Print

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

[Thermodyne]

FXR2evo99 Have you addressed the electronic speedometer yet?

I just went from a 93 Convertible to a 00 FXR4.  The gearing on the 93 made it a much peppier scooter.  So I see a sprocket change in my future.  Primary changes won't affect the speedo, but anything in the final drive will cause a miscount by the sensor. 

[ltank]

You can change the motor sprocket and the speedo will be fine. If you change the tranny or rear wheel sprockets you will need a recal unit.
Ltank

[FXR2evo99]

FXR2evo99 Have you addressed the electronic speedometer yet?

I just went from a 93 Convertible to a 00 FXR4.  The gearing on the 93 made it a much peppier scooter.  So I see a sprocket change in my future.  Primary changes won't affect the speedo, but anything in the final drive will cause a miscount by the sensor.  

My speedo on my FXR2 and as well as on FXR3's is mechanical speedo meaning it is a gear driven unit from a cable off of the front tire.

If you change anything on yours with you having a "electronic" speedo for the 2000 FXR4's with regard to gearing, you are right changing the transmission sprocket and the rear wheel sprocket as I did on my alteration will require that you also recal your sensor, since the speedo uses the information from a sensor coming off of the information from your transmission pulley and the rear wheel sprocket, so it becomes a bit trickier....

The problem with only a primary change (compensating sprocket [25T down to 24T] and clutch shell basket [36T up to 37T]) is that given that the transmission pulley is 32 tooth and the rear wheel sprocket is 65 tooth, you still won't pick up enough benefit without then doing them both, where as if you only concentrate on the transmission pulley [32T down to 30T] and the rear wheel sprocket [65T up to 70T] you can get from 2.925 (Very Tall Gearing) final gearing to 3.36 (shorter gearing)  final gearing which is a bigger result than leaving the transmission pulley and rear wheel sprocket alone and only concentrating on the compensating sprocket from 25 to 24 and the clutch shell basket from 36 up to 37 tooth.

Just some ideas.....

Regards,

Tim

[Thermodyne]

OK, time to revisit this. 

In doing the research for lowering the final ratio on my 2000 -4, I found that there was going to be an issue with the rear sprocket.  The MoCo does not make a 1.5 x 70 sprocket to fit the 2K axle/wheel used on these scooters.  So that left me with a high dollar aftermarket rear sprocket or re machining a sprocket from a earlier FXR.   Which means I would be at the mercy of the machine shop while my scooter was sitting on the jack.   And I was still going to have to address the electronic speedo.

I decided to rethink the whole thing.  So I sat down with the calculator and then went over to see what Baker had as far as primary gears.  Turns out they had just what I needed.  A 21 tooth compensator sprocket.  21/36x32/65 takes me to 3.48 final.  And all I have to do is open the primary and change the motor sprocket and chain.

So all that remains now is to decide weather or not I'll need to do anything to the clutch.  I'm thinking that it can handle the increase in torque as is.  It's like 17% or about a 10 pound increase in torque.  Any opinions on this out there?

[ltank]

If I remenber my FXR4 has a 3/4" rear axle. I have had several rear pulleys as I experimented with gear ratios. What is on paper dont always
feel right when your riding it. I did have to get the spacing behind the pully machined on two different pulleys but the bolt patters were the same. Stock was 1.5" x 65 tried  1.125 x 68  then went to 1.125 x  65  again. I run 25/36 and 30/65 for 3.12 5th  but then I shift into 6th
with a over drive gear set Primo Rivera .86  6th gear gives me a final ratio of   3.12x.86=2.68 . I like it. Its a little taller than the stock 5 speed with a 2.925 but I got 118 HP@ 5600RPM ande 123TQ 2@ 3800 RPM the 6 speed changed my rpms to a better level around town but
when on the interstate running 83 mph at 3000rpm

[FXR2evo99]

.
.
"..I was going through my old magazines the other day and remembered this article from march 85 motorcyclist.Stock bottom end,Branch #4 heads,sifton ev2 cam,44mm mikuni flatslide,branch modified manifold,ign module,and supertrapp mufflers=102hp 92lb-ft.I'm new to Harleys,but I remember reading that article as an 18 yo kid and thinking holy chit,that's a runner.I read it now,and I think,that's not possible!......or is it?.."

MAY 7th, 2014 UPDATE OF GEARING MODIFICATION PERSONAL R&D FINDINGS:

Hello everyone…..

Well this project has taken on a life of it's own….here we are exactly two years later since putting the 3.37 FINAL GEARING into my 1999 FXR2. 

The engine build itself that I did combined with the gearing modification has taken a couple of years to assist me in getting a more clear concise thought around this idea of a gearing change for the 1999 FXR2's FXR3's and FXR4's. 

The quote above was a recent one made on another forum and I thought I would take a moment within that forum to write up a response of my thoughts…which seems appropriate also for this THREAD as well.

I believe there are several elements that go into the thought process of gearing modifications and engine modifications on any bike, and given serious considerations to the style of riding I find myself doing….I have reached the following conclusions:

Here is my summary of the thought….

Back in the day, and I am not sure exactly when…..might even date back to 1985, but I know for certain all FXR's were running with 3.37 final gearing from specifically 1989 to 1993 then in 1994 HD introduced 3.15 gearing….and of course the only production FXR produced in 1995 was the police version also produced with 3.15 final gearing.  Then in 1999-2000 the FXR2, FXR3, and FXR4 were produced offering 2.925 final gearing.

The OEM HD evo engine came out of the box rated with 55 HP and 65 lbs of Torque.

I believe the logic of the 3.37 final gearing was to give the bikes more power with that stock engine….since they were somewhat underpowered.

Over the past couple of years I have messed with my 1999 FXR2 and have finally got an engine I feel very comfortable with when it comes to reliability, quickness, and over all power….we all know that FXR frame is a nice frame and at least for my FXR2 comes in at roughly 565 lbs wet. So it is definitely a lighter HD "Sport" Touring framed bike.

I am sure guys can get 100 HP and 100 lbs of Torque out of these engines….as has been extended by previous experiences….makes you wonder at what cost and expense and reliability….but the merits of an FXR featuring 100+ Horsepower could be a topic to itself yet in some ways applies to the overall gearing ideas as well.

Basically I have built an engine that has now recorded 84 HP and 94 lbs Of Torque….and originally I was running with the OEM final gearing of 2.2925 final gearing which is a taller gearing than even 3.15 final gearing.  Either HD had a lot of parts laying around to place into about 2800 bikes with 2.925 final gearing (which includes a 25 Tooth Comp Sprocket and a 36 Tooth clutch shell basket and a 32 Tooth trans pulley and a 133 belt and a 65 Tooth rear wheel pulley/sprocket) or they felt because of marketing they wanted to promote 50 miles per gallon on a stock bike.  The softails during this time were also running 2.295 final gearing and so were the international bikes because of euro highway speeds.

One thing guys could do as a point of reference and less expense is consider a change with their gearing on these bikes.

My experience has shown me however having run the OEM 2.925 final gearing with the stock engine on my FXR2 and having run the 3.36 final gearing with the FXR2 last summer for 6000 miles (by changing the transmission pulley from 32 Tooth down to the Andrews 30 Tooth and then going up in belt size to a 136 Tooth belt and then finding 70 Tooth rear wheel pulley/sprocket [arriving at 3.36 final gearing]) I have found that the vibrations at speed with the more developed power of the engine which I created from taking the OEM EVO stock engine from 55 HP and 65 Lbs of Torque to 84 Horsepower and 94 Lbs of Torque was causing me to search for a 6th gear at highway speeds on the FXR2.

As a matter of reference, I did find this very intriguing….since I have been running 3.37 final gearing in my 2002 RKC with 100HP and 107 lbs of Torque for nearly 6 years now without any issues at all in terms of looking for a 6th gear or vibration issues relating to higher speeds due to the higher RPMS of the shorter gearing of 3.37 final gearing in that bike.

Basically as of the end of April 2014, I made the conversion BACK to the ORIGINAL OEM 2.925 Final Gearing and am NOW running my 1999 FXR2 as a "conceptual" 4 speed bike with 84 HP and 94 lbs of Torque with 2.2925 Final Gearing with a 5th gear over drive "concept"….using the 5th gear once speeds are consistently at 75 mph or greater….which really brings the bike down into the comfort zone for over all engine vibrations and riding comfort when doing higher speed riding.

So….what's my point….my 2002 RKC with 100HP and 107 Torque is running 3.37 final gearing perfectly and is quite quick….and weighs in at 740 lbs and my 1999 FXR2 which weighs in at 565 lbs and has 84 HP and 94 lbs of Torque with 2.925 final gearing is being ridden as a 4 speed with a 5th gear overdrive sort of concept….and is quite comfortable on that framed and sized bike as well as being quite quick.

CONTINUE BELOW:

[FXR2evo99]

CONTINUATION:

Additionally while 100 HP and 100 lbs of Torque is possible with the evo OEM engine I didn't find it with the build design I created…oh and by the way I am only running the OEM CV Carb with a Dyna Tech 2000 Ignition Module that I like and am getting min 45 MPH per gallon and sometimes have seen 47 MPH as well….further riding this spring now that riding season is comfortably here perhaps I may see 50 but I can't take my hand away from that throttle it's just too much fun to ride.  It is now quite obvious to me that different framed bikes react differently in terms of engine build combined with gearing based upon the design of what you are riding.  For example a touring framed bike such as a road king weighing in at 740 lbs with a 16" front wheel is going to be experienced differently than a "Sport" Touring Framed Bike such as an FXR with either a 21" or 19" front wheel.  So in part establishing the merits of the EVO and it's power will always be in relation to which framed bike you place the power plant into.

The original poster had a great question about what these evos can do….and here we are….30 years later since the introduction of the engine discussing what we can possibly get out of these engines….

MY ONLY HOPE:
is to continue to keep getting parts to keep my little evo on the highway….lol

The EVO ENGINE a very nice reliability for an engine…and easy to work on….

I am glad my RKC has a twin cam in it…and I AM glad I only need a evo in my FXR to enjoy it….which sums up my opinion.  It is historical to enjoy both engine plants and both have their advantages.

I do believe for certain that those riders on heavier framed evos will always feel the need for a bit more power….but that all comes down to riding style of course…..here in CO and only being 20 minutes from either flat riding out on country roads or 20 minutes the other direction and being able to over the course of a couple of hours increase my elevation from 5,000 feet to 12,000 feet a 80" evo producing 84 HP and 94 lbs of Torque which is basically a 54% increase for HP and 41% increase for Torque without affecting the MPG of the bike is well within a expected reasonable expectation.  All of this increase in power is well within the means of the other aspects of the bikes capabilities, without having to change brakes or belts to chains or etc...

I will also mention this for later readers through out the years that might stumble into this discussion. prior to doing the engine on my 2002 RKC I felt the engine was indeed underwhelming….and not as fun to ride so the combination of 3.37 FINAL gearing and the "mouse build" I put into that engine has been a remarkable improvement, in fact on May 4th 2014 I found a stretch of highway flat with a bit of a incline and no tail wind at roughly 6,000 feet in which a perfect storm created a few miles to feel the need to twist the throttle and I squeezed that throttle on that bike to 120 MPH with the 3.37 final gearing that would be 5290 RPMS in 5th gear and both my tac which was showing 5350 aprx but a minimum of 5300 RPMS for certain and a speedo with the needle being buried at 120 MPH with full throttle and the bike still wanting to power just a tiny bit more…..provides me a great indication that indeed it was probably going about 122 MPH….not bad for a small "mouse build".

Two years ago during the summer I then began to find myself feeling very underwhelmed with my 1999 FXR2 because I was having so much fun on my 2002 RKC….when I would ride the RKC it would put a smile on my face….and then another day I would ride the FXR2 and feel very (as I just stated) underwhelmed…it just was not as much fun to ride.  So finally I decided to begin looking at modifications for the evo engine for the FXR2….it's taken a couple of years….to get it figured out….rotating as also mentioned above between gearing as well as some other minor issues….but now I look forward to riding both bikes equally.  I am not giving up any fun to ride either bike….where as prior to doing the evo modifications I felt my FXR2 was just too slow…and indeed it was….at only 55 HP and 65 Lbs of Torque.  Granted as a stock bike the 2.925 final gearing was probably only inducing that feeling even more as a comparison to the RKC.

I will say this…we need to continue to keep threads like this alive because as we get further and further away from even 1984 fewer and fewer data points will exist for guys to successfully know what to do for engine mods for their evos…..heck even as we speak the 95" build is so over and now it's on to the 107's and beyond.

I wish everyone safe trails and fun rides….with their evos…..such a wonderful platform if built correctly, can be very reliable and great.

Warmest Regards,

Tim

[FXR2evo99]

The final analysis really boils down to what type of riding you plan on doing with your FXR's.

Earlier in this thread I mention that I just would not see myself spending much time above the 75MPH area…yet in reality I find myself often times above that 75MPH area into the 80 MPH and 85 MPH area.  I also said I was not experiencing any negative aspects of vibration, and at the time of writing that review, I can only now say it took a season of riding to really figure all of this out…enough different days, enough different riding environments to place a real grasp of what the bike was/is really doing.

Thus the higher you go with your riding MPH zone basically the "buzzier" the FXR lighter framed bike becomes. Which I have begun to realize as I was referencing also having 3.37 FINAL Gearing in my 2002 RKC.  Energy absorption must be part of the equation if you plan to ride your bike for extended periods on highways where you might find yourself going above 75 MPH. 

So I would say now, be fair to yourself and really consider your riding style, if you are using your FXR as a bike to jump on for very short rides and at speeds not above 70 MPH then the 3.37 Final Gearing will be great, if you are thinking about the use of this bike as a "Sport" Touring bike in which you plan to take a trip on and spend hours a day on the bike….then the taller gearing of 2.925 will be a good advantage.

It is here where I also must retention that I have had the 2002 RKC with 3.37 Final Gearing for over 7 years and have taken extended trips on that bike….and because of the design of the bike at highway speeds the energy absorption is completely different and everything that I have experienced as a "buzzy" feeling on the FXR2 with 3.37 FINAL gearing is completely ABSENT while on the differently designed touring framed bike of the RKC (Road King Classic).  I suppose the analogy here would be equivalent to the energy absorption ideas associated with pistols and different calipers and frames of such pistols as to the type of kick back you might experience as well….energy consumption is also the premise within this thought.

The more you use your FXR framed bike at highway speeds greater than 70+ MPH the more you will enjoy the taller gearing of 2.925 and the less you will enjoy the 3.37 FINAL gearing, bottom line. 

Earlier in this thread it was brought to the attention of some readers that a compromise might be to extend oneself into a aftermarket 6 speed to accommodate for this nuance, and while this is indeed an accurate option, it does become a cost consideration as well.  While after market companies offer alternatives within 6 speed options, I would add further that for gears 1 and 2 that shorter gearing makes less difference than one might imagine, and given that we have already spent time talking about 5th gear, the discussion about the merits of shorter gearing really is limited to discussions about 3rd and 4th gearing as to whether it is worthy enough positive. 

3rd and 4th gear is where the sacrifice or strengths as well as the merits of shorter gearing will really play a much more significant factor.
All of you can go back above and study the RPMS with the given charts for 2.925, 3.15, 3.36 as well as 3.37 final gearing and make your own conclusions.

I basically determined in going back to 2.925 Final Gearing that my R&D and the style of riding I find myself doing on my 1999 FXR2 warranted a step backwards from my initial thoughts and have placed a higher value on the taller gearing. 

It was a great R&D experience and a fun project to play with. 

Given my personal R&D I would probably advocate for those experiencing their riding on a touring framed bike to give considerations without hesitation to 3.37 FINAL gearing while extending to those of us on FXR's to give merits to the considerations and benefits of the 2.925 gearing.

Another benefit of running 2.925 Final Gearing is that there is a 7% benefit in gas mileage performance as well. 

I would certainly not advocate on the larger framed bikes the idea of changing to taller gearing because of reasons of "buzziness" as owning both framed bikes the RKC has no negatives from running 3.37 Final Gearing. 

For those of you that own FXR's with 3.37 Final Geared Bikes (possibly 85-89 not quite sure but definitely those from 89-93) and depending upon the riding you do you may never really experience any issues at all with the "buzzy" feeling of the 3.37 Final Gearing….but the more you decide to turn your FXR into a "Sport" Touring Bike, and desire to spend more time traversing the landscape above 70+ MPH you might consider the merits of changing your gearing to the "taller gearing" of 2.925 as HD may have simply stumbled into the right gearing for our CVO FXR2's FXR3's and FXR4's. 

Warmest Regards,

Tim

[Thermodyne]

OK, so I went with a 21 tooth engine sprocket and a 74 link chain.  It worked out well.  I ended up with 3.47 final (on paper).  Electronic speedo was not an issue as all of the change was before the trans.  The scooter rides like my 93 did.  Lots of pep in the lower gears and I can use 5th any time I'm above 50.  I had some concerns about the clutch slipping, but that is not an issue, and the starter is also not bothered by the change.

I ran into a little issue with the clutch, that added $30 to the cost of the job, but it still came in at less then $300 for everything.

Of note would be the absence of the aforementioned high speed vibration.  The scooter is silky smooth at 65-70.  It could be that the clutch and trans are still turning at the old speed, and only the engine speed has been increased. 

[Winston Wolf]

After taking the time to read through all this thread, I wondered to myself why one wouldn't just buy a 150$ Baker compensator sprocket in 21 or 22 or 23 teeth....?  All you need to do is flip the tensioner shoe mount upside down, and no other parts are needed. Were they not available at the time?

[Twolanerider]

After taking the time to read through all this thread, I wondered to myself why one wouldn't just buy a 150$ Baker compensator sprocket in 21 or 22 or 23 teeth....?  All you need to do is flip the tensioner shoe mount upside down, and no other parts are needed. Were they not available at the time?

Or you could be like me and realize I just didn't have any great issue with the final gearing relative to the cam profile in a stock 80" Evo and could just leave it be.... I actually left something alone.