Print

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

[Iglide]

Friends,
I will do a performance upgrade on my new 09 SERG 110ci engine. I do like the low end torque with the 255s. It runs up on the trailer really nice,  but I feel there is much more to be had above the 3500 rpm range with this engine.
I've done the standard upgrades including: Fullsac 2” cores, drilled cat, SERT, and Heavy Breather. But, there is little left at or above 4000 rpm.
I don't ride much below 2500 rpm. I tend to shift at 4000 or above. I would like to get to 5500. I really don't like to lug the ride around in the <2500 rpm range.
I ride 2 up about 30% of the time. The wife and I do the Sturgis thing each year and I love to ride with her on the weekends. We generally don't carry much and I don't see a need for a tour pac at this time. Overall; I consider my riding style to be more of a daily rider approximately 35 miles each way to and from work 70mph+.
What I need is torque in the pass lane. My two lane ride to work is filled with twists, turns, and well…. Bull haulers… When I get in that pass lane I need to get gone.
I would appreciate your opinions regarding the two Cam choices I have in mind. Both builds will include the necessary head work (Polish, port, flow testing) and decking to a compression of 9.8-10:1.
As this is a 09 CVO, do I still need to consider cam plate, rockers, guides, and all that stuff?
I will likely include the Torrington bearings.
I have reliable engine builders available, I am just not sure of the cam choice:  Andrews 54H or SE 251??
Your thoughts and opinions are appreciated.

[Texas 103]

Friends,
I will do a performance upgrade on my new 09 SERG 110ci engine. I do like the low end torque with the 255s. It runs up on the trailer really nice,  but I feel there is much more to be had above the 3500 rpm range with this engine.
I've done the standard upgrades including: Fullsac 2” cores, drilled cat, SERT, and Heavy Breather. But, there is little left at or above 4000 rpm.
I don't ride much below 2500 rpm. I tend to shift at 4000 or above. I would like to get to 5500. I really don't like to lug the ride around in the <2500 rpm range.
I ride 2 up about 30% of the time. The wife and I do the Sturgis thing each year and I love to ride with her on the weekends. We generally don't carry much and I don't see a need for a tour pac at this time. Overall; I consider my riding style to be more of a daily rider approximately 35 miles each way to and from work 70mph+.
What I need is torque in the pass lane. My two lane ride to work is filled with twists, turns, and well…. Bull haulers… When I get in that pass lane I need to get gone.
I would appreciate your opinions regarding the two Cam choices I have in mind. Both builds will include the necessary head work (Polish, port, flow testing) and decking to a compression of 9.8-10:1.
As this is a 09 CVO, do I still need to consider cam plate, rockers, guides, and all that stuff?
I will likely include the Torrington bearings.
I have reliable engine builders available, I am just not sure of the cam choice:  Andrews 54H or SE 251??
Your thoughts and opinions are appreciated.

Rob,

Call me..I have some news on both the cat and a cam for you...Greg

[bisounours]

Friends,
I will do a performance upgrade on my new 09 SERG 110ci engine. I do like the low end torque with the 255s. It runs up on the trailer really nice,  but I feel there is much more to be had above the 3500 rpm range with this engine.
I've done the standard upgrades including: Fullsac 2” cores, drilled cat, SERT, and Heavy Breather. But, there is little left at or above 4000 rpm.
I don't ride much below 2500 rpm. I tend to shift at 4000 or above. I would like to get to 5500. I really don't like to lug the ride around in the <2500 rpm range.
I ride 2 up about 30% of the time. The wife and I do the Sturgis thing each year and I love to ride with her on the weekends. We generally don't carry much and I don't see a need for a tour pac at this time. Overall; I consider my riding style to be more of a daily rider approximately 35 miles each way to and from work 70mph+.
What I need is torque in the pass lane. My two lane ride to work is filled with twists, turns, and well…. Bull haulers… When I get in that pass lane I need to get gone.
I would appreciate your opinions regarding the two Cam choices I have in mind. Both builds will include the necessary head work (Polish, port, flow testing) and decking to a compression of 9.8-10:1.
As this is a 09 CVO, do I still need to consider cam plate, rockers, guides, and all that stuff?
I will likely include the Torrington bearings.
I have reliable engine builders available, I am just not sure of the cam choice:  Andrews 54H or SE 251??
Your thoughts and opinions are appreciated.

If money is not a problem, push the trigger for a TBW 58mm...

Jacques

[Hoist!]

The 251 works well in a 110, especially if you're gonna do headwork and a lil compression. There are others made for the 110 that will give ya a lil more, like Mackie and Cyclerama 595's. I ran the CR 595 and really liked the way the bike rode. Definitely need the 58 mm TB and a larger exhaust. Don't know if the stock exhaust setup w/2.25" Fullsacks will keep up with the flow. They might. If not, get a Big Bore Fatcat. I'm going with the S&S 625G cams in this go round. I haven't heard anyone doing it on a 110 yet, but the cam specs match up nicely for my build, and I'll see how I like it.

Make sure you have a good solid bottom end before really unleashing too much power from this thing. I'm not convinced the bottoms can hold up to heavy performance upgrades yet. Might want to get rid of the ACR's and go w/manuals for peace of mind. That stock ACR system is crap! Might wanna think about better barrels too. I'd talk everything over with a solid reputable builder w/110 experience. Everything has to match up properly to work well. Good luck with your build!

Hoist!

[SBB]

I'm going with the S&S 625G cams in this go round. I haven't heard anyone doing it on a 110 yet,
Hoist!

That's interesting!
Have a set of 625's (not S&S) in the garage right now.
It's a proven combination that provides lots of torque.
And I like those proven combinations!

www.tmanperformance.com

 

[gremlush]

Andrews 32H ,put one in my 07 springer {110''} and love it. Same tq. on the low end ,but more on top. 102 hp. and 114 tq.  dyno 250 I  with winpep 7 {5th gear run.} SAE ,stock throttle body ,Zippers air cleaner, cycle shack slip-ons. TFI  Dewey

[eddfive]

SE-255: lift 0.550"/0.550", I 211°/E 235°
Intake: 6° BTDC/25° ABDC, Exhaust: 48° BBDC/7° ATDC  Overlap 13

216354 54H 16/42 238 .555    .165 .615
                 43/15 238 .555   .158 .615   Overlap 31

SE 251        18/46 .579  .178
                  56/14 .579 .158  Overlap 32

SS 625G      20/55 .625  .189
                 60/20  .625  .184  Overlap 40
I always find this topic very interesting.  IMO if you are going to spend the money for a motor build, timken bearing crank and balanced flywheels should be considered.  I also believe in gear drive cams for best performance.  Looking at the cam specs there really is not that much difference between the 255 you have now and the 54H.  The Torque peak from a 255 cam is all there by 2500rpm, the 54h the torque peak would be there later by approximately 1000rpm.  With the overlap being longer the peak torque value may be less with the 54H but the power would be up.  Can not give exact numbers as so much depends on heads, compression and exhaust.  The SE251 cam would show the same characteristics and the peak torque would be out a little farther, the Torque may be a little less but power would be up.  The 54H could be run in the stock setup, not sure about the 251 since the lift is higher.  (do not remember max lift the stock 110 head can accommodate).

  The 625G cam is a whole different animal and for it to perform properly compression would have to be added to the motor.  The peak torque for this cam would be around 4500rpm or in that vicinity.  Power would be up with the added compression(head work,etc.etc.)needed to support it.

  I always recommend a good 2:1 pipe for these motor builds especially if you use the 625G cam.  This is what I have seen on my Dyno with some of these combinations.  No mater what you do you will need a good tune to get the best overall performance and driveability.  This is my opinion and what I have seen number wise.

[skyhook]

those long cams will have a narrow powerband if you're using the stock throttle body...if it were my motor and the only thing I was changing was cams, I'd use screamin' eagle 204:  early intake close, lots of duration, advanced intake lobe, bolt-in...trust me I'm a...well, you know!

[SBB]

those long cams will have a narrow powerband if you're using the stock throttle body...if it were my motor and the only thing I was changing was cams, I'd use screamin' eagle 204:  early intake close, lots of duration, advanced intake lobe, bolt-in...trust me I'm a...well, you know!

You running for govenor of Illinois?
I hear there's an opening.
I think that's what the last guy said, , , "trust me".

 

[Black Diamond]

OUCH!  Hey just because we offer free housing for our former Governors (Federal Prision) that ain't no reason to sling mud at....Oh never mind

JW

[Iglide]

I would appreciate your opinions regarding the two Cam choices I have in mind. Both builds will include the necessary head work (Polish, port, flow testing) and decking to a compression of 9.8-10:1.
As this is a 09 CVO, do I still need to consider cam plate, rockers, guides, and all that stuff..

I really don't need a bolt on, as I believe this engine is giving all it's got considering the 255 cam installed. I have made the necessary intake and exhaust changes. Installed a SSERT and had it tuned. I really don't think another cam without some top end work will create any results worth the $. However; I am certainly interested in advice, and any info that can be backed with dyno results. And, yes I realize that all Dynos are not created equal; but, it's all I got for an evaluation tool, other than "word of mouth".

[skyhook]

if I may offer a dyno chart to back up my point about the stock throttle body...notice how THE TORQUE DIDN'T EVEN PEAK with the stock throttle body

yes i am running for mayor...please send contributions...in god we trust all others pay cash

[skyhook]

if you don't want bolt in, I'd recommend bob wood #5 cam

[Iglide]

if I may offer a dyno chart to back up my point about the stock throttle body...notice how THE TORQUE DIDN'T EVEN PEAK with the stock throttle body

yes i am running for mayor...please send contributions...in god we trust all others pay cash

OK let me restate this,

Can anyone reproduce this performance (Dyno Curve listed by Skyhook) with modifications for a 09 SERG 110ci. I don't care what cams it takes. My only requirement is to stay below 10:1 compression and that the end result not produce overheating or any other strange unacceptable anomalies. The finished ride will still need to qualify as a reliable "daily rider" with gas mileage 30+ mpg. I would prefer to stay with the stock heads if possible, but I won't mind sending them in as a core charge exchange if necessary. I realize this will require "head work". And at these power and torque levels (refer to Skyhooks dyno chart), NO... I do not think it will require working the crank and all that major engine break down expense.

[skyhook]

actually there are a few guys with flhrse 110 and flhtcuse 110 who went with a cyclerama package that has a short cam and right around 10 compression...I would think this combo is very streetable, and would make better torque than mine below 3000 rpm...might not be as strong above 5000 rpm, but do you really go there very often?

also theres a member here named jsachs or john sachs...he's a very good, well respected head porter/engine builder

and our company could meet your goals as well

gonna keep editing until I confuse myself and you as well...thing is the cvo 110 heads are not very good as-built...several of the top heads porters have said that they do not respond well to basic blueprinting like 88/96" heads do...so now we have to pay big bucks for the heads to make good power and maintain the port velocity that's necessary for lowrange torque...that's why I sold mine and bought ported 96" heads...but these heads are usually around 86cc...this makes for about 10.5 compression in a 110" motor, unless dish pistons are used...at 10.5 compression a long cam is required to get the corrected compression back to the mid nines (what makes for a happy street motor)...so the dished piston option becomes more attractive, even though it makes for a little less efficient chamber than flattops...I believe most porters solution for cvo 110 heads is to mill them enough to reach the desired compression...personally I don't care for domed pistons as they also make for a less efficient chamber than flattop pistons

so I guess the most eloquent solution is stage 1 or 2 headwork, including milling for 10 to 1 comp with flattops, shrinking the ports, and reducing valve sizes to regain lowrange torque...any number of short cams can now be used...something with .570 to .600 lift and an intake close between 37 and 42 degrees...this setup will run fine with the stock throttle body and injectors...an aftermarket throttle body and injectors will help some, but aren't absolutely necessary with these relatively short cams

this is what I'd do with the bagger 110's...a torque motor is much more fun than a high horsepower motor in a heavy bike...a high comp/long cam build like mine is better for a light bike, with the understanding that:  1. it will overheat and ping in stop and go traffic, 2. it will have a low load stumble, like when steady cruising below 60 mph, 3. the torque will be poor below 2700 rpm

written by Philip Pipkin (my boss may have a slightly different take on this stuff!)