www.CVOHARLEY.com
CVO Technical => Twin Cam => Topic started by: workingdan on February 23, 2012, 06:35:51 PM
-
I am putting me bike back together, New cam, lifter, pushrods and roller rockers. I have been looking and have found alot of people say it dosent matter which way the lifter oil hole goes. My question is if it dosent matter, why does woods make directional lifters? So what way should I install them??? Thanks
-
I was wondering the same thing till I installed Woods lifters this past weekend and campared to the OEM. Woods lifters will go in one way and the hole will always be aligned with the oil passage in the case. OEM lifters can go in two ways. Either way you go, the oil hole is off to the side, not adjacent to the case oil passage. Apparenty the idea it to get the oil to the lifter as quickly and efficiently as possible. Not sure about S&S or the other manufacturers.
-
The MoCo faces the oil hole toward the cylinders....however it doesn't matter because the oil fills the recess in the lifter 360 degrees.
Doc
-
Ok so I did my resurch and I installed them as close to the oil passage. The bleed hole facing out. Seems to make sence to me.
Thanks for the replys
-
service manual says face them in---- but i agree w/ Doc oil is 360
-
I am putting me bike back together, New cam, lifter, pushrods and roller rockers. I have been looking and have found alot of people say it dosent matter which way the lifter oil hole goes. My question is if it dosent matter, why does woods make directional lifters? So what way should I install them??? Thanks
On an EVO you want the lifter feed hole facing the feed from the case. TC88 oils 360 degrees around the lifter feed but old habits die hard... In reality it doesn't matter on a TC88.
-
I would want mine faced in. I just installed a set of new HD lifters in a friends 07 SG and they had the oil Holes directional also. these hole went the the front.
-
I would want mine faced in. I just installed a set of new HD lifters in a friends 07 SG and they had the oil Holes directional also. these hole went the the front.
I know this is an old thread but figured I throw in my experience to maybe help someone else doing this.
I just happened to be pulling mine a few minutes ago when I stumbled on this thread and they are different now on the 103s I guess.
oil passages on the rear cylinder lifter sleeves are at the back of the hole facing forward and the lifter oil passages were facing the holes, being rearward.
oil passages on the front cylinder lifter sleeves are at the front of the hole facing to the rear and the lifter oil passages were facing the holes, being forward.
As Doc pointed out I don't think it really matters, but I'll put them back in the way they came out.
-
oil passages on the rear cylinder lifter sleeves are at the back of the hole facing forward and the lifter oil passages were facing the holes, being rearward.
oil passages on the front cylinder lifter sleeves are at the front of the hole facing to the rear and the lifter oil passages were facing the holes, being forward.
As Doc pointed out I don't think it really matters, but I'll put them back in the way they came out.
Those are the C's. I wouldn't put them back in.
-
Those are the C's. I wouldn't put them back in.
Why's that sir? I've read many a reputable threads (not just people's opinions) about the differences in quality from A to B to C lifters and them now being mass produced down in Mexico but all in all from the builders that I talk to, the C lifters are perfectly fine. I can honestly say I'll never buy another set of Woods Directional Lifters.
-
i think that many folks consider it a bad idea to reuse lifters.
they think its like trying to reuse gaskets
to
-
Even Harley abandoned the "C" lifters in the CVO's after the failure rate in the 110 engines worsened with them in place. Harley didn't switch to a more expensive lifter in 2013 just for the hell of it; they were trying to reduce the major warranty expense they incurred due to lifter failures destroying engines.
Folks need to separate the issues with lifters. First is the roller failures which can and have destroyed engines. Then you have the performance related issues of leak down rates, etc., that are less serious. Just because a "C" lifter works in some builds per some builders, over relatively low miles, doesn't mean they will live very long in other builds with different cam designs and valve spring pressures. I'd be inclined to heed the warnings from all the failures reported on the 110's and go with a different brand. Ever heard that one about where there is smoke there is usually fire?
Jerry
-
Even Harley abandoned the "C" lifters in the CVO's after the failure rate in the 110 engines worsened with them in place. Harley didn't switch to a more expensive lifter in 2013 just for the hell of it; they were trying to reduce the major warranty expense they incurred due to lifter failures destroying engines.
Folks need to separate the issues with lifters. First is the roller failures which can and have destroyed engines. Then you have the performance related issues of leak down rates, etc., that are less serious. Just because a "C" lifter works in some builds per some builders, over relatively low miles, doesn't mean they will live very long in other builds with different cam designs and valve spring pressures. I'd be inclined to heed the warnings from all the failures reported on the 110's and go with a different brand. Ever heard that one about where there is smoke there is usually fire?
Jerry
gotcha. Can you elaborate on what lifter they went to on the 13s? Is it a "D" lifter now?
-
and just for the record. I'm not questioning anyone here. Simply obtaining valuable/usable information for the cranium..
-
and I stand corrected guys.. it's the "B" lifters that the builders like so much..
ah well. looks like I'm changing lifters again.. :-)
-
Even Harley abandoned the "C" lifters in the CVO's after the failure rate in the 110 engines worsened with them in place. Harley didn't switch to a more expensive lifter in 2013 just for the hell of it; they were trying to reduce the major warranty expense they incurred due to lifter failures destroying engines.
Folks need to separate the issues with lifters. First is the roller failures which can and have destroyed engines. Then you have the performance related issues of leak down rates, etc., that are less serious. Just because a "C" lifter works in some builds per some builders, over relatively low miles, doesn't mean they will live very long in other builds with different cam designs and valve spring pressures. I'd be inclined to heed the warnings from all the failures reported on the 110's and go with a different brand. Ever heard that one about where there is smoke there is usually fire?
Jerry
My 2012 CUSE7 with 22k on the motor.
(http://i1099.photobucket.com/albums/g392/harleyjerry3/Gails%20H-D%2007-13/Picture388_zps33542686.jpg) (http://s1099.photobucket.com/user/harleyjerry3/media/Gails%20H-D%2007-13/Picture388_zps33542686.jpg.html)
-
My 2012 CUSE7 with 22k on the motor.
(http://i1099.photobucket.com/albums/g392/harleyjerry3/Gails%20H-D%2007-13/Picture388_zps33542686.jpg) (http://s1099.photobucket.com/user/harleyjerry3/media/Gails%20H-D%2007-13/Picture388_zps33542686.jpg.html)
OUCH! bet that was expensive...
-
OUCH! bet that was expensive...
Under warranty but I was 500 miles from home and had cost of rental to get home and them back to pick bike up. Hopefully the new motor has the latest and 'greatest' the moco has to offer. Don't know if this was the 'C' lifter or not. Just checked my parts book for this bike and it calls for the 'B' lifter. So if moco made a running change to the 'C' lifter on the 2012s I have no idea when that was. My bike was built on 10/10/2011.
-
Under warranty but I was 500 miles from home and had cost of rental to get home and them back to pick bike up. Hopefully the new motor has the latest and 'greatest' the moco has to offer. Don't know if this was the 'C' lifter or not. Just checked my parts book for this bike and it calls for the 'B' lifter. So if moco made a running change to the 'C' lifter on the 2012s I have no idea when that was. My bike was built on 10/10/2011.
Not sure of the specific date but the change was made in 2011 to the "c" lifters
-
Don't know if this was the 'C' lifter or not.
C. It has the feed hole inline with the roller. B feed hole is in line with the pin.
-
C. It has the feed hole inline with the roller. B feed hole is in line with the pin.
I don't have the lifter but from the photo it appears that the feed hole is in line with the roller so I guess this is a C.
-
gotcha. Can you elaborate on what lifter they went to on the 13s? Is it a "D" lifter now?
The latest lifter in the CVO110's, starting for the 2013 model, is the new high capacity roller bearing SE lifter.
----------------------------------------------------------
"Screamin’ Eagle Tappets feature large high capacity needles
in the roller bearing assembly to improve reliability when
operating with high lift cams, high pressure valve springs,
and in high RPM applications. The 25% larger needle bearings
increase the dynamic load rating by approximately 20%
when compared to the Original Equipment Twin Cam tappets.
The unique design delivers superior tappet life in performance
applications. Set of 4.
18572-13 $249.95
Fits ’99-later Twin Cam-equipped models and
’00-later XL and XR models."
----------------------------------------------------------
Jerry
-
The latest lifter in the CVO110's, starting for the 2013 model, is the new high capacity roller bearing SE lifter.
----------------------------------------------------------
"Screamin’ Eagle Tappets feature large high capacity needles
in the roller bearing assembly to improve reliability when
operating with high lift cams, high pressure valve springs,
and in high RPM applications. The 25% larger needle bearings
increase the dynamic load rating by approximately 20%
when compared to the Original Equipment Twin Cam tappets.
The unique design delivers superior tappet life in performance
applications. Set of 4.
18572-13 $249.95
Fits ’99-later Twin Cam-equipped models and
’00-later XL and XR models."
----------------------------------------------------------
Jerry
So Jerry, in your opinion are these H-D lifters as good or better than the aftermarket lifters that many have chosen to use when replacement was required? :confused5:
-
So Jerry, in your opinion are these H-D lifters as good or better than the aftermarket lifters that many have chosen to use when replacement was required? :confused5:
I can't say one way or the other. The bearing for the roller looks better, but looks can be deceiving. Only time in service will tell the real story.
If it were me, I think I'd go with a proven part that's been around a long time and has a great reputation. S&S is the first thing that comes to mind.
Jerry
-
Installing S&S premiums in my '12. Does the orientation of the hole matter on S&S lifter?
-
2013 CVO "new style" lifters chit the bed @18,000, bled down like a stuck pig, replaced with aftermarket, I like.
-
Installing S&S premiums in my '12. Does the orientation of the hole matter on S&S lifter?
Maybe one of the builders will chime in on your question.
-
Installing S&S premiums in my '12. Does the orientation of the hole matter on S&S lifter?
Orientation in a twin cam does not matter...
-
Slid them in with the "S&S Premium" out, holes in. There's a chamber around the lifter, so I guess maybe it doesn't matter. I have to go get the tappet block gaskets tomorrow. I knew I'd forget something!
-
Orientation in a twin cam does not matter...
Thank you
-
service manual says face them in---- but i agree w/ Doc oil is 360
Unless they designed the lifter bore and jet with with terminal velocity calculation coefficients to make the oil flow clockwise around the lifter passage instead of counter clockwise.