Print

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

[HD Street Performance]

I don't know for a fact that the 120r motor has correct geometry for the SE266e cams - but I suspect it does - at least I would hope it does

Lets just say that the stock ACR or MVA heads operate fine and neither have any large issues associated with how they are set up at .650 lift. The fact remains however that the clocking of the arc is off and the geometry even on the MVA head is optimized for much lower lift. What got me so interested in this was a colleage told me he did a test with a mock up head and rocker assembly and a stock head, stock protrusion. He made the statement he lifted the pushrod side as indicated by .001 reading dial indicator .4 and he got .632 at the valve stem. He then made the changes to the geometry so that the clocking was corrected (rocker perfectly perpendicular to the valve stem at mid lift .325")and now slightly over .650 observed. I proceeded to duplicate the test and observed the same. Following that excersize I talked to Dan Baisley and was further educated and learned that their corrected Roller Rockers changed the clocking relationship between the two levers so that the sweep of the arc on the pushrod side put the pushrod closer to centered in the tube and this lever end was corrected to perpendicular to the pushrod at mid lift. So now all the sudden issues with pushrods rubbing tubes is a thing of the past plus full lift is realized. These corrected rockers are not a "plug and play" part. You need to get the valvetrain set up properly and send a data sheet to Dan before these are made, no ballpark generic one size fits all deals.

To some this may seem like an excersize in pushing my wares but believe me correcting geometry for high lift cams is very time consuming and no where near a profit center for me. I sell to a price point and do this stuff because I enjoy it and want the valvetrain right regardless of the lift the customer uses.

[captdave221]

Well  I think I will go with the T-Man 625 cams. The valve train geometry using the MVA heads hopefully will be ok with that cam. If not will putting lash caps on top of the stems work? Can I do that with all stock parts meaning keepers and collars?

[HD Street Performance]

The lash caps could work. I avoid them just because I can do other things to get things corrected. Would welcome input from others on the topic.

Here is what Steve Cole said on the cam change deal..

"If you look just here on this forum there are several various builds of the 120R. Some were the 120R kit installed into a stock modified set of cases while others were the complete 120R engine or complete with modifications. The dyno sheets that are posted do not show much difference in torque output other than the one PoorBoy did. If you take all the others they are all in the 132 - 138 HP range and 124 - 132 Torque range using the SAE charts. If you look at the various dyno room conditions when they were run that alone could account for the variation. So with head work and camshaft change versus a stock out of the box 120R motor there is not much there so far and the torque curve has very little change in the 3000 - 6000 RPM range. Peak Torque was 4000 - 4100 RPM in them all. PoorBoy's one had more torque at 3000 than all the others, the rest were all grouped together +/- a few ft/lbs only. So from what I see on the dyno sheets so far I would say leave it as supplied and save some coin unless your looking to just take it apart to make it stronger."

By the way the example that is cited "Poorboy"..
He corrects the geometry and the cam he used was very similar to a TW9b but has more intake lift. So it is no shorty by any means, plus that motor was "optimized" and had added compression.

[fatboi1959]

I am running the 408-6 cams in my 120r and to my way of thinking they ARE noisy. Having said that the stock 266 cams are noisy also. My experience has been big lift big noise. T-man's 662 series are said to be very quiet as you probably know if your looking at the 625. Other than the noise the bike squirts forward like it weighs much less.(FLHTCUSE2). I am going to run these until the engine is broke in then re-evaluate. I have my eye on the Andrews 67H now! We just can't help ourselves now can we!  

[HD Street Performance]

Give me a ring when you get a chance.
I will give you some lash caps to try, if you are game.
I know a guy that may be interested in the stock cam, plus can tell you more about the Tman cams in that motor. By the way the TW67 was my cam of choice many years ago, I can tell you more about them too, but in the context of your motor.
One more contender is the S&S625, those have lobes with rates like an industrial motor and are quiet.

[fatboi1959]

Thanks Don will do. The one thing i do like about the Woods is the idle is pretty bad ass and the power is right there.Now if the RAIN will just stay away! 

[partycrasher]

I am running the 408-6 cams in my 120r and to my way of thinking they ARE noisy. Having said that the stock 266 cams are noisy also. My experience has been big lift big noise. T-man's 662 series are said to be very quiet as you probably know if your looking at the 625. Other than the noise the bike squirts forward like it weighs much less.(FLHTCUSE2). I am going to run these until the engine is broke in then re-evaluate. I have my eye on the Andrews 67H now! We just can't help ourselves now can we!  

fyi--tman 662's aren't any quieter than the woods similar cams.....first hand experience.

[HD Street Performance]

Any of them can be noisy but once again when you are in the .650 lift range of cams there are many installation issues to watch for that will bite you plus the ACR / MVA head has a few more quirks as I have detailed. A couple of issues I see are not centering the rocker supports over the valve stems, they will not center per se but they can be set to hit the stems evenly on intake and exhaust (they start not in the center but toward the middle of the head then at mid-lift they are centered) as long as the stem protrusions are right, and pushrod tubes need to be clearanced. I put the top tubes in the lathe and drill down from the top with a 5/8" drill bit in the tailstock down 1". This opens up the narrow area at the top where they flange the tube. If the pushrod hits there (many do with this much lift especially without fixing the geometry) the ball jumps out of the socket and causes lash in the valvetrain. Small issues but with the "plug and play" mentality musical cams can become very frustrating and expensive. Sweating the details pays off.

[Zinister]

I love my Woods 408-6 in my springer. I don't think it's much noisier than my stock cam.

My only problem is I need new exhaust to get more on the upper end. Response is immediate from idle!!!

[fatboi1959]

Partycrasher, Thank-you for the imfo on the T-Mans. They have them advertised as pretty quiet but like you say look at the specs and there's not that much difference from the Woods.

Deweysheads- Don i know we have been over this before and i agree with you. I did not install these myself this time. The stock 266's were making plenty of noise out of the box so figured it couldn't get much worse. I know the installer uses some longer 1/4-20 screws to align the rocker boxes via the breather hold down bolt holes.I had him put in the Woods offset rocker supports and lifters as i already had them. Also he installed the S/E roller rockers at the same time. The rocker boxes and the covers have been extensively clearanced as well. He is slammed this time of year so i'll go into it myself this time as i have more time than he. If i had to do it over i probably would have left the stock cams in longer but these Woods cams are pretty strong, so i figure if i can make them quieter then maybe later on i'll give the 266's another go. I like your idea about running the drill bit into the upper end of the tubes,maybe Seymor would be interested in doing that for me before i re-install them. I'm going to slide the upper push-rod tube down and see if i can see any interference before loosening the rocker arm support bolts and rolling the engine over till the pushrod is closest to the hole in the head and try and get some kind of measurement to determine if that is the culprit. I already de-burred the tubes where they slip into each other. So basically when the rocker is at 50% of it's travel the roller on the rocker should be pretty much in the center of the valve stem correct? Do the lash caps come in different sizes? I'm guessing they must.

Zinister- I'm glad yours are quiet that gives me the incentive to go into this thing again.

[Hekterr]

just read this whole post..

I was wondering what would be the best way to get to the 2.1 in. valve protusion.
I can think of three ways.
1.Custom longer valve
2. lash caps( would have to change keepers on my SE heads)
3. Bury the valve seats

  Maybe a combination of all of the above???

 Would really appreciate someone chiming in who has actually DONE this themselves and how they did it!!!

   Thanks. Dave

[HD Street Performance]

You forgot one, milling the head tops.
I have used a combination or a few, one, of all of them as the situation warrants. There are other considerations to consider and the OEM VS the CVO head casting makes the path to corrected geometry a little different.

[Hekterr]

Hats off to the guys who spend HOURS of time on customers heads getting geometry just right!

I used to use this stuff in my roundy round cars..but for a different reason..to keep the ends of the valves from getting beat to death
http://www.compcams.com/Products/CC-%27Valve%20Spring%20Accessories%27-0.aspx

 looks like  a gain of .080 in valve tip height  could be had with these...

Looks like I'm off to some local race teams to look for some take offs...

               Dave

[HD Street Performance]

The keepers will need to be changed too. Let us know the result. If this is a noise chasing deal I would not expect too much relief.

[Hekterr]

Deweysheads,

  Actually this is a noise chasing deal...SE 103+ heads on a 103ci with Woods tw7h cams..

I'm thinking these heads came with WAY too much valve spring pressure for this cam...

 I was going to take the heads off and change to140lb springs..And while i was doing that do all of the geometry checks as well.

  I haven't heard of anyone on these threads trying Lighter valve springs to lower noise levels.. I have no intention of going over 550o rpm..can't see why I need all that seat and open valve spring pressure...
I have indentically equipped 06 and 07 road glides..one with stock ported heads and beehive springs/7mm valves and one with SE heads..The SE Head equipped bike is Much noisier..

  They both do 120+ MPH .. just wanted to quiet the SE headed bike down.. I attract WAY too much attention with the stereo blasting to overcome the valve train noise!!

           Thanks,Dave