Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Author Topic: re 113  (Read 2753 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

mdduce

  • Junior CVO Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 61
  • FLHRSEI.ORG
re 113
« on: December 02, 2005, 09:10:30 AM »

Im in the middle of building my 95" to 113" using the new harley kit,Alot of talk reguarding the lower end bearings,Harley says they wont stand behind it unless you use ther spec and stuff!! what yall,s take on that, i know what should be done,(timkin)BUT THAT GIVES THEM AN OUT I GUESS ,THE SAY THEY HAVE RAN THIS AND IT WILL TAKE THE ABUSE!! WELL SEE I GUESS
Logged

Unbalanced

  • FUD Examiner
  • 5k CVO Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6708

    • CVO1: 2011 SESG,
    • CVO2: 2004 SEEG Pumpkin,
    • CVO3: 2002 Police Roadking, Maudie and Maybelle Slayer
Re: re 113
« Reply #1 on: December 02, 2005, 11:48:16 AM »

I would suggest having the dealer send the cases and not you to a machine shop that they recommend, so that they will stand behind it.   I can not see them not standing behind something that should and will make the lower end stronger.   Seems only natural if they dont have a hand in it that they would use it as an out.   My 124 has it and it is basically 140 / 140 and I have had no issues.   If your not going to do the timkin bearing I would shelf the build and pass on doing it.   I personally would be looking for the best way to get longevity out of the motor and its actually in harley's best interest to have the timkin in there.
Logged
HBRR Florida Chapter,  STILL - The Fastest Chapter - Proven yet again Bikeweek 2017

mdduce

  • Junior CVO Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 61
  • FLHRSEI.ORG
Re: re 113
« Reply #2 on: December 02, 2005, 06:16:22 PM »

Thank's, but this is the problem im having with them on the issue,the shop manager says that the shop where he's from never had problems or any issue with the harley bottom end using ther bearings and is persistant aganist the timken? This makes no sense to me at all either since im paying for the machinework any way, guess ill have to stub up on him over this, he's alredy got the cases back today and don"t think the mechanic will recomend them to stand behind the work unless they do it like harley recomends! said it would be on me if i go with timkin? something don't smell just right!!!!!THANKS AGAIN!
Logged

Grover

  • 1K CVO Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1049
Re: re 113
« Reply #3 on: December 02, 2005, 11:40:36 PM »

I can't believe he's against the Timken! Tell him he's an  [smiley=duhk.gif]idiot!!! My service manager at my dealership is pissed that Harley went to the new bearing.
He recommends that anyone doing a heavy hop up should do the conversion. Tell your shop manager to go back to school!!!
If you don't do the Timkin, don't do the 113 like Unbalanced said.
That 95'' could be pretty strong if you went with some good head work, cam's and slightly bigger throttle body.
You could also consider the GP bearing support.

Good luck in whatever direction you go,

Grover
Logged

EAGLE1

  • 1K CVO Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1488
    • FL


    • CVO1: 2015 FLHXSE CVO Street Glide "Silvia"
    • CVO2: 2006 FLSTFSE² Screamin’ Eagle® Fat Boy® (SOLD)
Re: re 113
« Reply #4 on: December 02, 2005, 11:54:58 PM »

Quote
You could also consider the GP bearing support.
Good luck in whatever direction you go,
Grover

this will be stronger
Quote

John, I must add my .02 to this. and put this issue to rest.

First off,  yes, the Timken setup is better than just the oem roller set up. but if you add the outer support bearing on the stock roller setup, you will be much stronger than just the timkins alone. no question! like they said about their testing " Extensive testing has been done with 160 +hp motors with no failures."  I would like to see the results of the same tests done with just the Timken setup, I would bet money that there would be failures. guaranteed!  This is all about the OHL and the amount of torque applied to it. The overhung load can be determined by dividing the output torque by the radius of the sprocket or pulley. I have been designing drive systems for 15 yrs. that would make a Harley motor look like a swiss watch in comparison. The Timken bearings because of their angular arrangement help support the shafts overhung loads, resulting in lower bending moments.
but the fact is,  with the outer support bearing being utilized, you remove the OHL forces from the equation, the shaft is supported on both sides of the sprocket and will be able to withstand much greater torque loads applied to it. Period.  so if you like to get on the throttle and lift the front end up, like some of us have proclaimed, then I would get the bearing. even though I bought a five year plan with my bike, mine's going in this winter, I would rather be riding that rebuilding. so like Hubbard says, there Endith the lesson!
Logged
Toes in the water, ass in the sand

mdduce

  • Junior CVO Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 61
  • FLHRSEI.ORG
Re: re 113
« Reply #5 on: December 03, 2005, 07:23:06 AM »

{THANKS! GUYS }FIND OUT MORE IN ONE HOUR THAN A WEEK ANYWHERE ELSE AT THIS SITE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Logged

EAGLE1

  • 1K CVO Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1488
    • FL


    • CVO1: 2015 FLHXSE CVO Street Glide "Silvia"
    • CVO2: 2006 FLSTFSE² Screamin’ Eagle® Fat Boy® (SOLD)
Re: re 113
« Reply #6 on: December 10, 2005, 02:37:05 PM »

Quote
Thank's, but this is the problem im having with them on the issue,the shop manager says that the shop where he's from never had problems or any issue with the harley bottom end using ther bearings and is persistant aganist the timken? This makes no sense to me at all either since im paying for the machinework any way, guess ill have to stub up on him over this, he's alredy got the cases back today and don"t think the mechanic will recomend them to stand behind the work unless they do it like harley recomends! said it would be on me if i go with timkin? something don't smell just right!!!!!THANKS AGAIN!

machining to a tolerance of + or - 5 tenthousanths (.0005) of an inch. This is a very critical procedure that is performed by skilled machinists using precision CNC equipment. This along with two other main factors is why Harley went away from the old school Timken setup. The other two crucial factors are, heat and rpm's. the Timken's because they have to be preloaded are susceptible to thermal growth. its a fine line to get it setup correctly, when the engine is cold the preload is loose, but as the engine heats up the preload on the bearings increases as well. if you try to make the preload too tight when the bearings are cold, you will fry them when they heat up to operating conditions.  Even if you get the preload right for normal operating conditions, exceed the operating temps and you start getting too much preload again. its just not a great setup for all operating conditions, there has to be a compromise somewhere. Next, the fact that there is more rollers in contact is a good thing, but there are drawbacks to this as well. more contact = more heat and more drag. these bearings are very strong granted, but they have the most rolling drag of any bearing on the market, making them very inefficient and robbing you of ponies, and because of this they also have the lowest max rpm rating of any bearing style available. so for me the whole idea of switching to these bearing for a high performance application is like "Jumbo shrimp" an oxymoron to the highest degree. you guys want the best of both worlds a stock looking monster HP sleeper. as the saying goes you cant have your cake and eat it too. Harley made these changes to save money yes, but they are also trying to keep the technology moving forward, as production tolerances increase as well as engine rpm's there needed to be a bearing change to accommodate this, for all operating conditions. the Timken's just don't cut the mustard. The roller bearing can take the heat and the rpm's better and are not as susceptible to thermal growth, but I agree that they should have added the outboard support from day one. Whoever made this change was looking in the right direction, but didn't think through all of the forces involved or was trying to save HD money at our expense, and as one of our members so eloquently put it, someone at HD should be bent over a knee and SPANKED REPEATEDLY.
Logged
Toes in the water, ass in the sand
 

Page created in 0.154 seconds with 25 queries.