SE-255 and HQ-500 cam comparison

G

gaia_fanatic

New member
After my research over the psat 2 weeks looking for the cam for me I have found a lot of people with the 255. No big deal, as said by others it all depends on where you want the torque. the 255 gives it out in the early stage rpms and then tapers off as you rev. the 204 gives tq in the mid range rpms, and the 258 is for high end torque. So it depends on where you want it. I think the 204 or the 255 would both be good for cruising baggers. They both give good tq at the cruising rpms roughly 2200-3000 depending on the rider because each one is a little different. that my nickel minus 3. However I am still debating which cam I will get, be it the HQ, SE, Tman, or Woods I think I will be satisfied either way.
 
What you are saying is simply not true and you are putting words in my mouth. I never said the 255's were "superior" to anything else on the market. In fact, I have always stated that they modestly boost the low-end and midrange, are not peak-HP cams, and are often a bargain when purchased on Ebay. Further, they are rare among performance cams in that they will not harm the extreme low-end using stock compression. I have harped on the idea that the ideal cams for any particular person will vary based on that rider's priorities. Please show me a message I've written that states otherwise.

My statement above showing the potential problems with the HQ dyno comparo is just that, exposing what I consider to be problems. I don't think it is representative of a well-tuned TC103/255 combo and I've so stated. It implies nothing else.
 
The reason I didn't look into the TW54H further was that according to Andrews it requires "hi-lift" springs, and I didn't want to do any engine mods. With their relatively late intake close I do wonder how they would handle the extreme low-end with stock compression, and suspect they may benefit greatly from a small CR increase.
 
I figgered I'd draw you out with that one!! Didn't want to leave anyone out in my rant...... LOL!!

As a token of my apology, I'll save you a LAWN CHAIR out back. j/k
 
I actually have the 54's in my '07 (that I bored to 105" with 10:1 comp) as the stock beehive springs are supposed to be good up to .575 lift, and they are only .005 more lift than the 255's.

Having said that, you probably are correct about the 54's in a stock comp 96" motor with their relatively late intake close timing. A 4* advance gear would probably be worth it with that cam. But then, you may as well run a 26, 255, or the mentioned HQ-500 without the advance since, IMO, they are a better fit for a stock comp motor.

Now back to your regularly scheduled programming....
 
I agree. I'm not defending iclick because he can obviously hold his own here, but I have found post to be very imformative without much bias. I've not read many post who went the 255 route based from Iclicks post and regreted their choice as well as found his facts to be false. I'm thankful that someone like me who doesn't have a clue about these things can learn so much from someone that doesn't appear to be pushing any one specific product just because that is their favorite. I'm still reading and still listening, but to suggest that Iclick is always bias isn'ttrue in my opinion.

Beary
 
I appreciate the nice comments and PM's I've received and would like to say that if I ever come across as biased or I'm otherwise out-of-line please drop me a PM and call me out. I always try to reveal the pros and cons of every recommendation as I see them, especially something as subjective as a cam choice, as what one hopes for in a cam upgrade varies greatly from one rider to another. With cams there is no do-it-all or "superior" grind, and that's why there are so many different choices. I'm not a tech and don't try many different products, but when I hit on something that works for me I always pass the info along and try to be objective about it.
 
I have to admit something. I just read some testimonial on the 255's and they are a good choice for money and time spent on them. My hat's off to the 255 cam bikers. I don't know as much as I thought.
 
Back
Top