Hydra glide fork question

[04customking]

I posted this on Hydra-glide.com too. Looking for help. I have my '54 forks off because there is no comfort at all to riding this bike. Front end feels like a solid bar. I had these apart earlier because I had to replace the sliders last year. They were terrible before this too. When I had them apart, I cleaned everything and noticed that the little weak valve springs looked like part of them was broken off but there were no pieces so it went back together and there was no difference in ride at all. I tried oils from 5w to 30w and still like a truck. So off they came since it's winter. This time, before I took them apart I put my weight on each of them to feel what they were doing. Right side pushed down about 4 inches and stayed there. Came back EXTREMELY slowly. The left side went down and came back up about the same speed as pushing down. Not much resistance. Spring pressure down and right back up with spring pressure against it. I figured the right one was bad. I bought new AM dampers and cleaned everything up including the new parts because they had some burrs on them. Everything fit great with no play with the snap ring in. Put in 7oz. of 20w Belray oil. Could hear air gurgling when working it. Went down and came up like the left one. I figured great. Went down awhile later and tried it again and it's like it was before. Goes down and very slow back. Must be the air got out of it. So, after this long post, my question is, which fork is the way it's supposed to be? I thought the right was bad but maybe that's the way it should be? I'm confused. Thanks for any info, Jim

[CraigArizona85248]

Jim,

I just put new bushings in my legs 4 weeks ago.  New tubes, and dampers at the same time.  My forks both behave the same.  You can definitely tell there is oil dampening the return but I would not call it a slow return.  When I install my dampers I take them apart... that is I remove the damper rod from the valves and springs.  I insert the valves and spring into the bottom of the fork leg first making sure the springs are loaded into the recesses in the valves so the valves can collapse flush against each other.  I secure all that with the retaining clip at the bottom of the fork tube.  Then I drop the damper rod down into the fork leg from the top.  Usually have to jiggle things around a little for the damper rod to fall through the valves and out the bottom of the fork leg.  Then I load the fork leg w/damper rod hanging straight down into the slider.  You gotta get the key shape of the damper end to line up with the keyed hole in the bottom of the fork leg then put a washer and nut on it.  There's probably other ways to skin this cat but this way works for me.

-Craig

[04customking]

Hi Craig. That's how I did it too. The little springs in this kit had to be made much smaller dia. to fit and stay in the recess but everything went together good. When I pushed the finished leg down to bottom it took about 6=7 sec for the main spring pressure to extend it back up. Seems way too long. It's like pulling 90w through a 1/8" hole slow. I did drain the 20w Belray out and put in 6oz. of type E HD oil and it's much better. Probably about 3-4 seconds to extend back up. Does that seem good? I never tried this "test" on any leg I had off before. By the way, nice toy you're wife bought. You are a very lucky man. I'm sure you know that. Jim

[CraigArizona85248]

I'd around one second for my fork tubes to rebound after I compress them.  It's quick, but still dampened.

Yeah... I'm so lucky I keep slapping myself to make sure I'm not dreaming.  LOL   

[Pzokes]

If you have replaced your stock dampers with Tiawan dampers, sometimes those Tiawan dampers don't rebound as good.  I also had one fall apart inside the fork.

I like a thin oil in the forks.  Just enough where it doesn't bang on the top of the rebound. 

I also don't like any spring that says that it gives "better control", etc., like Progressive Springs.  IMO they are too stiff.

But, everyone has their own opinions on what they like in front suspension.

[04customking]

I'm still messing with these forks. Craig, or anyone else, do you happen to have any pics of the damper assy. and the order they go together? I'm starting to second guess everything. If I assemble the two discs in the assembly reversed of what I believe is correct they both push down and come back with little if any resistance. If I put them in "correctly" they compress and then take way to long (in my opinion) to come back up. While checking ebay for fork stuff they show several pics of Tedd's stuff. Some have them assembled "correct" and some are backwards. I hope someone has a pic. Thanks.

[CraigArizona85248]

Jim,

Here is the order of assembly I use...

[04customking]

Thanks Craig. That's my "correct" order too. Back to the drawing board.

[Ultrashovel]

Don't get upset....(gulp) but is there any side pressure on the tubes when the wheel is installed??......It sounds like with the work you have done, this shouldn't be happening.

I had a stock front end on my '82 FXS and the forks were bent when I got them. I replaced the tubes with some Chrome Specialties ones. They had a great amount of "sticktion" I never did get them to work right. Forks were terribly stiff no matter what I tried. I finally replaced the front end wih a complete wide glide and all was well.

[04customking]

Ultrashovel, thanks for the reply. I've checked that and eliminated that. This will be long winded but I'm at my wits end (again) with this thing. Here goes. Bike rode like a truck. Removed forks. When pushing down on them individually they worked like this. Left side went down and came back up quickly. I almost thought it came up too quickly but... Right side pushed down the same, but it was like it stayed down and moved up very slowly until all the way up. Ok I figured, that's the problem. Took it apart, cleaned, examined everything, and since I didn't see anything wrong, I put it back together. Same thing. Pulled the left (good) one apart and it looked the same. Cleaned, examined, and put together. Still worked fine. Figured the hell with it and ordered two dampers from JP. Put them both in and the damn things were the same. Left good, right no good. Here's where it gets nuts. I took them both apart again but this time put the left, original, good damper in the right side and vise versa in the left with no other changes. Same tubes and sliders as always. The sides switched. Left side is now the bad one. To me that eliminated the tubes and sliders. So now the original right bad side is good and no matter what combination of damper parts I use I can't make it work the same. So, I have rolled the tubes on a surface place and they are fine and work in the legs fine. Sliders are both new as are the dampers. Like I said, I'm at my wits end. I can see absolutely no reason for these two legs to be different. I always have the same weight oil in both legs but have tried ATF, Harley type E, 10 wt., 15wt., and 20wt. I didn't expect any difference from oil but was trying to get the different "feels" of them. ANY suggestion would be appreciated. I don't feel like taking these things apart again but I can sure do it pretty fast at least.

[panz4ever]

I have a very early 49 front end (uses the old style stainless caps over the fork upper bracket bolt so the function operates the same but w/o a couple of the later parts) and got looking at the parts book. Seems you have been able to rule out the problem on the bottom side. This is just a thought...any chance the slider tube plug on yours (45775-49) is not functioning properly. Isn't there a small vent hole? Any chance it could be plugged or partially block so that air cannot get in and out when you compress the assembly and as a result the almost "stuck", "slow to rebound" scenario you are describing?

[Ultrashovel]

I have a very early 49 front end (uses the old style stainless caps over the fork upper bracket bolt so the function operates the same but w/o a couple of the later parts) and got looking at the parts book. Seems you have been able to rule out the problem on the bottom side. This is just a thought...any chance the slider tube plug on yours (45775-49) is not functioning properly. Isn't there a small vent hole? Any chance it could be plugged or partially block so that air cannot get in and out when you compress the assembly and as a result the almost "stuck", "slow to rebound" scenario you are describing?

I recall the early 1949 Front ends with vents on the caps. A friend had a 1949 EL and was aways complaining that they would leak fork oil on his clothes. Harley only kept those for a year as you correctly mention. I do recall having a 1951 frame and forks and IIRC, the caps were not vented. They were solid as the later bikes....

[CraigArizona85248]

The early '49 forks had something like a zerk fitting on the top to allow oil to be added.  Starting in late '49 they removed that and went with a vented fork cap.  I believe the vented fork cap was used all the way up until early '77.  If you have oil coming out of your vent cap, you are probably missing the baffle that screw onto the threaded plug that holds the spring inside the fork tube.  When the baffle is missing you get a lot of oil out the vent.

-Craig

[Ultrashovel]

The early '49 forks had something like a zerk fitting on the top to allow oil to be added.  Starting in late '49 they removed that and went with a vented fork cap.  I believe the vented fork cap was used all the way up until early '77.  If you have oil coming out of your vent cap, you are probably missing the baffle that screw onto the threaded plug that holds the spring inside the fork tube.  When the baffle is missing you get a lot of oil out the vent.

-Craig

Don't mean to contradict, but I'm reasonably certain that 1949 was the only time that Harley used those vents. You could be correct about the Zerk fitting on the earliest of the Hydragilides. unless someone made a modification. I never saw any of those...it must have only been for a short time. YMMV...

For the record, I had a 1946 FL in 1953. It had a loose crankpin that I had to repair. When I had the engine out, I discovered that one of the downtubes had broken through due to the excessive vibration. I asked a couple of weld shops and no one would guarantee that the frame wouldn't crack again. That was before the common use of TIG or MIG.

A friend in my club had a garage full of parts. For a reasonable sum, I got a unmolested 1951 OEM frame and Hydraglide forks. It had solid forktube caps. The issue was discussed back then because the fellow who sold me the frame had a 1949 EL (mentioned above) and the forks would leak all of the time.....don't ask me where he got the 1951 Frame. LOL.

At the same time, I discovered that a Knucklehead had different mountings on the front of the motor from the 1951 (Panhead) motors. A spacer was made by HD to mount the earlier motors in replacement frames. The difference was 3/8 of an inch. I asked the dealer about the fact that the motor was sagging forward and he told me about the spacer. He had one on the shelf. It was a steel plate that was about 6" long, 3/8" thick and an inch wide with the two 3/8" front bolt holes for the front mounts. With the spacer in place, the motor wouldd it nice and flat on the mounts.

My 1946 engine also had the typical cracked left front mount. While the engine was apart, I took the crankcase to a truck shop and a very skilled mechanic gas-welded it for me while I waited. Gas welding aluminum is seldom done anymore by weld shops since the advent of TIG but man, was that guy a welder! $5.00 and I was on my way. A little work with with a file and a drill and the motor was back in shape. The problem with gas welding aluminum is that you are using flux and you have a hard time telling when the metal is starting to pool....wait too long and your part will be in a puddle on the shop floor. LOL.

Those were happy days. Nothing to do but a little homework now and then and take a ride on my Hog avery day.....

[panz4ever]

Craig, first a couple of pics of my early 49 cap and plug. The cap itself is stainless. The plug is solid piece with a zirc-type fitting that is the vent and a long stem that fits through the cap that screws into the top of the fork tube. There is a small rubber piece that fits on the end of the zirc-type fitting but has no purpose (at least from my observation) other maybe to keep the fitting clean. From what I have been able to gather this was used only on early 49 pans. Three pics following so that you can see it. Could not show anything but the top the cap screw because I did not want to disassemble the front end.

[panz4ever]

Next up is the later style with the baffle. Have a pic of the baffle assembly connected to the plug and a pic of just the plug that goes into the tube. If you look at the pic of the plug it (top view) there is a hole in the center (for the baffle assembly) and a small hole on the side (used as a vent as well as a feed hole when adding fork oil). That hole on the side goes through the plug and into the baffles. You cannot see it it the assembled baffle but can see it from looking at the bottom of the bare plug. O and while I did not show it the baffled one has the same plug as the one that is bare...hole in the middle for the top of the baffle and small vent/oil fill hole on the side

So here's my thoughts on why the one fork rebounds correctly and one does not. Is it possible that the fork in question is not venting properly. Thinking maybe that small hole on the side is blocked? Obviously just a theory but it seems as though all the work has ruled out everything on the bottom end of the forks (or it appears to me as though you have)