Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 2 [All]

Author Topic: SE primary chain tensioner vs the regular auto version  (Read 14618 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

RayG

  • "What the hell was I thinking?"
  • Elite CVO Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 928

    • CVO1: 2008 FLHRSE4
SE primary chain tensioner vs the regular auto version
« on: November 01, 2016, 11:30:09 AM »

I'm probably going to replace my primary chain tensioner over the winter and was wondering if there was any major benefit to using the SE manual version vs. the regular auto chain model.  I have 90,000 miles on the bike and even with the S&S 124 with the 640 cams I have never had an issue. I see where a few guys have welded the tensioners.  I understand why they do it, I just have never had any issue using the regular one.  I currently have the Baker compensator but I plan to return to the OEM and use the Compensaver for improved lubrication.  I have the saver on the bench waiting until I open the primary.  Which tensioner should I get? 

RayG   
Logged

fastfreddy

  • 1K CVO Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1651
  • MY CVO
    • IA

    • CVO1: 2013 FLTRXSE traded
    • CVO2: 2016 FLTRUSE
Re: SE primary chain tensioner vs the regular auto version
« Reply #1 on: November 01, 2016, 11:47:20 AM »

Had the SE in for about 2 days, made to much noise... Like them gear drive timer in a SB Chevy. Hundred bucks and I will ship it to ya if you want it... Same as new condition make it $75 shipped and it's yours
Logged
SERGU aka the RENTAL ... never home & always broke...Thnx FF

FlaHeatWave

  • 1K CVO Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2208

    • CVO1: '01 FXDWG2 RED 103 6sp
    • CVO2: '05 FLHTCSE2 CHERRY
    • CVO3: '09 FLTRSE3 YELLOW 117/DD7
Re: SE primary chain tensioner vs the regular auto version
« Reply #2 on: November 01, 2016, 02:51:15 PM »

After over 50,000 miles on the '09, with no issues or related issues I'm staying with the stock one.
Logged
"I've read dozens of books about heros and crooks, and learned much from both of their styles"

grc

  • 10K CVO Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 14216
  • AKA Grouchy Old Fart
    • IN


    • CVO1: 2005 SEEG2
Re: SE primary chain tensioner vs the regular auto version
« Reply #3 on: November 01, 2016, 05:03:38 PM »


Stick with the automatic tensioner.  The latest version seems to be working fine, unlike the early versions.  Every review I've read on the SE manual tensioner has mentioned noise issues, and without an access cover in the primary cover like the old bikes, you would have to remove the outer every time you wanted to check / adjust the chain. 

JMHO - Jerry
Logged
Jerry - 2005 Cherry SEEG  -  Member # 1155

H-D and me  -  a classic love / hate relationship.  Current score:  love 40, hate 50, bewildered 10.

Texas 103

  • 1K CVO Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1483
  • FLHRSEI.ORG
    • TX

    • CVO1: 2016 "RGU"
Re: SE primary chain tensioner vs the regular auto version
« Reply #4 on: November 01, 2016, 05:37:34 PM »

Stick with the automatic tensioner.  The latest version seems to be working fine, unlike the early versions.  Every review I've read on the SE manual tensioner has mentioned noise issues, and without an access cover in the primary cover like the old bikes, you would have to remove the outer every time you wanted to check / adjust the chain. 

JMHO - Jerry

X-2 Jerry, My HD Tech said the same..way to friggin noisy...stock one works just fine...
Logged
Too Much of a good thing is just right !! Then more is always better

RayG

  • "What the hell was I thinking?"
  • Elite CVO Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 928

    • CVO1: 2008 FLHRSE4
Re: SE primary chain tensioner vs the regular auto version
« Reply #5 on: November 01, 2016, 07:38:06 PM »

I can always count on you guys for a quick and thorough answer.  I'll stay with the automatic tensioner. 

Thanks Guys

Ray G
Logged

Texas 103

  • 1K CVO Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1483
  • FLHRSEI.ORG
    • TX

    • CVO1: 2016 "RGU"
Re: SE primary chain tensioner vs the regular auto version
« Reply #6 on: November 02, 2016, 10:30:55 AM »

I can always count on you guys for a quick and thorough answer.  I'll stay with the automatic tensioner. 

Thanks Guys

Ray G

 Was noticing a little noise in mine. When I put my Compensaver in , I found the chain had about 3/4 " play in it. Just put a screwdriver on the back of the tensioner, it popped up one click then 1/4" of play  all good now, nice and quiet. They say 1/4" play at the top  when it cold and when you raise the chain with your finger , you'll see the shoe start to compress.   
« Last Edit: November 03, 2016, 01:22:31 PM by Texas 103 »
Logged
Too Much of a good thing is just right !! Then more is always better

North Star

  • CANADA- Love it or Leave it
  • 1K CVO Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1678
    • ON


    • CVO1: 2009 CVO Road Glide- Orange/Black
    • CVO2: 2015 Ducati Monter 821- Star White
Re: SE primary chain tensioner vs the regular auto version
« Reply #7 on: November 02, 2016, 10:53:23 PM »

Stick with the automatic tensioner.  The latest version seems to be working fine, unlike the early versions.  Every review I've read on the SE manual tensioner has mentioned noise issues, and without an access cover in the primary cover like the old bikes, you would have to remove the outer every time you wanted to check / adjust the chain. 

JMHO - Jerry

Which HD one is the newer version? Probably not the one that came in my 2009?


Logged
2009 Screamin' Eagle Road Glide- Electric Orange/Vivid Black
GMR 113", GMR 600 cams, Fullac DX & Kuryakyn Crushers, SE Heavy Breather, tuned by "Dyno Dave" Stoddart
Jagg 10 row fan assisted oil cooler
Axeo Legends/Ohlins 3-3/True Track front and rear
C&C Fastback seat w/orange flame stitching & a Le Pera Maverick
PYO Monkey Bars- 10"
Freedom Shields 12" light grey
Hawg Wired "six pack"amp/speakers, Iron Cross ipod interface
HD Daymaker headlights
Detachable King Tour Pak in Electric Orange

Texas 103

  • 1K CVO Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1483
  • FLHRSEI.ORG
    • TX

    • CVO1: 2016 "RGU"
Re: SE primary chain tensioner vs the regular auto version
« Reply #8 on: November 03, 2016, 01:26:36 PM »

Which HD one is the newer version? Probably not the one that came in my 2009?

I don't remember, thinking the '09 version had the older  wider teeth on it, changed a buddy's out to an extra one I had of my '11  New version has narrower adjusting teeth so it won't over adjust  overtighen. Was thinking the  new   part # has a " B" 
Logged
Too Much of a good thing is just right !! Then more is always better

Rooster

  • 5k CVO Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5180
  • FLhtcuse2.ORG
Re: SE primary chain tensioner vs the regular auto version
« Reply #9 on: November 03, 2016, 01:32:11 PM »

I don't remember, thinking the '09 version had the older  wider teeth on it, changed a buddy's out to an extra one I had of my '11 New version has narrower adjusting teeth so it won't over adjust  overtighen. Was thinking the  new   part # has a " B"
I need to confirm. If the 09 version is different in this respect that maybe why mine always felt banjo string tight why I changed to the Hayden unit and have been happy with that in my 07.
Logged

Texas 103

  • 1K CVO Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1483
  • FLHRSEI.ORG
    • TX

    • CVO1: 2016 "RGU"
Re: SE primary chain tensioner vs the regular auto version
« Reply #10 on: November 03, 2016, 01:40:46 PM »

I need to confirm. If the 09 version is different in this respect that maybe why mine always felt banjo string tight why I changed to the Hayden unit and have been happy with that in my 07.

That's why it gets tight, New one with the finer teeth takes care of that. You get a  Much more gradual adjustment.without over tightening.  Most of the good builders on here Steve @ GMR, Kirby, Steve @ Fullsac to mention a few say use the stock tensioner . Think a new one is  like $108 retail. My '16 has about 1/4 " play, 
Logged
Too Much of a good thing is just right !! Then more is always better

Rooster

  • 5k CVO Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5180
  • FLhtcuse2.ORG
Re: SE primary chain tensioner vs the regular auto version
« Reply #11 on: November 03, 2016, 01:56:51 PM »

Thanks, makes sense then.
Logged

Texas 103

  • 1K CVO Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1483
  • FLHRSEI.ORG
    • TX

    • CVO1: 2016 "RGU"
Re: SE primary chain tensioner vs the regular auto version
« Reply #12 on: November 03, 2016, 03:41:11 PM »

Thanks, makes sense then.

Good deal, That new  HD tensioner  is a hell of lot quieter than the Hayden. Pulled my Hayden  out of the old "11 ,it's in the box. Just set it up  COLD with about 3/16"-1/4" play at the top. When you push up on the chain after teh play is gone   you see the tensioner shoe  will start to compress and you are good. Think there is another 3/4" of "compression" of the shoe built in to the unit.

You can always do a quick and easy check after installation.  Just pull the derby cover off,  shine a light on there slide a long thin screwdriver in, and push up  on the chain. You'll know...             
« Last Edit: November 03, 2016, 03:46:53 PM by Texas 103 »
Logged
Too Much of a good thing is just right !! Then more is always better

Rooster

  • 5k CVO Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5180
  • FLhtcuse2.ORG
Re: SE primary chain tensioner vs the regular auto version
« Reply #13 on: November 03, 2016, 03:57:55 PM »

I have heard some people complain of noise from the Hayden but mine is quiet. I have had one on my old WG Evo for years. Maybe just the differences from my 07 to the newer bikes. I assume that would require a new chain and new comp assembly. I wonder if that would work on my 07. I am still running the first revision of the comp assembly on mine. So far it has held up with the 131 motor. Who knows now that I said that it may give up soon I hope not.
Logged

bigsixman

  • Full CVO Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 165
  • 2003 CVO Deuce FXSTDSE
Re: SE primary chain tensioner vs the regular auto version
« Reply #14 on: November 03, 2016, 09:59:14 PM »

I have had 3 bikes that I installed the Hayden tensioners and I have not had any issues with noise or function with either Hayden.

I only have about 5,000 miles each on two bikes and 1,000 miles on the third, but the Hayden has worked excellent.
Logged
2003 fxstdse CVO Deuce, 3,700 miles
2007 fxstd Deuce, 18,500 miles
2017 flhx Street Glide, 6,700 miles
Four 60s & 70s Japanese bikes

bigsixman

  • Full CVO Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 165
  • 2003 CVO Deuce FXSTDSE
Re: SE primary chain tensioner vs the regular auto version
« Reply #15 on: November 06, 2016, 11:45:57 PM »

I changed the fluids on my 2009 FLHX Street Glide today and I removed the primary cover to check on my Hayden tensioner. I put it on last year and it has 5,000+ miles on it and it looks just like when I put it in last year. The chain and the Hayden spec clearance has not changed over the last year and there is no noises coming from the primary area.

I use Red Line oils in all 3 holes and the 3 magnetic drain plugs look excellent.
Logged
2003 fxstdse CVO Deuce, 3,700 miles
2007 fxstd Deuce, 18,500 miles
2017 flhx Street Glide, 6,700 miles
Four 60s & 70s Japanese bikes

Cecild211

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 44
  • Ride long and hard
    • TN


    • CVO1: 2016 FLTRSE
    • CVO2: 2011 FLTRU 111,000 miles
Re: SE primary chain tensioner vs the regular auto version
« Reply #16 on: December 06, 2016, 07:04:34 PM »

Well here is my story to chew on.  I ride approximately 20k miles a year.  I have gone through several compensators throughout the years.  My 2011 RG has just over 111,000 miles. 

After the first compensator around 35k I replaced with the new Harley replacement and a Hayden tensioner.  The newer compensator are better, the Hayden tension works great.  But I had one significant problem with the tensioner.  Can't recall the exact mileage but it was less than 10k.  I did a inspection and the pad was worn out. Grover so bad that the chain rollers were hitting the pad.  Tried another pad with different lube and I had the same issue.  Went back to the Harley auto tensioner. 

The Harley tensioner is great as long as it doesn't over tighten. Again chew on this.  At around 98k I took a trip to the Dragon with some friends.  I rode it very aggressive with a lot of hard downshifts.  I was determined to see sparks in one of the killboy photos.  Mission accomplished.  Any way because of my riding style that day.  The tensioner overtightened.  This got me about 300 more miles before I started loosing clutch pull.  Made an adjustment and made it home.  Next day same thing lost clutch.  This time adjusting was not an option.

Ok so where is the problem you say.

Here is where it started. Because of the overtightened adjuster, the transmission shaft warped.  This caused the throw out bearing to slowly be eaten.  Hence loosing clutch.  So upon inspection found no evidence of a throw out bearing at all.  The small shaft the bearing rides on was welded to the push rod.  Yes welded.  So I had a ground up bearing all in my tranny. 

So 4000 dollars later I rebuilt tranny.  Added baker door and smooth chit kit.  New main shaft and all new bearings.  In the primary I went with baker manual adjuster and baker compensator.   

10 k later I lost charging.  Had a bad stator.  Pulled primary cover.  Chain adjustment was right where I had set it.  New compensator bearing surfaces look terrible all gouged.  Definitely looked like a lack of lubrication.  That's why I chose baker is because it looked bulletproof with those oil scoops to pick up the oil.

So current config is baker manual tensioner.  No more auto tensioner for me.  I know I contributed to the problem but the fact it adjusted to tight caused it.  I went back to Harley compensator they work decent.  Can be noisy and yes there is more noise with the manual adjuster. 

I recommend the baker smooth shift and the new door.  I probably would have done the DD7 if I had it to do over.  Never for me another auto tensioner.  I can inspect and adjust if needed.  And I recommend staying with the Harley compensator kit replacement.

Love my Harley's and this was a topic I have had a lot of experience with.  Among others, of course since I ride a lot

BTW 111,000 miles on motor.  Heads have never been remove and I use .5 quarts of oil every 5k



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Logged

32Lager

  • Full CVO Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 210

    • CVO1: 2009 SE Ultra
Re: SE primary chain tensioner, Compensator issues
« Reply #17 on: January 01, 2017, 07:31:42 AM »

My '09 is just shy of 48K miles and I'm taking it to a local INDY (with Harley certifications) to resolve some issues before spring. The main reasons are less clutch free play and louder shifting noise when hot. While it's in the shop, the primary will be opened to replace the stock chain tensioner, change oil in the clutch and to rebuild the clutch pack. He recommended Hayden's M6-BT07 chain tensioner to reduce noise and Barnett's Kevlar kit to improve clutch performance. I wasn't aware there was a newer Harley tensioner until reading Cecil's post. Since there's no door in my primary cover, is the newer automatic version from Harley a better option now instead of Hayden ?

I'm also tempted to install Baker's compensator while he's in there. The current compensator (installed under warranty) was Harley's latest version in March, 2014. This one has eliminated the starting issues and backfiring but the crank is rocking back and forth when I shut the engine off now. The dealer said this will cause damage but their explanation wasn't clear. Do you think compensator wear is causing this problem ? Since it's an '09, I would need to replace the rotor which adds up to $600 through Baker.

Any advice would be appreciated...



« Last Edit: January 02, 2017, 02:50:41 PM by 32Lager »
Logged

fastfreddy

  • 1K CVO Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1651
  • MY CVO
    • IA

    • CVO1: 2013 FLTRXSE traded
    • CVO2: 2016 FLTRUSE
Re: SE primary chain tensioner vs the regular auto version
« Reply #18 on: January 01, 2017, 05:41:34 PM »

I have also used the Hayden, to much chain slap. So went back to the stock tensioner, was trying to make the comps live longer but think I was only making it worse. The latest comp is lasting me about 25k. So I would say use the latest HD auto tensioner
Logged
SERGU aka the RENTAL ... never home & always broke...Thnx FF

32Lager

  • Full CVO Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 210

    • CVO1: 2009 SE Ultra
Re: SE primary chain tensioner vs the regular auto version
« Reply #19 on: January 02, 2017, 02:44:06 PM »

The Hayden comes with shims to preset the tension. Did you use them and still have problems ? I found this 2012 review of the Hayden tensioner and along with other people, there aren't many complaints. The only downside I see is possible wear from constant up and down movement.

http://www.hdopenroad.com/reviews/a-cure-for-the-harley-primary-auto-adjuster-blues-2/
Logged

fastfreddy

  • 1K CVO Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1651
  • MY CVO
    • IA

    • CVO1: 2013 FLTRXSE traded
    • CVO2: 2016 FLTRUSE
Re: SE primary chain tensioner vs the regular auto version
« Reply #20 on: January 02, 2017, 03:12:01 PM »

The Hayden comes with shims to preset the tension. Did you use them and still have problems ? I found this 2012 review of the Hayden tensioner and along with other people, there aren't many complaints. The only downside I see is possible wear from constant up and down movement.

http://www.hdopenroad.com/reviews/a-cure-for-the-harley-primary-auto-adjuster-blues-2/
chain tension was set to 3/8 inch play, it was in spec for what they recommend. also the shoe was worn bad for the short time it was in, i sent it back to them for inspection they said nothing about the wear just mailed me my money,  :nixweiss: i have been thru 4 comps, 3 tensioners, 1 clutch and main shaft bearing in the trans, maybe im just hard on stuff and your results may vary. 
Logged
SERGU aka the RENTAL ... never home & always broke...Thnx FF

32Lager

  • Full CVO Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 210

    • CVO1: 2009 SE Ultra
Re: SE primary chain tensioner vs the regular auto version
« Reply #21 on: January 02, 2017, 10:00:11 PM »

I don't think you're any harder on equipment than the rest of us. Harley's tolerances and technology cause these problems and they've kept their design this way for cost savings and nostalgia (sales). I'm on my third compensator, second transmission bearing and second primary bearing. The compression release was replaced, two of the lifters were shot at 27,000 miles and they ended up destroying the cams. My warranty was done in 2014 so I'm on my own now. For an '09, our bike is in great condition and I refuse to pay $43K for a new one that needs aftermarket pipes and a tuner to make it run right. Several dealers said to hang onto to mine so I'll make due with what I have.

I'm very happy to see the improvements Harley has made since Willy G. retired and hopefully, they'll continue to resolve the issues we have with the older models.
« Last Edit: January 02, 2017, 10:02:05 PM by 32Lager »
Logged

Cecild211

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 44
  • Ride long and hard
    • TN


    • CVO1: 2016 FLTRSE
    • CVO2: 2011 FLTRU 111,000 miles
Re: SE primary chain tensioner vs the regular auto version
« Reply #22 on: January 03, 2017, 10:07:17 PM »

chain tension was set to 3/8 inch play, it was in spec for what they recommend. also the shoe was worn bad for the short time it was in, i sent it back to them for inspection they said nothing about the wear just mailed me my money,  :nixweiss: i have been thru 4 comps, 3 tensioners, 1 clutch and main shaft bearing in the trans, maybe im just hard on stuff and your results may vary.


I agree, the Hayden shoe just doesn't hold up like the Harley shoe. Went through 2 in short mileage.  Just wasn't worth it for me


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [All]
 

Page created in 0.24 seconds with 21 queries.