why did harley quit using the timken bearing after 2002
#11
12-19-2009, 03:49 PM
Just another reason I will never part with my 01 RK. I love the bike, lived all my life without ABS, fuel injection, yada yada. Don't get me wrong; if I had the coin I would buy a new bike in a heartbeat but when I do that the 01 stays. Besides I have too much invested in this bike.
Last edited by strtarrow; 12-19-2009 at 03:59 PM.
#13
12-19-2009, 04:39 PM
I'm sure the moco is like other's, they are trying to cut cost and still make a reliable product. Most company's put stuff up for bid. The lowest bidder get's the bid. Timken is not the only company who makes quality bearing's. I'm sure the moco got a good replacement for that application.
#14
12-19-2009, 05:30 PM
Its more a matter of assembly line proceedure than actual costs. It takes much longer to set precision end play than it does to stab a shft through a hole. Same reason for the chain drive cams as opposed to the gear drive set up from past motors. When production numbers go up in any manufacturing facility you have to find ways to do it quicker!
#15
12-19-2009, 05:35 PM
Its more a matter of assembly line proceedure than actual costs. It takes much longer to set precision end play than it does to stab a shft through a hole. Same reason for the chain drive cams as opposed to the gear drive set up from past motors. When production numbers go up in any manufacturing facility you have to find ways to do it quicker!
I believe we have a winner!
#16
12-19-2009, 07:11 PM
Extreme HDF Member
Just another reason I will never part with my 01 RK. I love the bike, lived all my life without ABS, fuel injection, yada yada. Don't get me wrong; if I had the coin I would buy a new bike in a heartbeat but when I do that the 01 stays. Besides I have too much invested in this bike.
#18
12-19-2009, 07:49 PM
Its more a matter of assembly line proceedure than actual costs. It takes much longer to set precision end play than it does to stab a shft through a hole. Same reason for the chain drive cams as opposed to the gear drive set up from past motors. When production numbers go up in any manufacturing facility you have to find ways to do it quicker!
We all know the real reason...."Tight tolerances on shaft runout costs too damb much money" That's the only gripe that I have with HD.
#20
12-19-2009, 08:38 PM
I can understand the quickness of assembly, but I can't understand why they continue to have all those damb moving parts in the chain cam assembly. I was told by a salesman at Wild Prairie HD that the EPA says that harley can't put gear drives in the cam chest because of noise (environmental noise). I don't believe that for a minute, but that's what I was told.
We all know the real reason...."Tight tolerances on shaft runout costs too damb much money" That's the only gripe that I have with HD.
We all know the real reason...."Tight tolerances on shaft runout costs too damb much money" That's the only gripe that I have with HD.
Besides, they reduced the number of cam compartment parts with the 96.
47NortonIt seems to me "New and improved" = Lower quality and cheaper. How do you figure lower quality?
The sprocket shaft is now larger (stronger) and there has never been an issue with the straight roller mains. There is no latteral load on these engines (which is what a double Timkin bearing is used for) and the rollers in the new bearing are much larger (stronger) than the Timkin rollers.
Ive seen 120+ HP 103's and 130+ HP 117's with stock main bearings get the crap beat out of them for 20,000+ miles and no issues what so ever.