Same with the 1.9 IMHO. This is a 103 in an Ultra. Where would one ride that? 2500-3000 rpm. Bigger intake would move everything to the right a bit, I think. Sounds like a bar hopper build and not a touring bagger build to me.

 

Fixed the noisey valve train I had earlier. Woods Lifters did the trick.
Then because it was quiet now and a guy in a bagger walked away from my bike I had to go ahead and upgrade the cam. Guy just had a little smile when he looked back. Looking for a good exchuse anyway.
Went from Woods 7H to Woods TW400-6. Almost finished tuning. One would never know the cam was there unless you get a handful. Putts around very well.
No more walking away,--- maybe.

The point is the engine is still very quiet. Cain't say enough about these lifters. And there are some from Headquaters now also may get the job done. Better insides.
And has S&S Roller tips.

 

Greetings. I ride an 2005 FLHTPI that has been completely retro-fitted to civilian dress. I am running Woods TW6H-G 590 gear drive cams, SE roller rockers and lifters, adjustable pushrods, fueling oil pump, 10.5.1 pistons, Baisley heads, Se 95 inch kit, Reinhart Tru-Duals and a HD Heavy Breather. I have built this bike to run upstairs all day long. Now regarding the roller rockers and valvetrain noise. Up until June 2010 I was living with a very chatty motor thinking the noise was by product of the build. Wrong! Turns out the oil by-pass spring and check valve needed to be upgraded in the Dekron Cam Plate. After upgrading with an LMR2 spring kit all the valvetrain chatter reduced to sounding like a sewing machine and oil pressure at idle hovered at 35psi using Redline Synthetic at 230'F. Really! The downside of the noise reduction, did expose a random knocking noise on the lower right side of the rear jug.

Thus reason for this long post. The random tapping noise that exhibited post-upgrade was being caused by failure of the hard surface on the exhaust lobe of the Woods cam. Go figure? The loss in tolerence was just enough at idle or at 2500 RPMs and 50MPH to cause my motor to sound like an air chisel was at work. At higher RPMs the radom knocking went away. Yep! I had been running on a bare metal lobe. ( thank god for rollers) Fortunately the K&P reusable magnetic oil filter kept the hard surface flakes from chewing up my motor. I have yet to contact Woods about the failure.... but want to let you Bro's know about what I had learned and found... mucho bucks later.. .....Ride Safe!

 

funny I was thinking the same thing

 

A 1.900" intake is in no way, too large for a 103", and a 1.940" would not be out of the question, whatsoever.
We have used 1.940" valves in 98" engines with Bob Wood 6 cams.
On T-Man's dyno, showed 110/110 sae, about the same as we have seen here.
You can usually get a set of heads running at least another 10 cfm more with that larger intake, and tuners have also alerted us to the engine's cool running as well. Another aspect that you would notice, while flow testing, is that how hard they "gulp" air on the way to peak valve lift.
What size intake valve does an S&S 107" carry??
Scott
Scott

 

i agree 100%,a 1.900 is only .050 (.025 a side) bigger than stock valves and are pretty much the norm in any headwork,like most decent porters,we dont do "cookie cutter" off the shelf porting,each set of heads are done for the exact application being used,so even a 1.940 would not be a stretch in a 103" touring bike when heads are contured and ported for that application

 

Woods cams are ground by Andrews I understand. Mainly because they have had the machines from year one almost.

I would contact Woods cause he seems interested in his products and a hard surface shouldn't go away if the lubrication is doing its job.

 

Agree entirely.

We have gotten a little off topic,

Roller rockers are not necessary for a .575 lift cam, overkill for street application in my opinion.

 

Thanks for the suggestion Old Gunny. Yeah .. as soon as I get the cams replaced I intend to chat up Woods about the failure. They make a good product. I ran their TW-6G 510's for 4 years/25K prior upgrading to their TW-6HG 590's two years ago. I had put 32K on the 590's prior to the discovery of the metal fatigue on the rear exhaust lobe. Will let you know what the Woods folks have to say... ;-)