Lately I have relied on my old 1988 FLHTC to take me several hours from home and back. I ride for hours out on the interstate at 80 MPH, etc.. In the last year or so it has always gotten me back home. I am wondering how far I should push this old bike. It has 100,000 on the frame and 40,000 on the engine. I know this is a very speculative question.

I have been passively looking at newer bikes but, I don't really want a twin cam bike. I don't care about performance mods. I want to go as far as possible. I have always been told and believe that it's true: If you want your Harley to go far leave it stock. So, my engine is bone stock except mufflers and an S&S carb.

What's you opinion on these older EVOs as a touring bike that is still dependable?

 

Just pull a trailer, no worries........

 

 

It's as dependable as you maintain it to be. If you service it properly it'll go a lot more. I would think at 100g i would look at new neck bearings and all new bushings and as long as your tires are wearing properly i would think the chassis is true but i would still check all welds and pack all electrical connectors with dielectric grease. After all it is a machine and all machines are maintainable. Yes closer to stock will create a longer life span between refreshings. How much you want to go?

 

No offense intended, but efore I embarrass myself taking this question seriously, 762 posts and you don't know the answer to this already?

"Stock" is actually well below the design performance of the engine so, no, bring it up to what the engineers intended it to will not effect it in any way. Indeed, neither adding quality products fitted to closer tolerance.

What will wear out an engine far quicker is the way you ride it, either lugging it at one end or whacking it and making it screaming at the other.

Most abuse tends to happen at the lower end, riders not spinning their engines into the happy medium ground.

Join the queue discussing cam options and be liberated.

 

Know your bike. I just went through mine from axle to axle. I have ZERO doubt the entire chassis should now go longer than a brand new one and is better than when new. I can't speak to MY deep engine and trans internals, but chassis was rebuilt/assembled to high degree of accuracy. Wiring all checked and lubed, covered and such. Primary gon through, lifters checked. Now any likely premature failures on that chassis will come from "my custom" stuff. Like internal bar wiring I did. The Evo engine when stock is a 100k mile engine with proper care. I would say the the engine itself as a unit would be more reliable than any TC.

So, to answer your question. I think I good tear down to check for wear/loose stuff. Careful check of wear items should have you a bike as or more reliable than a brand new bike. Handle bar switches being the only thing that age just takes a little toll on I guess that is kind of a PIA and expensive to replace...and not much to maintain there. These bike are so simple. MOST of the parts that make them up are not wear items or reliability issues if simply installed right with loctite. Basically wiring, bearings, and drive train internals are what are going to let you down. Pretty easy to have the harness as good as new with a good check and some dielectric grease except maybe the bar switches. Bearings are simple to have as good as new. Drive train internals ..... you can check some of that easy, but assuming reasonable miles and care, the stuff you can check and most likely to fail is easy to have good as new.
Really this logic doesnt apply to a car with 1000's of parts. But on a simple bike like HD...it is not really hard to have a bike that is as good or better reliability wise than the day it was new. And with the added complexity of the newer bikes...outside of carb issues.....should be more reliable. I think a carb v complex injection for reliability is another debate.

I understand my bike and can do all this. If you can't, then new may work out to be more reliable. I genuinely think my bike after a few thousand miles of testing since tear down "SHOULD" be as or more reliable than a new TC or the day it was new 25 years ago. The custom wiring and 25 year old bar switches maybe equalizing reliability to that of a newer complex bike or new evo with yet undiscovered mfg defects.

Really on an older bike like this you will see only a few kinds of failures. Wires rubbing/dry sockets, Failure to be on top of standard wear and need to inspect items (duh), and major random engine failure. I think having some miles under the belt and a good going over should overcome the overall reliability issues that older gaskets and switches inevitably bring vs a new or newer bike.

And of course the skills and wisdom gained in the process should make any issues that come up no big deal.

 

I turned over 199,000 miles on my '94 Softail (108,000 miles on the current motor) last Friday coming home from Vermont. I maintain the bike carefully, and ride it "like I'm the guy who'll have to fix it if it breaks". The motor is a stage "1.5" (Mikuni HSR-42 carb, Big Sucker air cleaner, free flowing exhaust), and runs like a champ.


Yes, I keep on top of maintenance, and replace anything that needs it. As a result, my bike is reliable, and I trust it to be.

 

1988? That's from the "pre-Twin Cam" era, right?

No worries then.

:icon_bo wrofl:

 

If you can't do the work yourself...find a good indy and the bike will outlast you...EVO's were designed to be rebuilt...unlike twin cams. Some of the parts on the 88 are becoming obsolete...but all the important stuff that is obsolete can be replaced with parts from a newer model, that are better anyway...you basically can keep it going forever.

 

Seriously though I did laugh at first. It's like "Do think my wife will stick around longer if i slap her around on a regular basis"?