I did a compression test and got 185 psi in the front and rear cylinder. My heads are decked to raise compression. They also used stock pistons.
I was told by an engine builder that I have at least 10.1 if not more getting those numbers with my cams.
Frank recommended a cam but I can't remember what he said??? I'm going to try the pipe first and go from there. I'm just tired of the motor being lazy right off idle. I would like it a little more crisp if you know what I mean.
Well, if your CR is only 10.1-1, then I see Frank's point. I would really be interested to know what cams he recommends for your build with the Dragula. Going to shorter-duration cams will help increase low-RPM torque, at the expense of massive high-RPM HP. But torque is what gets you moving quickly - an increase in the
rate of acceleration. HP is only a calculated number - a function of torque * RPM / 5252 as a scaling factor. I would expect that whatever cams Frank recommends would likely have shorter duration than the 252/252 duration of your current Woods cams.
You said that the guy who built your engine builds race engines. That concerns me, and explains something. Race engines are built to run at high RPM to produce massive total power (TQ and HP) for a short time - and that means big, long-duration, high-lift cams like the ones you are running. But these cams are
not designed to produce a lot of torque at lower RPM, that you seem to be looking for. I'm not surprised that you have to turn higher RPM to produce the power with your cams... they are ground to do exactly that. The 54H cams that I am currently running don't really come in strongly until about 2700 RPM, and they only have a far-lower 238/238 duration than your cams.
You are making a lot of
peak power with your current setup... the question is
"where in the RPM range is that power actually being made?" If it's all being made at high RPM, then your bike is going to
feel sluggish on the low-end - which you say it does. Do you have your dyno chart that shows your TQ/HP curve that you could post? The TQ curve tells you volumes about how the bike will actually accelerate - whereas the simple peak TQ/HP numbers won't give you a clue about that. I had an interesting discussion with a guy at Andrews about this very subject recently, and he said that a lot of customers seem to be more interested in peak TQ/HP numbers than they are about the torque
curve... he supposed it's for "bragging rights". But high peak TQ/HP numbers are pretty worthless if they aren't made until close to 5000 RPM... most guys don't want to run their engine up there all the time to make usable power. I certainly don't!
I wouldn't look to the Dragula to help you
specifically with increasing low-end torque over what you are running now without changing the cams. It's a big pipe made to handle a lot of airflow and HP, and airflow is much less at lower RPM. But as RPMs increase, I would expect to see more of a difference, because airflow is increasing. For a low-end torque increase, I would look to shorter-duration cams.
Honestly, I haven't noticed any better low-end torque on Buster after I installed the S/C/S-4 (I was running the Fullsac X-Pipe and the Fullsac 2" CVO PowerCore baffles previously) - and the S/C/S-4 has the straight headers that are supposed to help with the low-end more than the Dragula.
Ken