why does it say that you can't use the springer on rubber mounted models? And how did it affect your install? Dave...

 

Have not done yet, but I think it is more to do with one not being available. The bearing surface on the lower tree needs to be stepped so it can go up into the bearing cup. That and the fact of how the fork lock works. Someone on here put a springer on a SB from a softtail, looked great, but I didnt like the way he had to affect steering geometry to get it done. In the front of the lower tree there was half of the above mentioned step, so he ground the rear portion in and the top flat. He said the bike now felt top heavy, but that he liked it. Said it had less nose dive, and a few other qualities as well. Dont remember much else.

This is the one thing that tops my winter list and will be done with no compromises. I downloaded some prints, and have altered half of them to sute the new dynas. Writing the cnc programs now. Will look similer to the redneck springer, but Im doing mine in Stainless. It will have solid sprung and rigid legs. Tube would be alot lighter but I dont care for the embrittlement of the welded stainless tube. I will be doing a few sets in steel as well, and they will be in the classified section in kit form in a few months. Got to pay for all that stainless somehow!

 

Ambitious nasty.

Can't wait.

Get er done.

mud

 

Nasty is probably recalling my post-mortem write up after I installed the springer. I said a mouthful in that post and perhaps I should clarify a few things.

The geometry is unchanged and the frame itself is unmodified. The stem on the springer has what appears to be a few degrees of negative rake, but that is deceptive as the rockers place the tire in almost the identical location as with the stock front end. So the effective rake and the trailare basically unchanged. The springer does in fact weigh more and much of that weight is near the neck so the center of gravity is obviously higher. But I don't think it is dramatically different. The handling IS different in that the bike is a bit more eager to turn, but it is due to the narrower profile of the front tire more than anything else. Less movement of the bars induces lean with that skinnier tire. Others have noticed the same quicker steering after switching to a 21" front tire on a stock front end. It isn't radical in the least and I do like it (it isn't a rake/trail issue). About 2 weeks ago a local indy put a new front tire on it and gave it a test ride. He came back with a smile on his face and said it rode and handled great.

There were no compromises made as far as the mechanical function of the front end. I'm a mechanical engineer so that's pretty important to me. The only compromise I feel I had to make was losing the fork lock but I never used mine anyway. A tab could be welded on that would permit using theexisting mechanism on the Street Bob but I didn't want to re-powder coat the springer, maybe some day.

The only modifications made to the springer were to allow the stem to seat inside the neck without rubbing. For some reason, the bearing surfacesare just barely recessed inside the neck and clearly that wasn't the case with the bike this front end was designed for (1996 Bad Boy). The Street Bob neck has built in cups for the races and they must be just a tad bit deeper. So the base of the stem on the springer rubbed on the bottom rim of the neck tube and needed some minor grinding to fix it. I could have just as easily used a second bearing dust cover as a spacer to accomplish this but I wanted to get the entire springer as far up inthere as possible to get the fork stops up a little higher and clear of the wires entering/exiting the frame. The grinding was limited to the area right at the base of the stem and I just used black touch up paint on it.

As far as your specific question about why you can't (or shouldn't) put a springer on a rubber mounted bike. . . I have no clue other than the fact that none of the rubber mounted bikes made by Harley work with a factory springer without a little minor modification. I am pretty sure that older Dynas have more fitment issues than the '06+ models. So I suspect that a rubber mounted motor is irrelevant here.

Kevin

 

Mo' pics, mo' pics! The springer looks great. It must definitely get some double- and triple-takes when people see it and try to figure out the combination of springer front end and exposed rear shocks.

 

Kpreese I wasnt knocking your bike, and am sorry if it came off that way. When I first got mine I was thinking springer. That was in Oct, and when told it cant be done thought bull***t. Did a serch and the only one I found was yours. I knew there were like minded people out there. Being a mechanical engineer, Ill take your word on geometry, but you shoud also be able to see whereI drew my conclution.I knew trail could be corrected in the rockers, to an extent in reguard to giving a mechanical advantage over the springs. Again sorry didnt mean to knock ya. And will say again looks great.

 

Thanks to all that replyed. I think I will go ahead with the springer in February, I don't need no stinkin forklocks. Dave...

 

No sweat, I didn't take it that way at all. I just wanted to clarify a few things. In my original post after mounting the springer, I tried to explain way too much and probably didn't do a good job. Everything you mentioned was something I talked about (shortened trail, higher COG, etc) but my compulsion to "reveal all" when it comes to technical things probably made all of those things sound like more like "issues" than they really are. The change in trail for example was something I didn't have the equipment or the desire to precisely measure, but I knew it was going to be a minor change so I wasn't concerned about it. However, itwas a factor that had to be considered so I mentioned it.

Keep us posted on your project!

Dave, here's a link to the post:
https://www.hdforums.com/m_911440/tm.htm

GentlemanBiker, click on my gallery to see some better pictures.

Kevin