Print

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

[Mr D]

Standard height spring or Low Profile Spring standard from the Mo Co? No where on the on the spec sheet from Harley does it state which fork spring, Visual looks like standard height spring based on where the upper fork slider is in proportion to front fender. I called 2 dealers and got 2 different answers  In the P&A book P/N 54564-09 says not compatible with FLHXSE 2/3

Thanks in advance riders.

[Midnight Rider]

Standard height spring or Low Profile Spring standard from the Mo Co? No where on the on the spec sheet from Harley does it state which fork spring, Visual looks like standard height spring based on where the upper fork slider is in proportion to front fender. I called 2 dealers and got 2 different answers  In the P&A book P/N 54564-09 says not compatible with FLHXSE 2/3

Thanks in advance riders.

On the front of the CVO SG, it should be standard springs.  Only the rear is lowered.

[grc]

The fork springs in the CVO bikes are not the same as the springs in the equivalent standard models.  For instance, the following are the part numbers for 2012:

FLHTCUSE7 and FLHXSE3 and FLTRXSE  =  P/N 48787-09

FLHTCU and FLHX and FLTRX  =  P/N 46235-09


Even though the CVO models I've listed have standard height front ends, the springs are not the same as the standard height regular models.  I have no idea why that is the case, but it has been the case for several years now.  It's possible that they use a slightly different spring rate for the "performance" bikes, kind of like the way the auto folks use different spring rates and shocks on the sportier versions of some models.


Jerry

[Mr D]

The fork springs in the CVO bikes are not the same as the springs in the equivalent standard models.  For instance, the following are the part numbers for 2012:

FLHTCUSE7 and FLHXSE3 and FLTRXSE  =  P/N 48787-09

FLHTCU and FLHX and FLTRX  =  P/N 46235-09


Even though the CVO models I've listed have standard height front ends, the springs are not the same as the standard height regular models.  I have no idea why that is the case, but it has been the case for several years now.  It's possible that they use a slightly different spring rate for the "performance" bikes, kind of like the way the auto folks use different spring rates and shocks on the sportier versions of some models.


Jerry

Thanks Jerry,

Maybe i should look at a Progressive spring vs. the Harley kit then.

[Cvostu]

I had the progressive springs installed with heavy fork oil.  Solved my diving problem when braking.  Made a big difference and that's really all I needed to do. Rides great.

[mjb765]

I did the Progressive Monotube kit--much better also

[Mr D]

I had the progressive springs installed with heavy fork oil.  Solved my diving problem when braking.  Made a big difference and that's really all I needed to do. Rides great.

Stu,

Which kit did you install? & did you lower an inch too?

[cyril]

I have had this thought for along time but trying to get the answer from anyone is not easy i prefer the standard spring rating at least the re bound will absorb some of the sharp bumps, my cvo rgu is way too stiff for that. IMO i changed the rear to 440`s which is better but it dont help the front any.

The fork springs in the CVO bikes are not the same as the springs in the equivalent standard models.  For instance, the following are the part numbers for 2012:

FLHTCUSE7 and FLHXSE3 and FLTRXSE  =  P/N 48787-09

FLHTCU and FLHX and FLTRX  =  P/N 46235-09


Even though the CVO models I've listed have standard height front ends, the springs are not the same as the standard height regular models.  I have no idea why that is the case, but it has been the case for several years now.  It's possible that they use a slightly different spring rate for the "performance" bikes, kind of like the way the auto folks use different spring rates and shocks on the sportier versions of some models.


Jerry

[Cvostu]

I originally went with the hd upgrade kit.  I didn't notice any improvement.  I talked to
My buddy Mark.  He suggested the progressive springs with the stock front end and so e hd fork oil.   I'm happy.  Rides great.  

[Midnight Rider]

I have had this thought for along time but trying to get the answer from anyone is not easy i prefer the standard spring rating at least the re bound will absorb some of the sharp bumps, my cvo rgu is way too stiff for that. IMO i changed the rear to 440`s which is better but it dont help the front any.

The main problem with the HD front end is not the spring itself, though it leaves much to be desired, regardless of the bike model.  The problem is with the internal valving, or "emulator".  The reason you get jolted on sharp bumps is because only so much fork oil can be forced through a given sized hole in the emulator.  You can put a different spring in the forks, and/or different oil, but you'll still have the chitty response to irregularities in the road surface.  Heavier fork oil just makes it more difficult for the oil to flow through the holes, and that is why you get reduced diving when braking.  If you are taking the forks apart, put cartridges in, like the new HD version, Progressive Monotubes, or Traxxion AK-20.  A true cartridge is FAR superior to other mods such as emulators, spring changes, or heavier weight fork oil (SE oil).

[cyril]

Its conclusive i will check out the cost of having monotubes , this poor setup spoils a good bike, way overdue for an upgrade, the changed chassis from 09 highlited the cr*p shocks.
 

[Cvostu]

I have my front end just right for me,,  I'm gonna leave well enough alone,,,,,,,,,,,  for a change.