Like many of you, I am coming up where I need to address the tensioners on my TC88 motor. Both outer and inner tensioner pads looked good at 20K miles, so I have time to consider options. Although I don't think it is a good idea, there is opinion that you can remove the tensioners and just run the chains with no tension. On the surface, I don't think HD gave the spring loaded cam chain tensioner design much thought or put it through testing rigor. Just my opinion. I am a 30 year experienced mechanical/materials engineer for medical devices, so I understand how products need to be challenged to failure. HD's design for spring loaded cam chain tensioners does not pass the smell test for having been put through such failure testing. So, any thoughts on modifying the spring to output less force to the pad and subsequent force on the chain? I assume pad wear is a result of material properties, force applied from pad to chain, times number of revolutions (or number of chain links passing under the pad) with other factors like chain surface finish, heat, etc. I was thinking there may be a lower spring force as I do not believe HD tested the low limit. Not sure what that lower limit is or how to test for it. Let me know your thoughts.

 

My understanding is that the chain surface finish was a big variable, hence the wide range of results reported on the forum regarding wear. The chain has more slack than what you would find on an old small block Chevy, I wouldn’t recommend running without the tensioners especially if you have a higher lift cam than stock.

If you have the disposable income maybe give it a try and see what happens? I’m curious how the slightly diminished valve timing accuracy would effect how the engine runs. Also not sure if the increased chain movement would cause noise or vibration. So far I’m not aware of anyone willing to risk their engine to try it.

 

Agree, I would not run without tension, but just wondering about reduced tension. There are people running without the tensioners, but I agree this is not a good idea, There should be some level of tension on the chain, but can it be reduced.

 

This has been kicked around, so here's what to look at;
a. Replace tensioners when needed.
b. Replace with CYCO shoe if you can.
c. Convert to gear drive if you have <= .003 crank runout.
d. Convert to 2007 hydraulic tensioners cam plate and cams.
e. Purchase upgrade cam plate kits from S&S or Feuling Parts.

All have their advantages and dis-advantages. Some here went different directions and are pretty happy of their choice.
I went with the CYCO shoes (pads) and happy so far.
You can search for all this in the forums. When you decide which way you want to proceed, members here are here to help.

hth

 

I assume you are talking about the 05 or 03.

Replace ever 10 years with OEM shoes. Hot oil and 10 years can make shoes brittle snd they can crack. Simple as that. Harley screwed up by not using a roller chain that rolls after the outer links groove in. Then, like their manual primary chain tensioner, they don't wear out.

There is no check. Mainly because no real tool to do it with. The link chain on the inner cam is not replaceable even with Harley's so called up grade. So with a hydraulic tensioner, at higher RPM and oil pressure, a hydraulic tensioner will wear out fast with s link chain.

It was not the finish. In fact ripple finish kept shoes at high rpm from cavitation with oil. That literally blows hunks out.

So, if you are over 10 years, replace shoes. Check in 20K and then you will know how far you can go for next check.

The inner is hard to see. The key here if the pin link is real close, the shoe is warn out.

 

Previous posts cover what need to be said about the '99-'06, except Dyna tensioner shoes. The Delron material was not suited for exposure to heat and oil and they have a history of failing catastrophically without warning and can take out a motor. I have two Harleys; OEM shoes went at 25K on one and gone at 12K on the other; replace both with geared cams.

The OP is over thinking. I don't know anyone running without tensioners; that's about the dumbest thing I have heard yet on this forum. Robarosa listed the various options to address replacement of the OEM tensioner shoes and the most cost effective option is to replace with CYCO shoes.; reuse the chains; they have been "polished". Most will check the CYCOs at 20K-25K intervals; they are a consumable item. Replacing with gear driven cams is more expensive but is a permanent and forever solution.

 

Thanks for the input. The 03 will be first up for this work. Kevin Baxter on YouTube has a great segment on why tension is necessary, I fully get the need for tension, but was thinking less tension may increase pad life. I have not heard of less tension being discuss, but did see a video on no tensioners which will lead to other problems.

 

While Kevin tries to dumb it down he makes several mistakes. It's not oil pressure directly that controls tension but a mini-lifter inside the late tensioners that control chain tension / slap.

I would not lighten the tension on the early spring tensioners, especially if changing the cams and/or valve springs. The whole problem with spring loaded tensioners is that they have to be strong enough to maintain tension when the lifter rolls over the peak of the cam and down the back side. That is when the tensioner has to fight keep tension on the cam. If it can't, it bounces which is one of the causes the micro fracture in the chain tensioner face.

BTW, There have been stock spring loaded tensioners that have made it over 100K. IMO its the amount of time the motor sits idling and how hot it gets.

On thing Baxter gets wrong is calling the link on the early silent chain "cast". They are stamped. While he seems to think they are inferior to roller they can be better as they provide more surface area for tensioning. The surface needs to be finished correctly tho. Since HD moved to hydraulic tensioners they were able to use a cheaper roller chain.

 

Too cool. Never had one apart. A while back, someone posted a picture of a hydraulic conversion still running link on inner cam. The tensioner went right thru shoe. He had increased oil pressure also, so I assumed that had some affect.

So you are staying, it not like a lifter, it has a limiter

You have some pictures?