www.CVOHARLEY.com

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: [1] 2 3 4  All

Author Topic: 110 t0 117 259 Cam vs 585 Cam  (Read 11443 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Dacuda

  • Full CVO Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 127

    • CVO1: 2013 Atomic Orange CVO Road Glide Custom 117
110 t0 117 259 Cam vs 585 Cam
« on: March 19, 2018, 02:30:58 PM »
Ok I got my 117 Bolt on kit and trying to decide which cam is better, the 259 cam or the 585
Logged

Texas 103

  • 1K CVO Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1483
  • FLHRSEI.ORG
    • TX

    • CVO1: 2016 "RGU"
Re: 110 t0 117 259 Cam vs 585 Cam
« Reply #1 on: March 19, 2018, 04:58:57 PM »
Quote from: Dacuda on March 19, 2018, 02:30:58 PM
Ok I got my 117 Bolt on kit and trying to decide which cam is better, the 259 cam or the 585

SE 585 Cam, hands down for touring. Torque curve almost straight up..not quite but very nice. I made 121/136  I wanted the torque where I could really use it 2000-3500 . 

SE259 cam is a " hot rod"  cam with more  happening to the right, yes  it will make good power needs  compression .   I wanted the torque where I could really use it 2000-3500  for touring. 
Logged
Too Much of a good thing is just right !! Then more is always better

Yellow09SERG

  • 1K CVO Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2055

    • CVO1: FLTRSE3 YELLOW!!
Re: 110 t0 117 259 Cam vs 585 Cam
« Reply #2 on: March 19, 2018, 07:40:22 PM »
Quote from: Texas 103 on March 19, 2018, 04:58:57 PM
SE 585 Cam, hands down for touring. Torque curve almost straight up..not quite but very nice. I made 121/136  I wanted the torque where I could really use it 2000-3500 . 

SE259 cam is a " hot rod"  cam with more  happening to the right, yes  it will make good power needs  compression .   I wanted the torque where I could really use it 2000-3500  for touring.

What he said  :thumbsup:
Logged
Most great stores start with a bad decision

HD Street Performance

  • Vendor
  • 2.5K CVO Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3118
Re: 110 t0 117 259 Cam vs 585 Cam
« Reply #3 on: March 19, 2018, 10:05:08 PM »
Or raise the compression, don't let the ratio scare you. That's what the 259 needs to have it all. Add porting and have more of torque and horsepower yet.
Logged

georgw221

  • Full CVO Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 170
Re: 110 t0 117 259 Cam vs 585 Cam
« Reply #4 on: March 20, 2018, 06:48:09 AM »
Texas 103

SE 585 Cam, hands down for touring. Torque curve almost straight up..not quite but very nice. I made 121/136  I wanted the torque where I could really use it 2000-3500 . 

SE259 cam is a " hot rod"  cam with more  happening to the right, yes  it will make good power needs  compression .   I wanted the torque where I could really use it 2000-3500  for touring.
[/quote]

Could you please post your Dyno Sheet.
« Last Edit: March 20, 2018, 06:49:46 AM by georgw221 »
Logged

Texas 103

  • 1K CVO Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1483
  • FLHRSEI.ORG
    • TX

    • CVO1: 2016 "RGU"
Re: 110 t0 117 259 Cam vs 585 Cam
« Reply #5 on: March 20, 2018, 10:22:02 AM »
Quote from: georgw221 on March 20, 2018, 06:48:09 AM
Texas 103

SE 585 Cam, hands down for touring. Torque curve almost straight up..not quite but very nice. I made 121/136  I wanted the torque where I could really use it 2000-3500 . 

SE259 cam is a " hot rod"  cam with more  happening to the right, yes  it will make good power needs  compression .   I wanted the torque where I could really use it 2000-3500  for touring.


Could you please post your Dyno Sheet.

Absolutely, it's at the house, will be later today   
Logged
Too Much of a good thing is just right !! Then more is always better

Yellow09SERG

  • 1K CVO Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2055

    • CVO1: FLTRSE3 YELLOW!!
Re: 110 t0 117 259 Cam vs 585 Cam
« Reply #6 on: March 20, 2018, 08:53:14 PM »
Quote from: georgw221 on March 20, 2018, 06:48:09 AM
Texas 103

SE 585 Cam, hands down for touring. Torque curve almost straight up..not quite but very nice. I made 121/136  I wanted the torque where I could really use it 2000-3500 . 

SE259 cam is a " hot rod"  cam with more  happening to the right, yes  it will make good power needs  compression .   I wanted the torque where I could really use it 2000-3500  for touring.


Could you please post your Dyno Sheet.

https://www.cvoharley.com/smf/index.php?topic=111497.0

Think that will get you to Gregs sheet if he doesn't get the chance to post it
Logged
Most great stores start with a bad decision

motor1

  • Elite CVO Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 656
  • Current Harley: 2022 FLTRKSE

    • CVO1: 2022 FLTRKSE
    • CVO2: 2022 FLRTXSE traded, 2015 FLTRUSE traded
    • CVO3: 2012 FLTRXSE traded, 2011 FLTRUSE traded
Re: 110 t0 117 259 Cam vs 585 Cam
« Reply #7 on: March 20, 2018, 10:15:27 PM »
I am ready to do the 117 kit. If I use the 585 cam can I use the pushrods that come with the kit? I know someone will recommend adjustable push rods, (and I know they are ok, but I still prefer one piece rods). Thoughts?
Logged
Excuses are the conditions under which you have failed.

grc

  • 10K CVO Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 14216
  • AKA Grouchy Old Fart
    • IN


    • CVO1: 2005 SEEG2
Re: 110 t0 117 259 Cam vs 585 Cam
« Reply #8 on: March 20, 2018, 10:27:45 PM »
Quote from: motor1 on March 20, 2018, 10:15:27 PM
I am ready to do the 117 kit. If I use the 585 cam can I use the pushrods that come with the kit? I know someone will recommend adjustable push rods, (and I know they are ok, but I still prefer one piece rods). Thoughts?

The lift of the 259 cam is .579", and the 585 is .584".  I'm guessing the base circle diameter is either the same or very close, and if that is true then yes the perfect fit pushrods from the kit should work.  You really need to verify, don't go by my guesswork.

Jerry
Logged
Jerry - 2005 Cherry SEEG  -  Member # 1155

H-D and me  -  a classic love / hate relationship.  Current score:  love 40, hate 50, bewildered 10.

Texas 103

  • 1K CVO Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1483
  • FLHRSEI.ORG
    • TX

    • CVO1: 2016 "RGU"
Re: 110 t0 117 259 Cam vs 585 Cam
« Reply #9 on: March 20, 2018, 10:33:37 PM »
Quote from: Yellow09SERG on March 20, 2018, 08:53:14 PM
https://www.cvoharley.com/smf/index.php?topic=111497.0

Think that will get you to Gregs sheet if he doesn't get the chance to post it

Thanks David , knew it was on here somewhere.
« Last Edit: March 20, 2018, 10:46:52 PM by Texas 103 »
Logged
Too Much of a good thing is just right !! Then more is always better

Texas 103

  • 1K CVO Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1483
  • FLHRSEI.ORG
    • TX

    • CVO1: 2016 "RGU"
Re: 110 t0 117 259 Cam vs 585 Cam
« Reply #10 on: March 20, 2018, 10:36:10 PM »
Quote from: motor1 on March 20, 2018, 10:15:27 PM
I am ready to do the 117 kit. If I use the 585 cam can I use the pushrods that come with the kit? I know someone will recommend adjustable push rods, (and I know they are ok, but I still prefer one piece rods). Thoughts?

I have the  perfect fit pushrods that came with my kit. PM me if you are interested . I went with the SE 24 TPI Adjustable. 2.5 Turns will get you about .100 preload. I personally would use that adjustables, that way you can control your lifter pre load. Perfect fit's will work too, either way.

 Take your time, pay attention to the little things, zero deck cyls, .030 gasket, 2.120 intake, just good basic stuff, nothing trick that will net you a lot. Nothing done to my heads except, milled .018 ( wet Head) , good valve job and clean up and 2.120 intake. No porting. Get a good tune! Think you will be happy with that combination.  PM me if you'd like to chat.         
« Last Edit: March 20, 2018, 10:56:53 PM by Texas 103 »
Logged
Too Much of a good thing is just right !! Then more is always better

Unbalanced

  • FUD Examiner
  • 5k CVO Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6708

    • CVO1: 2011 SESG,
    • CVO2: 2004 SEEG Pumpkin,
    • CVO3: 2002 Police Roadking, Maudie and Maybelle Slayer
Re: 110 t0 117 259 Cam vs 585 Cam
« Reply #11 on: March 20, 2018, 11:51:29 PM »
.
Logged
HBRR Florida Chapter,  STILL - The Fastest Chapter - Proven yet again Bikeweek 2017

HD Street Performance

  • Vendor
  • 2.5K CVO Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3118
Re: 110 t0 117 259 Cam vs 585 Cam
« Reply #12 on: March 21, 2018, 10:05:55 AM »
Nice build there Harry
Installing a larger valve in the 110 heads does not make much difference if the port geometry is not fixed.
The 259 may not be the best cam for the 117 but it will certainly work well when the proper compression is applied and better yet when the heads are fixed. The 585 may be a good torque grind but is too short for a 117" in my humble opinion.
Logged

Unbalanced

  • FUD Examiner
  • 5k CVO Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6708

    • CVO1: 2011 SESG,
    • CVO2: 2004 SEEG Pumpkin,
    • CVO3: 2002 Police Roadking, Maudie and Maybelle Slayer
Re: 110 t0 117 259 Cam vs 585 Cam
« Reply #13 on: March 21, 2018, 11:47:19 AM »
Quote from: HD Street Performance on March 21, 2018, 10:05:55 AM
Nice build there Harry
Installing a larger valve in the 110 heads does not make much difference if the port geometry is not fixed.
The 259 may not be the best cam for the 117 but it will certainly work well when the proper compression is applied and better yet when the heads are fixed. The 585 may be a good torque grind but is too short for a 117" in my humble opinion.

Thanks Don, but this is not my build I only gave some input on it.   This is Texas103's build :)    I was just helping to post the dynosheet for him.
Logged
HBRR Florida Chapter,  STILL - The Fastest Chapter - Proven yet again Bikeweek 2017

Yellow09SERG

  • 1K CVO Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2055

    • CVO1: FLTRSE3 YELLOW!!
Re: 110 t0 117 259 Cam vs 585 Cam
« Reply #14 on: March 21, 2018, 01:47:45 PM »
Quote from: Texas 103 on March 20, 2018, 10:33:37 PM
Thanks David , knew it was on here somewhere.

Harry helped you out too
Logged
Most great stores start with a bad decision
Pages: [1] 2 3 4  All
« previous next »
 

Page created in 0.162 seconds with 21 queries.