Defintive Position on the Inner Primary Bearing Issue 06-08
#1
12-03-2007, 10:10 AM
Defintive Position on the Inner Primary Bearing Issue 06-08
A lot seems to be have written about the 06-08IPB issue. Most seems to a mixtureof practical experience of the bearing failing and a lot of guesswork about the underlying problem (if any) and what the factory has done about it (if anything).
I've read all the posts carefully and still have some questions:
1) Did the 06 IPB have a problem and if so what was it (poor batch, or fundemetal lubrication design flaw).
2) What percentage of bikes were affected (are we hearing a noisey minority hereor is there a silent majority who are fixing their bikes without a fuss?) ?
3) Was the problem fixed for 07? Same part number, but was the quality actuallyimproved?
4) What percentage of 07 bikes have had prematureIPB fauilures. If it issignificantly less then 06then it indicates that something was done to address the problem for 07. If so, what? There certainly seems to be less reports of 07 failures on this Forum.
5) One thread suggests that on the 08 Touring models the IPB inner race, tranny input shaft and casing are different. Does this apply tothe Dynas as well, and if so has it been doneto adress earlier IPB problem - or for other unrelatedreasons? If it is what is different, and again what was the exact nature of the problem in 06 and 07?
6) Are IPB failures just part of the process own owning a big twin and its just a crap shoot when they go down. Might get 5 or 100K. Luck of the draw.
Bottom line I'm a happy 07 owner and just want to know if I'm sitting on a basic design flaw that will show up prematurely and whether it has been sorted for 08. Not whining - just looking for a bit of clarity!
I've read all the posts carefully and still have some questions:
1) Did the 06 IPB have a problem and if so what was it (poor batch, or fundemetal lubrication design flaw).
2) What percentage of bikes were affected (are we hearing a noisey minority hereor is there a silent majority who are fixing their bikes without a fuss?) ?
3) Was the problem fixed for 07? Same part number, but was the quality actuallyimproved?
4) What percentage of 07 bikes have had prematureIPB fauilures. If it issignificantly less then 06then it indicates that something was done to address the problem for 07. If so, what? There certainly seems to be less reports of 07 failures on this Forum.
5) One thread suggests that on the 08 Touring models the IPB inner race, tranny input shaft and casing are different. Does this apply tothe Dynas as well, and if so has it been doneto adress earlier IPB problem - or for other unrelatedreasons? If it is what is different, and again what was the exact nature of the problem in 06 and 07?
6) Are IPB failures just part of the process own owning a big twin and its just a crap shoot when they go down. Might get 5 or 100K. Luck of the draw.
Bottom line I'm a happy 07 owner and just want to know if I'm sitting on a basic design flaw that will show up prematurely and whether it has been sorted for 08. Not whining - just looking for a bit of clarity!
#2
12-03-2007, 10:17 AM
RE: Defintive Position on the Inner Primary Bearing Issue 06-08
My understanding is that the 06 inner primary bearing had manufacturing flaws. OR the bearing in the 06/07 primary is too small for the application. It has to be one of those 2 issues. But if your starts screaming you will know it. Just make sureyou change you primary lubricant at 1000 andby the book and keep good documentation and you should be covered. I have the HD letter that offers "free replacement" every 15000 miles for mine so I will be enforcing that at least once to be sure to get the factory installed bearing out of there.That said, most of the failuresoccur before 10,000 miles anyway so I probably have a good one because mine is as quiet as a mouse.
#3
12-03-2007, 10:24 AM
RE: Defintive Position on the Inner Primary Bearing Issue 06-08
"My understanding is that the 06 inner primary bearing had manufacturing flaws. OR the bearing in the 06/07 primary is too small for the application"
Thanks for the reply. So, does anyone know if the 08 IPB is a larger / heavier duty item?
Thanks for the reply. So, does anyone know if the 08 IPB is a larger / heavier duty item?
#4
12-03-2007, 10:36 AM
#5
12-03-2007, 10:37 AM
RE: Defintive Position on the Inner Primary Bearing Issue 06-08
"I have the HD letter that offers "free replacement" every 15000 miles for mine"
Read posts here (can't find it right now) that said people who received the Customer Care letter you mentioned also received a letter at a later date that stated the free replacement was ended becausethe 15,000 mile repalcement was was deemed not necessary.
I'd be curious to know what happens if the bearing fails after the 2 year waarranty.
Sammi
Read posts here (can't find it right now) that said people who received the Customer Care letter you mentioned also received a letter at a later date that stated the free replacement was ended becausethe 15,000 mile repalcement was was deemed not necessary.
I'd be curious to know what happens if the bearing fails after the 2 year waarranty.
Sammi
#6
12-03-2007, 10:49 AM
RE: Defintive Position on the Inner Primary Bearing Issue 06-08
Sammi: I'll be in small claims court with the letter on HD letterhead signed by an officer of the HD Motor Company promising me as a consumer to replace my bearing every 15000 miles as well as the letter claiming "nevermind". So, it will be little me against a multi-billion dollar corporation that is attempting to weasel their way out of a warranty promise that is in fact an addendum to my owners manual. The dealer will refuse but when they get my subpoena in Milwaukee (which will cost me $50 to file) I doubt they will want to spend the $$ on a local law firm to defend it.Anyway, the entertainment value will be worth the $50. But I doubt it will ever go there. I am sure they will replace the unit under warranty rather than suffer the expense andpotential badPR. In fact I didcall the Moco about this issue and they sent me the letter promosing the free replacement without hesitation.
#7
12-03-2007, 11:11 AM
RE: Defintive Position on the Inner Primary Bearing Issue 06-08
According to this thread anything after Feb 06 man date is ok ....
https://www.hdforums.com/m_1696586/tm.htm
https://www.hdforums.com/m_1696586/tm.htm
ORIGINAL: warren888
I saw a number of threads on this, and checked the Harley website. Under the "service check" function, it lists replacing the inner primary bearing every 15,000 miles, even though Harley retracted their initial positioning on this issue.
So I called into Harley and spoke to their tech group. Here is the story from them direct:
a). They did make a few changes to the transmission that impacted this replacement - and they do not require replacement now.
b). If you had a bike that required recalls - you had the changes done during the recall remediation (the tranny recall).
c). Once they identified the change, the factory revised the build - so any biked manufactured after this come from the factory with the change.
d). He claims it did NOT have to do with a ratcheting auto-chain tensioner - it was related to a modification in the transmission (some screw replacement -he could not recall the exact details).
e). I showed him how the 5,000 mile checkup on the web site still shows the replacement requirement - and he was very surprised. They missed removing that on the web site. I suspect they will fix the web site ASAP.
f). The '07 model has the same bearing - no changes made to it.
g). While on the phone - I spoke to him about some design suggestions - which he was actually interested in. Specifically, the ugly front turn signal relocation (stalks too long), and the idea of a tank lift. He was quite intrigued about the lift in particular.
So that's the story from the horses mouth. I'm not going to worry about it anymore.
I saw a number of threads on this, and checked the Harley website. Under the "service check" function, it lists replacing the inner primary bearing every 15,000 miles, even though Harley retracted their initial positioning on this issue.
So I called into Harley and spoke to their tech group. Here is the story from them direct:
a). They did make a few changes to the transmission that impacted this replacement - and they do not require replacement now.
b). If you had a bike that required recalls - you had the changes done during the recall remediation (the tranny recall).
c). Once they identified the change, the factory revised the build - so any biked manufactured after this come from the factory with the change.
d). He claims it did NOT have to do with a ratcheting auto-chain tensioner - it was related to a modification in the transmission (some screw replacement -he could not recall the exact details).
e). I showed him how the 5,000 mile checkup on the web site still shows the replacement requirement - and he was very surprised. They missed removing that on the web site. I suspect they will fix the web site ASAP.
f). The '07 model has the same bearing - no changes made to it.
g). While on the phone - I spoke to him about some design suggestions - which he was actually interested in. Specifically, the ugly front turn signal relocation (stalks too long), and the idea of a tank lift. He was quite intrigued about the lift in particular.
So that's the story from the horses mouth. I'm not going to worry about it anymore.
Trending Topics
#8
12-03-2007, 11:15 AM
Road Captain
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Northern Maryland
Posts: 610
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#10
12-03-2007, 05:57 PM
Road Warrior