I was thinking of going with a manual tensioner in mine. I'm gonna keep hayden in for now. See what happens this winter.

 

The idea of manual pisses me off without a inspection cover. But I am on my 4th bearing. Doc harley cheerfully says if you hotrid on friday night with harleytensioner to take cover off and reset.

I just want to punch him. He is such suck up. BS to have to pull cover off. This is one of the reason I don't take him serious.

 

Another vote for Baker. I also used their chain tensioner as well.

Baker seems a little noisy but it works well!

 

FWIW....

The newest version of the comp with the scoops, that Ohio pointed out, has done much better with a lot less problems than the "upgraded" comps starting in a few '06 models, then throughout the entire model line in '07...

The early Twin Cams used basically the same comp as Shovel Heads and EVOs before them.. While not bullet proof, it was pretty reliable and had few problems..

Additionally, the upgraded "B" version of the HD auto primary chain adjuster was also upgraded and had far fewer problems than it's "A" version predecessor. The "B" version is no longer available, but the "C" version that replaced it has not generated complaints that I have heard about....

I ran both in my '16 Ultra Classic after installing a 124" crate engine that dyno'd at 135HP/151TQ. Not a problem at those power levels...

The only reason I removed them was to add a solid engine sprocket (different gearing) which required a different primary chain tensioner...

 

What about the built evos and shovels? Did the comps fail with the additional power? before my time. But i have wondered this. In theory it is a good excuse, I just don't know if I believe harley in general

 

My shovel Head days were a blur, and my EVO days I did not have a garage, and used an idependent shop for most my work so my memory & experience is limited...

I personally never had a comp issue on two Shovel Heads with a total of over 100K miles between them, and an '89 EVO with 40K miles....

My Shovel below had cams, an SUII Carb, and straight pipes... I rode that bike HARD for nine years and around 80K miles before I traded it in on an '89 EVO Heritage...

While my mods were not high HP mods, my riding habits would be labelled "hard" to "extremely hard" on all parts of that bike... I was 23-32 yrs old during that time..

 

For awhile, people were building evos and not TCs. And I am sure people built evos before there TCs, same to be said with shovels. I am curious how they held up. S&S still have engines for sale. Do they recommend a different comp? I don't know answer, but curious.

Granted we got some big motors know. But 96" motors were not unheard of years ago. I am curious how they held up.

 

I had a 78 shovel flh. I never had an issue with the comp sprocket. I went to an 86 inch rebuild and still had the original comp. Never any issues.

 

TCs had regular comps at 88". The talk was to go bigger like 103", when they went to 96" they needed new comp. Atleast that is the story after the fact, after they changed to a failed design.

 

I seriously doubt they would have had as many issues with the older shovel/EVO/88" TC comp, than they did with the 96" engine's "upgraded" comps, had they left them in the 96" & maybe even 103" engines....

Personally, I believe they intended to upgrade the comps knowing bigger engines were coming, but their design was poor... and it took them 7 years to figure it out...