www.CVOHARLEY.com
CVO Technical => Drive Train => Topic started by: Phantom309 on August 03, 2014, 05:32:23 PM
-
I did a search and have been sifting through threads about the primary auto tensioner since last night and still can't find what I'm after ... almost like reading oil threads, there are so many different opinions. I have a tad over 1000 miles on my new bike and ready to drop the oil and pour in the good stuff, but I'm at a stand-still until somebody can answer this ... Can I grind the teeth off the stock auto tensioner so it would be more like a floating action like the Hayden piece? Are the springs strong enough for proper tension without the teeth? Has anybody even tried this?
My mind works in weird ways sometimes and I just want what's best for my bike for the long haul. The hundred bucks for the Hayden isn't the issue, I just like the idea of the bigger wear shoe on the stock one compared to the Hayden. The Hayden looks plenty thick, but to me the stock shoe looks like it would carry the load better since it's longer and has more surface area. What do you guys think?
-
I did a search and have been sifting through threads about the primary auto tensioner since last night and still can't find what I'm after ... almost like reading oil threads, there are so many different opinions. I have a tad over 1000 miles on my new bike and ready to drop the oil and pour in the good stuff, but I'm at a stand-still until somebody can answer this ... Can I grind the teeth off the stock auto tensioner so it would be more like a floating action like the Hayden piece? Are the springs strong enough for proper tension without the teeth? Has anybody even tried this?
My mind works in weird ways sometimes and I just want what's best for my bike for the long haul. The hundred bucks for the Hayden isn't the issue, I just like the idea of the bigger wear shoe on the stock one compared to the Hayden. The Hayden looks plenty thick, but to me the stock shoe looks like it would carry the load better since it's longer and has more surface area. What do you guys think?
Nope.
-
Nope.
Why not? Does is sound like a bad idea to you? Most people are bitchin about the chain being too tight and a couple said with the Hayden the chain seemed even tighter so I'm confused. I thought the Hayden prevented it from being over-tighted since the springs give it a floating action since there are no teeth like the stocker preventing it from backing off. So why not try grinding the teeth off so it floats? I hate to use my new bike for a guinea pig and thought some of the experienced gearheads in here would've tried what I want to do or know somebody that did before I do mine.
-
The Hayden is a great idea, but in my case the springs were too strong. I'd be happy to send mine to you (only 300 miles on it) for $75 shipped.
-
The Hayden is a great idea, but in my case the springs were too strong. I'd be happy to send mine to you (only 300 miles on it) for $75 shipped.
Did you put the stock tensioner back in? Thanks for the offer, but I'm leery about it if some guys are taking them out. I don't get it ... you read some of the posts about the Hayden and everyone talks like it's the best thing since apple pie. I watched the vid of the bike running with the Hayden and you could see it floating when it was revved. Any vids like that with the stock tensioner??
-
Strongly doubt you'll find anyone that has (willingly or sober) taken a stock piece that was never designed nor intended to function as a hydraulically supported tensioner and then taken that part to a handy bench grinder hoping it will thereafter semi-mysteriously learn how to function hydraulically as opposed to the Hayden part that was designed and intended to work that day from its inception.
However.... should you wish to pursue this endeavor, to be the trailblazer, to exhibit the bench grinding fortitude and industriousness necessary to be your own Westinghouse to Hayden's JP Morgan then please do produce the video also. I'll look forward to it. :vrolijk_11:
-
On Harleytechtalk there are some who have spot welded their HD tensioner in place so it can't overtighten and will never loosen either.
I believe if you do it the way you want, there would be no tension on the stock HD adjuster to keep the chain tight.
I had the Hayden in my 2010 (old style with weaker springs) and had no problems with it-whine etc like some have reported.
Will not put the Hayden in the 14.. I may put the GMR compensaver tray in for increased oil to the outer hub/needle bearing (more than the HD drip tray)..
-
Strongly doubt you'll find anyone that has (willingly or sober) taken a stock piece that was never designed nor intended to function as a hydraulically supported tensioner and then taken that part to a handy bench grinder hoping it will thereafter semi-mysteriously learn how to function hydraulically as opposed to the Hayden part that was designed and intended to work that day from its inception.
However.... should you wish to pursue this endeavor, to be the trailblazer, to exhibit the bench grinding fortitude and industriousness necessary to be your own Westinghouse to Hayden's JP Morgan then please do produce the video also. I'll look forward to it. :vrolijk_11:
:zroflmao: :zroflmao: :zroflmao:
Yeah, what he said! :huepfenlol2: :2vrolijk_21:
-
Why not get the old manually adjustable units. Check it every
15,000 miles and adjust as needed or gets noisy.
-
Strongly doubt you'll find anyone that has (willingly or sober) taken a stock piece that was never designed nor intended to function as a hydraulically supported tensioner and then taken that part to a handy bench grinder hoping it will thereafter semi-mysteriously learn how to function hydraulically as opposed to the Hayden part that was designed and intended to work that day from its inception.
However.... should you wish to pursue this endeavor, to be the trailblazer, to exhibit the bench grinding fortitude and industriousness necessary to be your own Westinghouse to Hayden's JP Morgan then please do produce the video also. I'll look forward to it. :vrolijk_11:
I never mentioned anything about hydraulics which has nothing to do with the stock primary tensioner that is spring loaded just like the Hayden. I will most likely leave well enough alone ... I just wanted to know how it would function without the teeth since it would still have spring pressure. I'm trying to understand how it works is all and you had to be a funny guy, thanks for the help.
-
Beware the Hayden unless you can get the full .5" spacing they spec. On my 2014 CVO BO with 12K miles I could get only 3/8ths... guess chain has not stretched much... I tried it any way and by 13k miles it was making lots of noise. When I opened the primary up I found the chain worn way into the block. Put the stock unit back in.
Had the Hayden in my 2011 ST Conv and it worked perfectly but had enough spacing on that bike.
-
I never mentioned anything about hydraulics which has nothing to do with the stock primary tensioner that is spring loaded just like the Hayden. I will most likely leave well enough alone ... I just wanted to know how it would function without the teeth since it would still have spring pressure. I'm trying to understand how it works is all and you had to be a funny guy, thanks for the help.
Trying to get across that what you're suggesting perhaps isn't the greatest of ideas was the help. Suggesting, to begin with, that "nope" NO ONE has done this didn't get the idea across (apparently). So then, yeah, I played a bit.
Whether it's spring tension and fluid supported or spring and locking teeth you're still talking about two entirely different parts doing (yes, similar) jobs in different ways. Grinding the stock piece will accomplish one of at least a few thing. It won't be ground on a smooth plane so the shoe will wear badly. Without the teeth to hold it in place I could easily see the mechanism moving or "chattering" which could lead to the shoe wearing badly or other harmonics that lead to metal fatigue and premature failure. None of the rivets on the articulating arms are all that big to begin with and it's not designed for any side loading that could at least potentially result from that oh-so-careful bench grinding. On top of all that the rivets/pins/whatever-they-are that attach the articulating arms to the plastic shoe aren't designed to be serviceable parts like the shoe on the old manual tensioner was. So once you got it apart to do this work with the bench grinder reassembly may be more interesting than you're anticipating (and more prone to failure).
You can still buy the manual tensioner. Or the Hayden. Or the... well; the point is why in hell would you jeopardize the primary and spend hours doing it when for just a few bucks there are parts out there ready made to get the job done. Being able to say "oooh, look what I did" is cool. But it's got to be worthwhile and have a risk/reward that makes sense.
That's ok, grind away my friend, I'm done.
-
Just reread the above. Think two things were going on. Original poster was (originally) more thin skinned than he needed to be (first real response wasn't all that bad) and I'm in a pissy mood.
Was out in the shop for awhile this evening taking a little time to reassemble an engine that's been waiting on me way too long. I have very few "prized" possessions or items that have an emotional attachment. Generally stuff is just stuff. But among those prized possession are my dad's tools. He had good stuff. Career machinist and mechanic.
So I'm out in the shop and grab the ratcheting pliers for the correct size ring compressor, squeeze it down a little as I have thousands times before, square everything up, get ready to rap the piston a bit and squeeze harder on the compressor and one of the ears brakes off dad's old ring compressor. Unrepairable (in any worthwhile way). Not a valuable too. Can replace the entire set for probably a hundred bucks. But can't replace dad's ring compressor. Dammit.
... which is to say, to the original poster, yeah, I was pissy. Sorry. But don't go grinding up the stock part. It's not a great idea. This comes from a guy who has taken a lot of parts to the grinder too. Heed the advice of Monty Python or Doctor Who and "run away!"
-
I'm not exactly understanding why someone with what they think is a brilliant idea would first seek affirmation of the brilliance of the idea from a bunch of strangers on a web forum, and then get pissy about a response that basically tells the truth, which is it's not a very good idea. And the fact that not one soul on this entire site has come back to answer the question "has anyone else done this" should tell the OP something.
If you are so unsure of your idea that you need some stranger to tell you it's OK to do it, I'd submit you already know the real answer, and that would be to forget modifying the stock tensioner and buy something that was actually designed by someone with the engineering knowledge necessary to do it right. If you don't want a Hayden, just leave the stock one in place or get a manual adjuster. Manual adjusters worked fine on the '06 and earlier bikes. Of course you'll need to remove the outer primary cover to make any adjustment, but it isn't necessary all that often after the initial break-in of the chain and sprockets. But by all means, go ahead and butcher your stock part if you want, then go back later and fix the damage plus buy a new tensioner. It's only time and money.
If you're looking for a sugar coated response, I'm the wrong guy for that. Sorry.
Jerry
-
I have not done this, but I did give the same thought some consideration the last time I had it out (2 weeks ago).
I would be willing to bet that the springs on the stock piece are far too weak to work this way, and this is my reasoning:
The spring's task in the stock design is to lift the block during the slack phase of the chain (under acceleration) to 'get another tooth' on the ramp, if there is enough wear to allow it.
Importantly, the springs don't do anything during the taut phase (decel) as the teeth on the ramp provide the support to keep the shoe from any downward travel.
If the teeth were removed (lets just assume 'smoothly milled') then the springs would in no way be heavy enough to support the taut phase and the chain would be slamming the shoe all the way down during decel and slapping about under acceleration.
That's all conjecture on my part, based on wild supposition.
-
After having read these comments, the easiest response would be, why not let the people who have been manufacturing an automatic chain tensioner for over 25 years continue to do the work?! The M6 Chain Tensioner does exactly what it's advertised to do. Unlike the stock adjuster, we tighten AND loosen as the bike requires. The BT07 (for 2007 and newer bikes) spring compression measurement should be set to 3/8" (contrary to earlier comments). There will always be tension on the chain with an M6 installed. HOWEVER, the difference is the springs will move both up and down absorbing the pressure on to the springs, not the chain. Too tight of chain (as with the stock adjuster) will cause premature wear on your transmission main shaft and crankshaft bearings and seals, not to mention other things that will cause your bike to spend more time in the shop than on the road. Solve the problem install the Hayden M6 and Enjoy The Ride!
-
Respectfully Kathy, the M6 kept my chain as tight as a banjo string and the primary howled like it was going to come apart.
-
Respectfully Kathy, the M6 kept my chain as tight as a banjo string and the primary howled like it was going to come apart.
I can't speak for the late model version, but the old BT01 version worked fine for me. But there is one big difference I noted when comparing the instructions for the two different versions. The old manual tensioner bikes had a slack specification of 5/8" cold, 3/8" hot. In other words, the chain becomes tighter as all the components heat up. I'm quite sure the laws of physics weren't changed when Harley went to the new primary design in '07, so odds are pretty good that the chains still become tighter as the components heat up. This is one very good reason why the stock ratcheting tensioner wasn't a very bright idea, and it may also have something to do with some of the complaints with the newer BT07 from Hayden. That new version calls for setting the cold spring clearance at 3/8", not the 5/8" called for on the older model. If the chain on the late models also becomes approximately 1/4" tighter when hot like the old ones, the tensioner may be operating with basically either very little or no ability to compress any further when hot.
Just a theory, and something I haven't tested since I don't have a late model with the POS primary design Harley pawned off on unsuspecting souls. You know, the brilliant idea that has allowed them to make a big pile of money selling new compensators since 2007 and still counting.
Jerry
-
I love this forum.......
Tinkering is a hobby of mine. I like to see what it does and if there is anything that can be changed/deleted/added to make it run/look/respond better. It's more fun when you do something that works with the cost aspect as low as possible
Phantom, in the case of the current stock tensioner and whether you purchase the Hayden or not, Kathy described it best with
"why not let the people who have been manufacturing an automatic chain tensioner for over 25 years continue to do the work?"
Pretty much says it all.....
-
I looked at the old install directions and got the .5' spec... but 3/8ths is exactly what I measured with no shims needed. Here is what the block looks like after 1k miles...
-
Forget my brainfart of an idea about grinding the teeth off my tensioner, it was just a thought .... and a bad one at that. I drained all three holes and filled her up with Redline 20W-50 in the engine, MTL for the primary and went with Spectro 75W-140 this time for the trans .... what a difference! I chose to skip the Heavy Shockproof this time after seeing some pics somewhere of a trans all gummed up from it. Could have been from too much moisture/short trips ... I don't know, but didn't want to take a chance.
Hard to believe how much less racket my engine makes now and it shifts like butter compared to having the Syn 3 in every hole. Finding neutral is a snap now, truly night/day difference. My bike was really clunky shifting before and neutral was tricky sometimes, not anymore.
Part of the problem was someone at the factory must have fallen asleep at the switch when they filled my primary, it was way over-filled. When I pulled the derby cover the oil level was over the tensioner shoe and over the rivets on the lower run of the chain. Obviously a lot higher up the clutch than it was supposed to be as well. 38 oz. put me just starting to cover the bottem of the clutch and I think the level was almost about the top of the tensioner.
For piece of mind you know I had to stick a screwdriver in there to check my chain tension and all was good. I could push it up about 1/2" or so in the middle. I guess all the reading about some people with banjo tight chains made me nervous, but now I feel better after seeing for myself. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." I see nothing wrong with my stock tensioner. I don't beat the crap outta my bike so I don't see any reason for it to over-ratchet. I know some of you love your Hayden, but I honestly don't see one making mine much better than it is now. Maybe later down the road I may try one, but I'm happy for now. Thanks for the help and I was a little pissy myself the day I first posted this ... the internet tends to do that sometimes, lol.
-
Forget my brainfart
:2vrolijk_21: all good :2vrolijk_21:
-
I've been installing Hayden M-6's since 1988 with no problems--very good product. However, the new BT-07 doesn't seem to have the same performance. They seem to wear much too fast and be noisier; I just replaced two blocks with 11K on them that the blocks are worn almost all the way through. I'll be sending them to Kathy so maybe they can work on the design for more longevity and quieter operation. On the late ones I've installed, I get the 3/8" + with no spacers but with the new springs, the chain seems very tight. I still think the Hayden unit is much better than stock, I had to have the transmission bearing and the compensator replaced under warranty before I installed the Hayden in mine.
-
...Part of the problem was someone at the factory must have fallen asleep at the switch when they filled my primary, it was way over-filled...
I wonder how you knew it was overfilled since, other than an initial fill, the MoCo doesn't give ant specs on checking the primary case oil level?
-Dick-
-
Straight out of a HD service manual. Just for another reference point my tensioner shoe was drowning in oil and was also OVER the center of the rivets in the chain at the same spot before I drained it. When filled to the proper level the top of the shoe is above the oil level and no longer even touching the chain there. My level was pretty far up the spring instead of just barely covering the bottom of it. BTW this pic is from one of my older manuals ... these new bikes with the hydraulic clutch have no adjuster, just to clear up any confusion. I never bought a manual for my new one yet.
-
OK, that's cool for your bike. The same advice does not exist for the current TC bikes.
-Dick-
-
OK, that's cool for your bike. The same advice does not exist for the current TC bikes.
-Dick-
Are you saying the new manual for the '14s doesn't have any specs on the primary oil level? I did measure 38 ounces like my owner's manual said and it did bring it up to the bottom of the spring. If there are no specs then maybe they are assuming most of us know to fill it to where it just touches the spring or it's a screw up on their part?
-
Are you saying the new manual for the '14s doesn't have any specs on the primary oil level? I did measure 38 ounces like my owner's manual said and it did bring it up to the bottom of the spring. If there are no specs then maybe they are assuming most of us know to fill it to where it just touches the spring or it's a screw up on their part?
The service manual gives specific instruction for a "dry fill" and a "wet fill" of the primary. I suspect they feel this is sufficient information. For what it's worth, a "dry fill" of 45 oz brings the lubricant level to what is shown in the diagram, and a "wet fill" of 38 oz also brings the lubricant level to what is shown in the diagram.
That said, I "dry fill" my primary with 34 oz, which is what is required for me to not have any clutch drag when starting the bike cold, using Formula+.
-
The service manual gives specific instruction for a "dry fill" and a "wet fill" of the primary. I suspect they feel this is sufficient information. For what it's worth, a "dry fill" of 45 oz brings the lubricant level to what is shown in the diagram, and a "wet fill" of 38 oz also brings the lubricant level to what is shown in the diagram.
That said, I "dry fill" my primary with 34 oz, which is what is required for me to not have any clutch drag when starting the bike cold, using Formula+.
That's what my OM says too, same as the SM then. From what I heard it would never take 45 oz. unless you remove the whole outer primary cover for the dry fill. I guess they say approximately 38 oz. for wet fill when you just pull the drain plug. I guess 7 oz. stays in there if you don't pull the whole primary off then. Thanks
-
The smart way to fill the primary on a late model, since many people don't get all the fluid out when draining, would be to pour in one quart (32 ounces) with the bike sitting upright and level, not leaning on the jiffy stand, and then visually check the level relative to the bottom of the clutch like it has always been done since I've been messing with Harley's. Add only enough to touch the bottom of the clutch. A slightly low level is preferable to a high level, because as many have already noted a high level will cause your clutch to drag. If Harley no longer puts that in their manuals, then once again the folks at Harley screwed up. Not surprising in my opinion.
The ONLY time 45 ounces should be necessary is when the primary is first filled at the factory, or after the primary has been completely disassembled and ALL fluid has been removed. Part of the problem IMHO is that some folks just look at that 38/45 spec and go ahead and dump in 45 ounces. That includes some dealership rocket scientists based on reports I've seen about overfilled primaries after paying a dealership to perform the service.
Jerry
-
Because I'm anal and for chits and giggles you guys just made me measure what I drained out of mine sitting level on my jack when I drained it. According to my nice measuring cup I drained 44 ounces out of my primary which is about equal to the dry fill. This why I like to do my own oil changes, I don't trust anyone but myself. What Jerry said is what I've been doing over the years and always worked for me. I did ok when I filled mine to the spring, but like I said it was way over the spring before I drained it ... about 7 ounces too much. Those guys at the factory and in the shops at dealers are always in a big hurry and don't care.
-
Why not get the old manually adjustable units. Check it every
15,000 miles and adjust as needed or gets noisy.
Because some clown took the inspection cover off my primary :soapbox:
Meaning the whole outer primary cover will have to come off the inspect and adjust the tensioner...
-
I can't speak for the late model version, but the old BT01 version worked fine for me. But there is one big difference I noted when comparing the instructions for the two different versions. The old manual tensioner bikes had a slack specification of 5/8" cold, 3/8" hot. In other words, the chain becomes tighter as all the components heat up. I'm quite sure the laws of physics weren't changed when Harley went to the new primary design in '07, so odds are pretty good that the chains still become tighter as the components heat up. This is one very good reason why the stock ratcheting tensioner wasn't a very bright idea, and it may also have something to do with some of the complaints with the newer BT07 from Hayden. That new version calls for setting the cold spring clearance at 3/8", not the 5/8" called for on the older model. If the chain on the late models also becomes approximately 1/4" tighter when hot like the old ones, the tensioner may be operating with basically either very little or no ability to compress any further when hot.
Just a theory, and something I haven't tested since I don't have a late model with the POS primary design Harley pawned off on unsuspecting souls. You know, the brilliant idea that has allowed them to make a big pile of money selling new compensators since 2007 and still counting.
Jerry
Think you are spot on about the clearances and shoe compressing when hot, just slipped mine back in has about it has .300 clearance , not enough. Fired it up, very quiet with a minor howl. Going to put some miles on it,let the chain bed into the shoe again and see where I am. If I still can't get to at least 1/2" minimum clearance then....
I'm going to slip a washer(s) under the the spring in the shoe, compress it to see where coil bind is on the spring , measure the washers to see where coil bind is then trim the bottom of the shoe to keep it from bottoming out when hot . Just want to make sure I don;t trim the shoe until I know where I'm at so I won't have coil bind . That will break the spring.
-
Phantom, you stated they're a moderate fairly easy rider. In that regard the stock tensioner will do it's job just fine and control the chain tension.
In saying that, it does have its down fall,... for instance, if you drop down to 5th snap the clutch and punch the throttle, or hard up shifts, it affects the tensioner buy the top slackness of the chain being transferred to the bottom of the chain, inturn the auto tensioner will move up to replace the slackness and can result in a overly tightened chain. The other tensioners mentioned over come this weakness of the auto tensioner.
But if you're a easy rider and not a screaming dancer the stock tensioner will do it's job.
If you have done some heavy acceleration and deceleration riding and your in doubt as you know it's a 5min job to pop the doby cover to check the tension.
I check mine each 500 miles. I learnt the hard way and it cost me a new clutch hub and inner primary case bearing for a overly tightened chain. I haven't done any hard shifting since and the chain is still the same amount of top slack when I checked it last.
-
I had the stock automatic adjuster they work as they should what i found with mine it would ratchet up too tight with the chain deflection
so i went with the Baker Drivetrain Armored Attitude Chain Adjuster done deal no more guessing
there are other options out there some with springs the issue with springs is they get weak when they are heated up
I also checked on the hydraulic one but I didn't like the fact the area where the chain was going to sit was not consistent
After doing a lot of research and going to Baker's office and speaking to Steve I was sold simple is better ...IMO
Ride safe..
-
I've been installing Hayden M-6's since 1988 with no problems--very good product. However, the new BT-07 doesn't seem to have the same performance. They seem to wear much too fast and be noisier; I just replaced two blocks with 11K on them that the blocks are worn almost all the way through. I'll be sending them to Kathy so maybe they can work on the design for more longevity and quieter operation. On the late ones I've installed, I get the 3/8" + with no spacers but with the new springs, the chain seems very tight. I still think the Hayden unit is much better than stock, I had to have the transmission bearing and the compensator replaced under warranty before I installed the Hayden in mine.
Hayden had a new "black " shoe that they are using on the M8 Tensioner. It's $22, it works on the "older" tensioners. Supposedly they changed the make up of the shoe. Just slipped mine back in with new shoe, seemed pretty quiet on the lift, time will tell.
-
Tex, from my own history with the hayden... toss it. the OE will work the best. just sayn
-
Tex, from my own history with the hayden... toss it. the OE will work the best. just sayn
I'm there on tossing the Hayden Freddy ,but the stock one is noisy as hell. Had the primary cover off this weekend to slip the stock one back in , set it four different ways, fired it up rattled like crazy. stuck a screwdriver between the bottom of the shoe and the bracket, pried up a little nice and quiet . This was the noise I had been chasing, I slipped the Hayden in 2 weeks ago just to test and it was dead quiet. Beats me. Slipped the Hayden back in there again , nice and quiet. Thinking I might have a bad stock tensioner that's just noisy.. but hell you never hear of them. Harry ( Unbalanced) had the same issue and did the same thing with a screwdriver and it got quiet.
John Sachs was telling me that when a motor is built it obviously changes the idle pulses makes it hit harder and yank the chain harder. I'd much rather run the Stock one, thinking I'll try a new one or low mileage used. Hell mine only has 12K on it.
Really like the Twin Power unit , trying to find someone running one to see how noisy it is. before I buy one. Next round I'm going to try a different stock tensioner to test. I thought It might be the A&S making the noise but it all went away changing tensioners...
-
I'm there on tossing the Hayden Freddy ,but the stock one is noisy as hell. Had the primary cover off this weekend to slip the stock one back in , set it four different ways, fired it up rattled like crazy. stuck a screwdriver between the bottom of the shoe and the bracket, pried up a little nice and quiet . This was the noise I had been chasing, I slipped the Hayden in 2 weeks ago just to test and it was dead quiet. Beats me. Slipped the Hayden back in there again , nice and quiet. Thinking I might have a bad stock tensioner that's just noisy.. but hell you never hear of them. Harry ( Unbalanced) had the same issue and did the same thing with a screwdriver and it got quiet.
John Sachs was telling me that when a motor is built it obviously changes the idle pulses makes it hit harder and yank the chain harder. I'd much rather run the Stock one, thinking I'll try a new one or low mileage used. Hell mine only has 12K on it.
Really like the Twin Power unit , trying to find someone running one to see how noisy it is. before I buy one. Next round I'm going to try a different stock tensioner to test. I thought It might be the A&S making the noise but it all went away changing tensioners...
Greg, have you considered a louder exhaust ::) ?
-
Greg, have you considered a louder exhaust ::) ?
Don, I also thought about better ear plugs... It's as noisy as I like now, Like to get it a little quieter, that ain't happening. Tough to do with compression & cubic inches...like it too much when I twist the wick..lol
-
I'm very happy with the Hayden unit. Much better than the tight azz stock one for me. Then again I have a Hayden in my 96 Wide Glide and it shifts like butter.
-
I had mine apart recently and the shoe was shot on my hb tensioner. Bike was banging into gear. I couldnt find the stock one so i put in the hayden. Simple unit and it goes into gear easy now. Ive had them in the past and i think they had a bad batch of springs and some were breaking. Believe thats been resolved. Had a bad inner primary bearing too.