Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Twolanerider]

How about the Woods directional Lifters?  Thats whats in my King now.  When I do the build next month, I will be putting the new Woods Alpha lifters in it.

As hare brained as this sounds the few bikes around me that occasionally make use of my beer fridge and lift all hear me say don't spend the money on the high dollar lifters.  Have seen them fail too.  Instead doing something like the standard S&S or the Feuling HP+ lifters.  Just good standard product.  Then replace them with regularity. 

It just amazes me that we so blithely or even nonchalantly accept engine internals that fail so regularly and catastrophically as a norm.  Modern manufacturing, design, repeatable tolerances and materials sciences suggest otherwise for seemingly everyone but Harley.  Yet here we are with consumable lifters.  Even as bad as Harley screws up its early releases of everything I am so tired of the Twin Cam bullchit I wish they do whatever comes next and put this bastard step-child to bed.

[HD Street Performance]

Made by Morel, decent.

[bakon]

Which brand failed was my question. I have only had SE fail on me but on a .650 lift cam and HTCC CNC heads

[LC110]

For a lifter I would recommend the Topline Hylift Johnson B-2313SE.
They have a tighter I.D Grind which makes for a very slow leak down.
Direct shot oil system, sends oil directly to the axle and roller needle bearings.

[sadunbar]

As hare brained as this sounds the few bikes around me that occasionally make use of my beer fridge and lift all hear me say don't spend the money on the high dollar lifters.  Have seen them fail too.  Instead doing something like the standard S&S or the Feuling HP+ lifters.  Just good standard product.  Then replace them with regularity. 

It just amazes me that we so blithely or even nonchalantly accept engine internals that fail so regularly and catastrophically as a norm.  Modern manufacturing, design, repeatable tolerances and materials sciences suggest otherwise for seemingly everyone but Harley.  Yet here we are with consumable lifters.  Even as bad as Harley screws up its early releases of everything I am so tired of the Twin Cam bullchit I wish they do whatever comes next and put this bastard step-child to bed.

Me too! I'd like to buy a new bike, but I'll never buy another Harley with a Twin Cam motor...  With allowing for a few years beta testing for whatever comes next, it's not looking like I will have the opportunity for a purchase for quite some time....   

[HarleyJeffOregon]

As hare brained as this sounds the few bikes around me that occasionally make use of my beer fridge and lift all hear me say don't spend the money on the high dollar lifters.  Have seen them fail too.  Instead doing something like the standard S&S or the Feuling HP+ lifters.  Just good standard product.  Then replace them with regularity. 

It just amazes me that we so blithely or even nonchalantly accept engine internals that fail so regularly and catastrophically as a norm.  Modern manufacturing, design, repeatable tolerances and materials sciences suggest otherwise for seemingly everyone but Harley.  Yet here we are with consumable lifters.  Even as bad as Harley screws up its early releases of everything I am so tired of the Twin Cam bullchit I wish they do whatever comes next and put this bastard step-child to bed.

I know! Why Cant we make a good Lifter!!!

[HarleyJeffOregon]

Which brand failed was my question. I have only had SE fail on me but on a .650 lift cam and HTCC CNC heads

When they were replaced the last time it was with the last version stock Lifter that comes from the MOCO in new bikes. My original 2010 set lasted 70,000 miles. the new set only 27,000. My goal was to make it to the 100,000 mile mark and then rebuild it. Oh well.

[Twolanerider]

I know! Why Cant we make a good Lifter!!!

It's the system and not just the part. 

[sadunbar]

It's the system and not just the part.

Absolutely correct...  The very same design lifters work just fine in other applications.  Lifters work just fine in an EVO!  As Don said, it's the overall system - the lubrication, forces, angles, pressures, temperatures and so on...  The Twin Cam package is plain not conducive long lifter life.  No one factor, probably no two or three factors.  The entire package.  If I were one thing, it would have been solved by someone a long time ago...

Just like the compensator.  There is no magic compensator design for this package.  Compensators work just fine in lots of applications, but not in this overall system.

[coloradotom]

Absolutely correct...  The very same design lifters work just fine in other applications.  Lifters work just fine in an EVO!  As Don said, it's the overall system - the lubrication, forces, angles, pressures, temperatures and so on...  The Twin Cam package is plain not conducive long lifter life.  No one factor, probably no two or three factors.  The entire package.  If I were one thing, it would have been solved by someone a long time ago...

Just like the compensator.  There is no magic compensator design for this package.  Compensators work just fine in lots of applications, but not in this overall system.

I wouldn't say it's the design. My '01 twin cam had 85k on it and I had no lifter issues or any issues with that motor whatsoever. People whined about wanting bigger motors and the moco delivered. Bigger motors = bigger problems.

[Twolanerider]

Absolutely correct...  The very same design lifters work just fine in other applications.  Lifters work just fine in an EVO!  As Don said, it's the overall system - the lubrication, forces, angles, pressures, temperatures and so on...  The Twin Cam package is plain not conducive long lifter life.  No one factor, probably no two or three factors.  The entire package.  If I were one thing, it would have been solved by someone a long time ago...

Just like the compensator.  There is no magic compensator design for this package.  Compensators work just fine in lots of applications, but not in this overall system.

Which, looking at it from a design perspective rather than a pissed off owner's perspective, is actually interesting as to the product and informative as to the company.

Lifters didn't fail like this in earlier Twin Cams.  Sure, cam bearings did (early on) and chain tensioners did.  But not lifters.  The cam bearings especially were a component rather than a system issue too.

Then Harley took an engine designed to be (with some basic adequacy) a low horsepower 88 inch engine and thought they were smart enough to make it both larger and weaker at the same time.  Timken bearings and reinforcements went away, crankshafts became less robustly manufactured, geometries and pressures became more challenging and displacements and outputs went up.

The only band-aids were compression releases to help with starting (and nothing else), a grossly ineffective compensator system (to minimize crank issues that would otherwise likely be even worse) and a little water running through the heads.  The system was adequate (not great, just adequate) enough for what it was.  It is still, basically, a decades old design that they are now trying to limp in to the 21st century and compete with companies producing more power.  It's no wonder the damn things die like ants in a playground full of boys with magnifying glasses. 

There is simply no way Harley didn't know this was a questionable recipe with weak ingredients.  MoCo is in the enviable position of selling vehicles that don't get many miles though.  So they can get away with a LOT that other manufacturers would not.  As much as we hear now; think what the tumult would be if this was discussed over an actually large fleet that regularly got 100,000 miles in 6 years?

[Twolanerider]

I wouldn't say it's the design. My '01 twin cam had 85k on it and I had no lifter issues or any issues with that motor whatsoever. People whined about wanting bigger motors and the moco delivered. Bigger motors = bigger problems.

It definitely is the overall design.  We can't compare the 01 valve train and top end to what's going on in a 110 now.  MoCo has made changes over the years to what was a system that was ok, marginally so, but ok; for a lower displacement lower horsepower but still decades old basic design.  They now try to make it compete in a market it was never originally designed for nor envisaged.  So, they die.

[DCFIREMANN]

As hare brained as this sounds the few bikes around me that occasionally make use of my beer fridge and lift all hear me say don't spend the money on the high dollar lifters.  Have seen them fail too.  Instead doing something like the standard S&S or the Feuling HP+ lifters.  Just good standard product.  Then replace them with regularity. 

It just amazes me that we so blithely or even nonchalantly accept engine internals that fail so regularly and catastrophically as a norm.  Modern manufacturing, design, repeatable tolerances and materials sciences suggest otherwise for seemingly everyone but Harley.  Yet here we are with consumable lifters.  Even as bad as Harley screws up its early releases of everything I am so tired of the Twin Cam bullchit I wish they do whatever comes next and put this bastard step-child to bed.

Your wish is my command!!!!!! Keep your eyes open and just wait to see what happens in August. I just wish we could ask the pool boy to confirm the release of a NEW Big Twin!!!!

Be Safe

THE DAWG

[Twolanerider]

Your wish is my command!!!!!! Keep your eyes open and just wait to see what happens in August. I just wish we could ask the pool boy to confirm the release of a NEW Big Twin!!!!

Be Safe

THE DAWG

Have heard a few rumors also Mike.  One in particular from a source I'd almost trust.  But you know me.  Without provenance or citation or something I still don't trust chit.  So I'm just waiting to see; like everyone else.  Interesting mixed product line may be ahead of us.  Maybe  .

[Rooster]

 :vrolijk_11:I will be watching this time instead of participating.