Jamie sent my map yesterday and cams are going to be here today. I also expect to possibly start tonight. However, just a quick question for someone running these cams w/ a PCV. Otherwise, I would just call FM, but it is the weekend now. I took a look at the map. My there is a lot of negative numbers in that map!

Why would there be so much reduction in fuel? I would think there would be a need for more fuel. Am I missing something on the way the cam effects the fueling requirements of the engine?

I would think that others with my setup have the same base map from FM... how is it running with the base map 103" TW555, FM headers, Jackpot slip-ons, Sg 1 A/C, PCV installed? Does yours have all the -'s?

Any help would be great. This is my first TC cam install, so just a little uptight over it.

 

I noticed a lot of negative numbers also, mostly in the lower RPM's @ light throttle. Because the Wood TW-555 camshaft has more durarion and therefore more overlap, you're going to have some dilation of the A/F ratio @ lower RPM's. Both valves being open at the same time and the dilution of the A/F mixture is what gives an engine with a high performance cam that wonderful sounding lope at idle that we all love to hear. The engine "sees" this as a rich condition and needs to be leaned out to compensate for it. Otherwise it tends to "load up" and foul plugs/stall, etc. I forgot to add....I'm running the FM 107cid with autotune and it runs great. Comparing the 107 base map with the autotune map showed that the autotune leaned it out even more @ lower RPM's than what Jamie had sent. However, I realize that every engine configuration has different needs so I wasn't too concerned, I just let the autotune do it's thing and I now have a happy, healthy running engine.

 

Thanks Gearhead for the explanation and confidence builder. It really is appreciated! I keep looking at PV to use just the basic tune since my headers are really V&H power duals. It only has the small bungs, so autotune for my PCV would require changing them... When I talked to Brian he assured me the PCV with their tune would work well, and Jamie commented on a separate email regarding me using the woods lifters that it is a sweet setup.

I am heading to harbor freight to get some bolt cutters and making sure I got beer in the fridge

 

A quick/easy answer would be that with the cam swap there is a reduction in volumetric effiency at lower manifold pressures, the MAP sensor picks this up and the ECM over compensates the fuel delivery so the PC map pulls fuel to correct the mixture, you will also note that this is also inverse in the mid to upper RPM's as fuel is added to correct the mixture

 

I did notice Jamie and thanks for jumping in on the thread and for your teams support.

BTW, the bike runs awesome and I am getting used to it the differences. Love the way it sounds idling and it just pulls right up the hills on the highway. It's like the Pro Touring JackPots and this cam were meant for each other, lol, cause they sound so good now!

I really wish I had done this a long time ago and will probably be one of my first mods on any future bikes I buy.

It does seem my range gauge is off somewhat, it reads roughly r220 on a fill up (used to read r250)... I am gonna calculate it manually for a few tanks to figure it out for real, cause it doesn't seem to be accurate anymore.

 

Glad this combination is working well

 

Almost home from my trip up to Little Chute. I have the 96 instead of the 103. Fuel Moto upgraded my CAMS to the 555. I have the PCV with auto tune. Gas mileage leaving Little Chute was around 35. That mileage could have been due to my throttle control. I just could not keep my hand off the throttle. So much fun! After that I settled in to my riding mode. Next few tanks I started getting around 39. The bike just keeps running better. One thing I notice is I just do not need the 6th gear anymore. I just started laughing when I am at 80mph and 3300rpm. One thing is my map is rich. 13.2 and 13.4. Jamie left it like that. My bike has always ran good with that setting. If I increased it up to 13.8 or so I do not believe it will matter that much on my fuel economy.

 

Well a follow up. I have tracked my mileage riding one up and country highways and biways, with some serious backroads and curves with a few spirited accelerations. I got 42mpg on the first tank and 40mpg on the 2nd. Believe it would do even better on the interstates in 6th @70-75mph. So I am happy with both power and MPG.

Bike is just awesome with this setup IMO. My bud even commented that pipes were deep sounding, and only were loud if I got on it, once I smoothed out, he couldn't even hear them (over his own!).