front engine mount not sitting square?

[1340evo]

Don't know if anyone else has come across this, but when I'm trying to settle my engine in last night, I'm seeing the front tube through the rubber mount being twisted due to how the two components cove together? Both look correct.
Its like the angle in the front motor mount plate is too shallow?
Anyone else seen this?

 

[Scotty]

Don't know if anyone else has come across this, but when I'm trying to settle my engine in last night, I'm seeing the front tube through the rubber mount being twisted due to how the two components cove together? Both look correct.
Its like the angle in the front motor mount plate is too shallow?
Anyone else seen this?

To many posts to look through what model bike is it?

[1340evo]

1989 FXR....

[capn]

The rear mounts might have dropped.Worn out.

[1340evo]

no.. all mounts are new and now in the correct orientation (see earlier posts) 

[Deye76]

Any pictures?

[1340evo]

Any pictures?

Go to post 1 and click the link to a drawing I did... its hard to get in to take a photo. I've tried to send the link again but got a warning msg, so think it must be this.. so if you have a look at the top.. Tx

[turboprop]

Don't know if anyone else has come across this, but when I'm trying to settle my engine in last night, I'm seeing the front tube through the rubber mount being twisted due to how the two components cove together? Both look correct.
Its like the angle in the front motor mount plate is too shallow?
Anyone else seen this?

This somewhat common for bikes that use this style of front rubber mount. It can be corrected by getting everything in its comfortable or 'happy' position. Assuming you have all the pieces (front and rear) installed in the correct orientation, it is a simple matter of loosening up the two bolts that attach the front rubber mount to the frame and the single 'through bolt'. Several ways to do it but the easiest way is to simply run the engine at a high idle with a few revs for a minute or two. This will allow the front mount to settle. You can also use a 1'2" OD bolt to align everything and then replace it with the oem size bolt.

[1340evo]

Don't know if anyone else has come across this, but when I'm trying to settle my engine in last night, I'm seeing the front tube through the rubber mount being twisted due to how the two components cove together? Both look correct.
Its like the angle in the front motor mount plate is too shallow?
Anyone else seen this?

This somewhat common for bikes that use this style of front rubber mount. It can be corrected by getting everything in its comfortable or 'happy' position. Assuming you have all the pieces (front and rear) installed in the correct orientation, it is a simple matter of loosening up the two bolts that attach the front rubber mount to the frame and the single 'through bolt'. Several ways to do it but the easiest way is to simply run the engine at a high idle with a few revs for a minute or two. This will allow the front mount to settle. You can also use a 1'2" OD bolt to align everything and then replace it with the oem size bolt.

Yes, that's what I was doing when I noticed the issue. The central bolt will pass through the hole as the hole is oversize, but once clamped up it puts quite a twist (front / back) on the small tube in the front mount effectivley pre-loading it...

[1340evo]

Okay, panic over (although I have seen before it not coming down square on the mount), but maybe this time its more to do with this....

when I bought the bike, the clown that built it did have the rear rubbers upside down and have since turned them over, so this may address the angle issue.. When I get a new one I'll check it.

"Potty mouth", this things only done about 250 miles!!

[FSG]

[1340evo]

Thanks for that FSG, I could not get it to do that LOL

Think my problem may of been solved with the rear mounts now I think about it as its lifted the back of the engine up about 1/2" if not more so may of corrected the front issue, but will re-check when I get a new one.

Next question, whats any good and available in the UK .. looking on line I can get Motorcyle store house which is where this last one came from! or Drag Specialties    or Alloy Art Mount Motor Iso Front - Part #112030

[Scotty]

when I bought the bike, the clown that built it did have the rear rubbers upside down and have since turned them over, so this may address the angle issue.. When I get a new

I would be checking everything the clown touched as he obviously is an expert 

[1340evo]

when I bought the bike, the clown that built it did have the rear rubbers upside down and have since turned them over, so this may address the angle issue.. When I get a new

I would be checking everything the clown touched as he obviously is an expert 

Think I have done now. Engine, there was issues in the oil pump and piston in wrong, Gearbox where he'd not torqued up the clutch hub and it spun on the tapper (now splined), carb re-done, exhaust mounts, electrics sorted, rear end lined up, have re-done most things now.. only bit I've not done are the folks.. and I do sometimes get a bit of a klunk from them.

[HogMike]

 

[1340evo]

gone for the KINETIC STRUCTURES one.. any experiance of these?

[guido4198]

Here's my post from a couple of weeks ago in the thread titled: "Vibrations".
The last time I replaced the front motor mount on my '85 FXRS, I did a lot of research on this forum and across 'net. I found a lot of information and recommendations. I didn't need to find the cheapest/least expensive item so I decided to try something new and went with one of these:
https://www.kineticstructures.com/harley-engine-motor-mount
I've put 20,000 mi on it so far and have to say I'm perfectly satisfied. My memory is that just the new front mount provided a great improvement over the one that was on the bike at that point in time. It was somebody's black rubber product but I don't remember who I got it from. It was in very poor condition and needed to go.
In the interest of full disclosure I have to add that right around that same time frame, I replaced the factory original rear isolators as well, pulled a crappy pair of Progressive shocks, replaced them with Pro-Action shocks and replaced the old  "Velva-ride" stabilizer links that I had put on a lot of years back( and have been satisfied with) with new ones of the same manufacture.
At the end of the day....I have a 36 yr old FXRS that will run 90 mph down the interstate and be smooth enough to read the front license plate in my rear view mirror on cars coming up next to me. 
Happy Guy.

 

[lumberjacklloyd]

gone for the KINETIC STRUCTURES one.. any experiance of these?

I highly recommend NOT getting the Kinetic structures mount. The mount sits at a different height than factory and there is undamped uptravel.

[1340evo]

Hi guido4198, thats what I've seen on a number of posts and why I went this way. I hope it kills my 2.5K vibes a bit as the rubber one don't deal with it well. I may change the rears also but they are new just over 2K ago. No idea what the original ones were as it wasn't my bike then, but these do feel very hard so again may contribute to the vibes.

Not sure why Lumberjack has so much against them.. have you actualy fitted one and tried it LJ?
The assembly holds the wire mesh and it acts as a spring in all directions so will actualy give you more damping that the rubber? would be good to hear what you found on yours??

[turboprop]

I bet if you were to search this forum you would find lots of information about front engine mounts, including the Kinetic brand one.

[1340evo]

not that much on Kinetics... there is one quote that appears to be re-posted a few times stating the same thing... Posative though... lets see

[lumberjacklloyd]

Hi guido4198, thats what I've seen on a number of posts and why I went this way. I hope it kills my 2.5K vibes a bit as the rubber one don't deal with it well. I may change the rears also but they are new just over 2K ago. No idea what the original ones were as it wasn't my bike then, but these do feel very hard so again may contribute to the vibes.

Not sure why Lumberjack has so much against them.. have you actualy fitted one and tried it LJ?
The assembly holds the wire mesh and it acts as a spring in all directions so will actualy give you more damping that the rubber? would be good to hear what you found on yours??

I have installed the Kinetic Structures mount, ran it for 500 miles and returned for full refund. Confirmed with Harry at Kinetic structures that it was dimensionally accurate with no defects according to them. The Kinetic mount is 0.125" taller than a broken in factory 79D mount. Rubber mounts settle to some degree in the first couple hundred miles and generally remain at the same height until deteriorated. Harry stated that the 79D mount that their stainless mount was modeled after was not "broken in". This makes sense as the new 79D motor mount I bought settled almost 1/8" in the first 200 miles and none after.

Also, when installed there is a large gap between the thin stainless wafer and the factory snubber washer on the bolt. Under hard acceleration the motor lifts off of the mount and there is undamped uptravel in the mount due to the gap. Because the mount is connected to a linkage that moves in an arc this causes drivetrain shimmy.

It is a flawed design with good intent, but some people just have to have the most "trick" looking parts. The factory 79D mount is what I run with great success. The original supplier of the FXR engine mount is still in business and selling the same mount; part number 507-2NS. The 1NS, 2NS and 3NS are different durometer ratings; discuss with them what will work best for you.

https://novibration.com/products/bonded-tube-mounts-500-series/

[1340evo]

Not sure I want a trick looking mount.. you can't see it with the rectifier in place.. just something to kill the 2500 rpm vibes...
so when assembled you say there is a gap and the whole thing can lift up. Guess you can see this when its off the bike also. Will take a look when it arrives and if so I'll send it back.
The Db ones look good....

[motorhogman]

I am running the 507 1NS in my 01 FLHT. Works better than any of the OEM mounts as far as vibration goes other than the very first OEM one. The first OEM mount was very good also. Down hill after that until I installed the Barry Controls mount. Also less half the price of the 79D including shipping.

The original supplier of the FXR engine mount is still in business and selling the same mount; part number 507-2NS. The 1NS, 2NS and 3NS are different durometer ratings; discuss with them what will work best for you.

https://novibration.com/products/bonded-tube-mounts-500-series/
Report

[1340evo]

both these go back to dB engineering so looks like they all originate there?

so the one you have on your FLHT is not the best you've had, but better than most.
The first original unit was the best, if I'm reading this right.. so guess that was a std HD mount.. wonder what revision?

[lumberjacklloyd]

You can see the gap under the cross member here. This was right after installation and got slightly larger after the first ride. The size of the gap is how much uptravel the engine has on the mount without any force holding it down other than its own weight. I wouldn't even waste time installing it. The 79D or DB engineering mounts are superior. The 3NS is most stiff and comparable to the 79D mount; the 1NS is the softest and IS identical to the original FXR engine mount.

[motorhogman]

both these go back to dB engineering so looks like they all originate there?

so the one you have on your FLHT is not the best you've had, but better than most.
The first original unit was the best, if I'm reading this right.. so guess that was a std HD mount.. wonder what revision?

The original mount in 2001 was a 16207-79B according to the 2001 Parts manual.
Yes the current mount installed ( 5071NS) is the best since the bike was new. The bike has 117,000 mi on it now. I've owned it since new. Hard to actually remember how smooth it exactly was going going back 21 years.  All I can say is it is smoother than it's been in a long time. I have to say that it actually got smoother after some miles, maybe 500 to 1000..
I replaced the rear rubber mounts a few years ago looking for the cause of a  vibration. Noticed no difference. Turned out to be a broken rear bumper causing it that time if I remember correctly..

[1340evo]

Thanks Guy's .. looks like I need to order the 5071NS... Will give it a go 

[motorhogman]

Thanks Guy's .. looks like I need to order the 5071NS... Will give it a go 

I think you will pleased. TurboProp a member here enlightened us to the Barry Controls. I believe he has tried some of the different compounds on an FXR. If I recall correctly I think he said smooth as silk with the 507 1INS

Search Barry Controls here there is a fairly lengthy thread about them.

[1340evo]

It's coming from dB engineering which I guess is the same thing.. and cheap.. its $19 on their web site

[motorhogman]

It's coming from dB engineering which I guess is the same thing.. and cheap.. its $19 on their web site

DB is a partner somehow. There is also a Mother company over them all.. Can't recall the name of it.   Like I said even with shipping cheaper than the Harley dealer.  Friend of mine has MC machine shop and up in MA and he bought 10 of them ( a mix of different compounds). He's installed several since January and no complaints.

[1340evo]

Think I'll do the same and sell them in the UK if it works as well as you say!! 

[turboprop]

Thanks Guy's .. looks like I need to order the 5071NS... Will give it a go 

I think you will pleased. TurboProp a member here enlightened us to the Barry Controls. I believe he has tried some of the different compounds on an FXR. If I recall correctly I think he said smooth as silk with the 507 1INS

Search Barry Controls here there is a fairly lengthy thread about them.

If the OP would do a simple search, all his questions about the front mount would be answered, with links to websites, etc. Instead, lets reinvent the discussion but do it poorly. Search. It works.

[1340evo]

Thanks Guy's .. looks like I need to order the 5071NS... Will give it a go 

I think you will pleased. TurboProp a member here enlightened us to the Barry Controls. I believe he has tried some of the different compounds on an FXR. If I recall correctly I think he said smooth as silk with the 507 1INS

Search Barry Controls here there is a fairly lengthy thread about them.

If the OP would do a simple search, all his questions about the front mount would be answered, with links to websites, etc. Instead, lets reinvent the discussion but do it poorly. Search. It works.

Tell you what.. you try searching for 'best motor mount'.. you get 101 answers. Sorry if you don't like people asking advice on forums, but I did think thats one of the reasons they exist.
You guy's have loads of info in the US and no doubt lots of people to discuss Evo's with. Where I am in the UK there is no one who knows anything.
As I say, sorry if you don't like it mate... I appologise!!  and probably 'poorly' IYO

[HogMike]

I've run 3 different mounts on my evo over the years.
This is the one that works best for MY bike.
It's the one on the left.

[HogMike]

More pics

[Burnout]

Is this the bottom of the mount?

[HogMike]

Is this the bottom of the mount?

Yes on my 1995.

The vibration issue may be due to an alignment problem.
There is a procedure in the manual to show the proper way to set up the alignment. There is "wiggle room" side to side and fore and aft to set up the drive train.
If the mounts are stressed they won't last long!

I tried to get a picture of mine but the oil cooler and regulator is in the way.

This may help:

[1340evo]

Thats like the 507 1INS we are talking about.

Are you sure its the bottom? I'd of thought it was the top?

I spent an hour last night with the the failed mount. I cut a ring of rubber off the top and placed a soft silicon disc 1/4" thick on the top, then did the same on the underside with a big snub washer. This allows the middle tube to move up and down and the vibration is taken us by the remaining rubber and the new discs. Works a treat and you can't feel anything much vibration wise 
What I've used is only soft so how long it will last is anyones guess. Bit will put me on until the new units arrive (maybe)

[Scotty]

Are you sure its the bottom? I'd of thought it was the top?

They are concave on the bottom so that last picture is the top as you said and seen plenty of people install them upside down because they go in easier that way 

This picture shows the top of the mounts
[attach=1,msg1393360]

This picture shows the bottom of the mounts
[attach=0,msg1393360]

[1340evo]

So the top pic shows them all in the correct orientation as you'd use them ...

[Scotty]

So the top pic shows them all in the correct orientation as you'd use them ...

Correct

[HogMike]

Sorry for the miss-information.

The bottom of the engine mount rests on the TOP of the round plate.
I remember trying a couple of different styles of styles before going to the one pictured below:

[HogMike]

I think it's time to clean all the old oil and dirt off now that I got it clear.

[1340evo]

Yes, needs a clean    this is my new design of mount that workes very well... two rubber hardnesses for optimum vibration reduction.. think I'll patent it 

[HogMike]

Hi guido4198, thats what I've seen on a number of posts and why I went this way. I hope it kills my 2.5K vibes a bit as the rubber one don't deal with it well. I may change the rears also but they are new just over 2K ago. No idea what the original ones were as it wasn't my bike then, but these do feel very hard so again may contribute to the vibes.

Not sure why Lumberjack has so much against them.. have you actualy fitted one and tried it LJ?
The assembly holds the wire mesh and it acts as a spring in all directions so will actualy give you more damping that the rubber? would be good to hear what you found on yours??

I also dealt with vibration issues at 2200-2500 rpm range. Only noticed it when I went to the new 113" motor.
After playing around with alignment and breaking in the motor, I found the vibration was still there but from about 2700 and up the vibration was gone. I think some of that had to be due to a particular motor.
My latest is most "happy" around 3000 rpm, right where the power band starts. My torque curve starts about there anyway.
Some motors just seem to vibrate more than others. 

[1340evo]

Well, its been in bits, flywheels trued, new pistons all weighed and balanced to 60%, heads CC'd and adjusted along with deck heights so both cylinders are the exact same, and its still there... not as bad for sure, but still not 100%.  Retarding the ignition made a differance and with the ignition I have in there now I can off-set the rear cylinder, so will check that once run in a bit more as I'm sure these can be out a couple of deg to one another   

[kd]

It's a 45 degree  V twin and it will never be 100%.

[Burnout]

You can only balance it for ONE rpm, and what ever is left is what you get.

You can speed up or slow down or change gears.

I'll never understand folks who worry about vibes, it's a Harley Davidson!!!!! More folks would bitch, if they were able to eliminate the shake .

I recommend a Twin Cam Softail for those folks, the nice motor with twin balance shafts. Still shakes though.
Or a nice low compression 74" Shovel with the massive flywheels. They still shake too.

[1340evo]

I know they will always shake in one RPM range, but why not srive to get it as good as you can?
As said before, I don't remember my Shovel doing it like the FXR or any of the Sportsters I've had, and the FXR is rubber mount

But, there is obviously nothing wrong with it as its all been looked at.

What I need to is ride another FXR and then I either be impressed with mine or very dispointed, so I won't go there.
But will keep trying to reduce it as much as I can

To add to the equation, I do have quite a hard seat and rear shocks so those won't help

Will report back on the new mounts when they arrive

[Scotty]

When I got my FXR I could not believe the vibration through the rev range and figured I got it cheap because it had a problem.
Having ridden solid mount motors and balanced twin cam motors as well as rubber mounted the FXR was the worst.
However after flipping the front motor mount because the last owner/dealer had put it in upside down and re-aligning the drive train (it was out a fair bit) it is as smooth as the rubber mount twin cams.
If I had never ridden a Harley before I might have thought that is how a FXR is but having ridden plenty of others it was obvious there was a problem.
So yes don't accept the vibes as normal when you know it can be better because you know what your riding and other people are just guessing as how much vibe you are feeling and they almost sound like a Harley dealer with "they all do that" 

[1340evo]

Indeed, we'll see what the front mount does and I'll double check re-aligning the drive train...  see where we go from there   

Did you use any guide for re-aligning the drive train or just the HD manual?

[HogMike]

Indeed, we'll see what the front mount does and I'll double check re-aligning the drive train...  see where we go from there   

Did you use any guide for re-aligning the drive train or just the HD manual?

IIRC
The H-D manual is pretty complete on the sequence how to do it.
I'd dig out the manual but it's down at the shop and I'm in "happy hour" mode at the present!

[Scotty]

Indeed, we'll see what the front mount does and I'll double check re-aligning the drive train...  see where we go from there   

Did you use any guide for re-aligning the drive train or just the HD manual?

I have some tools that a forum member made for me quite a few years ago and they work on the FXR and FLT but the manual and couple of long fluro tubes (something straight) will get you there.

[1340evo]

I have two pieces of ali extrusion that I used before so will give it a shot, and follow the imortal instructions of the HD manual to the letter.
But thats for tomorrow as its late Saturday night here in the UK and I've had far too much to drink as usual   

[FSG]

I do remember HD releasing either a SB or a TT relating to the mount and which was the right way up, trying to remember it now 

OK Service Bulletin   M-1182 , Improved Front Rubber Mount  .......    to be found in the section

there was something else as well but for now   

[Scotty]

I do remember HD releasing either a SB or a TT relating to the mount and which was the right way up, trying to remember it now 

OK Service Bulletin   M-1182 , Improved Front Rubber Mount  .......    to be found in the section

there was something else as well but for now   

Yep exactly  how I said they go in. That was for -79C part number.

[1340evo]

Q... why would re-aligning the drive train address vibration issues at a given RPM? Or are we talking vibration in general for this one?

[FSG]

I do remember HD releasing either a SB or a TT relating to the mount and which was the right way up, trying to remember it now 

OK Service Bulletin   M-1182 , Improved Front Rubber Mount  .......    to be found in the section

there was something else as well but for now   

Yep exactly  how I said they go in. That was for -79C part number.

4-sure   

[Scotty]

Q... why would re-aligning the drive train address vibration issues at a given RPM? Or are we talking vibration in general for this one?

Alignment helps with vibration across the rpm range. Any twist in the wheels and transmission/motor becomes a vibration at certain rpm's.
The straighter it is the less tension on all components and motor moves freely on rubber mount and thus less vibration.

[1340evo]

As you say, I guess you are not pre-loading / stressing the rubbers so they will work better. Any pre-load will result in more vibrations crossing into the frame.. sounds good to me.. will have a re-check

[1340evo]

Developments.. the Kinetic Structures mount arrived, so I wopped it on and went for a spin... Much better. It did settle a bit by a few mm but is way better than my last one.

But what it does do, is show the amount the engine bracket is not sitting square on the mount and in doing pre-loading it which I'm sure will go a long way towards my vibration issues!

But I can't work out whats causing it?

Front of the mount I measure a 7mm gap, the back of the mount I measure 4.3mm gap, so knowing its 50.3mm dia I can work out the extra angle required. (its about 3 deg)

But why isn't it right? Now I can make a new front mount no problem.. but why's it not correct to start with. My rear mounts are good (new) and now in the right position. Do the front metal bits come in different types. Has he put a FLH mount on a FXR for example?... any thoughts.

[kd]

How is the shaft to transmission bore wear?  That could contribute to it sagging in the rear.

[1340evo]

you mean the rear swing arm shaft?... its fine, and the rear mounts are new...

If you calc it back to the rear mounts, they would have to be 35mm out to give a 3 deg angle at the front?

Wondering if he's bought a new front metal bit and its just crap.. could do with someone who has one off measuring the angle ?

[Scotty]

Front engine mount is the same part number for FXR and FLH right up to the end so that is not the problem.

One issue I noticed putting these rubber mounts together is putting the rear shocks on will in some cases pull the transmission back and down if the engine is not done up and bolted down correctly.
Could be your issue but I am just thinking out aloud but would give a problem as you have noted.

[1340evo]

If anything, it's forward as the bolts right at the back of the slot, and as I say above, would need to be 35mm out to get a 3 deg difference at the front...
But, getting this correct I'm sure will help with vibration reduction...

[Scotty]

If anything, it's forward as the bolts right at the back of the slot, and as I say above, would need to be 35mm out to get a 3 deg difference at the front...
But, getting this correct I'm sure will help with vibration reduction...

35mm? I don't think your math is correct it would only have to be a pushed forward and up a little bit at the rear to make the front mount go like that.
I am no engineer and cannot do the math but a fulcrum and a lever in mind suggest to me that you missed something doing the calcualation.

Short shocks back and down and long shocks up and forward.

[1340evo]

Why would the shock length influence the front mount angle / position?

I am an Engineer and the math's are right. To get the bracket to lay flat on top of the mount, you'd have to lift the back of the engine 35mm to recover the 3 deg or so its out.. 3 deg over around 660mm (front mount point to rear mount point) is more than you think

[HogMike]

Why would the shock length influence the front mount angle / position?

I am an Engineer and the math's are right. To get the bracket to lay flat on top of the mount, you'd have to lift the back of the engine 35mm to recover the 3 deg or so its out.. 3 deg over around 660mm (front mount point to rear mount point) is more than you think

If you could find another fxr to compare dimensions from the drive train to the frame it may help.
I would not modify the mount until all other dimensions are verified: stabilizer links to frame, etc.
Are you sure the frame is not damaged?
My frame to engine mount looks to be parallel with the mount in place. Why yours is not is curious.

[1340evo]

Everything else looks good.. I can ride the bike, take my hands off the bars, turns left same as it turns right so I'm sure it not bent, and it would have to be a mile out to cause this I'm sure.
When I got the bike, the rear mounts were on upside down (so on the wrong side) and the hole in the mount was around 5 o'clock.. I've since changed that putting the hole to 11 o'clock so that bits correct now. As it was, it must of been even worst?
I've bent a few bits of metal at work today and made some clamp plates for the existing mount. I can put it in the vice tonight and see if I can add another 3 deg to the bend. If not I'll take it to work next week and use the gas on it or make a new mount plate.
Other than the rear hole on the gearbox being lower than std in the casting (where there versions on this) I'm foxed.
Heads to frame clearance looks okay and equal etc.

May be its a new mount as it does look new for sure.. and its not been bent correctly in the first place?? 

[HogMike]

If you can get another front mount (my book shows 47159-79A) I think I would go that way before trying to bend the one you have.

Regardless, even if you get everything to line up "properly" it may still vibrate.

I've had good luck with the concave style of bushing on my evo but it's not YOUR bike.

Good luck and keep us posted.

[Scotty]

Why would the shock length influence the front mount angle / position?

I don't know the reason but it pushes or pull the transmission mount away from being centered in the hole and puts pressure on the mount.
Seen it more than a few times now so I do not attach the shocks until the motor/tranny are aligned when installing in unknown combination.
Take the chrome buttons out the swingarm ends and see if the mount is centered and in the same position both sides.

[capn]

1340evo, Take it to a Harley dealer and see what they say.The baggers used those mounts till 06.

[1340evo]

well, it wont bend ... hitting it as hard as I can in a bigger vice that this on a sold steel bench... no way.. must be made by snap-on

[98fxstc]

If the obvious causes do not provide a solution, maybe the fit is due to a variation in the engine casting or a variation in the frame mounting location or a bit of both.
How about making up a wedge shaped spacer to fit with the front motor mount. (2.5 mm for 50mm dia )
Then everything will bolt up in its happy place ?

[1340evo]

Why would the shock length influence the front mount angle / position?

I don't know the reason but it pushes or pull the transmission mount away from being centered in the hole and puts pressure on the mount.
Seen it more than a few times now so I do not attach the shocks until the motor/tranny are aligned when installing in unknown combination.
Take the chrome buttons out the swingarm ends and see if the mount is centered and in the same position both sides.

Kind of see where youre coming from.. they are the same but not centred, but then they are not centred when new, the shaft should sit about 11 oclock looking at mine and a good number of pics when I changed them over

[1340evo]

If the obvious causes do not provide a solution, maybe the fit is due to a variation in the engine casting or a variation in the frame mounting location or a bit of both.
How about making up a wedge shaped spacer to fit with the front motor mount. (2.5 mm for 50mm dia )
Then everything will bolt up in its happy place ?

Kind of thought all that before, youd need sperical seats and washers for under the bolt / nut head as they would be on an angle also... Maybe the best way to sort it would be the twist the bracket on the frame by 3 deg so it holds it up right to the existing metal bit... but it would crack my paint

[Scotty]

Kind of see where youre coming from.. they are the same but not centred, but then they are not centred when new, the shaft should sit about 11 oclock looking at mine and a good number of pics when I changed them over

Well the alignment tool I have holds the transmission shaft at center in the hole so that the transmission cannot move vertical or horizontal and you leave this in until the front is done up and both stabilizer links are set correctly so that the bolt just falls through and does up with no tension. At this point you can release and connect up the rear shocks.

[kd]

I'm thinkin Scotty has hit on it.  They (the new rear mounts) probably weren't centered because the front mount was holding them out of position and they flexed into the old spot when pulled into place.  Follow his instructions and it should reseat properly.  Something similar can happen with the 2 front mounts on a late model 09 up touring.

[1340evo]

Do you have a picture of the setting tool at all, but I don't see there being enough movement in the rear mounts to cause this issue at the front?

If anyone has a front mount plate off and can measure it's angle.. mine's measuring 27 deg which in itself is curiouse

The drawing of the frame is interesting.. it shows the mounting plate at 31 deg 35 min. assuming the engine goes in level and they calculated for the height of the mount, that should be the same angle on the metal bit... not sure if the assumptions are correct tho?

[Scotty]

Do you have a picture of the setting tool at all, but I don't see there being enough movement in the rear mounts to cause this issue at the front?

[attach=0]

[attach=1]

Should be obvious how they work but let me know if not

[1340evo]

Mmm, dont you get the same leveling your frame and leveling the swing arm with a spirit level. Thats how I did it before...

frame drawing is interesting tho... I need to check the angle on the metal front mount plate somehow

[Scotty]

Mmm, dont you get the same leveling your frame and leveling the swing arm with a spirit level. Thats how I did it before...

Not with the shocks attached like people think as it pushes everything out of line.
This holds the swingarm and transmission in place with no vertical or horizontal movement possible which is exactly where you want it when setting everything.
I have seen it so bad on one bike it was like a crab down the road and the vibration was shocking.
With those and a small bike lift I had it set back up correctly in under an hour.

[attach=0,msg1393961]
 

[1340evo]

So the flat bits bolt round the top hanger bolt, the turned bit go in the hole, and the screws into the end of the swig arm axle.
Only thing is my swing arm axle is not in the middle of the hanger hole, it sits about 11 oclock

[Scotty]

So the flat bits bolt round the top hanger bolt, the turned bit go in the hole, and the screws into the end of the swig arm axle.
Only thing is my swing arm axle is not in the middle of the hanger hole, it sits about 11 oclock

That is the problem you need to push and manipulate the trans/motor back and down until the swing arm axle is in the middle and lock it down there and then adjust everything else to suit. Once everything else is in place then release the swing arm axle and it will find it's natural place correctly but at the moment it is forced.

[1340evo]

It will never be in the middle of the bolt on blocks as the hole in the rear mount is not central to the bit that locates in the block.. see picture 1 below.. and picture 2 is what I have now.
To address my issue, I'd have to go up in these blocks to bring the front of the front mount down, but it's not possable

I think the frame drawing kind of confirms my front metal bit is out. If someone was to measure a front mount i'm sure we'd see 150 to 149 deg angle on the thing. Wonder if anyone has their engine out right now so could do it?

I have a drawing ready for Monday anyway. Increased to 8mm thick and with 3 deg on what I have now. I'll get one lasered out and bent up, see where we are then

[14Frisco]

Not explicitly for a 1989 FXR, but HD-46247A VEHICLE ALIGNMENT TOOL might be of interest.

[1340evo]

Not explicitly for a 1989 FXR, but HD-46247A VEHICLE ALIGNMENT TOOL might be of interest.

Thanks for that, interesting read, guess its the same sort of thing that Scotty explains. But I can see how you can center the shaft in the blocks as the hole is off set? wonder if newer ones use rubbers with the hole in the midle, or are we just centering with any play between the hole in the mount and the shaft??

[FSG]

HD-46247A VEHICLE ALIGNMENT TOOL

[1340evo]

Sorry, last post should say 'I CAN'T see how you can centre the shaft in the blocks as the holes in the rubber bit are not in the middle. Also they have a notch out of them that locates on a pin in the housing, so you're limited there also??

Scotty, do the ali turned bits fit into the blocks and are a nice fit in the hole, or are they very loose so you can get them off ctr?

[1340evo]

My Mate sent me a picture of his mount (can't post it here as it's not my picture?) but it shows the angle on his at 31.3 deg. so does look like they should match the angle on the frame bracket.

Will get one made up tomorrow

[HogMike]

My Mate sent me a picture of his mount (can't post it here as it's not my picture?) but it shows the angle on his at 31.3 deg. so does look like they should match the angle on the frame bracket.

Will get one made up tomorrow

What is the angle on the one you already have?
If it's 31.3 it should be the same as you show on the frame mount point.
If not maybe your original one was bent at one time?
I guess at least now you have measurements that you can check.
If I missed it, was this bike ever in an accident?

[HogMike]

I'll have my evo on the lift soon as I'm finished with the softail for now, just have to move some bikes around.

I can check level point on that bike if need be. Will also give me a chance to do some cleaning!

[1340evo]

The one I have is 27 deg, so it's opened up? Strange thing is, there is no way I can bend it back.. its very strong for 1/4" metal.
Two people now say the angle should be the same as the one on the frame and that kind of adds up.
Also watch a video on the front mount and how important it is not to bind them up... thats why you run the motor with it lose so its not binding side to side...
but guess mine is binding front to back when its re-torqued up?

Will be making a new one this week (quickest way in the UK) and see what its like then... do hope it solves the problem

[FSG]

(can't post it here as it's not my picture?)

upload it to an image hosting site ( e.g.  https://imgur.com/ ) and then post a link to it here

[HogMike]

The one I have is 27 deg, so it's opened up? Strange thing is, there is no way I can bend it back.. its very strong for 1/4" metal.
Two people now say the angle should be the same as the one on the frame and that kind of adds up.
Also watch a video on the front mount and how important it is not to bind them up... thats why you run the motor with it lose so its not binding side to side...
but guess mine is binding front to back when its re-torqued up?

Will be making a new one this week (quickest way in the UK) and see what its like then... do hope it solves the problem

Too bad about taking too long to get one.
There's some on eBay with rubber and link for $25us

[98fxstc]

John Sachs has pics and method for alignment tool similar to Scotty in homemade tools section (for touring)

https://harleytechtalk.com/htt/index.php/topic,1733.0.html

[1340evo]

Hi, and thanks for the link.
Thats all well and good if the shaft will go into the middle of the hole, but my rubbers take mine off ctr? (see post 85 above)
So they wont center? and even if I could get them in the middle by forcing them, they would just spring back soon as I released them..

So guess you guys are running rubber mounts that put the shaft in the middle of the clamp plate hole?

[Ajayrk]

Are the covers for the rubber bushing left and right specific?  The alignment pin on the cover should be up.

[motorhogman]

Hi, and thanks for the link.
Thats all well and good if the shaft will go into the middle of the hole, but my rubbers take mine off ctr? (see post 85 above)
So they wont center? and even if I could get them in the middle by forcing them, they would just spring back soon as I released them..

So guess you guys are running rubber mounts that put the shaft in the middle of the clamp plate hole?

The rubber mounts on my 01 FLHT have off centered holes.  Just looked at a set I changed out a while ago.. I'll have to assume the ones I put in there (OEM 47564-86B) are also offset..

[1340evo]

yes, they are LH and RH, also longer side to the bottom (distance between bolt hole and bore as there is a long and short side to them) and yes, the location pin is up. this located in the slot you see on the rubber mount above.

[Ajayrk]

The hole in the rubber mount is offset.  I think it is that way to allow the engine to rock fore and aft and not up and down.  I would think once the rubber is mounted the pivot shaft would be centered under the cover.  I replaced those mounts on a 1985 fxr, but it was so long ago that I don't remember the orientation.

[1340evo]

The hole in the rubber mount is offset.  I think it is that way to allow the engine to rock fore and aft and not up and down.  I would think once the rubber is mounted the pivot shaft would be centered under the cover.  I replaced those mounts on a 1985 fxr, but it was so long ago that I don't remember the orientation.

not a chance, they just sit which ever way you put them.. by swaping blocks side to side and rotating the rubber you can get them to sit at 1, 5, 7 or 11 .. but thats it, they won't move from there.

[Ajayrk]

Wish I could have been more helpful.  I do remember replacing the clev blocks at that time.  Not sure if that had any affect on the rubber mounts.

[1340evo]

Wish I could have been more helpful.  I do remember replacing the clev blocks at that time.  Not sure if that had any affect on the rubber mounts.

Thanks anyway, kit is a strange set-up.. why would you put the shaft off centre?

[turboprop]

Wish I could have been more helpful.  I do remember replacing the clev blocks at that time.  Not sure if that had any affect on the rubber mounts.

Thanks anyway, kit is a strange set-up.. why would you put the shaft off centre?

I asked Erik Buell this question many years ago. I forget his answer but it was pretty extensive. During that same discussion he talked extensively about stabilizing harmonics.

[1340evo]

Looks from the above that some have converted to centralized ones unless from a given year they changed?

New brackets are ready now so will be trying them as a dry fit tonight to see it it makes it all nice and square now

[Ajayrk]

Nice drafting.

[1340evo]

A bit rough, but used it to get the new angle and measurements to do the actual drawing... Copy attached if anyone wants it?

[1340evo]

So, new bracket fitted, everything nice and square now, with the Kinetics industries mount, and its made a huge differance to the vibration.
I'd say its about 20% what it was before and in top gear between 60 and 70 (which is about 2500 rpm on mine and where it vibrates) nothing much at all now, so well pleased with the mount and new bracket.
I still have the US rubber mount coming so will give that a try when it arrives.

Only slight vibes I get are in the lower gears and only through the foot pegs, maybe a bit of insulation on those and it would be more or less vibe free

[Hossamania]

Compared to a rigid mount shovel, it is vibration free!

[HogMike]

So, new bracket fitted, everything nice and square now, with the Kinetics industries mount, and its made a huge differance to the vibration.
I'd say its about 20% what it was before and in top gear between 60 and 70 (which is about 2500 rpm on mine and where it vibrates) nothing much at all now, so well pleased with the mount and new bracket.
I still have the US rubber mount coming so will give that a try when it arrives.

Only slight vibes I get are in the lower gears and only through the foot pegs, maybe a bit of insulation on those and it would be more or less vibe free

Soooooo...... now the bracket that bolts to the engine drops 30 degrees and that "tongue" is now parallel to the mounting plate on the frame?

I'm not real clear on the angle from the oem plate to the one you made. Maybe the oem one got bent in the past?
At least it sounds that everything is working fine now.
Good job.

[1340evo]

So, new bracket fitted, everything nice and square now, with the Kinetics industries mount, and its made a huge differance to the vibration.
I'd say its about 20% what it was before and in top gear between 60 and 70 (which is about 2500 rpm on mine and where it vibrates) nothing much at all now, so well pleased with the mount and new bracket.
I still have the US rubber mount coming so will give that a try when it arrives.

Only slight vibes I get are in the lower gears and only through the foot pegs, maybe a bit of insulation on those and it would be more or less vibe free

Soooooo...... now the bracket that bolts to the engine drops 30 degrees and that "tongue" is now parallel to the mounting plate on the frame?

I'm not real clear on the angle from the oem plate to the one you made. Maybe the oem one got bent in the past?
At least it sounds that everything is working fine now.
Good job.

No, I tried to bend the existing one before making a new one.. you can't bend them as they are so superstrong steel, and on the Facebook FXR forum, some guys measured theirs. Thet range from 27 deg like mine, through to 32 deg.
so, if you are suffering the vibes, best to check this is correct.

Funny, but I don't remember my Shovel having the vibes much at all?... or maybe I was just younger then