Internal Balancer

[FSG]

Only question is how stout are the bearings and the bores in the case they press into.

Just a note to point out that all the bearings press in from the inside of the cases while they are split.

[rbabos]

Only question is how stout are the bearings and the bores in the case they press into.

Just a note to point out that all the bearings press in from the inside of the cases while they are split.

Yes. Where I was going with this is some of the early softails with a tad heavier weights then 07+ weights were on occasion known to wallow out the case bores to the point the bearing(s) were loose. This weight looks more massive on this so that got me thinking about the case bores over time. Depends on how wide the bearings are and how much overall case area they used for press fit.
Ron

[rbabos]

Only question is how stout are the bearings and the bores in the case they press into.

Just a note to point out that all the bearings press in from the inside of the cases while they are split.

Yes. Where I was going with this is some of the early softails with a tad heavier weights then 07+ weights were on occasion known to wallow out the case bores to the point the bearing(s) were loose. This weight looks more massive on this so that got me thinking about the case bores over time. Depends on how wide the bearings are and how much overall case area they used for press fit.
A second concern is being straight cut gears and with heat the gear lash increasing due to the crank and balancer bores moving away from each other, how much rattle will it have at idle when hot?
Ron

[FSG]

There is a scissor gear used to help keep noise down.

[glens]

There is a scissor gear used to help keep noise down.

That's what it looked like to me in this image as well.

[rbabos]

There is a scissor gear used to help keep noise down.

Ah ha, so there is. All good then.
Ron

[CowboyTutt]

I took the 75% reduction in idle shake instead of 100% as to mean, HD didn't want to make a Honda Shadow.  Its a Harley, its supposed to shake a little.  If they reduced the mechanical shaking to 100% with the CB and then added rubber mounting, it would be too lacking in character to appeal to anyone. 

I have always enjoyed the shaking at idle of my 09 TC-A in my Dyna.  After building a high compression 107, it shook even more at idle, like a dog shaking off water!  It was pretty cool, and unlike any motor I have ever had before, and not objectionable for the little time I spend idling.  It was totally cool. 

I don't understand all this "make it smooth" chit. 

Its AN ENGINE!!!!  It's supposed to shake some.  If you want something smoother, buy a Gold Wing.  Great motors, sound good with a pipe, make great TQ and move out under acceleration quite well!!!!!  Have friends who have owned the 1800 cc ones, and engines do impress when loaded down. 

But not a Harley guys.  Its a 45 degree V-twin.  By its very intrasinct nature, its going to vibrate.  I don't understand this drive to make it into something that looks like it, sounds like it, but doesn't run like it.  I know I speak for a diminishing age group but if you want something that smooth in a twin, BMW's would be looking real good right now. 

Regards,

-Tutt 

[rageglide]

Speaking of rubber mounting... Is this new balanced engine still rubber mounted?  If so, why?   

When I first rode a balanced softail with loud exhuast in 2000 I thought, what the h*ll, the throttle is a volume knob.  No vibration, but of course I was used to evo softail which felt like a Harley...   That was then, this is now.  I still have my evo but I sure have gotten used to riding rubber...

My BMW 1150GS vibrates quite a bit actually, so does the old R75/5.  Somewhere between the Evo Softail and the hot rod Roadglide.  Newer BMWs have balance shafts in the boxers and when I rode a friends 1200 I thought it felt smoother, but not too smooth.

[CowboyTutt]

Yep, new engine counter balanced and rubber mounted in a touring frame. 

What does this mean for us Softail and Dyna owners when we are obliged to have it? 

I'm told by my dealership that touring guys are more tolerant of new technology as they just want to ride places and ride hard.  I have no problem with that, and they are a good demographic group to try new technology. 

But while I tour, I'm not a part of that demographic.  A TC-A motor in rubber mounts, hits a real sweet spot for me.

Let it wag it tail at idle and pulse under my legs when running in rubber mounts.  Works for me, and works well!

And yeah, had a 98 BMW Cruiser before landing here.  And a 99 Busa for 5 years.  Been around the block or too.  Best bike ever?  A hot rod Twin Cam, hands down. 

Regards,

-Tutt

[rageglide]

For years I wondered why the B motor wasn't hard mounted in the Bagger frame.  Apparently the engineers at HD decided the way to keep the bars and front wheel wiggling was to semi balance the new engine and keep it in rubber.  But to me it seems like the natural progression was to solid mount this balanced engine and make the entire unit more rigid.  Then again when the Softail got the B motor the engineers realized they needed some vibration to make the damned things shift reliably..

I definitely enjoy a hot rod twin cam.  The guys I know who ride a LOT on baggers keep em stock and seem happy.  Me, I get bored with stock power/personality.  My carb'd 2005 95" hotrod was more enjoyable day to day than the current '12 120".  Fuel infection adds a great deal of complexity and finickiness to the mix.  I don't have deep pockets to deal with the tuning BS and even after dyno tuning by a tuner who's considered top notch the 2012's personality changes daily, worse than an S&S carb on my other bikes.

I tend to tour on the GS because I can actually carry more crap than the bagger...  Plus I put way more long distance miles on my evo softail than I've ever done on baggers.  But I was younger then and since my dad died (on a bike) I don't do as much long haul riding.

Bob

[Deye76]

"I took the 75% reduction in idle shake instead of 100%"

No matter on percentage, to the eye, it is rock solid at idle, at least the one I watched yesterday was.

I was never bothered by how much the engine moved at idle, at speed is where I care about shake, and all the rubber mounted bikes I've owned were fine. I'm amazed HD would go through all the engineering to satisfy those annoyed by "idle shake" and keep "c" lifters for example.   

[Rockout Rocker Products]

So, if they started with 100% reduction, then went to 75%.... what's needed to get to 50 or 25%..... shaving mass off the balancer?

Something tells me it's not that simple, it never is.

[BUBBIE]

Looks like Each Slot on the crank gear has a place for the "One Pin" showing. filling each slot...

Has any talk about How this works? "Not Guessing" I know it was mentioned... Looks to be where the Balance is and could be different according to RPM and Torque applied...

sorry if answered before but I didn't see it... Maybe a post a Link IF SO... (So why the Pins ? Is movement needed to Not shear off parts?)

tks

signed....BUBBIE

Ron said: Balancers are usually rpm specific on these 50-60% 45* v twins. Maybe overthinking it.

[glens]

I say take the damn thing out and fill the resultant void to minimize case volume.  I don't mind an out-of-balance crank assembly spinning around in its bearings if the cases can move with it because the whole thing's rubber-mounted.  That won't put too terribly much pressure on the bearings/races.  What I don't like is two out-of-balance shafts spinning in the cases, actually fighting each other in the process so the cases as a whole don't want to follow the circles each shaft are trying to individually make their spots in the cases move.  That puts a butt-load of force on the individual shafts/races/case-points and positively cannot be good long-term.  No thank you very much!

[Bigbluff]

Isn't piston speed one of the main factors in limiting RPM? Harleys are under-square engines with long strokes and relatively small bores for displacement. The longer the stoke, the faster (at any given RPM) the piston has to accelerate to, from zero at one end of travel and back to zero at the other end of travel. The loads required to do that increase considerably as RPM goes up.

Am I thinking about this all wrong?

[rbabos]

Isn't piston speed one of the main factors in limiting RPM? Harleys are under-square engines with long strokes and relatively small bores for displacement. The longer the stoke, the faster (at any given RPM) the piston has to accelerate to, from zero at one end of travel and back to zero at the other end of travel. The loads required to do that increase considerably as RPM goes up.

Am I thinking about this all wrong?

Not at all. Thing is,  some want to rev a low rpm designed, long stroke, high torque engine designed for cruising at 3k to 7k. Design rules no longer apply.
Ron

[bobscogin]

  Then again when the Softail got the B motor the engineers realized they needed some vibration to make the damned things shift reliably..

My understanding is that the rubber mounted engines couldn't be used in the Softail because the swing arm had to mount to the frame to keep the faux hardtail look, unlike the Touring and Dyna models that had it mounted through the transmission housing. Thus, they got the counterbalanced B motors.

Bob

[PoorUB]

A few years ago I mentioned that HD should put a balanced engine in a rubber mount bagger frame. Most posters thought it was a silly idea.

Well, look what we have today!

[04 SE Deuce]

A few years ago I mentioned that HD should put a balanced engine in a rubber mount bagger frame. Most posters thought it was a silly idea.

Well, look what we have today!

I mentioned the same thing years back and got the same flack. 

Every sporting/performance twin I can think off other than 90 degree Ducati's have balancers. 

Putting rubber hinges in the chassis is not conducive to good handling/stability,  minimizing movement/flex would be good. 

They may be out there but I haven't seen any other brand that has a current model with rubber mounts/hinges in the chassis but when it comes to other brands I follow just about every model except cruisers.

[rbabos]

A few years ago I mentioned that HD should put a balanced engine in a rubber mount bagger frame. Most posters thought it was a silly idea.

Well, look what we have today!

I mentioned the same thing years back and got the same flack. 

Every sporting/performance twin I can think off other than 90 degree Ducati's have balancers. 

Putting rubber hinges in the chassis is not conducive to good handling/stability,  minimizing movement/flex would be good. 

They may be out there but I haven't seen any other brand that has a current model with rubber mounts/hinges in the chassis but when it comes to other brands I follow just about every model except cruisers.

Even then most are mere isolating bushings. As one Kawi tech told me, makes installing the bolts easier.
Ron

[Xyzzy]

The balancer adds additional parts to the engine. I assume (?) more parts means more things that could possibly fail.

Anyways, does balancing the engine (reducing vibration) increase engine reliability?

[Buffalo]

I would say that a better balanced engine "should" make it last longer. Certainly less vibration transferred thru the chassis will cause less ancilliary parts to shake, rattle, roll and come undone. Gaskets could likely have less clamping loads, so last longer, maybe 90in lbs instead of 110 will do the same job. Engine mounts, in theory should have less work to do, so might last longer.
From what I've seen on the TC, a good tune goes a long way into controlling the idle shakes. Now they likely intend to run very lean as before, but the counterbalancer will hide the vibes. I've seen some TC shake violently at idle (stock) while properly tuned barely move (and run cooler). Does that meet emissions? No way.
HD has just found another way to get around a complaint from customers while supposedly meeting the Euro 4 emission standards. JMHO  Buffalo

[rbabos]

I would say that a better balanced engine "should" make it last longer. Certainly less vibration transferred thru the chassis will cause less ancilliary parts to shake, rattle, roll and come undone. Gaskets could likely have less clamping loads, so last longer, maybe 90in lbs instead of 110 will do the same job. Engine mounts, in theory should have less work to do, so might last longer.
From what I've seen on the TC, a good tune goes a long way into controlling the idle shakes. Now they likely intend to run very lean as before, but the counterbalancer will hide the vibes. I've seen some TC shake violently at idle (stock) while properly tuned barely move (and run cooler). Does that meet emissions? No way.
HD has just found another way to get around a complaint from customers while supposedly meeting the Euro 4 emission standards. JMHO  Buffalo

That's where the CB should shine. As for lasting longer engine wise, not really. Crank is still bouncing in the mains but the cb's mask it's feed back to the rider.
Ron

[Xyzzy]

Cool info!

My M8 107 is very smooth compared to the TC 103 I had previously. I love it. It feels like it is begging to be revved.

The only drawback I have seen so far regarding the CB is there is a very loud whine at ~42 MPH. Fortunately, I rarely ride at that exact speed. I'm not going to sweat the noise, because I'm pretty certain it isn't anything bad and "they all do that".

My TC 103 had a whine in first gear. I haven't heard that yet on the M8 107.

[PoorUB]

Lets get the '18 speculation going!

I wonder with HD dropping the V-Rod, at least state side, and this new engine with a balancer what is coming next year? It seems to me for HD to build two balanced engines is a waste of resources. Maybe next year the SofTails will have the same M-8 with a different counter balancer and the current "B" motor will be gone.