It's a meaningless claim, just like the same claim was for the Twin Cam. Remember all the major issues on the early Twin Cams, like cam bearing failures, that somehow never showed up in those millions of miles of "testing"? And how about the major issues with the 2006/2007 introduction of the new and unimproved Twin Cam that supposedly underwent a ton of testing AND a full year of sales in Dyna's before being thrust upon the rest in 2007?
I sincerely hope the MoCo has finally become serious and truly addressed all the customer concerns, and that this new engine is everything they claim and more. But I'm not your average Kool-Aid drinker, and while I'm not from Missouri I still don't take anything for granted but instead insist they "show me". Here's hoping they've finally done it right.
Jerry
Dang, everyone I spoke to about my 2007 FLHRSE3 problems said that it was the first they heard about said problems, I'm referring to dealership, straight from dealer principal, the MOCO finest customer service reps, including two supervisors, to the illustrious HD reps that we were privileged with their attendance at two CVO GTG's.
I know all my ideas aren't winners but I have been riding since the late sixties and feel I can comment about some real world experiences.
Now with the new engine and the thought of me being a beta tester on my dime..........................negative. I do however wish everyone the best of luck on the new HD's and hope they can stand up to the test of time, or real world riding.
Kind Regards
TN
Correction; I did receive several apologies from certain HD employees and they did admit there were certain failures on the introductory of the 110" motor after my relentless badgering. Improved failure rate now but.......
I do hope this new motor proves to be a workhorse for everyone involved. Sincerely