Print

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

[CVODON]

No problem with the two 110's I've had. I'd buy another tomorrow if it was something I wanted.

[bbrown]

I had the 110 in a 12 cvosg.  I had that bike for only 42k miles.  Never had one issue with it.  Had John Sachs do a build on it with 58mm intake injectors heads cams and more.  Not one complaint with it. Now I have one in the 16rg. .  No work done on this one at all. . I'm going to leave this alone this time. . Again.  Not one problem.  I typically do not ride like I stole it.  Maybe that's why my things last. . Just saying. . Stuart.

yup.  My experience is the same

[quicked]

NO,its not junk but if you ride hard ya gotta change out uh couple uh things and maintain well,thats all

[FLSTFI Dave]

They have their faults.  I have had issues with every 110 I have owned except one. 

All my bikes get all recommended service and are well cared for.

My 09 SERG, failed compensator, failed lifters at 46K miles, traded at 46K.

My 12 SERG, Failed regulator, failed compensator, failed clutch master cylinder.  Traded at 47K.

My 15 SERGU, Failed water pump, and then failed lifers at 44K, Harley replaced engine,  traded with new engine.

My 13 SERK, built the engine with 1500 miles on the bike, head work, behive valve springs, woods lifters, cam and so on.  HD came out with the 117 cylinders when the bike had 15K on it.  Built it again with the 117 cylinders, freshened the heads and more aggressive cam.  No issues with this engine.

I do not think the 110 is junk.  I do believe the lifers will fail in the 110, especially with the stock valve springs.  I have seen them fail as early as 21K on a friends bike and seen them last over 46K.  2.5 years is about what it takes to get 45K on my traveling bike.

So far my 17 with the 114 has 18K on it with no issues.

[SIKBIRD]

They have their faults.  I have had issues with every 110 I have owned except one. 

All my bikes get all recommended service and are well cared for.

My 09 SERG, failed compensator, failed lifters at 46K miles, traded at 46K.

My 12 SERG, Failed regulator, failed compensator, failed clutch master cylinder.  Traded at 47K.

My 15 SERGU, Failed water pump, and then failed lifers at 44K, Harley replaced engine,  traded with new engine.

My 13 SERK, built the engine with 1500 miles on the bike, head work, behive valve springs, woods lifters, cam and so on.  HD came out with the 117 cylinders when the bike had 15K on it.  Built it again with the 117 cylinders, freshened the heads and more aggressive cam.  No issues with this engine.

I do not think the 110 is junk.  I do believe the lifers will fail in the 110, especially with the stock valve springs.  I have seen them fail as early as 21K on a friends bike and seen them last over 46K.  2.5 years is about what it takes to get 45K on my traveling bike.

So far my 17 with the 114 has 18K on it with no issues.


Damn Dave, you are logging some miles! Of course if I lived where you live I'd have a lot more miles too.

[ultrafxr]

Having had major failures related to lifters and cam bearings in 110 motors on three different bikes I would say that they have a built in deficiency and disappointing longevity.  In each case the failures on my bikes resulted in brand new motors or in the last case a rebuilt from the crank on up.

I too am meticulous about maintenance but don't think changing motor oil every day would help prevent the failures.  It's a crap shoot as some failed as soon as 22k while others lasted to almost 50k.

I simply do not trust the motor to get me home as I've been stranded 000s of miles from home on several occasions.  Not fun.  In fact a major PIA.  No more 110s for me.

[NH Bulldog]

I had over 30k on my 2012 110 when I traded it in this spring.  I maintained good fluids (not Syn3), never really pushed it too hard, but we rode 2-up 99.9% of the time and even towed a trailer for about 20k of those miles.  Never had any issues, it made the same noises from day 1 until the day it was traded in.  I was never concerned of it imploding, but from what people are saying here, it could have happened at any time........or not. 

When you think about it, what is the real difference between any of the TC motors that would make a 110 more susceptible to failure over a 96 or 103?     

[ultrafxr]

I had over 30k on my 2012 110 when I traded it in this spring.  I maintained good fluids (not Syn3), never really pushed it too hard, but we rode 2-up 99.9% of the time and even towed a trailer for about 20k of those miles.  Never had any issues, it made the same noises from day 1 until the day it was traded in.  I was never concerned of it imploding, but from what people are saying here, it could have happened at any time........or not. 

When you think about it, what is the real difference between any of the TC motors that would make a 110 more susceptible to failure over a 96 or 103?   

Much stronger valve springs which hammer the valve train.  Some say way too much spring pressure and recommend changing them.

[Ironhorse]

Much stronger valve springs which hammer the valve train.  Some say way too much spring pressure and recommend changing them.

That and the crank. I think if HD had a decent crank that came pinned and welded, it would reduce the number of crank run out issues. You never hear of a Dark Horse crank scissoring.

[xupd42bmg]

I've got the 16RG. I ride the chit out of it and I know my day is coming. I just hope it's within warranty. Other wise I'm building the motor anyway.

[KGB]

I've got the 16RG. I ride the chit out of it and I know my day is coming. I just hope it's within warranty. Other wise I'm building the motor anyway.

X2

[HD Street Performance]

Much stronger valve springs which hammer the valve train.  Some say way too much spring pressure and recommend changing them.

Hearing noise, that is lash. That comes from lifters not able to keep the roller seated on the cam. Root cause is not the springs but they are in the mix. The beehives guys are using have higher seat pressure than the oem spring.

[Ironhorse]

Hearing noise, that is lash. That comes from lifters not able to keep the roller seated on the cam. Root cause is not the springs but they are in the mix. The beehives guys are using have higher seat pressure than the oem spring.

So it's a combination of things, springs, lifter, and cams. Is the crank also in that mix?

[grc]

A big part of the issues can be traced all the way back to the redesign and retooling done for the 2007 (2006 Dyna) model year.  That's when all the crankshaft (flywheel assy) issues became ridiculous and Harley changed it's runout specs from .003" max at the pinion shaft to .012" at the pinion shaft, to avoid having to scrap large quantities of their production.  There was also a major change to the primary drive which increased shock loading on the suspect cranks, and a general cheapening of various component parts by the MoCo.  There were plenty of failures on the TC96 models, so it wasn't just a CVO110 issue.  The 110 though came with it's own set of additional problems from day one, such as the head gasket failures and oil leaks, defective ACR's, and compensators that couldn't cope.  They also had many issues with tapered cylinders right out of the box and piston slap.  Last but definitely not least the valve train was seriously flawed in a multitude of areas.  The valve guides had a bad habit of dropping or seizing on the valve stem, especially on the hotter rear cylinder.  The inner cam bearings failed at relatively low miles, as well as the lifter rollers.  Only after six years of failures did the MoCo upgrade the inner cam bearings and come out with a beefed up roller for the lifters, and even that lifter has had many failures reported.

I'm sure I missed a few more, but that should give those who are new to the site or to the CVO110 a little history.  Yes, not all 110's have suffered massive failures.  However, we have many members who have had several CVO110's over the past ten years and have had more than one failure.  Some have already posted in this thread.  I'd say that those who have posted about never having a single issue with their 110's are either really really lucky, or don't ride much.  The luck of the draw is something that bites some people with pretty much any product, but high quality and well engineered products have many fewer "luck of the draw" failures than Harley, where engineering takes a back seat to styling and cost cutting (profit enhancement).  To answer the OP question, IMHO the 110 is not totally junk, but compared to a well designed and manufactured engine from anyone else I think it is highly suspect.  I made a personal decision many years ago that I wouldn't buy a bike with a 2007 and later TC engine in it, and especially a CVO110.  I don't tolerate miserable reliability in my other vehicle choices, and I'm not interested in making exceptions for H-D.

Jerry

[HD Street Performance]

As always a great response.

My opinion is the 96" motor was flawed from the inception and the issues are not limited to the engine. Add a stack of mismatched valve train parts that don't play well and heat things up more with lean mixtures and higher cylinder pressures and you have an engine package that is much more prone to fail, and they do.
The valve train can be fixed but it takes disassembly. Not a simple lifter change but that's a start.