I scratched the post temporarily because I screwed up the chart, and without the chart it wouldn't have made much sense. In so doing I lost the text in the post, so I had to re-write it. When I originally superimposed the 255 chart onto Jamie's in Photoshop I had the Y-axis out of scale and it made the 255 chart look flatter than it in fact was. I did it again and made sure it was accurate this time. This forum is all about discussion and sharing ideas, and I think the bottom line is that all of the cams discussed here are winners.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Wood TW6-6 TW-555 Cam Dyno Test by Fuel Moto
- Thread starter Emelia D
- Start date
The "shape" of the TQ curve with the new 555's is still pretty impressive even when compared to the SE 255's.... And lets not forget that we do not "ride a dyno chart" we ride the motorcycle and the peak #'s at WOT are not a full representation of how the bike performs out on the road. I'm pretty confident that even with stock compression, the TQ of the new 555's will come on strong and early enough for most riders.
While we are on the subject of the 255's and MAX early TQ --> Lets not forget the new Andrews 48H cam which has been shown to outperform the 255's at their own game - ie MAX TQ.... comes in exactly like the 255's but pulls harder and longer.
While we are on the subject of the 255's and MAX early TQ --> Lets not forget the new Andrews 48H cam which has been shown to outperform the 255's at their own game - ie MAX TQ.... comes in exactly like the 255's but pulls harder and longer.
This is true, but a TQ curve is a good representation of the bike's ability to accelerate at WOT at any given RPM. You can see the TQ value at 2500 at WOT, 3500, etc.--and I think that is important. You're right about not riding dyno charts, and I've said that many times, but a TQ curve tells you quite a bit. OTOH for me a HP chart tells me relatively little, and in a practical sense only what the engine will do at high RPM's.
I agree with you here too. Keep in mind that I worship the low-end and midrange, which is where I ride most of the time, while others will prefer to have the punch up higher. Drag races are won with peak-HP, while passing a truck in 5th gear is a function of TQ. I think if you aren't concerned with performance below 2500 rpms any of these cams will serve very well, but I do think the Wood offerings will be a little flat on the bottom-end. It's all in what you want.
I also think this cam is a winner based on the specs, but I'll need to see some charts before deciding for sure. Have you seen any? Like you said it looks like it may be a real torque monster like the 255's yet be able to pull better at the top-end. Time will tell. Do you know when they'll be introduced, or re-introduced? I heard that a few were released a few months ago, then Andrews stopped production for a re-release later on.
I agree with you here too. Keep in mind that I worship the low-end and midrange, which is where I ride most of the time, while others will prefer to have the punch up higher. Drag races are won with peak-HP, while passing a truck in 5th gear is a function of TQ. I think if you aren't concerned with performance below 2500 rpms any of these cams will serve very well, but I do think the Wood offerings will be a little flat on the bottom-end. It's all in what you want.
I also think this cam is a winner based on the specs, but I'll need to see some charts before deciding for sure. Have you seen any? Like you said it looks like it may be a real torque monster like the 255's yet be able to pull better at the top-end. Time will tell. Do you know when they'll be introduced, or re-introduced? I heard that a few were released a few months ago, then Andrews stopped production for a re-release later on.
Thanks for the reply. I would like to see that chart.
In some of Fuelmoto's examples the TW6-6/555 is hitting 90 pounds of torque at 26-2700 RPM. I would say that is about where I find myself cruising at speed. Especially in an 09+ bike in 6th. Well...actually above 2600 at that point more like 27-3000. Bonus though! Cause at that RPM (3K) they are delivering around 100 pounds and thats all the better for passing. I also like that they don't fall off quickly while the RPM's and HP go up.
Take in mind, I'm not a "peaK" HP/TQ guy. Just looking for the most available torque I can get at my typical cruise range.
Having the cam bring on even more power in the higher RPMs (if that is the case) is just an added bonus.
Definitely looks to be a much more flexible cam than the 255s. At least for people that like a broader range of power. Kinda cool.
lp
In some of Fuelmoto's examples the TW6-6/555 is hitting 90 pounds of torque at 26-2700 RPM. I would say that is about where I find myself cruising at speed. Especially in an 09+ bike in 6th. Well...actually above 2600 at that point more like 27-3000. Bonus though! Cause at that RPM (3K) they are delivering around 100 pounds and thats all the better for passing. I also like that they don't fall off quickly while the RPM's and HP go up.
Take in mind, I'm not a "peaK" HP/TQ guy. Just looking for the most available torque I can get at my typical cruise range.
Having the cam bring on even more power in the higher RPMs (if that is the case) is just an added bonus.
Definitely looks to be a much more flexible cam than the 255s. At least for people that like a broader range of power. Kinda cool.
lp
The TW48's? I would too.
I think if you spend most of your time above 2500 rpm the Wood cams are winners, and the only weakness they have IMO is below that. I'm probably the odd-ball in the group who spends quite a bit of time between 2000-2500, and almost never cruise above that.
The 255's don't "hit a wall" at 5k like some say they do, but the Wood cams profiled here will walk away in a drag race, as this is a function of high-RPM HP. OTOH I'm more interested in having the power where I ride, which is way below the redline. In fact, I think I may have hit the redline two or three times on this bike in four years, and two of those were checking to see if RevXtend on the PCIII and PCV were working. I'm not much of a hot-rodder, to say the least, but I do like being able to punch it where I'm riding and have it move without ado.
Probably, but for my type of riding I think they're not quite right. It's all a matter of where you want the power.
I think if you spend most of your time above 2500 rpm the Wood cams are winners, and the only weakness they have IMO is below that. I'm probably the odd-ball in the group who spends quite a bit of time between 2000-2500, and almost never cruise above that.
The 255's don't "hit a wall" at 5k like some say they do, but the Wood cams profiled here will walk away in a drag race, as this is a function of high-RPM HP. OTOH I'm more interested in having the power where I ride, which is way below the redline. In fact, I think I may have hit the redline two or three times on this bike in four years, and two of those were checking to see if RevXtend on the PCIII and PCV were working. I'm not much of a hot-rodder, to say the least, but I do like being able to punch it where I'm riding and have it move without ado.
Probably, but for my type of riding I think they're not quite right. It's all a matter of where you want the power.
dominguezsex
New member
Dave here's good cam install writeup atrain68 did.
http://www.hdforums.com/forum/touring-models/461066-cam-project-final-write-up.html
http://www.hdforums.com/forum/touring-models/461066-cam-project-final-write-up.html
A dyno chart doesn't necessarily give you an idea of how fast a bike will accellerate. One thing the dyno chart doesn't show is how fast the motor spools up. A motor with better volumetric effeciencies will rev to redline faster than another motor with lower VEs. When that happens, the motor that revs faster is into higher torque and hp numbers quicker. This is one of the reasons that people say "you don't ride dyno charts". It's not uncommon for a motor with lower overall hp and tq numbers to be actually faster than another motor with higher numbers, because of how fast it spools up.
A dyno chart is good for one thing: comparing the effects of changing componants on a motor. It will not accurately guess which bike will be quicker, unless the numbers are so far apart that it's beyond question.
A dyno chart is good for one thing: comparing the effects of changing componants on a motor. It will not accurately guess which bike will be quicker, unless the numbers are so far apart that it's beyond question.
SCVroker7253
New member
Sometimes it's good to see the graphs layed over time. It can show the acceleration curve.
Miss Shelley =)
New member
Atrain68's excellent write-up has already been linked. I also did one here.
If you have normal tools, a modicum of mechanical ability, and can read the service manual you can do it. It is a great bonding experience with your bike and you'll feel great when you finish. You'll also be more knowledgeable of how the bike works when you finish and you'll feel like a guru even if you're not. Having an experienced someone on-site would be helpful, but this isn't a necessity. The manual is really quite thorough and complete in its descriptions. It made me confident enough to encourage and help a friend to DIY cam job a year later.
If you have normal tools, a modicum of mechanical ability, and can read the service manual you can do it. It is a great bonding experience with your bike and you'll feel great when you finish. You'll also be more knowledgeable of how the bike works when you finish and you'll feel like a guru even if you're not. Having an experienced someone on-site would be helpful, but this isn't a necessity. The manual is really quite thorough and complete in its descriptions. It made me confident enough to encourage and help a friend to DIY cam job a year later.