Print

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

[mrmagloo]

Might be kind of out there, but just want to get some others opinions on the matter. Naturally, the softails have the B motors which with the solid mounts still translates a little rumble, but it's not bad at all. Every time I ride a touring bike the first thing I notice is the thing shaking all over the place. I just rented a '09 Street Glide for the day in Vegas and did the Valley of Fire / Hoover Dam circle and at stops, and even decel, it's just a little much sometimes.

I just can't figure why they don't put the counter balanced motors in these things. With the rubber mounts - you could even go with a harder durometer urethane to tighten things up a bit, and these things would be still smooth as hell. Naturally, you'd still get the rumble but without your teeth rattling.

I'm just wondering what folks opinions would be if they gave the option of having a counter balanced motor in touring bike?

[grc]

I've thought about the same thing ever since I bought my '05 SEEG.  It would seem to be the best of both worlds, with the counterbalancers negating the big shakes and the rubber mounts filtering out the little ones.  With proper tuning of the mount material, I could forsee less vibration while also getting less rear steer from mount movement.  There is one big reason I seriously doubt we will ever see it, however, and that is $$$.  With H-D eliminating important reliability items left and right to save a buck, I can't see them spending the extra money for the counterbalanced engine in the Touring bikes.

Jerry

[mrmagloo]

Too bad they moved this from the General CVO discussion and buried it in the TC section as I really think this is a pretty broad topic for discussion. 

That said, on the replacement motors they sell, I think it's only a couple of extra dollars for the B motors, and in volume, it can't be that big of a deal.

[GregKhougaz]

The reason is power!  Though it's only a few ounces think of how many times the counter balance moves around the crank shaft.  They steal a lot of power from the motor.  All you have to do is look at HD's torque ratings for the Dyna v. Softail lines to see the difference.  For example, every additional once on a wheel is the equivalent of adding a pound to the vehicle itself.  No thanks here.  my 04 RG used to shake the front wheel at idle.  The 09 SERG is much better and I don't even notice... smooth as glass once moving. 

[mrmagloo]

I know there's a little power loss. However, it's not that drastic, and certainly a new slip-on or intake could easily make up the difference.

[Billy]

My soft tail  was much rougher at 70 than my serk the serk is some as glass except at idle. Plus you lose power at off the line is bad my wifes lowrider always beat me . not with the serk .

[OILCAN1]

I just rode my friends 05 heritage for about fifty miles over the weekend, and if anyone thinks that is anywhere close to as smooth as a rubbermout bike they are smoking some highly illegal Chit.

[mrmagloo]

No doubt that at cruising speed the rubber mounts kick in. It's below 1,500 rpm and at idle when the motor is bouncing all over the place. Sure the counter balanced motors probably cost a couple of HP, if that, but that's easily made up with the first aftermarket add-on.

The point I'm trying to ask is, is all that bouncing around necessarily a positive? I merely think having a counter-balanced motor, in perhaps slightly harder durameter urethane mounts would be the best of both worlds. I am not suggesting going to hard mounts.

[miker]

The 09 flhtcuse4 is way less bouncy than my 07 serk was.  The newer ugly upper motor mount works!

[Hoist!]

No doubt that at cruising speed the rubber mounts kick in. It's below 1,500 rpm and at idle when the motor is bouncing all over the place. Sure the counter balanced motors probably cost a couple of HP, if that, but that's easily made up with the first aftermarket add-on.

The point I'm trying to ask is, is all that bouncing around necessarily a positive? I merely think having a counter-balanced motor, in perhaps slightly harder durameter urethane mounts would be the best of both worlds. I am not suggesting going to hard mounts.

You should never be below 2000 RPM in any gear but first or you're lugging the motor!!! Take the bouncing as a sign you're lugging the engine and don't ride it there. Your bouncing will be gone!

Hoist!

[Hoist!]

I just rode my friends 05 heritage for about fifty miles over the weekend, and if anyone thinks that is anywhere close to as smooth as a rubbermout bike they are smoking some highly illegal Chit.

No question that an FL front end on a Softail frame is one of the worst setups HD ever came out with. For whatever reason, this combo produces more vibration, even with the "B" motor. My '85 solid mount 4-speed Evo bike is so much smoother than any B motor softail I've ridden, especially FL softails!

Hoist!

[mrmagloo]

The 09 flhtcuse4 is way less bouncy than my 07 serk was.  The newer ugly upper motor mount works!

I do think the 09 Street Glide I rented last week was little better than the older ones I've rode, but still I couldn't help to notice when coming to a stop with the clutch in, that it felt like I was on a rough road due to the motor bouncing about. Just not used to it, and obviously feel this can be improved without diminishing the experience.

You should never be below 2000 RPM in any gear but first or you're lugging the motor!!! Take the bouncing as a sign you're lugging the engine and don't ride it there. Your bouncing will be gone!

Nobody is lugging the engines. I made a reference to the rpm range where the unbalanced motors tend to shake the worse - between idle and 1500 rpm, OUT OF GEAR. If you get a square wheel going fast enough, it'll eventually smooth out...

[SPIDERMAN]

Might be kind of out there, but just want to get some others opinions on the matter. Naturally, the softails have the B motors which with the solid mounts still translates a little rumble, but it's not bad at all. Every time I ride a touring bike the first thing I notice is the thing shaking all over the place. I just rented a '09 Street Glide for the day in Vegas and did the Valley of Fire / Hoover Dam circle and at stops, and even decel, it's just a little much sometimes.

I just can't figure why they don't put the counter balanced motors in these things. With the rubber mounts - you could even go with a harder durometer urethane to tighten things up a bit, and these things would be still smooth as hell. Naturally, you'd still get the rumble but without your teeth rattling.

I'm just wondering what folks opinions would be if they gave the option of having a counter balanced motor in touring bike?

magloo,
          When H-D came out with the first B motor bikes, they actually had a problem with the lack of vibration having something to do with the compensator sprokets or something. I wish I could remember what the issue was. Anyway, a B motor with rubber mounts would indeed be smooth as glass and for a lot of us would not feel at all like a Harley-Davidson.

Just my $0.02

B B

[GregKhougaz]

... but still I couldn't help to notice when coming to a stop with the clutch in, that it felt like I was on a rough road due to the motor bouncing about. Just not used to it, and obviously feel this can be improved without diminishing the experience.

The shake at idle you feel on the new 09 is likely due to the rear cylinder cut off feature.  In an effort to combat heat, HD sacrificed a little vibration.  Trust me, your woman will love it!

[Smiler]

My experience with a softail saw the vibration kick in 65+ mph, whilst the SERK shook when idling but smooth ride once you set off.