Rigid_EVO Woods cams vs Rocker Ratio ?

[groovemeisterus]

I've rebuilt my engine so many times, and have had to put solid 5/16"-18 Carbon Steel Solid Inserts from stripped head threads from bob woods prowler cams from pushrod side of heads that someone that works on engines for a long time that helped me remove my valves and springs, mentioned that I should be using different rocker arm ratios ?

https://www.fastenal.com/products/details/11138988

Anyone have any input ?

Signature should show parts list. But Branch #5 ported heads, Bob woods prowler
0.590" lift cams that matched the head flow CFM, stock length hammer pushrods (non adjustable), and pistons to match 30 degree combustion chamber for good squish area from branch also.

Should I be running a different rocker arm ratio for said cams with specs below
or listed in link ? I ride it like I stole it, but have one left stock non steel insert stock head threads in head left. Plus steel inserts in an aluminum head when temps up and expansion make a difference.

The head threads were always torqued to spec, but when racing, the cam lobes are so sharp that they beat the bolts up and strip them out sometimes when racing at high RPM's.

Currently under a full rebuild of engine top and bottom and needing some feedback on if I would need different geometry rockers ? And why ?

https://www.woodcarbs.com/designer.htm

W8S 19 / 47
49 / 17 246
246 .590
.590 .183
.176 Sportster 5 Spd XL

Thanks for any feedback on cams and 1200 conversion from 883 gearing, and rocker ratios do's and don'ts and what to's.

And I run S&S chrome rocker boxes.

Thanks. Rather not have to rebuild again even though I learn a lot from what not to do.

But never explored the why's and how's of rocker geometry with radical cams.

Thanks in advance for any feedback.

:xlforumrocks

[60Gunner]

I seriously contemplated woods cams for my TC 103 before doing the s&s 570s. The TW999-6A to be exact recommended by Bobby. Woods cams are known for making good power in the TC world but do have steep ramp rates. But it's more the lift and while the stock rockers should be fine for .590, it can sometimes be advantageous to change the geometry. Best person to ask about your specific cams/setup would be Bobby.
Curious why those cams?

[seajay]

Hammer performance did BFH work on my heads with 2.02 intakes and S&S 1.725 rockers. Running NRHS .590 cams.

[rocketmangb]

Sea Jay
The NRHS 590s "Hurricane 4 ? " are now listed as Feuling 580's I think
But hows it run ?
Dyno ?
Cranking compression ?

[seajay]

Originally Posted by rocketmangb

Sea Jay
The NRHS 590s "Hurricane 4 ? " are now listed as Feuling 580's I think
But hows it run ?
Dyno ?
Cranking compression ?

Same specs as the 590s. Runs great(4th gear my fav). No dyno. 210-212 CP

[ReddTigger]

When rebuilding mikes bike, we had an issue with studs stripping from cases. repaired using timeserts as they create a mechanical bond to the base material. the ones you listed from fastenal do not seem to do so, but use lockpatch to hold in place.

the time serts use both. ..
http://www.timesert.com/html/hd.html

I Have been wanting to use woods cams in a sporty build, but the steep ramps have kept me from pulling the trigger. especially since hammer made their cams with a gentle lobe on purpose..

[rocketmangb]

I think he had trouble with the rocker box to head bolts

[Maxeffort]

Increased ratio might be very desirable in an all out race engine, but not necessarily for a street bike.

It’s a lot of expense for a little more lift (that you may not need)
Increased rocker ratio makes the valve motion more aggressive and the valves harder to control. A valve train that was stable with one ratio, may not be when the ratio is increased.. valve bounce, float, spring surge etc... this may in turn require better/ different springs, lighter valves to control.

[60Gunner]

Originally Posted by Maxeffort

Increased ratio might be very desirable in an all out race engine, but not necessarily for a street bike.

It’s a lot of expense for a little more lift (that you may not need)
Increased rocker ratio makes the valve motion more aggressive and the valves harder to control. A valve train that was stable with one ratio, may not be when the ratio is increased.. valve bounce, float, spring surge etc... this may in turn require better/ different springs, lighter valves to control.

Exactly. Well put. That's why I said it MIGHT be beneficial without getting into all that.
And there's a big difference between building and even tuning, especially timing, for a dyno/race bike and a street bike.
And why I think Hammer's 570s are the best cams they have for a street bike. Also why I ultimately went S&S 570s over those 999-6As in my TC 103. The 999-6As woulda been fun on the dyno tho. But I can't rev much past 6000 with this B motor anyway because of the counterbalance. Other than dyno day, I'd bet a lot of people don't. And up to 6000rpm the 570s kick ass. Woods cams are tempting but.
Now the OP is racing so different story.

[groovemeisterus]

Originally Posted by 60Gunner

I seriously contemplated woods cams for my TC 103 before doing the s&s 570s. The TW999-6A to be exact recommended by Bobby. Woods cams are known for making good power in the TC world but do have steep ramp rates. But it's more the lift and while the stock rockers should be fine for .590, it can sometimes be advantageous to change the geometry. Best person to ask about your specific cams/setup would be Bobby.
Curious why those cams?

After heads were ported Branch flowed them and the max CFM was right at
about 0.590" then CFM started to not matter with more lift.