Advice needed from the cam experts
#31
I have had 203's from HD, HQ 0034's, and now Andrews 37's, I have installed some TW26's in 88" engines and they worked well also, Listen to what Bob has suggested to, I have seen some great dyno's from the 204's as well from all the cams you've mentioned, it's all about the combo and what you are looking for, imo the woods cams are way overpriced but they work well, but if you pay $390 for the cams and another $100 for the advance gear your into a good chunk of change, the 300 will work fine if you have a good tuner to tune it, if your looking for alot of bottom end then choose a cam with early intake closing, say a TW21, if mid range is where you want to ride then I'd be happy with the choices that have been mentioned, 37's, 54, Tman 525 and the 26's will work as the 204's.
Good luck on the end results and get a good tune for the best ride.
Good luck on the end results and get a good tune for the best ride.
#32
#33
Wholehog,
I'm real interested in the results you get with the Crane 300-2 (now 1-6000 for the TC-96). It looks like a good set of cams to me. I've had Andrews 26's in my last two twin cams and I feel they were definitely worth worth the cost and made the bikes feel like they should have come from the MOCO. I've got an o9 FLHT now and am leaning towards the 1-6000 for this bike because they should shift my torque slightly to the right compared to the 26's. Good luck, ride safe and keep us updated on your results.
I'm real interested in the results you get with the Crane 300-2 (now 1-6000 for the TC-96). It looks like a good set of cams to me. I've had Andrews 26's in my last two twin cams and I feel they were definitely worth worth the cost and made the bikes feel like they should have come from the MOCO. I've got an o9 FLHT now and am leaning towards the 1-6000 for this bike because they should shift my torque slightly to the right compared to the 26's. Good luck, ride safe and keep us updated on your results.
#34
I have had 203's from HD, HQ 0034's, and now Andrews 37's, I have installed some TW26's in 88" engines and they worked well also, Listen to what Bob has suggested to, I have seen some great dyno's from the 204's as well from all the cams you've mentioned, it's all about the combo and what you are looking for, imo the woods cams are way overpriced but they work well, but if you pay $390 for the cams and another $100 for the advance gear your into a good chunk of change, the 300 will work fine if you have a good tuner to tune it, if your looking for alot of bottom end then choose a cam with early intake closing, say a TW21, if mid range is where you want to ride then I'd be happy with the choices that have been mentioned, 37's, 54, Tman 525 and the 26's will work as the 204's.
Good luck on the end results and get a good tune for the best ride.
Good luck on the end results and get a good tune for the best ride.
#35
The HQ 525 and HQ500 are real nice bolt ins and will provide nice torque gains, the 500 comes on a bit earlier, the 525 carries out a bit farther. Both work very well in an otherwise stock engine. Other recommendations such as the T-Man 525, Andrews, 204 etc are also good, it is a matter of exactly what you are looking for and if you may be building the engine a bit more in the future. I have run the Woods 6 in a couple of bikes and builds I have done for others and it is also a good cam but I do not like running an advance key when there are so many others out there that are truly bolt ins that are ground to work well with stock compression.
#36
Wholehog Dalton is correct about the HQ 0034's coming on but to tell the truth the 37's pull harder from the get go to me, seems to respond a little quicker than the hq cam, not saying theres nothing wrong with the hq cam it's just my opinion, I have some dyno charts for both and I'll compare to see if there's any difference that I can see.
#37
Wholehog Dalton is correct about the HQ 0034's coming on but to tell the truth the 37's pull harder from the get go to me, seems to respond a little quicker than the hq cam, not saying theres nothing wrong with the hq cam it's just my opinion, I have some dyno charts for both and I'll compare to see if there's any difference that I can see.
Do you consider the 37s to be a true "bolt in" cam for a bagger?
Thanks.
Last edited by thewholehog; 01-23-2010 at 07:03 PM.
#38
The HQ 525 and HQ500 are real nice bolt ins and will provide nice torque gains, the 500 comes on a bit earlier, the 525 carries out a bit farther. Both work very well in an otherwise stock engine. Other recommendations such as the T-Man 525, Andrews, 204 etc are also good, it is a matter of exactly what you are looking for and if you may be building the engine a bit more in the future. I have run the Woods 6 in a couple of bikes and builds I have done for others and it is also a good cam but I do not like running an advance key when there are so many others out there that are truly bolt ins that are ground to work well with stock compression.
You mentioned the Tman525, Andrews and se204.... do you consider these true bolt in cams? (ie stock compression) out of these, which would come on the earliest and hang on the longest?
Thanks
Last edited by thewholehog; 01-23-2010 at 09:15 PM.
#40