Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[110tHunDer]

LOL Blaine, I like it!!!!


I have a question for the experts. Is it OK to change to full synthetic oil? A buddy of mine said first he changed to semi-synthetic then he checked to see if there were any leaks. He didn't get any and eventually changed to full synthetic. I have 12,000mi. and I would like to use full syn. Also, my buddy recommends SPECTRO because it contains the best ingredients for our bikes. I used Mobil one full synthetic in my Ultra and I thought it was good. So what do you think?

Thanks, George 

George, like I said in my PM to you, the Spectro oils should work great in the ol' Evo.  I've got synthetic lubes in mine and she's dry as a bone!

[gflvette2]

TY Brian.

[Hoist!]

Can't spend much time on right now Tim, but wanted to answer this to clear it up. The Traxxion AK-20 can be made in stock heights, raised or lowered, and is built to your riding wieght and style. The stock frok tubes are used. Traxxion saets up the cartridge inside for the various custom setting for you. You do not need to change your fork tubes to change your ride height with this. Did it my SERK. Jim (HD-Dude) is also a Traxxion Dealer.

Hoist!

[FXR2evo99]

"........you betcha, had the fork oil changed as soon as I got the bike.  The regular Harley Type "E" oil was used, so nothing of any heavier weight than stock, which admitedly might have helped,  I still get a severe amount of fork dive with my bike, much, much more than with either of the Touring bikes I have.  Rides OK going down the road, but braking and cornering behavior leaves a bit to be desired, at least for my tastes.  I'm thinkin', no weight or brand of fork oil is going to make a 30+ year old design perform like a state-of-the-ark...."

103tHunDer~~~
With all respect, I really feel there is a "significant" difference in "performance" between regular harley type E fork oil and Bel~Ray 20w Fork Oil.....but perhaps it's only in my mind and has no "performance" qualities which would indeed make up for a 30+ year design as you are stating.......BUTTTTTTTTTT

Let's do a little R&D here....nows our chance [ok it's really your chance, but we are TEAM FXR R&D BOYS HERE RIGHT?].....lol.....besides the "scare" everytime you take a fork tube cap off and that spring wants to shoot out [lol], this is an easy R&D project, if your willing to give this a quick go, it's only what, a 2 hour job at the very most from start to clean up, inclusive of getting to the shop for some new drain plug screws....ok....so drum roll please.....perhaps you "might" acquire a "liter" of Bel~Ray 20w Fork Oil and put it into your forks, putting in an amount of 10 oz for each fork....Then let's see how your bike performs for awhile.....give it a couple of weeks before forming an opinion or say 300-400 miles of riding.....These forks are so easy to change the fork oil with.....Were talking less than $20.00 for this R&D effort here.... How about it??

So in general......

I am actually getting no fork dive with my FXR2, and I ride it fairly extreme inclusive of cornering in the mountains as well. [BUT come on here I have to [chuckle], and reference that any "cornering" or "performance" here is always quite "subjective" lol, my son-in-law would get a real kick out of this discussion, he is an "experienced" and "accomplished" rider that puts several bikes into corners...ie: Yamaha R1, Honda RC-51, Honda Interceptor as that's the "style" of riding he enjoys doing....ie: the sport bike experience...pssst he's not a "youngster" either....above 35+ for age just so we know we aren't talking about a youngin here...lol] so given the "appropriate" context of our bike's ability to "perform" I will continue....I realize we are all after the best "performance" our "cruising" bikes are capable of....and I am in TOTAL AGREEMENT....ok back to our regularly scheduled discussion....lol.  As I tried to articulate eariler I have INDEED had two other bikes perform poorly with diving while applying the front brakes, and I certainly feel "my" FXR2 holds in the corners perfectly well as it is currently being run......[I am not saying this to hear, then....well don't do it to your bike.....I am trying in text to speak about the "characteristics" of how the bike "seems" to be performing] I mean I can't go any "tighter" into corners than I am currently limited to, as I have scraped the pegs from the left side and of course the muffler on the right side.....and the bike handles quite firm and tight within the corners....but as we all know dragging pipes or pegs is unsettling.....so given that the ground clearance is only 4.56 inches for an FXR2 and the right lean angle sports a whopping 31 degrees to the left and 29 degrees to the right.....who is to say I have enough ground clearance or lean angle available to me to EVEN say that the bike "could" be handling poorly. 

THUS, I can fully recognize Hoist's developing need to adjust an FXR in height in terms of different shocks and front fork alterations creating a improved front end handling experience as well.

So say one decides to increase the following:

29 degrees to 35 degrees is a 21% increase for a lean angle to the right
31 degrees to 37 degrees is a 20% increase for a lean angle to the left

increasing the FXR2 from 4.56" to 6" of ground clearance would require approximately 1.5" of additional height which would be an increase of 32%.  If indeed the OEM shocks are 12" on the FXR2 it would seem difficult to acquire the additional height via a shock less than 14" since we all know there is a slight geometrical angle to the shock which prevents a 1:1 correlation.  So the shock height of say 13" would create some obvious higher ground clearance but I am not sure of the exact amount....perhaps say another .75 of an inch.  which would allow for maybeeeee a total ground clearance of 5.25" which would be a 15% increase.  There is always the chance too of increasing one's tire diameter to get a higher "profile" tire which would of course provide even more clearance....so perhaps that's how HD gets the additional clearance as well.

[FXR2evo99]

(Continued From Above)

So given these types of modifications, even if they aren't precise but they are on the right path way....now what will you have, you will have a bike that HD created in the mid 80's...you will have a bike that's stance is similar to that of the dirt bike....which I am not making judgement upon...merely pointing out...the rear fender will be seperated from the tire more creating that "dirt bike" look or european touring style perhaps....which is ultimately the look the "stylists" @ HD were constantly battling....but let's say that's ok...that the look will be what the look is....is it really here where the decision for better performing shocks and better performing front forks will play their most "significant" role....It's obviously what HD was attempting to do with the FXRS-SP Low Rider Sport Edition....even the "name" signifies the "battle lines" of the "engineers" and the "stylists/marketeers"....a bike that had higher ground clearance and better performance which meant that raising the bike was needed ONLY to have the actual name infer another meaning.....Marketing has it's presence in our minds even when we are not aware of it.

So let's say by doing the above you increase the bikes ability to perform.....approximately 22% better into corners....I am already able to go into any "practical" corner in the mountains that post a speed of say 30 mph and take that corner comfortably at 55 mph, which is more of an indication of how Colorado Highways have their postings set up for "Cautious" MPH in the mountains....I can literally say there are at most approximately 10-12 corners in the entire state that when it is posted 30 MPH that's what you better be doing.....so over 90% of the time one is "typically" safe entering into any corner at about 85% over the stated yellow cautioned posted MPH. [<~~~LOL not looking for a debate about posted speed limits but I am trying to gain an understanding of the stated goal of changing such elements on one's FXR and these are the best examples I know how to implement such a discussion......] So with the above changes of improving the bike's handling ability one would be able to enter into the corners as in this example say at 67 MPH and feel more centrifugal force ie: "G's" and thus increase one's adrenaline as well as one's endorphins thus creating more pleasure? 

So if I am fairly accurate on this....in spending over $1,800.00 I will actually pick up about 22% more pleasure from the bike....and in order to experience that "stated" pleasure I run the risk of even a larger ticket....as you can see above I am already over the "suggested" speed limit anyway...

I KNOW this sounds "sarcastic" but I assure you I am not trying to be, I am trying to quantitatively "grasp" what one would be after with such "improvements" to one's FXR.....

I believe this is why the "crotch rocket" crowd enjoys the experience of that journy....as it CERTAINLY could never be the comfort of the ride....as there is absolutely none on "sport crotch rocket" so their excitement and pleasure is in how fast or tight a corner can be taken.....

So now....as you can see where my mind set is on these two major items [shocks and forks] of which I can only hope anyone reading this will see that I am trying to speak to the obvious points how would I sincerely benefit from such improvements....or how would I notice such improvements without affecting the "look"/"style" of the bike as well as without putting myself on a machine that could result in finding yourself in a situation that is even more of a risk in a negative way ie: thinking one can enter into a corner hotter than they really should....I realize this can happen at anytime....but I have a pretty good idea where "that" is at because of the "scraping" of the pegs...

Here is where HD I believe had their biggest problem with this bike....for gosh sakes one of the engineers Rit Booth at the time was riding a MOTO Guzzi 850 Le Mans....

[FXR2evo99]

(Continued From Above)

To reiterate the "theme" of the engineers:

Vaughn Beals states that the attention of the motor company was on the newly designed FLT model, but then he is quoted as saying that the motor company realized “we needed a “vibration-isolated” “Sport’s Bike”, as well to “draw new riders into the Harley camp”.  What Beals meant in his reference of a “Sport’s Bike” was to be taken in context of the Harley Big Twin, which essentially goes back to the FX model of bikes at the time.  What he was attempting to more directly relate to was Harley Davidson's need for a lighter cruiser.   So what they began to go after was a bike that was not necessarily a “peg-scratcher” but a “lighter” rubber mounted touring bike which could “cruise”.   Beals, continues, “We were looking for something with better handling than an FLH and something that wasn’t as large and intimidating as the FLT and something aerodynamically desirable.  So the new team was turned loose to create a new machine.  The “FX” was to be the “sport model” of the “FL”.  So essentially the FXR became the “sport model” of the FLT.  What they ended up discovering was that the FXR frame was FIVE TIMES stiffer in torsion, which is where it counts, than the old FX/FL frame had been. Which made for better cornering and ultimately a much better ride than can be offered even within the Dyna family that is produced today.....hmmmm very interesting..... They also went after higher “lean angles” ie: lots of “ground clearance”.  What they wanted the new bike to be was “stiffer” and to have even more of that “on-rails” feel than the current FLT.  The FXR was never meant to be a “crotch rocket”, always maintaining the goal of working within the frame work structure of Harley Davidson.  At each design level the engineering design team pushed the envelope of “modern performance” whenever possible and where practical, to make it “stiffer and give it more precise steering” affirmed Rit Booth.   

Gosh isn't it obvious what these guys faced in both departments the look of a Harley, which many felt this bike lacked to begin with because of the frame, the mind set of the engineers to build a completely different bike than had gone out the door before....the idea of a LIGHT "sport touring" bike with performance which means of course height and lean angle and yet....the very classic styling we all love in a Harley...the low center of gravity the ability to be as "low" as possible....ie: the best selling Harleys, the SOFTAILS....because of the low long look....it's always as HD knows FORM over FUNCTION.....and in the end....it's always about "low" with a harley or it's about no comfort at all with a crotch rocket but with built in performance.....it's impossible to have both on the same bike....

So I hope you will all throw in your feelings and thoughts....and I am certainly not suggesting I have any answers...and if there is one thing for certain we get into these bikes and this hobby to express ourselves....

I am just after the "quantative" benefit of spending aprx $1,700.00 and to what level of improvement will one 'practically" see/experience on the highway.....I am hopeful that "quantative' analysis will come forth while extracting the "emotions" out of it....meaning that isn't this FUN!  LOL 



Hoist....

I appreciate you taking the time to reflect on how the Traxxion works by not needing to actually use another set of forks....and thanks for responding however you have time to.....this is a journey not a race....lol.....I plan on riding for the next 20 years...ok well, come to think about it, it is actually sort of a race...lol time flies....


Regards,

Tim

[Hoist!]

Tim, the front end on these bikes is the same 39mm used on the Dynas. Fork lengths may vary due to rake/trail/bike style, but the mechanics of these are all the same. You can stiffen them up with thicker oil, get slghtly better response with Emulators and Progressive springs, but you will never turn it into a responsive racing inspired suspension as Traxxion designed. I can't explain how much different it is, but I guarantee you'll notice it as soon as you pull away from the curb! It's that noticible. If true performance is what you're after (I am), then you can't necessarily try to justify the cost. There are many components I used on my SERK, that I could've used lower cost alternative parts instead. But my "No Compromise" way of doing things allows me to use components I KNOW I'll be happy with. And you can't get it right the first time, all the time. I've changed components that I thought were best for me, then found I was wrong. Such is life. This is how we learn what we like. But I'll have Traxxion on every HD I own from here on in. I'm that sold. Ignore the cost, and analyze the product. But a better front end for the $$$ can't be achieved!

Regarding ride height and lean angle, I will raise the bike 1" from where it is stock. Whatever lean angle and clearance it achieves is what it is. I know I'll be raising it and increasing those specs, without having it look like a Big Ole Dirt Bike! Not like the Performance Handling bikes they offered or like the Dyna Convertible. It'll be more like a stock '93/'94 FXR Super Glide.

Has anyone gotten the stock FXR3 shock height yet? Need to know what size bitubos to order. Might even need to go to 13.5". Thanks.

Everyone's economics are different. I do not have a bottomless budget, but I'll spend what I need to to get what I like. But I normally don't spend money on additional cosmetic improvements, like OCD! and I usually don't try to justify the cost of something I know will add superior performance to my ride though. We all act differently in this regard, so I won't make a blanket satement ands say that EVERYONE MUST HAVE THESE THINGS. But I must!

Hoist!

[110tHunDer]

103tHunDer~~~
With all respect, I really feel there is a "significant" difference in "performance" between regular harley type E fork oil and Bel~Ray 20w Fork Oil.....but perhaps it's only in my mind and has no "performance" qualities which would indeed make up for a 30+ year design as you are stating.......BUTTTTTTTTTT

Let's do a little R&D here....nows our chance [ok it's really your chance, but we are TEAM FXR R&D BOYS HERE RIGHT?].....lol.....besides the "scare" everytime you take a fork tube cap off and that spring wants to shoot out [lol], this is an easy R&D project, if your willing to give this a quick go, it's only what, a 2 hour job at the very most from start to clean up, inclusive of getting to the shop for some new drain plug screws....ok....so drum roll please.....perhaps you "might" acquire a "liter" of Bel~Ray 20w Fork Oil and put it into your forks, putting in an amount of 10 oz for each fork....Then let's see how your bike performs for awhile.....give it a couple of weeks before forming an opinion or say 300-400 miles of riding.....These forks are so easy to change the fork oil with.....Were talking less than $20.00 for this R&D effort here.... How about it??

So in general......

I am actually getting no fork dive with my FXR2, and I ride it fairly extreme inclusive of cornering in the mountains as well. . . .

Hey, Tim, it's definitely worth a try.  So, you're saying the springs are stock on your bike and you get "no" dive?!?  Man, my front end compresses considerably just with pushing the bike around in the garage and when getting on or off, not to mention when under braking.

Be awhile before the Champaign, IL branch of "TEAM FXR R&D" ( ) gets a chance to do the fork oil swap, but I'll keep you guys posted on what the timetable looks like.

[Hoist!]

BTW Tim, I forgot to discuss tha CA bike thing. As you're as aware as anyone, a 1 of 64 bike doesn't offer a lot of availablility. My understanding is that the CA '99 Evo only has a Charcoal Evaporative Emissions Canister, which of course can be easily removed. I'll also be installing an S&S Super E and a set of Cycle Shack duals, or a good 2:1 exhaust. The bike already has an SE ignition module on it according to the owner. But buying this as a CA bike isn't the same as buying new CA bikes. Shouldn't pose a problem to make this a non-CA bike, unless someone knows otherwise.

Hoist!

[110tHunDer]

. . .

Has anyone gotten the stock FXR3 shock height yet? Need to know what size bitubos to order. Might even need to go to 13.5". Thanks.

. . .

Sorry, Howie!  Did not realized you had asked previously.  The rear shocks on mine measure 12 inches center-to-center.

[Hoist!]

Sorry, Howie!  Did not realized you had asked previously.  The rear shocks on mine measure 12 inches center-to-center.

Excellent Brian, thanks! bitubo 330's here we come!

Hoist!

[Twolanerider]

Excellent Brian, thanks! bitubo 330's here we come!

Hoist!

Howie, sometimes it really does need to be function over form.  But have you at least considered other shocks?  I like the Bitubo just fine.  Really do.  A small-ish but real improvement over the Progressives.  There's not enough of a difference between the two, however, that I'm not 100% sure I'd do the Bitubos if they weren't hidden behind the saddlebag.

[110tHunDer]

 
That reservoir looks kinda cool!

[Hoist!]

Howie, sometimes it really does need to be function over form.  But have you at least considered other shocks?  I like the Bitubo just fine.  Really do.  A small-ish but real improvement over the Progressives.  There's not enough of a difference between the two, however, that I'm not 100% sure I'd do the Bitubos if they weren't hidden behind the saddlebag.

Agree Brian! I like the shocks. Better than any Progressives I've had, but never ran the 440's. Since I know how good they are, why try something else? I LIKE the way they look. Got em for my FXWG too. That style of shock to me, goes perfect on the 3. Hot Rod shocks for a Hot Rod FXR!!!

Hoist!

[gflvette2]

So Hoist, How did you make out with the bike? Is it a "GO"?. I hope so. I also hope I could keep up with you after your finished with it.

Best,

George