Hey Guys

I have pulled the shocks off the 87 Heritage.
As it goes the early softies have shocks that are different in some way.
I would like to find out if I can use the 89-99 type as replacements. This is why I need some measurements.

My shocks
Eye to eye centres is 11 1/4
Front eye centre to the body is 1 1/2
The body is 5-inches
The body diam 2 3/4

From looking at pics on google, the 89-99 shocks have a longer body measurement. This may, or may not cause some issues. It appears to me, that the tranny bolts hanging down may need to be inverted to make some clearance on the top side of the shock.

Can anyone help?

 

Working the nightshift tonight but tomorrow I can do some measuring on my wife's 89 heritage as long as I can do the measuring from the primary side of.the bike.its tight to the wall and I can't move it with my bike in the way up on the jack. But I'll see what I can do.

 

Lynn , That would be great, Thank you.

 

My shocks
Eye to eye centers is 12"
Front eye center to the body is 2"
The body is 5 3/4"
The body diam 2 3/4

These are the numbers off some Progressive shocks I put on a year ago.

Bike is a '95 Heritage

I hope this helps

 

The earlier softail shocks were some funky gas charged deal with a resovoir.
This Wasn't USED IN The Later softails. Don't get confused over measurements and size. HD, being a manufacturer, didn't make major changes to things. Stuff interchanges from 84-99

 

MoCo changed the shocks starting with '89 models. Prior to that they used a nitrogen filled type with a separate sealed resivoir.

The only company I could find to update mine ('88 FLSTC) was Works Performance Shocks.
Found my instruction sheet for the install but can't seem to find the receipt, but they are not cheap.

When I was looking, Progressive Suspension was the first company I called because they only list the shocks for '89-'14 modles. After talking with one of the techs they confirmed they do not make them for the earlier models and gave me the info for Works Performance (www.worksperformance.com)

So while some parts are interchangeable, the lower/rear shocks for them are not on your year model.

Thinking maybe not the length but the diameter needed for clearance or maybe even the mounting position on the underside. And seeing that someone gave you the diameter of the Progressive ones off his 95 Heritage, I will try to get unde mine tomorrow and see what numbers I can give you.

 

Thanks for the measurements THC
I suspected the body length was longer. I also thought the eye to body looked a bit longer as well, and your measurement confirms that too. It seems that the body diameter is the same, a good thing. I have both shocks out of the bike right now, but later today will slide one back in to see iff there is going to be any length issues with the extra on the body, and extra on the front eye to the body. The body to the rear of the bike had lots of room as memory recalls, so I don't think that would be a problem.

With a 12-inch measurement eye to eye, that would be a major difference in ride height. 3/4 inch longer than mine, would lower the *** end down pretty far. Easy enough to cut a piece of metal and drill the holes on 12 inch centres to see where the swing arm and wheel end up. This difference still would not be a big issue to me. Being a machinist, Im sure that the shaft could be shortened and re-threaded to bring a 12 inch shock down to 11 1/4

The shock length change does make me wonder though. The Moco had to have moved the mounts to do this. Im just wondering if they moved the front mount forward, or the rear mount back, or both? I they move the swing arm mount back, maybe a swingarm swap would correct the 3/4 inch difference? Ah, things the make ya go Hmmmmm

I am aware of the Works performance shocks. Yes they are expensive at 7-8
hundred bucks. They appear to be a long body shock. They also look like a narrow body shock as well, guessing a 2-inch OD? I maybe wrong, but the Works shock looks like it does not have any adjustment for spring pre load?
If that is correct, I would really have to question how they would be riding 1-up and 2-up? If you cant ajust them, there must be a down side in ride comfort one way or the other. If I was to settle for a non adjustable (narrow body) shock, there is a few low buck options out there, but don't want to go that route.

Any and all input is welcome guys

 

The Progressives that I measured have a 2" adjustment for ride height.
That might be part of the difference.

 

Works have a 5/8" adjustment which translates to about 1-3/4" at the seat. Don't know how this compares to the later 89-up shocks though.

 

Panz4ever, thanks for the information.
THC, I have a question or two if you don,t mind. What progressives did you use, 422s ?
Are they adjustable for spring preload as well?

I did check the bike for the measurements for the progressives THC mentioned.
It looks like there should be plenty of room for the shock body. That's a good thing.
Now I think the next thing will be, is there room to knock the extra 3/4 inch out of the progressives? I cut a piece of metal on 12 inch centres and installed it. The swingarm was pretty close to being on the bump stops. So the length would need to be addressed for sure. I know most manufactures allow for height ajustments, but that usually is increasing the length of the shock, not reduceing it.

I also did notice one thing .With the rear mount on the swingarm. As the swingarm moves up, as you lower the bike, the mount being where its located swings downward.
This could only help with tight clearances. Atleast I know now if I have clearance on the top of the shock with the swingarm hanging, any swingarm movement upwards should provide more clearance.

So, at this point it looks like the 98-99 shocks could be doable. Providing there is enough room on the shaft/ ajusters to shorten the over all length by 3/4 inch to get
11 1/4 centres. I could be wrong here, but the difference in eye to eye would have more to do with why the 89-99 shock will not work with the early softails. It would dop the bike to the bump stops.