Internal Balancer

[City Chicken]

Any other Harley big twin come with an internal balancer (that wasn't a Softail-only powertrain, I mean?)

[misfitJason]

Doesn't the vrod have one

[rbabos]

Doesn't the vrod have one

Yes and gear driven. It will interfere with the crank if timed incorrectly but otherwise they cause no problems even at higher rpms then the big twins.
Ron

[BUBBIE]

IF Balancer is only needed at Low speed RPM? Could there not be a way to Auto-disconnect balancer for the Higher revs and reconnect for the lower ones... Just say'n.... More crap to control and go wrong...

Kinda like the cams that Bump to allow Low compression NOT a direct clutch that wouldn't align up...

signed....BUBBIE

[rigidthumper]

It has to keep time with the flywheel, so you can't disconnect and reconnect it.  No way to guarantee it goes back in the right spot

[rbabos]

IF Balancer is only needed at Low speed RPM? Could there not be a way to Auto-disconnect balancer for the Higher revs and reconnect for the lower ones... Just say'n.... More crap to control and go wrong...

Kinda like the cams that Bump to allow Low compression NOT a direct clutch that wouldn't align up...

signed....BUBBIE

They are pretty much bullet proof Lonnie. One thing that puzzles me though is in order to take out the low end shake, does this actually add vibes at the higher rpms, making it more reliant on the rubber mounting? Balancers are usually rpm specific on these 50-60% 45* v twins. Maybe overthinking it.
Ron

[BUBBIE]

Didn't someone say Lower Rev-Limit on this motor? and it would drop some if held on the limiter?

Old RPM 5250 cross over point...

signed....BUBBIE

[rbabos]

Didn't someone say Lower Rev-Limit on this motor? and it would drop some if held on the limiter?

Old RPM 5250 cross over point...

signed....BUBBIE

Quite often the CB are a reason for rpm limits depending on mass. If so, the performance guys will be yanking them out for sure as step one in the process. Rubber mounts are still there as always.
Ron

[harleytuner]

Didn't someone say Lower Rev-Limit on this motor? and it would drop some if held on the limiter?

Old RPM 5250 cross over point...

signed....BUBBIE

the rev limiter is timed 2 stage.  Hits right around 5900-6000 and if you try to hold at the rev limiter it'll lower to 5450

[BUBBIE]

Crossing over the 5250 and going UP without the balancer weight n higher Limit setting, should allow More RPM quicker and also Horse Power UP n Torque Down...

Think this motor could be a 7,000 RPM runner?  with Balancer weight removed ? ?

signed....BUBBIE

[rageglide]

Bubbie, that 5250 number is a calculated number and doesnt' change or have any bearing on RPM limiter.  Even a 10k rpm limited 4 cylinder UJM crosses torque and hp at that point.

What is the rev limit of a VRod?   The twinky B hard limit was 6200 and I thought that was due to the chain.  With the gear I would expect we could go higher.  I think the new engine made mention of default limiter at 5500 vs 5800 on the twinky A motor.

[BUBBIE]

I know the 5250 number is a constant... Using it to show that crossing point as RPM UP usually has HP increasing  UP n TQ going Down...



signed....BUBBIE

[rbabos]

Bubbie, that 5250 number is a calculated number and doesnt' change or have any bearing on RPM limiter.  Even a 10k rpm limited 4 cylinder UJM crosses torque and hp at that point.

What is the rev limit of a VRod?   The twinky B hard limit was 6200 and I thought that was due to the chain.  With the gear I would expect we could go higher.  I think the new engine made mention of default limiter at 5500 vs 5800 on the twinky

9k usually but some push it a bit. 9100 on my PV cal.
Ron

[rageglide]

So based on the V-Rod config the gear driven balancer may not play a big role in determining the rev limit in this engine. 

Bubbie, apparently I missed your point, sorry. 

[BUBBIE]

 

I like adding some of the "Known by All"   There are those who will Learn or Ask by mention things in the RPM use...

I answer to Help and add questions at times... 

Here is an Excellent read to understand Torque : Horsepower

http://www.largiader.com/articles/torque.html

signed....BUBBIE

[BUBBIE]

 A fixed relationship between torque and horsepower at certain engine RPM's has lots of power, but no torque? Remember that the connection between torque and power is rotational speed. Some sport bike motors like rbabos', might generate 155hp at 10,500 RPM but the torque at that RPM is very small; about 58 ft-lbs.  Eh.......

The large-displacement Big twin;  might peak at 100+ hp above 5250 RPM. The torque applied at the twin's lower rpm, 75 ft-lbs, is greater than the torque applied at the sport bike's 10,500 rpm but the sport bike makes up for it with a lot more engine speed and ends up with more horsepower.

Ron can FLY-By most TC's because he has the Horse Power and RPM... and Besides I Like Ron... 

My Language for Not Plagiarizing article... 

signed....BUBBIE

[rageglide]

But Bubbie, what does that have to do with the internal balancer?   That's the part I didn't understand about your post.

[rbabos]

So based on the V-Rod config the gear driven balancer may not play a big role in determining the rev limit in this engine. 

Bubbie, apparently I missed your point, sorry.

Weight and bearing loads would determine max rpm, much like the early softail CB B motors, although they can be pushed much higher as well especially the lighter weights from 07+. There's always an rpm safety factor in the design limits, and many push that envelope.   Vrod cb is not that big to allow increased rpms and the engine is also rubber mounted as a secondary smoothing agent. 60* cyls shake a hair less also. Some have removed them for racing and the increase in vibes is noticable. Much like softails, removal makes them less street friendly but to a lesser extent unless one lives near the rev limit most of the time.
Ron

[rageglide]

So based on the V-Rod config the gear driven balancer may not play a big role in determining the rev limit in this engine. 

Bubbie, apparently I missed your point, sorry.

Weight and bearing loads would determine max rpm, much like the early softail CB B motors, although they can be pushed much higher as well especially the lighter weights from 07+. There's always an rpm safety factor in the design limits, and many push that envelope.   Vrod cb is not that big to allow increased rpms and the engine is also rubber mounted as a secondary smoothing agent. 60* cyls shake a hair less also. Some have removed them for racing and the increase in vibes is noticable. Much like softails, removal makes them less street friendly but to a lesser extent unless one lives near the rev limit most of the time.
Ron

Maybe I should have said, this new gear driven single cb may not introduce the same rpm limitation as the B motor chains do.  Certainly not saying it isn't a factor, but rather, may not have as low of an RPM limit as the chains do.  I would be wary of spinning this new engine at 7+k rpm... The bob weight does look moderately heavy and things would get ugly if it failed.   

[rbabos]

So based on the V-Rod config the gear driven balancer may not play a big role in determining the rev limit in this engine. 

Bubbie, apparently I missed your point, sorry.

Weight and bearing loads would determine max rpm, much like the early softail CB B motors, although they can be pushed much higher as well especially the lighter weights from 07+. There's always an rpm safety factor in the design limits, and many push that envelope.   Vrod cb is not that big to allow increased rpms and the engine is also rubber mounted as a secondary smoothing agent. 60* cyls shake a hair less also. Some have removed them for racing and the increase in vibes is noticable. Much like softails, removal makes them less street friendly but to a lesser extent unless one lives near the rev limit most of the time.
Ron

Maybe I should have said, this new gear driven single cb may not introduce the same rpm limitation as the B motor chains do.  Certainly not saying it isn't a factor, but rather, may not have as low of an RPM limit as the chains do.  I would be wary of spinning this new engine at 7+k rpm... The bob weight does look moderately heavy and things would get ugly if it failed.

Only question is how stout are the bearings and the bores in the case they press into. That would be the weak link if any. The gear drive and shaft assembly should be ok. One of those things we need to wait and see.
Ron

[glens]

I'd solve the whole problem by yanking the counterbalancer - once the warranty's up, of course   But I don't anticipate getting one of these M8 bikes within the next several years anyway.

[Don D]

Ron
On the same page, the balancer must have a sweet spot so to speak.
The techno speak throws around numbers such as 75% and 100%. No clue what that means and there are no rpm range qualifiers. How in the heck can a motor be too smooth? This is a touring bike why not break the mold and get it as smooth as possible? Would they loose market share?
All this marketing hype sounds like engineering was told what the objectives were and they met or exceeded most, a good thing if the drive train is sustainable, and then those same market folks created their own marketing techno babble.

[harleytuner]

Ron
On the same page, the balancer must have a sweet spot so to speak.
The techno speak throws around numbers such as 75% and 100%. No clue what that means and there are no rpm range qualifiers. How in the heck can a motor be too smooth? This is a touring bike why not break the mold and get it as smooth as possible? Would they loose market share?
All this marketing hype sounds like engineering was told what the objectives were and they met or exceeded most, a good thing if the drive train is sustainable, and then those same market folks created their own marketing techno babble.

They probably couldn't get them perfectly smooth so they said the designed it that way.

[jbexeter]

The simplest way to make a motor silky smooth is add flywheel mass, I used to run an old 1.6 litre single cylinder diesel with 600 lb flywheels that (think oil oil field donkey motors) that was so smooth it would barely move a glass of water.

Throttle response would be crap of course.

Couple it (say a 2x mass flywheel) with a CVT and you'd be on to something, tourer wise.

Straight cut gears are *always* going to whine, Citroen got the logo because they were an early adopter or herringbone gears that cut transmission noise down dramatically.

[rbabos]

Ron
On the same page, the balancer must have a sweet spot so to speak.
The techno speak throws around numbers such as 75% and 100%. No clue what that means and there are no rpm range qualifiers. How in the heck can a motor be too smooth? This is a touring bike why not break the mold and get it as smooth as possible? Would they loose market share?
All this marketing hype sounds like engineering was told what the objectives were and they met or exceeded most, a good thing if the drive train is sustainable, and then those same market folks created their own marketing techno babble.

Yup, I was in awe when I read the mystical properties of the plastic thrust washer in the new comp.  If you read between the lines, it translates to , it works so well for these guys, let's use it too. Nobody will know.
Ron