Print

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

[grc]

I keep seeing references to 34 teeth.  How many are on the HD comp?  What does this change do for us?  2009 FLTRSE3   Also,  do we have to buy the new stator or cup or whatever it is that you need with the new HD comp?

The stock crank sprocket is 34 teeth, so the Baker unit maintains the stock primary ratio.  As for the rotor, if yours is still stock then yes you will have to change the rotor to the late model style.  H-D didn't add the SE comp to the CVO until the 2010 model.

Jerry 

[Hotrod50]

So I'm going to have to spend $400 on new compensator, then $100 for new rotor, then $200 for compensavor to fix this mess?  2009 FLTRSE3

[sadunbar]

So I'll ask the question...  Baker is advertising their compensator as being built around the "tried-n-true pre-2007 cam lobe geometry".  The reason the compensator changed in 07 was because the existing pre 07 cam lobe geometry was not sufficient to handle the loads primarily generated by the advent of the cruise drive in 07.  Even the original 07 compensator (pre SE compensator) was not sufficient to handle the torque loads, resulting in twisted cranks and other failures.  Because of the failures, Harley first came out with the "torque smoothing" calibrations, then the isolated drive, then the SE compensator...    The SE compensator seems to have addressed the issues with torque load, but the SE compensator itself was a design failure, suffering from extreme premature failures.    I will be an interested spectator...   

[grc]

So I'm going to have to spend $400 on new compensator, then $100 for new rotor, then $200 for compensavor to fix this mess?  2009 FLTRSE3

Unfortunately, that's the scenario.  It could be worse, I know of people who are on their third replacement SE compensator.

Good luck.

Jerry

[grc]

So I'll ask the question...  Baker is advertising their compensator as being built around the "tried-n-true pre-2007 cam lobe geometry".  The reason the compensator changed in 07 was because the existing pre 07 cam lobe geometry was not sufficient to handle the loads primarily generated by the advent of the cruise drive in 07.  Even the original 07 compensator (pre SE compensator) was not sufficient to handle the torque loads, resulting in twisted cranks and other failures.  Because of the failures, Harley first came out with the "torque smoothing" calibrations, then the isolated drive, then the SE compensator...    The SE compensator seems to have addressed the issues with torque load, but the SE compensator itself was a design failure, suffering from extreme premature failures.    I will be an interested spectator...   

I'll be right there beside you.  For everyone's sake who has had to put up with this BS for the past seven years and counting, I do hope Baker has the answer but of course only time will tell. 

Jerry

[muddypaws]

I'm ready....

[timo482]

interesting.. I've never read anywhere that the 07 compensator was designed because the old one would not handle the load - i thought it was designed to make assembly in the factory faster.

??

[sadunbar]

interesting.. I've never read anywhere that the 07 compensator was designed because the old one would not handle the load - i thought it was designed to make assembly in the factory faster.

??

The SE compensator was originally offered as a Screamin Eagle performance upgrade.  The 2007 stock compensator had already been (insufficiently) redesigned from the "tried an true pre 07 compensator" in an attempt to handle the higher torque loads of the 110 motor and cruise drive.  The SE compensator should have been offered as a warranty item, but was pawned off as a "performance upgrade".  I think it was 2009 or 2010 that the SE compensator became the stock compensator on CVO's.  This is the SE compensator description from the Screamin Eagle catalog:

"This premium compensator has been engineered with heavier springs and increased travel to support the high torque output associated with high-compression race and large displacement engines. Designed to support up to 7 times the energy absorption capacity of the Original Equipment compensator, this unit helps protect the engine and driveline components during harsh drag race launches. This Compensator is the perfect addition to a complete performance upgrade, and it complements the installation of the Screamin’ Eagle® Performance Clutch Hub."

Here is a post from back in 2008 that describes the scenario of the introduction of the SE Compensator very well...

http://www.cvoharley.com/smf/index.php?topic=30766.msg503390#msg503390

Absolutely nothing at all to do with faster assembly time.  Everything to do with a poor engineering effort that occurred back in 2007 and still exists today, in spite of the introduction of the SE Compensator and four subsequent re-designs of the compensator.

[grc]

2010 was when the MoCo started installing the SE compensator on CVO's.  The regular models weren't "upgraded" until 2012. 

The compensator was changed from the time tested old design when H-D decided to redesign the primary for the 2006 Dyna/2007 other models.  They took the idea from Baker to basically overdrive the primary ratio so they could make top gear in the new six speed trans a 1:1 ratio, as opposed to an overdrive ratio in the trans.  It was this ratio change in the primary that really created the extra stress, more than the additional torque of the 110 over the 103.  The same thing created the multitude of IPB failures, even on the TC96 bikes like the Dyna in 2006, and the rest of the models in following years.  Regardless, the change was typical for H-D, poorly engineered and either not tested, or not tested to the proper standards.  And typical for H-D as well, they let the customers deal with the problems for many years before they made any attempt to rectify the problems.  At this point it has been nine years since the new primary design hit the street, and they still haven't come up with a robust design for the compensator.  But they are more than happy to sell customers a new one every couple years, once the warranty expires.  Just one more example of them making money off their mistakes.

Jerry

[catahoula58]

Has anyone heard any updates from baker on how their testing is been going?  I know the weather has been bad around the states.  Just checking to hear of anything!  Thanks

[Classic Beast]

I understand Bert is on a 2000 mile test ride now

[GMR-PERFORMANCE]

 I will sit back and wait I see
The theory of the tried and true early design statement as what they built is really nothing like the early part, and with a larger sprocket you increase leverage onto the ramps.. 

I think if that was the way to go it would have been done by HD, just like Hobans tried the rubber isolator set up HD had that as well back in the early 80's .. Like it or not HD has some huge pockets and they may not always have the best idea , they really do test parts. If that works great if not well that how it goes .. I like Baker and spend a ton of money with them .. But not so sure about this .. I am sure the public will test them and see what happens..

We have some experience in dealing with comps .. so again for us it will be a wait and see deal.

[cmashark]

So why not install a good crank in your engine and just go to a solid front sprocket?

[GMR-PERFORMANCE]

Even with a good crank a engine like the V twin for normal street use needs something to dampen the power pulse in the lower RPM. Many guys have tried the solid comp route and most do not like the jerky-ness in low RPM and many time it will transmit vibration as well..

Now on inline smooth imports sure but not so much for a 900+ lb bagger chugging around in a parking lot.

[sadunbar]

I will sit back and wait I see
The theory of the tried and true early design statement as what they built is really nothing like the early part, and with a larger sprocket you increase leverage onto the ramps.. 

I think if that was the way to go it would have been done by HD, just like Hobans tried the rubber isolator set up HD had that as well back in the early 80's .. Like it or not HD has some huge pockets and they may not always have the best idea , they really do test parts. If that works great if not well that how it goes .. I like Baker and spend a ton of money with them .. But not so sure about this .. I am sure the public will test them and see what happens..


We have some experience in dealing with comps .. so again for us it will be a wait and see deal.

I'm with you Steve...  Wait and see...