Because that's how Harley-Davidson designed it.

 

Fixed. Better?

 

That doesn't help at all.

 

That helps tremendously to understand. Thanks!

Not that I'm disagreeing with you, but just as a clarifying question. The modern sportsters are both rubber mounted and have the swingarm mounted to the frame. How do they differ that allows them to maintain belt tension?

Thanks again!

 

Because that's how they designed the Sporty. Form and function follow design -- trust me on this, I'm an engineer.

 

I just want to understand the design reasons why they chose what they did.

The sportster has the swingarm mounted to the frame as far as I know, and the dyna has it mounted to the transmission? Why?

I don't doubt that your an engineer, would you mind using your knowledge and understanding of the subject to explain to me why it is how it as?

 

if you look at it, the Sportster also passes through the engine/trans case assembly.

The Swingarm pivot bolt passes through frame AND cases

 

I saw your first post, what a mess, you did that on purpose, no paragraphs, ain't nobody got time for that!

Hmm, popcorn

Those sons-a-bitches

I always use a mitt when catching a drift!

Fer sure! TriGeezer sharp Ultra

You tell us!

This is the Dyna forum, the help desk is on the first floor!

There's only one way to help this thread, it's just a jump to the left!

 

This is a question only harley knows. Maybe it helps on something, but it sure causes a lot of headache also. I’m amazed the dyna line nearly lasted two decades with the same swingarm to transmission design. Still, I love my dyna because I’ve used a lot of money and time making it better and not because it is a good bike lol.

 

Harley probably did this because it`s cheaper than what they did before and still has kept the integrity as far as safety and reliability is concerned. It`s always about money.