[swampboogiedoug]

Here are some shots of my heads & the Jones Cams ( Stage 3 turbo ) installed. Notice how large the base circles are. They gently open the valves rather than stressing them like the SE parts. They also use much less shim to accomplish proper lash. There are shots of both the intake and exhaust sides. This was done CNC by Wegner Engineering who did all of the Destroyer program heads. I had Scott Fitzgerald do the valve spring setup for me. The valves are 2mm oversize so I was unable to use the pieces I bought from Jones. They also used a single groove keeper so I had to get new springs and keepers ( beehives / tool steel). You need to ask your head guy which parts he needs before you buy all your parts. Final shot is of the combustion chamber showing valve clearances.. No flow bench numbers, but I would hazard 20-25% increase.

 

[Jan-Dirk]

Very nice, please post results

 

[Knut J]

:notworth: Interesting!
Doug, share with us the other engine goodies...

 

[streetrodracer]

swampboogie Doug - Hey looking real good, nice top end Revo porn ! I got the Jones Stage 2 Cams so I appreciate the ramp and lash stuff - Question - Wegner did the CNC work on the original Destroyer and BB S/E Heads, of which I've got a few with his CW # on them but were you able to have him do that CNC work for you recently ? If so that's pretty cool ! I went with the AV&V valves, what you got there ?

 

[Heavens Thunder]

Very Sweet !

 

[swampboogiedoug]

The heads were done in the last year or so. Not sure whose valves they are, you would need to ask Scott. He doesn't use any second rate parts.

 

[RoddyDucati]

those look awesome! great pics! what size motor are they going on?

 

[swampboogiedoug]

Stock displacement 1130 cc ( 69 ci). With a turbo you don't need more inches, you put your $ into better parts. There are some members with stock displacement, bigger turbos & methanol blasting out over 300 hp. At 1 bar ( app 14 pounds boost) the motor thinks its twice a big.

 

[vrodwogi]

swampboogie Doug - Hey looking real good, nice top end Revo porn ! I got the Jones Stage 2 Cams so I appreciate the ramp and lash stuff - Question - Wegner did the CNC work on the original Destroyer and BB S/E Heads, of which I've got a few with his CW # on them but were you able to have him do that CNC work for you recently ? If so that's pretty cool ! I went with the AV&V valves, what you got there ?

Would that be Wegner in Markesan WI??:stooge:

 

[swampboogiedoug]

Yes, I believe that's where they're located

 

[vrodwogi]

Cool I know Carl Wagner from the days that I raced late model stocks, did not know he got involved with Harley on the v-rod destroyer stuff. Less than 30 miles from me, will be stopping by there and seeing about getting them to do a set for me, Thanks for the info

 

[johnr204]

Ok. I GOTTA play devils advocate here...... sorry guys
Jones cams DO have a larger base circle than say SE. BUT.......I completely disagree with the "gentle ramp" line of what I consider total B.S. Hear me out........ 2 cams.... vrod, Chevy, vw, ford.... does not matter. ANYHOW.... if the cam opens the valve any given number, say .500, it must do it in the same amount of crankshaft rotation, no? So the lift being equal, and duration within say 1 or 2 degrees, the "gentle slope" cannot physically be much different. Cams are generally rated for duration from a starting point of .050, then it gives total lift. The valve will not last if it is opened too quickly, or worse yet closed too quickly. That is why heavier springs are a necessity with larger lift cams. Because the lifter MUST stay in contact with the profile of the cam. When the cam is moving faster than the lifter spring pressure is to keep in contact with the cam, that is called "valve float". That is BAD!!!!!! Because if the exhaust is not fully closed by the time the intake begins to open, they will hit each other. Anyhow....... that's another topic.
My point....smaller base circle does not NECESSARILY mean harder opening. The cam grinder can control the gentleness (or not) of opening, and / or closing (or not) but everyone must get from the same "point A" (valve just beginning to open) to "point B" (total lift) in exactly the same amount of crankshaft rotation. So, while the grind may have SLIGHTLY different profile, they must ALL get to the same result.
And............GO!!!!!!!

 

[coastrider]

Ok. I GOTTA play devils advocate here...... sorry guys
Jones cams DO have a larger base circle than say SE. BUT.......I completely disagree with the "gentle ramp" line of what I consider total B.S. Hear me out........ 2 cams.... vrod, Chevy, vw, ford.... does not matter. ANYHOW.... if the cam opens the valve any given number, say .500, it must do it in the same amount of crankshaft rotation, no? So the lift being equal, and duration within say 1 or 2 degrees, the "gentle slope" cannot physically be much different. Cams are generally rated for duration from a starting point of .050, then it gives total lift. The valve will not last if it is opened too quickly, or worse yet closed too quickly. That is why heavier springs are a necessity with larger lift cams. Because the lifter MUST stay in contact with the profile of the cam. When the cam is moving faster than the lifter spring pressure is to keep in contact with the cam, that is called "valve float". That is BAD!!!!!! Because if the exhaust is not fully closed by the time the intake begins to open, they will hit each other. Anyhow....... that's another topic.
My point....smaller base circle does not NECESSARILY mean harder opening. The cam grinder can control the gentleness (or not) of opening, and / or closing (or not) but everyone must get from the same "point A" (valve just beginning to open) to "point B" (total lift) in exactly the same amount of crankshaft rotation. So, while the grind may have SLIGHTLY different profile, they must ALL get to the same result.
And............GO!!!!!!!

All true to a point, if you start with same blank circle. But the reason the SE cams have an such aggressive ramp is that HD took the existing cam circle and ground more off the heel to gain the extra lift, whereas Jones cams start with a bigger circle in the blank in order to gain the extra lift at the peak.
It's not BS, the opening slope is gentler.

 

[johnr204]

Am not saying jones are a better cam. That is a proven fact. But, if two ppl raced up a mountain, one starting at sea level, and the other starting at 500 ft, with the distance being 2000 feet, the start point becomes irrelevant.
I think I stated my case fairly clearly. And I remain unconvinced that the ramp is "more gentle". Still say that statement is B.S.

 

[coastrider]

Am not saying jones are a better cam. That is a proven fact. But, if two ppl raced up a mountain, one starting at sea level, and the other starting at 500 ft, with the distance being 2000 feet, the start point becomes irrelevant.
I think I stated my case fairly clearly. And I remain unconvinced that the ramp is "more gentle". Still say that statement is B.S.

Well, I suggest you get your compass out and a piece of paper and draw some circles. You will soon see. Don't see how it can be BS when there are people on here that have had failures due to the harsh opening.

 

[coastrider]

Am not saying jones are a better cam. That is a proven fact. But, if two ppl raced up a mountain, one starting at sea level, and the other starting at 500 ft, with the distance being 2000 feet, the start point becomes irrelevant.
I think I stated my case fairly clearly. And I remain unconvinced that the ramp is "more gentle". Still say that statement is B.S.

Perhaps I can explain this differently. If you place a piece of 3 x 2 timber in front of 2 wheels, 1 small and 1 large, then roll each wheel over the timber. Both wheels will raise from the ground the 2" equally but the effort required to push the small wheel over will be greater than the effort required for the large wheel. Why? Because the curvature of the bigger wheel is gentler.
It is this effort that translates to the forces in effect on the metal to metal of the moving parts causing more stress and ultimately failures. Not BS, simple physics.

 

[streetrodracer]

Bumpstick Realities.

The Stage 2 Jones cams do not have quite the total lift of H-D S/E cams. Also you must shim the bucket up to the reground smaller base circle of the S/E cam so it's closer to the true centerline of the cam to start with - THEN it's going to open MORE than the Jones. At least on this comparison in the same degrees of rotation it is IMPOSSIBLE for the Jones cams to NOT have a more gentle ramp, they start out larger in diameter and open less. I've got both and have compared them off the bike in a spare head long ago and it's very evident, also it's the rate of valve opening based on the curve of the ramp. The fact that S/E cams valve trains are not as quiet and throttle blade shafts break with them is additional evidence they are not as kind to the valve train as Jones cams. I believe a good engine builder always uses cams with the largest base circle if reliability and longevity is the goal. Only drawback with the Revo with Stage 3 -4 Jones is they often require clearance machining so the higher lobes don't hit the bottom of the cam cover - a smaller base circle can get away with higher lift before it hits but I would not use smaller base circle cams for that one advantage. :blahblah:

 

[pecee]

Perhaps I can explain this differently. If you place a piece of 3 x 2 timber in front of 2 wheels, 1 small and 1 large, then roll each wheel over the timber. Both wheels will raise from the ground the 2" equally but the effort required to push the small wheel over will be greater than the effort required for the large wheel. Why? Because the curvature of the bigger wheel is gentler.
It is this effort that translates to the forces in effect on the metal to metal of the moving parts causing more stress and ultimately failures. Not BS, simple physics.

dont agree.a smaller wheel takes less torque to turn than a larger,simple physics.

 

[coastrider]

dont agree.a smaller wheel takes less torque to turn than a larger,simple physics.

Read the example again. The wheel isn't just turning. Its climbing over an object. Try pullling a wheelchair with small wheels over a curb and then a small wheel one. Or when did you see a tractor with little wheels. Simple physics!

 

[rynyoung]

dont agree.a smaller wheel takes less torque to turn than a larger,simple physics.

Having motor build now so find this topic interesting. I understand the point your making but coast rider is right about the physics involved. Better or worse when it comes to overall performance???

Think about it another way - two identical trucks with 4:11 axle gears crawling over 15" boulders. One has 25" diameter tires and the other has 40" tires. Both tires rise 15" as they roll over the boulder BUT do so at different angles of incidence/attack. This is why the larger diameter cam lobe effects the valve travel as it does.

To your point, more torque is required to turn the larger tires (or to overcome a given amount of friction / inertia) so the truck with the 25" tires will accelerate faster on flat surfaces regardless of the angle of travel (uphill, downhill or flat). However, when it comes to rolling over obstacles, the larger tires (or cam lobes) require less torque due to their increased circumference relative to boulder height (valve travel). This advantage arises from the lower angle of incidence (decreased friction) generated by the larger tire (cam lobe) as it rotates over (around) the obstacle (valve tip).

With a larger diameter lobe, the valve travels at a more constant rate of speed throughout the stroke even though it may open and close at the same crank position as the smaller diameter lobe. This is because the former provides a longer distance of lobe travel through which the stroke of the valve can be more evenly distributed. But to achieve this within the fixed space allocated in the head there is an offset required to balance the equation - and that is less total lift relative to the H-D S/E cams as noted by streetrodracer.

Here's a decent visual illustration