Anyone want a NOS 2006 Superglide?
#11
05-22-2019, 07:52 AM
The following users liked this post:
Mattbastard (05-22-2019)
#12
05-22-2019, 07:59 AM
Was the problem fixed in 2008? I know the spec didn't change, but did the tolerances improve from a manufacturing standpoint?
#13
05-22-2019, 08:04 AM
Ultimate HDF Member
The following users liked this post:
Campy Roadie (05-22-2019)
#14
05-22-2019, 11:06 AM
The earlier TC cranks from 1999-2002 were 4" stroke forged cranks that were well supported on the sprocket shaft side with a Timken bearing as opposed to a roller bearing. This, in my opinion, adds needed stability. Starting in 2005, all Twin Cam cranks are cast units, vs hot or cold forged.
Last edited by Campy Roadie; 05-22-2019 at 11:42 AM.
The following 3 users liked this post by Campy Roadie:
#15
05-22-2019, 01:55 PM
What he said ^ has been my experience. I have two TC cranks sitting on the garage floor right now that did not meet .003 TIR, one is a TC A crank from 2011 and the other is a TC B crank from 2006. I think the slip & assist clutch HD added in 2015 to a couple models and then added to the entire Touring line was because they wanted to minimize the potential for the pressed cranks to shift on hard downshifts.
The earlier TC cranks from 1999-2002 were 4" stroke forged cranks that were well supported on the sprocket shaft side with a Timken bearing as opposed to a roller bearing. This, in my opinion, adds needed stability. Starting in 2005, all Twin Cam cranks are cast units, vs hot or cold forged.
The earlier TC cranks from 1999-2002 were 4" stroke forged cranks that were well supported on the sprocket shaft side with a Timken bearing as opposed to a roller bearing. This, in my opinion, adds needed stability. Starting in 2005, all Twin Cam cranks are cast units, vs hot or cold forged.
We've talked a bunch about this topic, you and I. But I don't recall if we ever got into the later Superglides as far as mechanical worthiness. As you know, I just don't fit on the earlier bikes. The later ones seem bigger.
#16
05-22-2019, 02:42 PM
Ultimate HDF Member
Understood. But what I'm wondering is there a year Superglide out there that won't have known defects like the lack of dowels or inner primary bearing issues. We all (ok some of us) know the new TC cranks are ****. But aside from that, would say, a 2009 Superglide have those issues sorted out in the design? Besides buying a 1999-2002 Superglide, is there a vintage one should look for when buying a Superglide?
We've talked a bunch about this topic, you and I. But I don't recall if we ever got into the later Superglides as far as mechanical worthiness. As you know, I just don't fit on the earlier bikes. The later ones seem bigger.
We've talked a bunch about this topic, you and I. But I don't recall if we ever got into the later Superglides as far as mechanical worthiness. As you know, I just don't fit on the earlier bikes. The later ones seem bigger.
They never made the cranks better, Harley has a long track record of building a great engine/transmission platform for the first few years of a motor and then letting the bean counters fu*k it up by trying to save $1.00 on each bike by weakening a design.
They did it to the EVO by cheaping down the engine cases in the late 80's and causing them to crack at the lifter blocks and around the Timken race in the left case, they also changed the crank design after 1986 and it was cheaper to produce but it was a **** poor design.
They also did it with the Twin Cam by changing the flywheels to a cheaper manufacturing process and removing the Timken bearing from them and then changing the tolerances to try to hide it from the consumer.
The reason the later Dyna's seem bigger is because they are....They made the frame heavier, they didn't fix the problem by adding a front stabilizer like they should have, they just made them heavier and called it "improved."
The funny thing is....Even on the "improved" later models you still have to add a stabilizer to the motor to make them track correctly which was the problem that was supposed to be addressed by the "improved" frame.
Harley couldn't bring themselves to admit that they should have put an additional stabilizer link in the Dyna because they would have then had to go back and recall the problem on all of the previous Dynas that they sold with the poorly designed motor mount system since it was a safety issue.
Fortunately for all of us....The aftermarket came up with a few solutions to the problem such as the Preditor mount that I have which immediately cured the stability problem.
Last edited by Greezey Rider; 05-22-2019 at 02:48 PM.
The following 3 users liked this post by Greezey Rider:
#17
05-22-2019, 04:51 PM
They never made the cranks better, Harley has a long track record of building a great engine/transmission platform for the first few years of a motor and then letting the bean counters fu*k it up by trying to save $1.00 on each bike by weakening a design.
They did it to the EVO by cheaping down the engine cases in the late 80's and causing them to crack at the lifter blocks and around the Timken race in the left case, they also changed the crank design after 1986 and it was cheaper to produce but it was a **** poor design.
They also did it with the Twin Cam by changing the flywheels to a cheaper manufacturing process and removing the Timken bearing from them and then changing the tolerances to try to hide it from the consumer.
The reason the later Dyna's seem bigger is because they are....They made the frame heavier, they didn't fix the problem by adding a front stabilizer like they should have, they just made them heavier and called it "improved."
The funny thing is....Even on the "improved" later models you still have to add a stabilizer to the motor to make them track correctly which was the problem that was supposed to be addressed by the "improved" frame.
Harley couldn't bring themselves to admit that they should have put an additional stabilizer link in the Dyna because they would have then had to go back and recall the problem on all of the previous Dynas that they sold with the poorly designed motor mount system since it was a safety issue.
Fortunately for all of us....The aftermarket came up with a few solutions to the problem such as the Preditor mount that I have which immediately cured the stability problem.
They did it to the EVO by cheaping down the engine cases in the late 80's and causing them to crack at the lifter blocks and around the Timken race in the left case, they also changed the crank design after 1986 and it was cheaper to produce but it was a **** poor design.
They also did it with the Twin Cam by changing the flywheels to a cheaper manufacturing process and removing the Timken bearing from them and then changing the tolerances to try to hide it from the consumer.
The reason the later Dyna's seem bigger is because they are....They made the frame heavier, they didn't fix the problem by adding a front stabilizer like they should have, they just made them heavier and called it "improved."
The funny thing is....Even on the "improved" later models you still have to add a stabilizer to the motor to make them track correctly which was the problem that was supposed to be addressed by the "improved" frame.
Harley couldn't bring themselves to admit that they should have put an additional stabilizer link in the Dyna because they would have then had to go back and recall the problem on all of the previous Dynas that they sold with the poorly designed motor mount system since it was a safety issue.
Fortunately for all of us....The aftermarket came up with a few solutions to the problem such as the Preditor mount that I have which immediately cured the stability problem.
Understood. But what I'm wondering is there a year Superglide out there that won't have known defects like the lack of dowels or inner primary bearing issues. We all (ok some of us) know the new TC cranks are ****. But aside from that, would say, a 2009 Superglide have those issues sorted out in the design? Besides buying a 1999-2002 Superglide, is there a vintage one should look for when buying a Superglide?
We've talked a bunch about this topic, you and I. But I don't recall if we ever got into the later Superglides as far as mechanical worthiness. As you know, I just don't fit on the earlier bikes. The later ones seem bigger.
We've talked a bunch about this topic, you and I. But I don't recall if we ever got into the later Superglides as far as mechanical worthiness. As you know, I just don't fit on the earlier bikes. The later ones seem bigger.
I like 2001 and 2002 Super Glides (FXD), FXDX and FXDXT the best out of all the Twin Cams. The Wide Glide and Low Rider have a 32 degree neck rake vs 28 and don't really do well as a back road scratchers. Despite having a Road King, I don't think any gauge should be on the tank, you have to drop your head to see them, especially if you wear a FF helmet; I like my gauges front and center. The front wheel on the WG is visually pleasing but doesn't fit with what I want a Dyna for. The Low Rider with the aforementioned tank gauges and "low" suspension is a non starter for me. Any good Super Glide from that era can be tarted up with FXDX suspension and a tach, as mine has. HD still has the OEM bits to convert for sale, or at least they did a little while ago.
I personally believe the 4" stroke Twin Cam was the jewel of the Twin Cam line. Yes the tensioners need to be dealt with, but I'd rather fix a tensioner problem than a crank problem. The 6 speed thing? Meh....I've ridden my 5 speed for tens of thousands of miles at 85+ mph. The shorter stoke lends itself to being a little more "revy" than the later 4 3/8" stroke 96/103. When they increased the stroke that's when they started having heat and compensator issues; increased piston speed (from the longer stroke) means more heat and the compensator has to deal with the additional stroke as well. Now they've got one version of the M8 with a 4 1/2" stroke. Who says Harley isn't steeped in history?
The early Twin Cams we're Harley's hope that they could create a line of bikes people who rode other brands would consider. They married the engine and trans to increase rigidity and to eliminate the independent movement between the engine and trans that sometimes broke the inner primary on Evos. As beloved as the Evo was and what it did for HD, it did have issues. The aforementioned case cracking from thin material, porous castings, spun inner cam or crank bearings, weepy cylinder base gaskets, weepy/leaky three piece rocker cover gaskets, etc. The point I'm trying to make is they all have issues, I feel the early Twin Cams have less issues than the Evo it replaced and less serious issues than the M8 has. The scary part of that motor is they don't know why they're having trouble. To be sure, it isn't all of them but it's enough; even more troublesome is that the occasional need to replace multiple engines for customers that probably don't beat their bikes. What are the odds a guy would be that "lucky"?
As I said, the low mile Dynas I'm looking for are 2001-2002. They have:
Lower weight than a current Dyna (before they quit making them)
Hot forged crank, low TIR (my Dyna has .001 TIR)
Timken left side bearing
Crank position sensor only, no cam position sensor
Excellent B lifters
Change the tensioner shoes to Cycos, replace the rocker breathers to stamped units, inner cam bearings and you've got a runner
I like 1999 and 2000 models as well and in those years there was the Dyna Convertible. Just a couple extra things to look at with these years. The rear outer cam bearing will be a ball bearing and it should be replaced post haste with a roller bearing. The ball bearing wouldn't stand up to the force from the chain running from the pinion shaft. Engines produced after December of 2000 will have a roller bearing on the outer end of the rear cam. (engine production number, not the frame production number) It could also have been replaced as a "goodwill" by HD. I would want to know if that "goodwill" came after an engine failure.
Prior to 2001 MY they had a cam position sensor and they were prone to failure. Thankfully the bike will run without because of the crank position sensor so the cam sensor can be removed and with a different ignition it's gone for good.
I'd also be up for a 2003 model despite having a roller bearing crank (on both sides). The 03 models have a cold forged crank, as opposed to a hot forged 1999-2002. The switch to a roller bearing also created a problem in that the compensator nut will sometimes loosen because it bottoms on the crank shoulder instead of the compensator. Harley sent out a TSB to shim it (2003-2005, I usually just have 30 thou machined off and reinstall it. If it comes completely loose it can cause damage inside the primary. The real knock on the 03s for me, or at least has been, is the owners think they have a gold mine. Now that they've laid out there on CL and Ebay not selling or because there's a blue million of them, they've had to re-evaulate pricing. I will make exceptions on miles based on condition but I ALWAYS factor in my time/$ to do these changes and/or if I find serious tensioner damage.
We've been down the road together Bob; you find a Dyna and I'll ride to your house with the tools and make it right.
Last edited by Campy Roadie; 05-22-2019 at 07:53 PM.
The following 4 users liked this post by Campy Roadie:
#18
05-22-2019, 06:59 PM
But I will do a nice Dyna some day. It will probably be a total rework from the ground up, so bring lots of tools. And a welder.
The following users liked this post:
Campy Roadie (05-22-2019)
#19
05-22-2019, 07:41 PM
Ultimate HDF Member
All of what Greezey said. I will add this opinion:
I like 2001 and 2002 Super Glides (FXD), FXDX and FXDXT the best out of all the Twin Cams. The Wide Glide and Low Rider have a 32 degree neck rake vs 28 and don't really do well as a back road scratchers. Despite having a Road King, I don't think any gauge should be on the tank, you have to drop your head to see them, especially if you wear a FF helmet; I like my gauges front and center. The front wheel on the WG is visually pleasing but doesn't fit with what I want a Dyna for. The Low Rider with the aforementioned tank gauges and "low" suspension is a non starter for me. Any good Super Glide from that era can be tarted up with FXDX suspension and a tach, as mine has. HD still has the OEM bits to convert for sale, or at least they did a little while ago.
I personally believe the 4" stroke Twin Cam was the jewel of the Twin Cam line. Yes the tensioners need to be dealt with, but I'd rather fix a tensioner problem than a crank problem. The 6 speed thing? Meh....I've ridden my 5 speed for tens of thousands of miles at 85+ mph. The shorter stoke lends itself to being a little more "revy" than the later 4 3/8" stroke 96/103. When they increased the stroke that's when they started having heat and compensator issues; increased piston speed (from the longer stroke) means more heat and the compensator has to deal with the additional stroke as well. Now they've got one version of the M8 with a 4 1/2" stroke. Who says Harley isn't steeped in history?
The early Twin Cams we're Harley's hope that they could create a line of bikes people who rode other brands would consider. They married the engine and trans to increase rigidity and to eliminate the independent movement between the engine and trans that sometimes broke the inner primary on Evos. As beloved as the Evo was and what it did for HD, it did have issues. The aforementioned case cracking from thin material, porous castings, spun inner cam or crank bearings, weepy cylinder base gaskets, weepy/leaky three piece rocker cover gaskets, etc. The point I'm trying to make is they all have issues, I feel the early Twin Cams have less issues than the Evo it replaced and less serious issues than the M8 has. The scary part of that motor is they don't know why they're having trouble. To be sure, it isn't all of them but it's enough; even more troublesome is that the occasional need to replace multiple engines for customers that probably don't beat their bikes. What are the odds a guy would be that "lucky"?
As I said, the low mile Dynas I'm looking for are 2001-2002. They have:
Lower weight than a current Dyna (before they quit making them)
Hot forged crank, low TIR (my Dyna has .001 TIR)
Timken left side bearing
Crank position sensor only, no cam position sensor
Excellent B lifters
Change the tensioner shoes to Cycos, replace the rocker breathers to stamped units, inner cam bearings and you've got a runner
I like 1999 and 2000 models as well and in those years there was the Dyna Convertible. Just a couple extra things to look at with these years. The rear outer cam bearing will be a ball bearing and it should be replaced post haste with a roller bearing. The ball bearing wouldn't stand up to the force from the chain running from the pinion shaft. Engines produced after December of 2000 will have a roller bearing on the outer end of the rear cam. (engine production number, not the frame production number) It could also have been replaced as a "goodwill" by HD. I would want to know if that "goodwill" came after an engine failure.
Prior to 2001 MY they had a cam position sensor and they were prone to failure. Thankfully the bike will run without because of the crank position sensor so the cam sensor can be removed and with a different ignition it's gone for good.
I'd also be up for a 2003 model despite having a roller bearing crank (on both sides). The 03 models have a cold forged crank, as opposed to a hot forged 1999-2002. The switch to a roller bearing also created a problem in that the compensator nut will sometimes loosen because it bottoms on the crank shoulder instead of the compensator. Harley sent out a TSB to shim it (2003-2005, I usually just have30 thou machined off and reinstall it. If it comes completely loose it can cause damage inside the primary. The real knock on the 03s for me, or at least has been, is the owners think they have a gold mine. Now that they've laid out there on CL and Ebay not selling or because there's a blue million of them, they've had to re-evaulate pricing. I will make exceptions on miles based on condition but I ALWAYS factor in my time/$ to do these changes and/or if I find serious tensioner damage.
We've been down the road together Bob; you find a Dyna and I'll ride to your house with the tools and make it right.
I like 2001 and 2002 Super Glides (FXD), FXDX and FXDXT the best out of all the Twin Cams. The Wide Glide and Low Rider have a 32 degree neck rake vs 28 and don't really do well as a back road scratchers. Despite having a Road King, I don't think any gauge should be on the tank, you have to drop your head to see them, especially if you wear a FF helmet; I like my gauges front and center. The front wheel on the WG is visually pleasing but doesn't fit with what I want a Dyna for. The Low Rider with the aforementioned tank gauges and "low" suspension is a non starter for me. Any good Super Glide from that era can be tarted up with FXDX suspension and a tach, as mine has. HD still has the OEM bits to convert for sale, or at least they did a little while ago.
I personally believe the 4" stroke Twin Cam was the jewel of the Twin Cam line. Yes the tensioners need to be dealt with, but I'd rather fix a tensioner problem than a crank problem. The 6 speed thing? Meh....I've ridden my 5 speed for tens of thousands of miles at 85+ mph. The shorter stoke lends itself to being a little more "revy" than the later 4 3/8" stroke 96/103. When they increased the stroke that's when they started having heat and compensator issues; increased piston speed (from the longer stroke) means more heat and the compensator has to deal with the additional stroke as well. Now they've got one version of the M8 with a 4 1/2" stroke. Who says Harley isn't steeped in history?
The early Twin Cams we're Harley's hope that they could create a line of bikes people who rode other brands would consider. They married the engine and trans to increase rigidity and to eliminate the independent movement between the engine and trans that sometimes broke the inner primary on Evos. As beloved as the Evo was and what it did for HD, it did have issues. The aforementioned case cracking from thin material, porous castings, spun inner cam or crank bearings, weepy cylinder base gaskets, weepy/leaky three piece rocker cover gaskets, etc. The point I'm trying to make is they all have issues, I feel the early Twin Cams have less issues than the Evo it replaced and less serious issues than the M8 has. The scary part of that motor is they don't know why they're having trouble. To be sure, it isn't all of them but it's enough; even more troublesome is that the occasional need to replace multiple engines for customers that probably don't beat their bikes. What are the odds a guy would be that "lucky"?
As I said, the low mile Dynas I'm looking for are 2001-2002. They have:
Lower weight than a current Dyna (before they quit making them)
Hot forged crank, low TIR (my Dyna has .001 TIR)
Timken left side bearing
Crank position sensor only, no cam position sensor
Excellent B lifters
Change the tensioner shoes to Cycos, replace the rocker breathers to stamped units, inner cam bearings and you've got a runner
I like 1999 and 2000 models as well and in those years there was the Dyna Convertible. Just a couple extra things to look at with these years. The rear outer cam bearing will be a ball bearing and it should be replaced post haste with a roller bearing. The ball bearing wouldn't stand up to the force from the chain running from the pinion shaft. Engines produced after December of 2000 will have a roller bearing on the outer end of the rear cam. (engine production number, not the frame production number) It could also have been replaced as a "goodwill" by HD. I would want to know if that "goodwill" came after an engine failure.
Prior to 2001 MY they had a cam position sensor and they were prone to failure. Thankfully the bike will run without because of the crank position sensor so the cam sensor can be removed and with a different ignition it's gone for good.
I'd also be up for a 2003 model despite having a roller bearing crank (on both sides). The 03 models have a cold forged crank, as opposed to a hot forged 1999-2002. The switch to a roller bearing also created a problem in that the compensator nut will sometimes loosen because it bottoms on the crank shoulder instead of the compensator. Harley sent out a TSB to shim it (2003-2005, I usually just have30 thou machined off and reinstall it. If it comes completely loose it can cause damage inside the primary. The real knock on the 03s for me, or at least has been, is the owners think they have a gold mine. Now that they've laid out there on CL and Ebay not selling or because there's a blue million of them, they've had to re-evaulate pricing. I will make exceptions on miles based on condition but I ALWAYS factor in my time/$ to do these changes and/or if I find serious tensioner damage.
We've been down the road together Bob; you find a Dyna and I'll ride to your house with the tools and make it right.
I agree with all of this except the bold red part....
One of the reasons that I bought an '01 Wide Glide and went through the time and work to turn it into a pretty much FXDX clone was because I wanted the extra rake for the more stable handling at high speed on the highway.
I have found that the increased rake, while not really having much effect at all on the handling in the twisties does help with straight line highway stability.
I have had many motorcycles and have ridden many more in the course of owning my shop and I like the 32 degree rake much more than the 28.
The following users liked this post:
Campy Roadie (05-22-2019)
#20
05-22-2019, 07:47 PM
I agree with all of this except the bold red part....
One of the reasons that I bought an '01 Wide Glide and went through the time and work to turn it into a pretty much FXDX clone was because I wanted the extra rake for the more stable handling at high speed on the highway.
I have found that the increased rake, while not really having much effect at all on the handling in the twisties does help with straight line highway stability.
I have had many motorcycles and have ridden many more in the course of owning my shop and I like the 32 degree rake much more than the 28.
One of the reasons that I bought an '01 Wide Glide and went through the time and work to turn it into a pretty much FXDX clone was because I wanted the extra rake for the more stable handling at high speed on the highway.
I have found that the increased rake, while not really having much effect at all on the handling in the twisties does help with straight line highway stability.
I have had many motorcycles and have ridden many more in the course of owning my shop and I like the 32 degree rake much more than the 28.
The following users liked this post:
Greezey Rider (05-22-2019)
