SE-255 and HQ-500 cam comparison

J

jethom33545

New member
"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".

FWIW: The lowest bike I tuned with this config did 96 ft lbs SAE. Most break 100. Just sayin'. (DJ250i WP7 1200 ft.)
Not all like the same AFR and timing. Bike posted above did 103 ft lb SAE btw.

IMO, too often on the SE255 issue, many seem to have ridden only the dyno sheets.
Actually ride a 96 with a 255 and good tune and the sentiments may change.
The additional ft lbs it makes far to the left can make a big difference with the late model gearing.
"Best cam" is subjective. Not saying the 255 is best but it sure does a great job when all the factors such as gearing are put in to place.
 
Good post.

It's funny how these cam posts bring out the 255 haters. I know that wasn't Carl's objective by any stretch. He was just following up with past requests but some here continually bash the 255's for no reason. There are a ton of weaker cams that go through these forums without the diss but yet someone mentions 255's and the tools come out like cockroaches. If there was ANY other cam that would move my fat ass bagger loaded 2-up with saddlebags and tourpak chocker-block full off the line like the 255 does without bumping to insane CR , I'D BUY THE DAMN THING. When I say off the line, I'm talking right out of 1800rpms of over 100ft/lbs TQ available at the twist of the wick. That's all I need. I'm wanting my ass out of traffic with some distance between me and the minivan mom on the cell phone with kids playing volleyball in the back seat!!. Period. I read all these "save you a stool at the bar" replies. You know what? Kiss my ass while you wait at the bar. I like riding my bike at the speed I ride it. If I REALLY wanted to race a bike I damn sure wouldn't be on no 107 year old blueprint. ......and I can assure you the ones making these comments wouldn't be SAVING a seat, they'd be without one by the time they did show up.

Yes there are other cams and I'd like to try them all, but at present until I punch out the cases, this one fits the bill for a while anyways.

Personally, I like looking at ALL the power curves the cams offer. Not as a pissing match interjection, just entertainment mainly. I like to see how others put together their bikes. Nothing wrong with that, eh?

What some of you should be pissed at is these bullshit dyno's of stock heads putting out a bazillion horsepower and trazillion TQ that gets blasted through these forums. FOOLISHNESS and I don't care WHO is doing the tuning.

If/when I do find a cam that compliments my econo-build and STILL gives me the 115ft/lbs TQ that this one does.............I'm in. Until then, post away, I love looking at the other offerings.
 
Geez, I need to stay on my meds. Guess I ain't ready to wean off of 'em yet.




Right here is one of the most upstanding tuners in the business IMO. Straight shooter and EXTREMELY talented in his line of work.

Good seeing you post John!
 
Cams are such a subjective matter. Harleypingman did a great job in adding to the fountain of information that is available. HQ cams do what they are advertised as doing and do it well. I have experience with the 0034, 500 and 575. I also have personally run many cams, Woods, Andrews, HQ and T-man, but not the 255 so I will not comment on the 255.

Point is, if you are doing a cam swap yourself, choose someone you trust and go with their recommendation. If you are having a build done, again, go with a reputable builder and follow their recommendations and don't piecemeal together a science project. Some will work out, a lot don't. When someone brings a bike to me, I will make recommendations and those are based on experience and results.

I like HQ products and service, I don't try to hide that at all, but that being said, there are others out there that also provide a quality product.
 
Damn son, go back on the meds ! LMAO

But you are right, there is only so much you can wring out of stock configurations. What can vary tremendously is the rideability, where the power comes on, whether the engine's power is progressive or peaky and how easily they can be tuned.
 
You guys input has taught us ALOT(although some of us are slow learners)! Happy New Year Dalton!

Now where did I put my Thorazine?
 
Just a observation Air cleaner,rineheart true duals,and properly tuned a 103 with 255 cam. yeilds 81 hp and 96.07 torque. it says on the ultra limited specs that it puts out 102 foot pounds of torque stock. without the 255 cam,free flow air cleaner or exhaust opened up. Maybe someone can explain.
 
I'm trying to find an issue of american iron I have. I can't remember the issue but it was within the last 2 years. It gives a great explanation of cams. As others have said the overall configuration of the motor and and riding preference of the rider should impact cam selection. There is no one best cam. I for one appreciate ALL of the information I can find.
 
I have to put my two cents in on this comparison. I've seen this comparison before and I'm sad that HeadQuarters dropped some of the more interesting facts from the new website plan but that's beside the point; I'm still amazed at how much the the SE255 cams are loved, after so much has been proven by other companies. True; a dynomometer's main objective is developing an engine load for tuning but the dyno usually doesn't tell a fib.
 
Back
Top