There is a good article in this month's (or the new month may be out now...) VTwin magazine that should help you understand the complete set of issues involved in Cam choice. Of course, you can just use the ol' crap shoot method and hope you get one that is right for your model of engine and your riding needs. Anything will make a difference... it's just the degree of satisfaction from your investment that may or may not be acceptable.

I am going through the same thought process myself. It is amazing to me the variations in head quality on a HD engine series, much less when you start allowing for stroke, displacement, and gear ratios.

I would like to think that someone has a program that they can put in the final gear setup, the desired primary riding purpose, the head flow potential, the stroke, the compression, and the displacement and be able to provide the dimension choices for a good cam... but I haven't come across it yet. The variables seem to be beyond anyone's 'real world experience' range. No one could have come across each and every possibility, tested it, and decided what in their experience was best.

So... seeking advice from someone that has built a number of engines that are like what you are going to end up with and purpose built for the same reasons is probably the best source of info.

Anything else becomes a 'research project' I think. The debate on geared vs. chain driven cams is enough to make your head hurt... all by itself. It is a 'proven' (snort chortle?) fact that chain driven cams can vary valve timing and thus horsepower enough to make a difference (4 degrees is what I have read). Well... even if consistenly true, is that a big deal when you aren't drag racing? I don't think so. I also wonder, since there is very little difference in cost, why the MoCo doesn't use gear driven cams for all versions of their engines and purposes. If they are such a great idea, why aren't all bikes made that way? I would guess that it has to do with manufacturing tolerances and as you would find out, that is an issue when you want to convert your bike to gear driven cams (crankshaft endplay, for one example). They certainly have more experience than I when it comes to engine durability.

Why am I blabbering on about this? Forum opinion research should only be a small part of the answer to your question.

C#

 

Like everyone else said, choosing cams and exhaust systems is a little bit like choosing your favorite food. It's a personal thing. I went thru several iterations of pipes and cams but finally settled on the Fatcat 2 into 1 and the Andrew 26H camset. I tried the SE211 with my V&H BSS pipes. It was a big improvement over stock, but the torque didn't come on till you got over 4000 rpm. Most of us like the torque early, especially if you ride two up. The Andrews 26H is a good compromise for early torque that doesn't run out of steam as you rev up. Right now I'm pretty happy with this setup. Here are a few dyno runs to show you the changes and how the Andrews and Fatcat moved the torque curve to the left. The SE211 chart shows how the SE211 boosted torque over stock cams, but only after 4000 rpm. The tw26 chart shows how the Andrews cam plus the Fatcat moved the torque peak to the left near 3000 rpm, plus it is a flatter curve. Unless you like to rev your bike to 5K everytime you leave a stop, you probably want the torque to come on early vs later.

 

Whatever cam you choose will be better than stock,everybody has a personal preference

 

With the 408-44 + 4* adv, when does the cam "kick in?" Is it 2500rpm? 3500rpm?
Woods website lists this cam as a "hot rod" cam.... I'm curious to hear your experience and whether you think this cam has good manners at lower rpm, and how much bottom end TQ you have lost for top end gains??

Thanks.

 

I didn't mean VTwin... I meant American Iron Magazine. That's where there is a good article on cam choice and other choices too, for that matter. Sorry...

I have read some good response on the Fueler "hot rod" cams, too. It appears that they are using asymetrical lobes to keep the low rpm manners in line but provide a wider band of torque. I also know some bagger riders that like the woods cams but I haven't yet heard of anyone using the cam that you mention.

C#

 

dont have a tack so not real sure when it comes on I am geussing some where around 2500to 3000 it pulls real good even 2 up,I would say it hasnt lost any low end tourqe,it sounds real good and pulls real good. My dyno # were 92hp 96 torque I dont have a way to post them but I am very happy with this cam,I want to change the gearing a liittle but wanted to do that before cam

 

Comparing the SE211 w/ BSS pipes to the Andrews 26H w/ Fatcat 2-1 is isn't really a fair comparison however, your end result is correct.. The SE211 isn't a good performer with stock compression.. Compression needs to be over 10-1 and really in the 10.5-1 range for the 211 is owrk properly.. Also a 2-1 really helps it maintain lowend power since it's a mid range cam..

I like the Andrews cams and feel they have a good range of cams to meet all needs and setups.. Not familiar with the R&R 525 but I have a friend with the HQ500 and he really likes it..

As for the gear v. chain drive debate, it's pretty simple.. The reason the chain drive is used is because crank runout needs to be almost perfect with the gear drives where as you can have a little forgiveness with the chain drive.. General rule of thumb is chain setups prior to '07 were't that great and changing to gear drive is recommended. However '07 and later the chain drives work well and there's no need to change..

 

So what you are saying is that you want to change the gearing to make the cams come on quicker, right????

Or are you saying you did want to change the gearing, but once you did the cams you no longer had any need to change gearing???

Thanks.
Its a pity you dont have a dyno chart as I would love to see your TQ curve.

 

I'm looking for a cam that gives a boost without loosing bottom end TQ.... especially because I have true dual pipes.

The new 48H cam is looking better every day.....

 

I totally agree with the above. The best thing for you to do is to call a few of the cam producers and get their advise on the subject. It is all about how you ride the bike if you will like your choice of cams. The hardest part is to get it all with just a cam swap, There is so much more to performance building than just bolting on something without losing something else somewhere in the rpm range of the engine. The people who say no to this ride in the rpm range of the cams they chose. Like they say you can't have it all there is always a trade off