Correct the early style comp was a very robust part. But from 2007 ( 2006 dyna) the comp has been a issue in fact the new current comp still is a rattler on a large % fo the bikes due to the new flat roller bearing they used.
"The comp has always been a troublesome component"
Not true IME. My 2004 RG (126hp/123tq) currently has 79,000+ hard miles on the OE comp. nary a problem. Before that (same design) on several Evo's logged more than a quarter million miles, no problems. Before that several Shovels and Pans with no problems. Having dozens of riding friends over the last 40 years, nobody had issues with comps. Plenty of other issues LOL, but not comps. The present crop of engineers just had to screw with them evidently. You know corporations must embrace "change"....even if it doesn't work.
Correct the early style comp was a very robust part. But from 2007 ( 2006 dyna) the comp has been a issue in fact the new current comp still is a rattler on a large % fo the bikes due to the new flat roller bearing they used.
Quite true, guys! I had a '95 FLHTP that never gave me a bit of trouble with the comp... or anything else for that matter. The Evo big twin was nearly bulletproof - and aside from the Evo Sportster engine, is IMHO the most reliable engine the MoCo has ever produced... probably because it's so simple, with its single cam driven off of the crank with a pinion gear, much stouter bolted-together crank like the Pans and Shovels had, replaceable lifter blocks, etc. Many less parts to go out of spec or fail.
I was directing my comments to Twin Cams, specifically the '07-up design, but I didn't word it very clearly. Guess I shouldn't post in the middle of a sleepless night!
One thing that comes to mind is that our current CVOs put out considerably more TQ/HP than the previous engines, especially when we hop them up as we like to do. That surely puts a lot more strain on the compensator than the previous engines ever did. But I can't help wondering exactly why the previous compensators hardly ever failed, and these new '07-up ones are failing right and left. Is it just a cheap design that the MoCo refuses to properly address through a more robust design to save money, or something more dark and sinister?
Ken
Author
Topic: 103 verus 110 (Read 8995 times)