SE-255 and HQ-500 cam comparison

G

Gooser

New member
Darren, thanks for reminding me that when I looked at the dyno sheet and compared it to the text from HQ's website when this was posted more than a year ago, the dyno chart didn't match the numbers in the text.

I printed out the dyno chart on 8.5 X 11 copy paper and, although the print is fuzzy (and my eyes are no longer young) the HQ 500 numbers are 86.51 hp and 103.35 tq and that was run file 54.

The lower block above the graph lines is run file 18 and the numbers are 76.65 hp and 92.06 tq.

The top narrative below the graph lines describes "INSTALLED HQ-500 CAMS." The lower narrative makes no mention of SE 255 cams; it does mention the Rinehart TD's and SE a/c.

The chart doesn't match the numbers in HQ's narrative except with respect to the HQ 500 cams, and the hp of the stock cams. I'll ask Kevin from HQ if they have any other dyno charts from the dealer that show the SE 255 numbers shown in the narrative.
 
This chart for the 255's in a TC103 doesn't jibe with any dyno run that I've seen for even the TC96. Below is a chart on a TC96 with AC and TD's by another tuner on another bike. Keep in mind that TD's hurt low-end performance but this bike charted 90 ft/lbs TQ or higher from
 
iclick do you have stock in the se 255 cam? I'm sure there are better cams out there if not the HQ there is woods also. 4 hours for a cam change is very possible
 
I'm not sure what you're asking. I have SE255's in my stock TC96 if that's what you mean. If you refer to the dyno chart in my previous post it is also in an otherwise-stock TC96 with Stage 1 mods (SEST, AC, TD's).



"Better" is relative. Some like me value performance on the low-end and midrange more than a high peak-HP number or a high TQ number when the cams' behavior is weak on the low-end. Others like peaky performance with more top-end power, and for those people the HQ500 might be a better choice, although I've seen all-round better numbers on Woods 6-6 dyno runs.



Yes, if you're fast, but can anyone do the swap and conduct a proper dyno tune in that time span? I hear it takes 3-4 hours to do a thorough dyno-tune with SERT/SEST. How did they do all that in 4:40? I don't think it is possible.

I still suspect the 255 chart was conducted without a dyno tune, using instead some sort of canned map or possibly the HD Stage II download. A canned map would be fine if it was accurate, but the chart said "Tuned by Dusty," and that implies a custom dyno-tune. Something just ain't right here.
 
ICLICK< exactly there are better cams and it is a buyers choice, you constantly are posting the 255 is superior, for you it might be but others tend to disagree, let us know when you personally try all the other cams, not just since I have a 255 cam it's the best..my bike is black so all black bikes are the best. as far as stock I was thinking the way you praise this cam that you had stock/money invested in it. main thing Iclick is happy with the 255's and this is what counts.
 
Have you tried the 255's? Just wondering if you have so you can say for certain that they are inferior to all other cams out there....

Out of the thousands of posts out there, what I see over and over again is "I think you should use...", not "it's a fact that this cam is better than that one and here is why." That's why it's called an opinion. I have never said clicker say anything to suggest that the 255 is the best because he has it. He has said that it fit his style the best, and in his opinion, would be hard to beat for him. It's about sharing experiences and opinions.....

For the record, I have never tried 255's, nor do I own any stock in any cam company.
 
It would probably take me 20 minutes tops to warm the bike up and calibrate 100TP on both cylinders. Longer to do the whole map for sure. Dusty probably just did WOT. As for Herko's chart find another dyno sheet that's even close. Most 255/96 charts I've seen maybe make 77-82 and 90-95. Just sayin.
 
Back
Top