www.CVOHARLEY.com
CVO Technical => Twin Cam => Topic started by: *58Vette on December 15, 2014, 06:29:24 PM
-
I'm currently running a 113 at 10.59:1 in a 2011 FLHXSE2. I found some money for my Christmas! I'm going from Fullsac 2" to 2.25", Barnett +1 Kevlar clutch kit, ClutchWiz and the 480lb spring, and a new set of Crane HTC 296-2 cams. All for under $550, I still have to buy new gaskets. Sure love this time of year. I just wanted a change. Think it'll help?
-
Tq looks very good as is, what are your goals?
-
I was hoping for a little more torque in the curve. I wasn't planning on the cam change, but for the price I thought "what could it hurt". I already have the AV&V beehive .650 springs. I thought a little wider LSA might do that. The clutch slips on occasion; so the +1 clutch and ClutchWiz seemed one of the best choices for the money. Most other 110s around here seemed to be running the borzilla and I wanted to be a little louder than I am now, without losing to much power.
-
Have done better with tman 625 and hd se259. This was with ported heads, nothing wild.
-
TMan .625 would be my choice as well. Quieter than the Crane 296.
-
I love my 296 cams in my 110. Set up right they are quiet as any. Great power where you want it. I have 30000+ miles on them since install.
-
I'm currently running a 113 at 10.59:1 in a 2011 FLHXSE2. I found some money for my Christmas! I'm going from Fullsac 2" to 2.25", Barnett +1 Kevlar clutch kit, ClutchWiz and the 480lb spring, and a new set of Crane HTC 296-2 cams. All for under $550, I still have to buy new gaskets. Sure love this time of year. I just wanted a change. Think it'll help?
Increasing in muffler core size from the 2.0s to 2.25 cores is a step in the right direction for mid range TQ on a 113 for sure.
The 625 T man as mentioned by others would be at the top of my list too.
-
Here's my 113" with TR-625 cams:
(http://www.cvoharley.com/smf/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=78774.0;attach=227226;image)
-
"Set up right they are quiet as any"
Bobby Woods say the exact same thing. :lolk:
-
Another big fan of the T-Man 625s here!
You might check around and see how good that Barnett +1 clutch works with the CVO hydraulic setup...
-
From the look of the 110 and 113 graphs, hd-dude and Phaq2. The 625's seem to run out a bit further and have more of a top end. The 296s have a steeper ramp up to torque. They sure look awfully close comparing a 110 to a 113...
-
Remember that the exhaust header and muffler combo play a huge roll in the torque curve as well....
-
Tman 625, fan :2vrolijk_21: crazy power every where. and mine is still at 110 inch
-
"Set up right they are quiet as any"
Bobby Woods say the exact same thing. :lolk:
My woods are pretty quiet. Ask Mayor and Scott at Hillside , 650 lift just need prep work as with any cam, I had tman 625, little to soft for me on the bottom, but they are a decent cam
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Don, Your Headwork. You Told Me About TheTw-888 Question. Didn't Look Bad So Far 625S Not Bad, But The 296S For130 Didn't Seem Bad Either.
-
I am not sure what you are asking? The TW888 VS the 296 is so close I am not sure a change is justified unless the compression is bumped 3 or 4 tenths. Even that said the pipe will do more for you.
BTW Tim if the TR625 is soft off idle there is something else wrong not the cam, the recipe or the tune.
-
Alright, after looking over all of the cams. I believe your right; the cams might not make a lot of change. The TW888 and the Tman 625 have almost identical valve timing, just different ramps and Tman has .050 more lift. The 296 advanced 4 makes the cam close to the others. I'm sure the 625s lift deffinately would help some, but how much. The 296s would probably be somewhere in the middle between the 888 and 625s. I guess the 2.5 cores would probably do the most and with a better tune.