REPRINT FROM OLD HTT: WOULD YOU RECOMMEND 3.37 GEARING ? ? ? ?

[ClassicRider2002]

-

DISCLAIMER: THIS IS A REPRINT TOPIC FROM "OLD" HTT

I have saved many great topical discussions as "links" over the years and would hate to see these lost, so I am reprinting this TOPIC here, which may "perhaps" help some.

TOPIC:  WOULD YOU RECOMMEND 3.37 Gearing ? ? ? ? 12-10-2004

From: joek86  (Original Message) Sent: 12/10/2004 4:29 PM   Message 1 of 30 in Discussion
If you were to do a motor build that resulted in 100/100, would you recommend stock gearing or 3.37? Fatboy , solo riding driver weight, 265lbs, tw-55 gear drive. Country riding, like blasting!

[ClassicRider2002]

-

From: blkmtrckl Sent: 12/10/2004 4:41 PM   Message 2 of 30 in Discussion
3.37
nuff said


From: realfastchevy Sent: 12/10/2004 4:49 PM   Message 3 of 30 in Discussion
joek86    what is the rest of your build other than the TW55s 


From: joek86 Sent: 12/10/2004 4:54 PM   Message 4 of 30 in Discussion
Flat tops 95, SE performance heads, PC, Andrews TW-55, Lightening Headers, HB-125, 3.37gearing.
     

From: Nooter6 Sent: 12/11/2004 12:32 AM   Message 5 of 30 in Discussion
3.37. You will never go back!!!  


From: boise1 Sent: 12/11/2004 6:25 AM   Message 6 of 30 in Discussion
Buying a set from a friend, brand new still in the box. 2001 Fxst, 95, andrews 37B, S.E. Flat Tops, S.E. ignition, stock heads, thinking of underground, dyno was 96 Tq., 87 Hp. It screams now, but can,t wait to get the 337s also upgrading clutch, maybe just a S.E. diaphram, what do you think?


From: HokieRich1 Sent: 12/11/2004 6:35 AM   Message 7 of 30 in Discussion
On my 04 Roadglide, Stage one bike, the 3.37 gears made more of a difference than I would have believed. The nice thing about the gears is you see a small but definitely noticeable difference in acceleration in highway speed rollons and pulling up grades. That is a real world difference where it counts.   
     

From: joek86 Sent: 12/11/2004 7:52 AM   Message 8 of 30 in Discussion
I have 3.37 installed now, but I put the gears in early on when I had much less power. There has been some disscussion in my peer group that 3.15 would be better after building as much power as we have. The feeling is that we won't be as prone to hitting the limiter. That is the only reason that I am questioning the 3.37 gearing.


From: FLSTS01 Sent: 12/11/2004 9:58 AM   Message 9 of 30 in Discussion
Joe i'm running a Underground build (112/112) in a FLSTS and switched back and forth from 3:15 to 3:37 gears a couple times this fall just to see which i liked better and in the end i stuck with the 3:37. Found it to be alot better on take offs and it doesnt make much difference at the top. As for hitting the rev limiter i have mine set at 5900 and have only hit it once stupidly down shifting instead of up.  I like to get nuts on the country roads in the twists and turns and the 3:37's help alot there to. I'm pushing 260lbs and the bike is 700lbs and i'd never go back to the 3:15 again.

From: 99fxd Sent: 12/11/2004 10:14 AM   Message 10 of 30 in Discussion
Is the 3.37 easier on the starter ro harder on the starter compared to  say 31.6?  I am building a higher compression motor (10.8:1) and am trying to figure what will work best with this set-up for starting and rideability.  I am aware that with the 3.37 you tend to run slightly higher rpm's and to me that is just fine, mine is an 'A' motor.  Just looking to see what effects it will have on other aspects of the bike.


From: jdog1588 Sent: 12/11/2004 10:36 AM   Message 11 of 30 in Discussion
I have a 2000 Heritage Springer. Can anyone tell me what is the stock gearing I have? THANKS
 

From: FLSTS01 Sent: 12/11/2004 11:18 AM   Message 12 of 30 in Discussion
jdog1588 you have 3:15 gearing.
     

From: jdog1588 Sent: 12/11/2004 11:39 AM   Message 13 of 30 in Discussion
I should have added in my post that it is a "carb" 2000 Heritage Springer. Does this make a difference? THANKS
     

From: Hogout2 Sent: 12/11/2004 12:32 PM   Message 14 of 30 in Discussion
Had A 91 Heriatage with 3.37, was meant for 55mph crusing, I hated it for highway crusing, felt like I always needed a taller gear.


From: Ontheriver Sent: 12/11/2004 4:37 PM   Message 15 of 30 in Discussion
I live and ride mostly 5500-6000' above sea level. (Utah) The 3.37 sounds like and interesting option for high altitude motoring and my 2000 Heritage?
 

From: ΞFasterĚđ» Sent: 12/11/2004 4:54 PM   Message 16 of 30 in Discussion
Hogout,
I had a 91 Springer that also always felt like it needed another gear, but was under the impression that it was an issue conserning the rear belt pulley, not the primary gearing. I think the pulley ratio was changed around '95.


From: ΞFasterĚđ» Sent: 12/11/2004 4:56 PM   Message 17 of 30 in Discussion
I have to admit, I don't know what the stock primary gearing was on that bike.
   

From: Tankmanbob Sent: 12/11/2004 5:00 PM  Message 18 of 30 in Discussion
In answer to the starter question - the 3.37 gearing will make your starter work a bit harder - about 7%.

If you are concerned about that you could get it back by either going to the 1.4kw starter, or the Compu-Fire starter ring which gives you a 15% gearing advantage.

To the Heritage Springer guys - I checked my spring pre-load last night and found it to be set too loose.  The service manual says the threaded posts should extend 0.625 to 0.750 above the spring adjuster nut.  Mine were both at 0.500.  Worth checking, easy to do if you have a caliper.


From: 99fxd Sent: 12/11/2004 6:20 PM   Message 19 of 30 in Discussion
I am going to swap my 2000 dyna to the 3.37 gearing.  What is the easiest, cheapes, or best way to do this without having my speedo off?  Going from 32 to 30 on the trans output would do it but this would screw up my speedo.  The other question is how bad does it mess the speedo up?

   
From: blkmtrckl Sent: 12/11/2004 6:31 PM   Message 20 of 30 in Discussion
99fxd,
< Just looking to see what effects it will have on other aspects of the bike.>
It will turn you into a bully---always pickin on rice burners---just because you can!


From: _zigzzagz_ Sent: 12/12/2004 1:00 AM   Message 21 of 30 in Discussion
The optimal setup would be the 3:37 with the baker dirct o.d. 6 speed. with the r ration 1st and 2nd for the bulk cube bikes. Oh, if I had a giant pile of money.  zigz


From: _zigzzagz_ Sent: 12/12/2004 1:17 AM   Message 22 of 30 in Discussion
Wasn't the 3:37 gearing stock on the heavier evo touring bikes? Or maybe it was all the evo's, but when Bob Wood mentioned I should do the 3:37 when we were discussing my 124" he had said something about the 3:37 gearing being stock on the older heavy tourers so you'd have to figure they couldn't be that bad on the highway. I understood they only dropped the cruising rpm a few hundred, I seem to remember hearing 300 rpm being the number so it shouldn't make that much a negative difference in top end.  I do have a friend with an 80 inch evo with much lower gearing than 3:37 even. Not really sure what it is but it is a holy terror off the line, even takes my 124" off the line for the first bit but he says it's absolutely terrible on the highway. Unfortunately all the torque my 124" makes has made my 1st gear near useless too which is no good for off the line but it's my friends little 80 evo that has me decided on the 3:37 and installing the baker 'r' ration 1st and 2nd gears. Can't have him showing me up again come this summer.  zigz


From: blkmtrckl Sent: 12/12/2004 6:36 AM   Message 23 of 30 in Discussion
Harley has had some factory bloopers on the assembly line no doubt.. An occasional bike gets done with oddball gearing as is the case with my 01 FXD. It came from the factory with 3.37 final. Ed has mentioned on here that he has seen this on a few also.
At 70 mph I am taching approx 3250 +-.
With stock 3.15, 70mph is 3000rpm on my buddies' rides.
I think HD MOCO just uses whatever is laying in the bins when they assemble some of these bikes. The 3.37 gearing was for 99 MM FI baggers I believe ? Maybe they had some parts left over from 99 and decided to not waste them?
 

From: Tankmanbob Sent: 12/12/2004 7:35 AM   Message 24 of 30 in Discussion
Hey zigz, the R ratio baker 6-speed would be just the ticket for you - combined with some other way of lowering the final drive gearing, either through the primary like the 3.37 guys, or through the secondary like the smaller front pulley or chain drive guys.

With the kind of power your 124" could end up making, chain drive may be the way to go.  I've got my bike apart right now, and I can attest that going to chain secondary drive would be no big deal installation wise. 

I'll try another spreadsheet attachment - you might not have been able to open the other one if your windows is an older version.  This spreadsheet has trans & final drive gearing in it.  You can monkey around with all the figures to see exactly what you will get.  There are three tables at the bottom that give you speed per RPM, RPM per speed, and torque multiplier (compared to stock gearing)

For 3.37 gearing with the Baker R, put 24 & 37 in for the primary, 32 and 70 in for the secondary, and the gears are 2.82, 2.08, 1.60, 1.23, 1.00, 0.80

These inputs give you the following equivalents compared to stock:

1st - 2.96
2nd - 3.17
3rd - 3.44
4th - 3.37
5th - 3.37
6th - 2.70

The torque multiplier you'd get is:

1st     -6%
2nd    +1%
3rd     +9%
4th     +7%
5th     +7%
6th     -14%

So you can see you'd get a much more usable 1st gear, 2nd gear would be just like stock is now, and 3rd thru 5th would give you a nice torque multiplier, 6th would be a good high speed cruiser.


From: 99fxd Sent: 12/12/2004 8:00 AM   Message 25 of 30 in Discussion
I was wondering if anyone has a list of the parts needed, with part numbers to make the switch from 3.15 to 3.37?  I am now not interested in the 3.36 swap as it will mess with the speedo.


From: jmorton10 Sent: 12/12/2004 8:05 AM   Message 26 of 30 in Discussion
37846-99a clutch shell(37T)
40269-85a compensating sprocket(24T)  
~John


From: 02roadcling Sent: 12/12/2004 9:00 AM   Message 27 of 30 in Discussion
john,  Use the same stock chain?


From: jmorton10 Sent: 12/12/2004 9:03 AM   Message 28 of 30 in Discussion
the stock chain works fine.  ~John


From: joek86 Sent: 12/12/2004 11:14 AM   Message 29 of 30 in Discussion
Hey John,are you installing 3.37 in your new bike?  Joe


From: jmorton10 Sent: 12/12/2004 12:01 PM    Message 30 of 30 in Discussion   
I'm not sure yet Joe, I like the "long legged gearing" with the stock gears & was thinking of leaving this bike at 3.15 for superior cruising.

After riding it a while however, I realized that the rubber mount motor setup does not really begin to smooth out until it gets above 2500 rpm, so I may be better off with the 3.37 in this bike also.  I did not have time to remove the 3.37's from the Heritage before I traded it, so I would have to buy them again if I go that route.  ~John  

[ClassicRider2002]

-

Anything added beyond this point is new information.

Regards,

"Classic"

[ClassicRider2002]

-

I actually have a excel spread sheet that was provided within a THREAD here at HTT by:
From: Fuzznut5197 Sent: 6/13/2008 7:01 PM
Anyone have any use for this driveline spreadsheet? It was posted here back in 2003, and I thought is was saved somewhere in HTT, but I can't find where.

Hopefully all will be able to down load the EXCEL PROGRAM below next to the "paper clip"

If you plug in your actual gearing (comp sprocket "T"ooth size, clutch shell basket/ring gear "T"ooth size, rear wheel sprocket "T"ooth size, transmission "T"ooth size as well as rear wheel diameter then it will factor RPMS and such which would aid you in determining what level of gearing you might benefit most from........then if you wish to ponder some other options for your comp gear or your clutch shell basket gear or perhaps your secondary gearing which might require a different belt you can see what might create the biggest bang for your buck.....

[NOTE: Please remember that putting your cursor next to the paper clip icon below will allow you to open this EXCEL PROGRAM, if you desire simply choose to save the program to your computer as well]

[attachment removed after 60 days by system]

[Ultrashovel]

I know a lot has been said about 3.37:1 gearing alreadt. I think it's great. My 2004 Ultra was geared 3.15:1 and I had to be doing 60 mph to get into fifth (high) gear. It was even worse when I added the sidecar.

With 3.37:1 it's perfect for solo and sidecar. It used to be standard on the Evos and Harley has been gearing their bikes too high for the past few years anyway. Try it, you'll like it.

The only issue is how to get it on a 2007 or later EG.....HD doesn't make stock parts, do they? In my case, I changed the motor and clutch basket to 24/37 but the newer primaries are, of course, different.

I've had no problem wih the starter at all. The bike starts instantly with the new ratio. It was never a problem on the Evos so it's no probem on my 88" TC.

[ClassicRider2002]

-

Hello Everyone~~~

Through out all of the "old" THREADS that deal with the 3.37 Gearing Modifcation to our TWIN CAM BIKES I really enjoyed reading them....and after all of the valuable input from everyone whom posted, I eventually did the MODIFCATION to my 2002 RKC.  Like many before me have stated and I must concur, this MODIFICATION has to be ONE OF THE ABSOLUTELY BEST MODIFICATIONS I have done to my "BAGGER", it's such a wonderful "bang" for the buck invested....

Thus I put together a detailed THREAD about the modification, if you are interested in reading about such Simply CLICK, VIEW, & READ the Attached "LINK" below:

3.37 MODIFICATION GEARING INSTRUCTIONS FOR 2002-2006 TWIN CAMS 

I happen to be "ClassicRider" @ V~TWIN FORUM.

Regards,

"Classic"