Print

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

[Hoist!]

I just got off the phone with Alan at Feuling. They're carefully examining the failed engine parts, and might want to see my cases. Some unusual wear, but not apparent as to the root cause yet. They have seen a lack of QC on the HD engine cases, which are our only choice on newer HD's. Seems like QC is completely a thing of the past at HD. The holes for the cam bearings seem to be located with their own "tolerances" set for them too now. 2 thou off will cause cam and lifter loading and wear them prematurely. Not a big problem for stock chain drive engines I guess. But give it some HP and gears, and you could have issues. There's lotsa metal in the scavenger pump. They were actually surprised this bike kept running. They'll be working with Vern to determine if my cases are bad. If they are, I'll be demanding new cases from HD, at the very least. You know how happy I am with MoCo right now. Imagine how I'll feel if when I find out they can't properly locate cam bearing holes in their cases! But I'll save that for another time right now. You just all need to now that their engineering is absolutely "just barely good enough". Between the so-so engineering combined with manufacturing tolerances, has to be why there are so many problems with this POS 110. Maybe good enough for 70 HP, which is what they sold ya, but not for the real world!!!  Stay tuned, this could get interesting!!!

Hoist!

[Twolanerider]

Never seems to stop does it Howie?  Can start putting 2 and 2 together, however, to begin seeing root causes for the oil pressure drop you were seeing before.  It was actually the first indicator of what was beginning to happen inside the engine.

[WFP]

Howie, it's called LEAN...

They trim excess until it just meets their goals.  no kidding or smileys.

The days of assuming that there is excess capability out of anything for any of these companies that employ this process are forever gone.

Look up : http://www.danaher.com/about/businesssystem.htm

/Bill

I just got off the phone with Alan at Feuling. They're carefully examining the failed engine parts, and might want to see my cases. Some unusual wear, but not apparent as to the root cause yet. They have seen a lack of QC on the HD engine cases, which are our only choice on newer HD's. Seems like QC is completely a thing of the past at HD. The holes for the cam bearings seem to be located with their own "tolerances" set for them too now. 2 thou off will cause cam and lifter loading and wear them prematurely. Not a big problem for stock chain drive engines I guess. But give it some HP and gears, and you could have issues. There's lotsa metal in the scavenger pump. They were actually surprised this bike kept running. They'll be working with Vern to determine if my cases are bad. If they are, I'll be demanding new cases from HD, at the very least. You know how happy I am with MoCo right now. Imagine how I'll feel if when I find out they can't properly locate cam bearing holes in their cases! But I'll save that for another time right now. You just all need to now that their engineering is absolutely "just barely good enough". Between the so-so engineering combined with manufacturing tolerances, has to be why there are so many problems with this POS 110. Maybe good enough for 70 HP, which is what they sold ya, but not for the real world!!!  Stay tuned, this could get interesting!!!

Hoist!

[BLM777]

Must of missed a thread somewhere, Howie.  When and how did you melt down?

[Hoist!]

Very familiar with lean manufacturing processes Bill. But tolerances still need to be up to task for the job. Lean manufacturing doen't mean sacrificing quality to get less cost out of the product though. HD can't have it both ways. You can't promote a bike as a Screamin Eagle Performance Custom bike, and give ya a just barley up to task standard bike instead. They need to make up their minds on what they're selling here. Cause what they're selling is now standard POS bikes with every bolt on chrome do-dad they have. Nothing more than that. Maybe I was too naive and believed it was more than that. But I can't be the only one who thought we were buying a higher performance bike in the SE CVO, not a standard HD in CVO trim! My FXR3 was never promoted as a SE peformance bike. They need to tell the truth about these P'sOS!!!!!!

Hoist!

[Hoist!]

Must of missed a thread somewhere, Howie.  When and how did you melt down?

Brian, we had this bike running great for 13K miles, but then started hearing valvetrain noise. It got me home, but an immediate trip to the shop revealed bad lifter and cam failure. We're now trying to determine the root cause to insure we can build a performance motor that's reliable as intended. There appear now to be more obstacles in doing this as was first thought, if the case issue is what Feuling thinks it is!

Hoist!

[WFP]

But step back Howie...if a company is producing a baloon, and the baloon says do not inflate past x PSI and you inflate to x+10,.  When it bursts, is it the company's problem?  Now, I do NOT defend LEAN, and I think there should be excess capacity for safety...but if they design a drivetrain for 100 lb-ft of torque and no more, then if we go over that who is to blame for a problem.

In the past, let's say there was 100% excess in the design and you could safely go from 60 to 120 lb-ft of torque.  Now, if we reduce that excess to 10% and start with 100 lb-ft. of torque, then you could only go safely to 110 lb-ft.

These are use for illustration of my belief and not intended to represent your issue but your issue may in fact reinforce my position.

I don't agree with the philosophy but the bottom line is, I believe that they are doing just ennough to pass and get a "C" instead of going for the "A" because that is what the whole LEAN principle allows.

/Bill

Very familiar with lean manufacturing processes Bill. But tolerances still need to be up to task for the job. Lean manufacturing doen't mean sacrificing quality to get less cost out of the product though. HD can't have it both ways. You can't promote a bike as a Screamin Eagle Performance Custom bike, and give ya a just barley up to task standard bike instead. They need to make up their minds on what they're selling here. Cause what they're selling is now standard POS bikes with every bolt on chrome do-dad they have. Nothing more than that. Maybe I was too naive and believed it was more than that. But I can't be the only one who thought we were buying a higher performance bike in the SE CVO, not a standard HD in CVO trim! My FXR3 was never promoted as a SE peformance bike. They need to tell the truth about these P'sOS!!!!!!

Hoist!

[BLM777]

Brian, we had this bike running great for 13K miles, but then started hearing valvetrain noise. It got me home, but an immediate trip to the shop revealed bad lifter and cam failure. We're now trying to determine the root cause to insure we can build a performance motor that's reliable as intended. There appear now to be more obstacles in doing this as was first thought, if the case issue is what Feuling thinks it is!

Hoist!

What they think it is will likely be what it is.  They've been my "go to" guys on off the wall problems for years.  Good luck.

[WFP]

As you might guess, I have to deal with another company embracing the Danaher process and the results speak for themselves with all the failures and issues we have seen.  The LEAN process can be used for some good improvement, however, it is more often than not, used to make a product less that what it was to save cost...

[Hoist!]

But step back Howie...if a company is producing a baloon, and the baloon says do not inflate past x PSI and you inflate to x+10,.  When it bursts, is it the company's problem?  Now, I do NOT defend LEAN, and I think there should be excess capacity for safety...but if they design a drivetrain for 100 lb-ft of torque and no more, then if we go over that who is to blame for a problem.

In the past, let's say there was 100% excess in the design and you could safely go from 60 to 120 lb-ft of torque.  Now, if we reduce that excess to 10% and start with 100 lb-ft. of torque, then you could only go safely to 110 lb-ft.

These are use for illustration of my belief and not intended to represent your issue but your issue may in fact reinforce my position.

I don't agree with the philosophy but the bottom line is, I believe that they are doing just ennough to pass and get a "C" instead of going for the "A" because that is what the whole LEAN principle allows.

/Bill

That's all well and good. But when I own it, I should be able to do what I want with it. As long as I say FTW!!! Let's see here. You buy somthing that's got no room in it to do anything more with it than the way it was designed, even though you've had many options in the past. You have to figure out on your own that they changed the rules. But while they're quietly doing that, they locked the whole bike up in patents, preventing you from doing what you've always done to your bikes in the past!!! The greedy bastards want IT ALL!!! Well F them. They can't have it ALL!!! They don't start coming clean, they'll start seeing the beginning of the end!!! And it  couldn't happen to a nicer group of greedy corporate assholes!!!

Hoist!

[WFP]

Yes, you own it...but if at one time it could take up to 120, but now can only take 110, it wont help you.

I do not like this myself but I see it far too often.

When they made the first fiberglass sailboats, the pearsons...the hulls were two inches of solid glass.  now, they put in just enough glass and enough coring to get by on almost all of the production recreational boats.

/Bill

That's all well and good. But when I own it, I should be able to do what I want with it. As long as I say FTW!!! Let's see here. You buy somthing that's got no room in it to do anything more with it than the way it was designed, even though you've had many options in the past. You have to figure out on your own that they changed the rules. But while they're quietly doing that, they locked the whole bike up in patents, preventing you from doing what you've always done to your bikes in the past!!! The greedy bastards want IT ALL!!! Well F them. They can't have it ALL!!! They don't start coming clean, they'll start seeing the beginning of the end!!! And it  couldn't happen to a nicer group of greedy corporate assholes!!!

Hoist!

[Hoist!]

Yes, you own it...but if at one time it could take up to 120, but now can only take 110, it wont help you.

I do not like this myself but I see it far too often.

When they made the first fiberglass sailboats, the pearsons...the hulls were two inches of solid glass.  now, they put in just enough glass and enough coring to get by on almost all of the production recreational boats.

/Bill

All I ask is to know WTF is going on, if I want to get into something, BEFORE I delve into it!!! Not too much to ask. They make these bikes, and all these performance "for off-road, race use only" parts for them I own it and wanna race it off-road, and buy all this expensive racing chit for it. But your base part, the cases, really can't take any of it in the first place!!! That's a buncha bullchit in my book. Decide what business you're in and market your product that way. I'm sick of them trying to wear both hats, and failing miserably at both now!!! FTF!!!

Hoist!

[grc]

I don't remember anything in my lean manufacturing classes that said the product quality should be sacrificed; as a matter of fact one of the benefits is supposed to be improved quality through efficiencies, reduced inventories, reduced waste, etc..  Looks more to me like just more of the same ol' same ol' from the "aces" running the company into the ground.  

When the TC was introduced in '99 the various reviewers like Donny Petersen were falling all over themselves praising the much better castings and the machining compared to the EVO or anything that went before.  And it sure seemed like things were good for the first few years.  However, that tooling is now 10 years old, and H-D drastically increased production a few years back.  I would guesstimate that they fell into the same short term thinking that has hurt many American manufacturers, cutting back on preventative maintenance to save $$ while increasing output past the original tooling design parameters.  

Jerry

[Hoist!]

I don't remember anything in my lean manufacturing classes that said the product quality should be sacrificed; as a matter of fact one of the benefits is supposed to be improved quality through efficiencies, reduced inventories, reduced waste, etc..  Looks more to me like just more of the same ol' same ol' from the "aces" running the company into the ground.  

When the TC was introduced in '99 the various reviewers like Donny Petersen were falling all over themselves praising the much better castings and the machining compared to the EVO or anything that went before.  And it sure seemed like things were good for the first few years.  However, that tooling is now 10 years old, and H-D drastically increased production a few years back.  I would guesstimate that they fell into the same short term thinking that has hurt many American manufacturers, cutting back on preventative maintenance to save $$ while increasing output past the original tooling design parameters.  

Jerry

Thanks for the non-defensive post Jerry! That makes some sense. Corporate greed may very well be the culprit here. If so, and we find that for sure, the whole world needs to know. You'll see the name Hoist! on every forum and bike magazine website I can find! I will be working with engineers now to see if we're getting screwed even worse than we thought. And if we are, ya'll know how quiet I'll be about it. I need to have the proper engineering performed by the right experts to determine this first. I hope that they at least know how to still build engine cases. If not, maybe converting the entire drivetrain to pre-'06 is the answer. And of course, sans 1 HD part!!! That way I can do WTF I want to MY bike!!! And I will be delivering the pile of dog chit '07 parts to the HD President's desk personally along with my good wishes!!!

Hoist!

[WFP]

I don't remember anything in my lean manufacturing classes that said the product quality should be sacrificed; as a matter of fact one of the benefits is supposed to be improved quality through efficiencies, reduced inventories, reduced waste, etc..  Looks more to me like just more of the same ol' same ol' from the "aces" running the company into the ground.  
...

Jerry

Class is different than manufacturing floor...again, some LEAN processes are good...but again, it is to deliver just enough to pass...overbuilding is excess and is a LEAN no-no.