The weak point in our touring forks is the fixing of the top-hat at the top of the tubes in the top yoke or triple-tree. The only significant contact is between the rim of the hat and the underside of the yoke. The tube of the hat is a lose fit in the yoke and provides no significant support. The fork tube itself is not directly supported at all. There is no doubt in my mind that if the fork tube was longer and supported directly in the top yoke (like most other Harley models) the bike would be better off and we would enjoy improved ride and handling.

In exactly the same way, we also would enjoy improved ride and handling with a third stabiliser by the swingarm axle, to support the rear engine rubber mounts. The after-market solutions are expensive, because they are made in small numbers and have to be designed to fit around other features of the bike. If Harley incorporated these features in production they would add very little extra on the cost of producing a new bike. The rear stabiliser of a Sportster, for example, is almost invisible because it is an integral part of the design of the bike.

As for whether a CCE kit, or any of the other handling kits out there, are worth the money, each of us must make that decision ourselves. I have a handling kit and custom rear shocks at present and am waiting for the availability of cartridge forks. The improvements so far are remarkable and well worth the cost and effort IMHO! I can't wait for the next instalment!

 

>>> Sweet, In simpler terms, the upper and lower trees are free to swivel independently of one another on the tree stem.....sort of scissoring action takes place, with the two trees rotating on the stem in opposite direction.
<<< Yes

>>> If the upper and lower trees utilized a fixed stem alignment design to ensure synchronized motion, i.e. key, spline, setscrew, this particular handling issue would be nearly eliminated, baring the remaining tube flex.
<<< No way. Leverage. We make our trees (see on my site) with a fixed top steering stem connection (reversed for ease of neck bearing adjustment) and a large barrel nut on the bottom that is a tight slip fit, In no way would that ever prevent top/bottom tree deflection on its own. Think about it!

>>> The OEM tubes aren’t necessarily weak; they are just too weak to keep the trees in alignment in the current set up.
<<< Please refer to my 07-09-2011 10:43 AM posting and look at the picture. There is no clamping/holding force to secure the top of the fork tube which in turn rotates independent with the bottom tree. In other words, you do not have real control over the steering of your bike under stressful conditions due to the forks deflecting because the triple trees move independent of one another. Without a clamp around both trees there will be deflection. This means that the wheel is free to wobble under some conditions. Increasing osculation is known as a tank slapper and can prove deadly. Some think this comes only with the rear end (rear steer) but in fact it comes from both ends on this 1970~current touring design by entering some road conditions. Go slow and you will never notice this as the bike must have been intended for. Go fast and many design flaws present themselves.

 

As has been stated previously by Howard and a couple others, the weak link in the Touring front end is in the top triple clamp. The cure is expensive but well worth the effort whether you go with the stock HD fork or an aftermarket upside down unit like Howard's. Anyone that has changed the fork oil has to know how deficient those top trees are.
You will still have to deal with the rear end at some point if you ride aggressively. These touring bikes were simply not designed for that type of riding. Had they been designed for that we would have a counterbalanced motor with a roller bearing swing arm (NO RUBBER) mounted directly to the frame and triple clamps that don't flex and actually clamp a cartridge fork.

 

You simply change the hinged connection to a fixed connection, just as the lower tree is attached. Imagine this: You build your front porch with columns that just sit on a concrete block that is above ground. I build my fornt porch with columns that are embedded in the ground a few feet with concrete poured around them (a good example of fixed vs hinged connections). When the wind blows your porch roof and my porch roof, which one do you think will be more stable. The front wheel acts like the roof as the tubes act as the columns.

 

Keep in mind that the stresses are applied form different sources, but basically the same loading principles.

 

http://www.bikernet.com/pages/story_detail.aspx?id=9275

A good example of what I was actually looking for in all this. A good write up!

 

Ok, I’m starting to come into focus now, I just had to stop thinking in 2D and look at all information offered so far. I also had to reconsider all the terminology used when discussing the individual elements of this system. Howard gave me the last piece of the puzzle when he mentioned the tube rotation. I’ve been overlooking the potential torsional motion of the tube itself twisting on its axis, or rather the flex that occurs if you grip both ends of the tube and apply twisting force. There are multiple twisting forces at play when dissecting all the elements of the OEM front fork system. As mentioned before with agreement from others, the upper and lower trees have the potential to rotate on the stem independent of each other when opposing force is applied to the two fork tubes. Now then, when the upper and lower trees are flexing out of alignment with each other, there is another simultaneous twisting action taking place, the tube itself is twisting at the upper tree connection. With the OEM top tree, although the tube end is fastened firmly in multiple planes, there is no resistance to rotation of the individual tube in its bore. The CCE’s tree clamp design eliminates the tubes’ ability to rotate freely in the top tree, and adds the strength of two fixed columns to the system working in concert to reduce the twisting between the upper and lower trees on the stem. By harnessing the torsional strength of the individual tubes, they effectively join the upper and lower trees more solidly, and prevent the twisting motion between the upper and lower trees on the stem. The simplest explanation is the CCE tree applies holding force in one additional plane which effects significantly more strength of all 4 connection points between the tubes and the trees. How’d I do, not bad for a Hillbilly that flunked High School, eh.

Howard, I totally get that your system moves the fixed tree to the top, removing the fulcrum point from the middle of the tube, which exists with the OEM lower tree fixed to the stem. I just don’t understand why you say no way to an upper and lower tree fixed in rotational alignment on the stem via spline, key, set screw or the like. How much tortional motion exists in the stem itself?

 

You did well!

 

I honestly wonder why so many folks buy Harley's if they are such a death trap, and how the MOCO can still be in business since these bikes are so dangerous.

I recently moved from multiple metric bikes over to my touring Harley. If I hung out here on the forum much before I bought, I may have stayed with a metric or went with a Victory.

That being said, I haven't had any death wobble issues, but I ride my bike as it is intended, to tour and cruise, not to race. if I wanted to do that, I would have purchased a sport bike or a sport tourer.

just my $.02

 

I would like to clarify something. I do not think that a HD is a death trap and I do not think that anybody else on this forum believes that or they would not be riding HD. But what is true is the fact that HD, Honda, Kawasaki, Victory, etc.... will all design bikes based on many things including but not limited to, COST! I am a fanatic when it comes to things I am passionate about. I love motorcycles and I love to ride and work on them. As a result, I am always open to improvement as are most folks on this forum. Regardless of the type rider you are, you can learn alot from discussions like this one.