Print

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

[Fullsac Performance]

Read this thread with some interest.  After lots of reading and discussion with Steve, I went with the Andrews 54 CAM and swapped out to a Cat-less header pipe.  Steve also recommended a thinner head gasket which I had installed for a slight increase in compression.  After re-tune, I "mapped" 99 HP and 110 ft lbs.  Best, it's a very flat torque curve with  over 100 ft lbs between 2,400 and 5,100 rpms and the 110 peak at 3,700.  HP increase was very linear and consistent with 99 HP from 5,200 to 6,200. 

         Did not match fullsac's numbers but the bike runs much stronger now at all rpm's.        The only major difference is the 2" v. 2.25" cores.  I also kept in the HD packing when I installed the fullsac cores.  That may cost me some power but the bike is still not too loud.  Have to recommend this one.  Thanks Steve! 

Hey Greg

What were the before numbers?

Steve

[GregKhougaz]

Steve, good question!  Thought about that last night and had to get my numbers which were
109 ft lbs and 90 hp.  So, some thing is not right....  Now I'm hoping the ft lb number is off.  It sure feels like it is off from the prior numbers.  The bike feels so much better, especially riding two up.  What to do?   

BTW sending pipe back today. 

[Black Diamond]

Steve, good question!  Thought about that last night and had to get my numbers which were
109 ft lbs and 90 hp.  So, some thing is not right....  Now I'm hoping the ft lb number is off.  It sure feels like it is off from the prior numbers.  The bike feels so much better, especially riding two up.  What to do?   

BTW sending pipe back today. 

Could be your power just comes on earlier and stays in the riding range so she feels a lot better. I just did the same thing. Overall numbers stayed close to the same. However power in the range I ride in is so much better and smoother.

JW

[Fullsac Performance]

Steve, good question!  Thought about that last night and had to get my numbers which were
109 ft lbs and 90 hp.  So, some thing is not right....  Now I'm hoping the ft lb number is off.  It sure feels like it is off from the prior numbers.  The bike feels so much better, especially riding two up.  What to do?   

BTW sending pipe back today. 

Numbers make no sense. 9 hp gain with no TQ gain? The bike feels better because of the torque gain that did happen.
Can't explain your dyno run. A trip to AZ should clear things up. Lol..

Steve

[GregKhougaz]

Numbers make no sense. 9 hp gain with no TQ gain? The bike feels better because of the torque gain that did happen.
Can't explain your dyno run. A trip to AZ should clear things up. Lol..

Steve

I knew you'd say that.  At this point, that's what I'm thinking.  Still the bike feels great.  I'll have to ask the tech who did the tuning. 

[FLSTFI Dave]

Wow, that looks nice Steve.  How hard is it to do the cam change?

[Fullsac Performance]

Wow, that looks nice Steve.  How hard is it to do the cam change?

A good mechanic can get it handled 3-4 hours. If your pulling the heads to go with the .030 gaskets, add another hour.

Steve

[FLSTFI Dave]

A good mechanic can get it handled 3-4 hours. If your pulling the heads to go with the .030 gaskets, add another hour.

Steve

Will the extra compression be very much?  I have read quite a bit that say these 110 really need more compression.

Four hours labor would not be bad, as I have a friend who is a HD Master tech, but will do work for me at his house for a much reduced rate.

[Fullsac Performance]

Will the extra compression be very much?  I have read quite a bit that say these 110 really need more compression.

Four hours labor would not be bad, as I have a friend who is a HD Master tech, but will do work for me at his house for a much reduced rate.

The .030 gaskets only raise the comp 2/10s of a point. The reason for the gaskets is to reduce the excessive piston to head clearance improving combustion efficiency. The 110s are on the verge of pinging already. The 54 adds some relief by lowering the cranking pressure by 10 psi. Adding more comp may not be the best plan for a civilized touring bike. JMHO

Steve

[FLSTFI Dave]

The .030 gaskets only raise the comp 2/10s of a point. The reason for the gaskets is to reduce the excessive piston to head clearance improving combustion efficiency. The 110s are on the verge of pinging already. The 54 adds some relief by lowering the cranking pressure by 10 psi. Adding more comp may not be the best plan for a civilized touring bike. JMHO

Steve

Well that makes sense.  I definatly would not want the pining.  My bike is used to ride, and make trips on.

My fatboy has 10.2:1 comp, with the S&S 570 gear drive cam.  It  has been very civilized, but that is an 88 punched to a 95".  I have put 38K trouble free miles on that build.  It is set up for mid range torque not hp.

[harleyguynv]

The .030 gaskets only raise the comp 2/10s of a point. The reason for the gaskets is to reduce the excessive piston to head clearance improving combustion efficiency. The 110s are on the verge of pinging already. The 54 adds some relief by lowering the cranking pressure by 10 psi. Adding more comp may not be the best plan for a civilized touring bike. JMHO

Steve

So if you just changed cams and did nothing with the head gaskets would it affect your dyno numbers? If so what is your best guess as to how much? Also, I know you did a comparison of your different sized baffles and the 2" did slightly better than the 2.25" with the 255 cams. How do you think the 54's would compare using the same size baffles? I guess I am asking would you do better using the larger baffles with the 54's?

[Fullsac Performance]

So if you just changed cams and did nothing with the head gaskets would it affect your dyno numbers? If so what is your best guess as to how much? Also, I know you did a comparison of your different sized baffles and the 2" did slightly better than the 2.25" with the 255 cams. How do you think the 54's would compare using the same size baffles? I guess I am asking would you do better using the larger baffles with the 54's?

This particular bike had the 2.25 cores. I'm sure the 2.0 cores would have had slightly better bottom and mid range numbers. The customer wanted loudest, so 2.25s it was. The gaskets alone are worth a 2-3 HP gain. After I pulled the bike off the dyno, I noticed the rain sock was still on the HB AC. That was 1-2 HP loss, tested it before.  One or two HP here and there, next thing you know you have gained or lost 5 hp in the small details that most people overlook.

Steve

[FiveO CVO]

Steve,
Do you have a part number for those 54's?  I ride a '08 FLHRSE4 and have RB Racing 2-1 BlackHole Spyder's on right now and may consider going with the Fullsac's down the road if I get bored with the one-pipe look.  I have a Speeds Performance Plus Speedy Flow intake.  I've been looking and wanting to do just cams, and leave it at that, no other mods.  I really don't want to fall in that abyss of continuous mods, but do want a little more pep in that range your looking at.  I looked at Andrews website but don't really see anything that talks about or says 110/2008's.  Could you nudge me in the right direction?  One more question, could I do a 54 in a gear drive on my bike instead?  Thanks.

[harleyguynv]

I did the 54 cam change without changing the head gaskets. I really did not want to change the cylinder base O-rings to do the head gasket change. I was told that when you loosen the heads to change the head gasket you are supposed to change the cylinder base O-rings also. I had real problems with my previous engine with the cylinder bases leaking and after several attempts to fix them HD put a new engine in my bike last Dec. I just did not want to take a change of changing the head gaskets and just re-tightening everything back down. It may have been ok to do this but this engine does not leak any oil and I did not want to chance it. I guess I am paranoid to say the least. It maybe a mistake not to change the head gaskets with the 54h cams because on a test run on the dyno yesterday the numbers were considerably lower than my tuned numbers before the cam change. (Dynojet was doing free HP-TD runs yesterday) I realize that once they retune the engine the numbers will be better but I cannot see how they will improve enough to be much if any better than what I had before the change. I reminded the tuner of what the old numbers were and he was doubtfull the numbers would be better than the old numbers also. It is the same guy who tuned the bike to begin with. He is going to try and get the bike in this week to tune it properly.  I have my fingers crossed that they will improve alot more than I think. I hate the thought of putting the 255's back in, but we shall see. I've attached 54h cam dyno sheet for all to look at. I did not realize that you can only post one attachment at a time or I would post the tuned map. The numbers on my tuned map W/255's are 96.54 HP and 112.08 TQ. I might add I did talk to Andrews about the 54h and they said it is a good bolt in replacement for the 110's and you could do the swap without changing the head gaskets.

[Fullsac Performance]

I did the 54 cam change without changing the head gaskets. I really did not want to change the cylinder base O-rings to do the head gasket change. I was told that when you loosen the heads to change the head gasket you are supposed to change the cylinder base O-rings also. I had real problems with my previous engine with the cylinder bases leaking and after several attempts to fix them HD put a new engine in my bike last Dec. I just did not want to take a change of changing the head gaskets and just re-tightening everything back down. It may have been ok to do this but this engine does not leak any oil and I did not want to chance it. I guess I am paranoid to say the least. It maybe a mistake not to change the head gaskets with the 54h cams because on a test run on the dyno yesterday the numbers were considerably lower than my tuned numbers before the cam change. (Dynojet was doing free HP-TD runs yesterday) I realize that once they retune the engine the numbers will be better but I cannot see how they will improve enough to be much if any better than what I had before the change. I reminded the tuner of what the old numbers were and he was doubtfull the numbers would be better than the old numbers also. It is the same guy who tuned the bike to begin with. He is going to try and get the bike in this week to tune it properly.  I have my fingers crossed that they will improve alot more than I think. I hate the thought of putting the 255's back in, but we shall see. I've attached 54h cam dyno sheet for all to look at. I did not realize that you can only post one attachment at a time or I would post the tuned map. The numbers on my tuned map W/255's are 96.54 HP and 112.08 TQ. I might add I did talk to Andrews about the 54h and they said it is a good bolt in replacement for the 110's and you could do the swap without changing the head gaskets.

Any chance your a tooth off? Somethings not right, and I can assure everyone its not the 54 cam.

Steve