe.  You can't have it all = low tq and high hp. Chasing numbers is costly and unless following a proven recipe, often disappointing. Your chart shows good low end tq, should be a fun ride, enjoy it.

I didn't modify the mufflers for this tuning session- before (in the August runs), I had installed the Fullsac screens and Dynamat baffle wrap, but I since took them out, so this tuning session was with the Rineharts as delivered. And no, according to Dave the Rineharts usually perform well and don't kill low end tq (like CFR's or High Outputs as I mentioned).

[North Star]

I'm not chasing numbers but in this case those numbers measure the improvement over what I originally had. I'm not saying I want xxx hp and xxx tq- I was just expecting a more significant improvement, which I don't think is unreasonable to expect when making the changes I did.

That measurement of + 5 hp/5 tq tells me the TTS100 cam and Fullsac DX pipe, which were the only major modifications from the previous tune, were not worth the money spent on them. Forget the numbers- all I wanted to see was that high torque curve from 2000-2500+ like all the other TTS100 dyno charts I've seen.

I get the part about how one must spend a ton of money to do a ton of mods to see real gains when you approach the 100 hp/120 tq territory, but like I said, I was expecting to see similar improvements that others have seen with this cam. I think part of why I didn't was because that I had a pretty good cam/exhaust set up prior to making these changes.

I spoke to Dave by email tonight and he agrees that he expected to see better performance for what I have. We agreed to pick up the discussion next spring, and he will see what he can do for me.

Btw, I do have CVO cans and 2" Fullsac cores sitting on my shelf that I was trying to sell.. Maybe if I'm bored one day I'll throw them on again and see if it makes a difference, but I'd rather keep the Rineharts unless I knew for a fact that they are the reason for the disappointing low end torque, which I do not know for sure.

On that note, I am also hanging on to my catless OEM ceramic coated pipe for now. So far nobody can prove to me the DX is any better for my bike, and if I re-install it over the winter and find out on a re-dyno my torque has improved, I will have proof that not only is it not better, but in fact performs worse than the OEM on my bike. Steve posted on this thread after I made my comments about the DX, but he didn't have anything to say about it??? 

Yeah, here comes the flaming, I know  God forbid anyone says anything remotely negative about a forum favorite product  , but I don't give a chit because I'm not blindly loyal to anyone, and I know many on internet forums are. Are the DX the culprits? I don't know yet, I'm just putting it out there.....but it is a possibility.

[North Star]

The SE 255 and TTS cams are so close, you really aren't letting the motor breath and the Rineharts are too big. Switch to 2" baffle cvo recores and the dip goes away with no hp take away.
Put a cam in it with a little more duration and it will pick up.
Did it occur to you that when they did the valve work valves got sunk? That affects the compression, drops it if the heads are not milled to bring back the chamber volume to original.

Btw, thanks for all your sound advice. You warned me there wouldn't be much difference, and it looks like you were right.

RE- compression- I do have the .030 head gaskets which the builder told me raises the compression back up to stock since he re-degreed the 255 cam, which bumps up compression a bit. With his build, he did not want to raise compression higher than original. Now that I no longer have those cams/re-degree sprocket, I should be at least at original compression or a touch higher- well within the optimum range for the TTS100.

As I've said, I'm really surprised the 2.25" baffles in the Rineharts are suddenly noticeably too big now, when they apparently had no ill effect before, at least none that could be seen on my previous dyno charts. Only things I changed now was the cams and head pipe, and now they are too big to work with my combo?

Probably should have went with the Kuryakyn 24D and left my OEM headpipe on.

[Ridgerunr]

North Star, I can't read into any posts here "flaming" you. Much testing has shown the X pipes (Fullsac, V&H, etc.) do quite well with some muffler/baffle combinations. Unless back to back, same day, dyno etc. testing is done, only then will you know if the headpipe is helping or hurting. It's not fair to blame the cams or pipe if the headwork isn't a good match. Picking parts like groceries off a shelf and expecting stellar results doesn't always work out. Ask me how I know LOL. (I wasn't laughing at the time, but have read and learned some since then.)

[HD Street Performance]

Why the pipe size has influence now and not so much before.
Despite similar  duration  the tts100 by virtue of closer lsa has added overlap. That gives you the slight hp gain and you inherit the torque dip

[Fullsac Performance]

Here's a recent back to back dyno test on a nice running 107 that I built for Customer out of SO Cal.
Its a 107 with Tman 600 cams, SE CNC heads, 58 TB, and a DX Pipe.

Against my recommendation, the customer chose to keep his Rineharts with 2.25 cores. So I did as he asked and tuned it. He left and rode it all afternoon. Not overwhelmed with the low end power he returned. Again I recommended  we install a pair of stock 103 mufflers that had my 2.0 full length spiral louver core and retune it. He complied and we did just that. The bottom end difference was drastic! 10 FT pound gain with the smaller cores at 2500 RPM! The customer rode it around the block once, needless to say those Rineharts are still collecting dust on a shelf around here.

North Star, getting more bottom end power from your build really is this easy.

Steve@fullsac.com

[GMR-PERFORMANCE]

Great post Steve.. It funny that customer's will say I ride above that ok fine , however the light throttle roll on power suffers more that the wide open pull you see.. End result sluggish power down low.

here is a sheet on a bike we tuned only. Customer had just bought the bike , had almost no info on it but it had a SE tuner and he was told it had 577 cams???  No idea if they are ours, tman redshift etc.  but he had to have a CFR muffler but said he did not want to pay the price so he bought the Knock off ones from E bay.. HA HA talk about a turd this thing would not get out of its own way.. But its looks great and sounds cool.. 

[Fullsac Performance]

Great post Steve.. It funny that customer's will say I ride above that ok fine , however the light throttle roll on power suffers more that the wide open pull you see.. End result sluggish power down low.

here is a sheet on a bike we tuned only. Customer had just bought the bike , had almost no info on it but it had a SE tuner and he was told it had 577 cams???  No idea if they are ours, tman redshift etc.  but he had to have a CFR muffler but said he did not want to pay the price so he bought the Knock off ones from E bay.. HA HA talk about a turd this thing would not get out of its own way.. But its looks great and sounds cool.. 

Only 75 pounds of TQ at 2500? That's a steaming pile for sure! Lol..

Steve@fullsac.com

[GMR-PERFORMANCE]

Now think a guy tipping the scales at 275 ish his wife on the bike as well , Plus loaded down and a 6th gear roll on and done even think about a up hill grade and a headwind... To me it makes no sense what so ever.. 

[North Star]

Ok thanks Steve and Steve. I respect both your opinions as experienced builders/tuners, so I guess I should go with what you say.

I actually do have my original CVO cans with the Fullsac 2.0 cores- maybe I'll put them on and see if I notice any difference. Next spring I'm going back down to Dave's for a touch up tune, because it also runs hotter than before (after his tune with the OEM headpipe and 255's). It also seems to take longer to wind up now, which I suppose is the feel of lower torque at lower RPM's. When I do that, I will see if the lower end of the curve improves.

Like I keep saying though, it's not like I'm running known torque killers like CFR's or High Outputs, so that is why it's hard to accept that the 2.25 cores are suddenly killing the low end now, when it didn't before. I guess like HD Street Performance says, maybe with the TTS cam, this now shows up more.

[Dan_Lockwood]

I'm not chasing numbers but in this case those numbers measure the improvement over what I originally had. I'm not saying I want xxx hp and xxx tq- I was just expecting a more significant improvement, which I don't think is unreasonable to expect when making the changes I did.

That measurement of + 5 hp/5 tq tells me the TTS100 cam and Fullsac DX pipe, which were the only major modifications from the previous tune, were not worth the money spent on them. Forget the numbers- all I wanted to see was that high torque curve from 2000-2500+ like all the other TTS100 dyno charts I've seen.

I get the part about how one must spend a ton of money to do a ton of mods to see real gains when you approach the 100 hp/120 tq territory, but like I said, I was expecting to see similar improvements that others have seen with this cam. I think part of why I didn't was because that I had a pretty good cam/exhaust set up prior to making these changes.

North Star, Sorry if I sounded like that's ALL you were doing is chasing numbers, that was not my intentions.

Even if the dyno was not as optimistic as the other guy's dyno, at pre tune pull and an after tune/mods pull should still be relevant.  I understand and appreciate your thought process.

I think years ago Steve's pulls on the '09 SERG's with the TTS, gutted header and 2" baffles netted around 90 hp / 110#/' torque.  In my case it really doesn't matter as I had quite low expectations.  I just wanted a slightly better sounding bike that ran cooler.  A great success on all counts.  And I don't have a lot of money invested in the mods.

I'm still very happy with mine.  I "used" to weigh in at about 290# and the wife was around a 100# less.  See I didn't say how much she weighed, did I...  The low end throttle response has always been fantastic.  I hate to repeat my best buck bang, but the 30t drive sprocket REALLY helped a LOT!  I now weigh in about 55# less and the wife is about 50# less.  It now feels like I had a rebuild with a new hot cam and head work, but I'm going with the weight loss.  In cars they say 100# is equal to 10hp.

Good luck with your bike and hope you try your old mufflers with the 2" baffles.