Primary chain adjusters
Thread Starter
|
Seasoned HDF Member
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 11,226
Likes: 3,049
From: St.Louis Mo.
Primary chain adjusters
2015 Tri-Glide and I have 13,000 miles on a Baker Armored Attitude adjuster and yesterday i thought it got noisy. When the bike was hot and i rev the engine a little there was kinda of ticking noise coming form the primary. Almost like the chain was hitting the cover. The chain is adjusted correctly and this is not the case, but sounds like it. I have my original auto adjuster and may try swapping them out. Just have a hard time believing that the adjuster could cause this. Maybe it is the compensator making the clicking noise. ( most likely the cause )
Could be that i rode all day and never turned the radio on and just got dialed into all the noises. No other noise anywhere . Maybe i should just turn the music up. I was thinking maybe switching to Harleys new primary gear oil and see if that helps at all. What do you guys think ? THANKS !
Could be that i rode all day and never turned the radio on and just got dialed into all the noises. No other noise anywhere . Maybe i should just turn the music up. I was thinking maybe switching to Harleys new primary gear oil and see if that helps at all. What do you guys think ? THANKS !
Last edited by hardheaded; Sep 6, 2021 at 02:04 PM.
Seasoned HDF Member
Joined: Jun 2017
Posts: 5,315
Likes: 4,272
From: Granville New York
Might be time to pull the primary cover...if nothing else it'll give you piece of mind. Does the noise go away with the clutch pulled in? Inner primary bearing may be bad if so. You wouldn't be the first guy who had an issue with the baker adjuster. Not a believer of "mechanic in a can" fixes...if there's a problem different oil isn't going to help.
Thread Starter
|
Seasoned HDF Member
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 11,226
Likes: 3,049
From: St.Louis Mo.
Doesn't matter it the bike is in or out of gear , clutch in or out, rolling or sitting still. When i first heard it i thought it was a lifter making noise. But it coming from the front of the primary. The more i listen to it i think it's the compensator loading and unloading when i rev it up and it comes down to idle. Sounds like the comp. is getting sloppy. What are the thought on the Man of War comp ? The Screaming Eagle Comp ? I know there is a big price differance.
I might just pull the cover and take a look.
I might just pull the cover and take a look.
Seasoned HDF Member
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 14,165
Likes: 11,255
From: San Diego, CA
I'd put the OEM adjustable tensioner back in....
In 2010, HD upgraded the auto primary chain tensioner #39939-06A to the #39939-06B. The upgraded "B" tensioner had several upgrades that made it far less troublesome than its predecessor. Some of the changes: thicker base (less flex), smaller ramp teeth (smaller incremental changes), and the shoe ramp reduced the amount of teeth. These changes improved its performance. Not bullet proof, but far fewer issues...
I ran the OEM auto tensioner ("B" tensioner) on my 2016 bagger after adding a 124" S&S engine at 135HP & 151TQ. It handled that power with no problem. I only changed it out because I went to a smaller engine sprocket and went with a tensioner with a different size tensioner shoe, rather than adding a second, snap-on shoe to the "B" tensioner shoe....
Here is a comparison between the "A" tensioner (problematic tensioner, on the bottom) and the newer "B" tensioner (far fewer issues, on the top)..
I'd definitely open up the primary and take a look... You can reuse the cover gasket as long as you are careful taking it off and it's not damaged in the process. I have had my primary cover off 3 times on the same gasket. It's still on there with no leaks...
NOTE: Currently, the "B" tensioner has been superseded by the 39929-06C tensioner. Not sure if there were additional changes to the tensioner, or it's just a vendor change, etc....
In 2010, HD upgraded the auto primary chain tensioner #39939-06A to the #39939-06B. The upgraded "B" tensioner had several upgrades that made it far less troublesome than its predecessor. Some of the changes: thicker base (less flex), smaller ramp teeth (smaller incremental changes), and the shoe ramp reduced the amount of teeth. These changes improved its performance. Not bullet proof, but far fewer issues...
I ran the OEM auto tensioner ("B" tensioner) on my 2016 bagger after adding a 124" S&S engine at 135HP & 151TQ. It handled that power with no problem. I only changed it out because I went to a smaller engine sprocket and went with a tensioner with a different size tensioner shoe, rather than adding a second, snap-on shoe to the "B" tensioner shoe....
Here is a comparison between the "A" tensioner (problematic tensioner, on the bottom) and the newer "B" tensioner (far fewer issues, on the top)..
I'd definitely open up the primary and take a look... You can reuse the cover gasket as long as you are careful taking it off and it's not damaged in the process. I have had my primary cover off 3 times on the same gasket. It's still on there with no leaks...
NOTE: Currently, the "B" tensioner has been superseded by the 39929-06C tensioner. Not sure if there were additional changes to the tensioner, or it's just a vendor change, etc....
Last edited by hattitude; Sep 6, 2021 at 06:57 PM.
Grand HDF Member
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 3,580
Likes: 215
From: Illinois
Doesn't matter it the bike is in or out of gear , clutch in or out, rolling or sitting still. When i first heard it i thought it was a lifter making noise. But it coming from the front of the primary. The more i listen to it i think it's the compensator loading and unloading when i rev it up and it comes down to idle. Sounds like the comp. is getting sloppy. What are the thought on the Man of War comp ? The Screaming Eagle Comp ? I know there is a big price differance.
I might just pull the cover and take a look.
I might just pull the cover and take a look.
Trending Topics
Seasoned HDF Member
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 19,939
Likes: 8,036
From: poway
I'd put the OEM adjustable tensioner back in....
In 2010, HD upgraded the auto primary chain tensioner #39939-06A to the #39939-06B. The upgraded "B" tensioner had several upgrades that made it far less troublesome than its predecessor. Some of the changes: thicker base (less flex), smaller ramp teeth (smaller incremental changes), and the shoe ramp reduced the amount of teeth. These changes improved its performance. Not bullet proof, but far fewer issues...
I ran the OEM auto tensioner ("B" tensioner) on my 2016 bagger after adding a 124" S&S engine at 135HP & 151TQ. It handled that power with no problem. I only changed it out because I went to a smaller engine sprocket and went with a tensioner with a different size tensioner shoe, rather than adding a second, snap-on shoe to the "B" tensioner shoe....
Here is a comparison between the "A" tensioner (problematic tensioner, on the bottom) and the newer "B" tensioner (far fewer issues, on the top)..
I'd definitely open up the primary and take a look... You can reuse the cover gasket as long as you are careful taking it off and it's not damaged in the process. I have had my primary cover off 3 times on the same gasket. It's still on there with no leaks...
NOTE: Currently, the "B" tensioner has been superseded by the 39929-06C tensioner. Not sure if there were additional changes to the tensioner, or it's just a vendor change, etc....
In 2010, HD upgraded the auto primary chain tensioner #39939-06A to the #39939-06B. The upgraded "B" tensioner had several upgrades that made it far less troublesome than its predecessor. Some of the changes: thicker base (less flex), smaller ramp teeth (smaller incremental changes), and the shoe ramp reduced the amount of teeth. These changes improved its performance. Not bullet proof, but far fewer issues...
I ran the OEM auto tensioner ("B" tensioner) on my 2016 bagger after adding a 124" S&S engine at 135HP & 151TQ. It handled that power with no problem. I only changed it out because I went to a smaller engine sprocket and went with a tensioner with a different size tensioner shoe, rather than adding a second, snap-on shoe to the "B" tensioner shoe....
Here is a comparison between the "A" tensioner (problematic tensioner, on the bottom) and the newer "B" tensioner (far fewer issues, on the top)..
I'd definitely open up the primary and take a look... You can reuse the cover gasket as long as you are careful taking it off and it's not damaged in the process. I have had my primary cover off 3 times on the same gasket. It's still on there with no leaks...
NOTE: Currently, the "B" tensioner has been superseded by the 39929-06C tensioner. Not sure if there were additional changes to the tensioner, or it's just a vendor change, etc....
HD Forum Stories
The Best of Harley-Davidson for Lifelong Riders
7 Times Harley-Davidson Chucked Tradition Out the Window
Verdad Gallardo
7 Surprising Harley-Davidson Products that Are Not Motorcycles
Verdad Gallardo
8 Best Harley-Davidson Motorcycles Ever
Pouria Savadkouei
10 Worst Harley-Davidson Motorcycles Ever
Pouria Savadkouei
Killer Custom's Jail Break Is The Breakout That Refused to Blend In
Verdad Gallardo
Crazy Bunderbike Build Looks Amazing, But Is It Impossible to Ride?
Verdad Gallardo
Harley-Davidson Reveals Super Cool Cafe Racer Concept
Verdad Gallardo
Engraved Rebellion: Inside Bundnerbike's Glam Rock II
Verdad Gallardo
10 Motorcycles You Should Never Buy
Joe Kucinski
Seasoned HDF Member
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 14,165
Likes: 11,255
From: San Diego, CA
One of the things I find interesting is that there seems to only about 1 or 2 pics floating around of the original tensioner that is bent. I wonder if the bend was the result of driving or someone damaging the tensioner by torqueing or removing the crank nut with a jam block while the tensioner was in place.
I wish I knew....
However it happened, it's obvious the newer version will be less prone to flexing than the older version...
I "borrowed" this pic from a post long ago, because I believe it does a good job of showing the differences between the two versions...
Seasoned HDF Member
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 19,939
Likes: 8,036
From: poway
Kinda makes you wonder if the changes were all done simply because someone screwed up and had to post the issue on the internet. I do believe that the finer tooth count and a possible adjustment smaller tension spring travel was the result of the early tensioners ratcheting too tight. Also the reduced number of teeth on the block helped the tensioner ratchet when it needed to. Otherwise, since it is submerged on oil, the teeth would have issues separating.