88" crank in a 96"block

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

Oct 30, 2011 | 09:44 PM

#21

redrubicon2004

Road Warrior

Joined: Apr 2008

Posts: 1,899

Likes: 8

From: Aurora, IL

Quote:

Originally Posted by fabrik8r

06 dynas were 96", they were the guinea pigs

They were 88's with the new style tensioners, new primary, and 6 speed trans. At least the last one I had the engine out of was.......

Oct 30, 2011 | 10:54 PM

#22

2black1s

Elite HDF Member

Joined: Nov 2010

Posts: 3,846

Likes: 173

From: Simi Valley, CA

I know the nature of this or other forums highlight bad experiences moreso than good, and this can't be the real world norm, but the wrong stroke crankshaft in an engine build? C'mon!

This guy wasn't "building" your engine. He was assembling parts. He obviously didn't check the installed pistons deck height or he would have known something was amiss.

Good thing the mistake wasn't in the other direction - the engine wouldn't even turn over once the piston crashed into the head. Although in that case, he would have found it before you and saved himself this embarrassment.

I feel sorry for you guys that rely on someone else to work on your bikes.

Oct 31, 2011 | 06:04 AM

#23

fabrik8r

Outstanding HDF Member

Joined: Jan 2010

Posts: 2,916

Likes: 31

From: earth

Quote:

Originally Posted by redrubicon2004

They were 88's with the new style tensioners, new primary, and 6 speed trans. At least the last one I had the engine out of was.......

I stand corrected, you're right about the 88" '06s. '06 had a lot of unique changes, hard to keep track of them all sometimes.

Nov 2, 2011 | 08:05 AM

#24

vbx07

Thread Starter

Tourer

Joined: Nov 2007

Posts: 442

Likes: 4

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2black1s

You are correct. He should have checked the stroke, but in his defense, it was a rush job in order not to miss a scheduled vacation. He thought that the 06 dyna crank was infact an 4 3/8 stroke so he didn't bother with checking. I did say in my first post that something didn't look right, but when I questioned it I was told the crank was out of an 06 dyna so I thought maybe because of the changes, the factory may have used 06 connecting rod's on an 4 3/8 crank. Anyway, I'm glad he fessed up and is going to make it right! And I agree with your comment about other people working on my bike. I wish I had the confidence to attempet rebuilding a motor. I must say that thing's like this can get me to focus on learning.

Nov 2, 2011 | 08:08 AM

#25

vbx07

Thread Starter

Tourer

Joined: Nov 2007

Posts: 442

Likes: 4

Quote:

Originally Posted by djl

As was explained in the same post in the Engine section; it is possible but your compensator/stator assembly would not have fit. Looks like the builder did you a favor and installed rods from a TC88. The 88" rods and the 96" rods are the same length. The additional stroke comed from re-locating the crank pin in the wheels by .1875". The rods are not the problem on why the motor is down on power.

Thanks for your input. Evedently it did fit. So I learned something.

Nov 2, 2011 | 11:16 AM

#26

djl

HDF Community Team

Joined: Jun 2006

Posts: 12,776

Likes: 2,607

From: san antonio

Quote:

Originally Posted by vbx07

Thanks for your input. Evedently it did fit. So I learned something.

I didn't really learn anything but am reminded that "there is an exception to every rule". Your original question was whether or not an 88" crank could be installed in a 96" block. The answer is, as was posted by me and others, yes but the output side is different and therefore, even though the crank fit and could be installed, it would not work.

The exception to that rule is that the '06 TC88 Dyna crank. It was unique to all other '06 models in that the output side was modified for the six speed tranny and, therefore, that TC88 crank could be installed and would work in a TC96 engine. The exception to the rule.

Glad the problem is solved and the builder is making it right; sounds like a stand up guy worthy of repeat business in spite of the mistake.

Nov 2, 2011 | 04:53 PM

#27

$tonecold

Club Member

Joined: Feb 2011

Posts: 4,709

Likes: 2,219

From: Gilbert, Az.

Quote:

This guy wasn't "building" your engine. He was assembling parts. He obviously didn't check the installed pistons deck height or he would have known something was amiss.

Good thing the mistake wasn't in the other direction - the engine wouldn't even turn over once the piston crashed into the head. Although in that case, he would have found it before you and saved himself this embarrassment.

I feel sorry for you guys that rely on someone else to work on your bikes.

And I feel sorry for those of you that don't know what you are talking about. The cylinders on 88's and 96's are all the same height. The 96's have the piston pin located 3/16 higher to allow for the extra stroke. The deck height would have been OK. Personally I would have kept the short stroke crank and had the cases bored 1/4 over and gone with the 4 1/8" bore for a short stroke 107. Then you would have had some power.

Nov 2, 2011 | 05:07 PM

#28

2black1s

Elite HDF Member

Joined: Nov 2010

Posts: 3,846

Likes: 173

From: Simi Valley, CA

Quote:

Originally Posted by $tonecold

And I feel sorry for those of you that don't know what you are talking about. The cylinders on 88's and 96's are all the same height. The 96's have the piston pin located 3/16 higher to allow for the extra stroke. The deck height would have been OK. Personally I would have kept the short stroke crank and had the cases bored 1/4 over and gone with the 4 1/8" bore for a short stroke 107. Then you would have had some power.

Two things...

First - could you explain how you've come to the conclusion that I fit into that category as your post would imply?

And secondly - "The deck height would have been ok"? Really? 3/16" down in the bore at TDC is ok? I didn't know that - Thanks for sharing.

Last edited by 2black1s; Nov 2, 2011 at 08:16 PM.