Skip to comments.Harley Announces Recall of 13,400 Bikes
Posted on 11/23/2005 12:31:34 PM PST by Red Badger
MILWAUKEE (AP) -- Harley-Davidson Inc. issued a voluntary safety recall on 2006 model Dyna series motorcycles built between June 9 and Oct. 19 due to a transmission defect.
The company said late Tuesday the recall affects some 13,400 motorcycles and is expected to cost less than $5 million, which it will make reservations for in the fourth quarter.
Harley-Davidson also said it expects to meet its previously announced wholesale shipment target of 329,000 motorcycles for 2005.
The Milwaukee-based company said it will provide owners with free pickup and delivery and will make recall kits, which include three redesigned transmission components, available at dealerships starting the week of Dec. 12.
The defect may allow the motorcycles to go into a false neutral position even though the neutral indicator light is illuminated, it said.
"If that happens, the transmission could engage into first or second gear unexpectedly," Harley-Davidson spokesman Bob Klein said Wednesday.
Two accidents related to the problem were reported, but none resulted in injury, Klein said.
The defect resulted from a design flaw in the six-speed transmission, which replaced the five-speed on the Dyna to make for a smoother ride at highway speeds and increase fuel efficiency, Klein said.
The redesign also resulted in a change to the front forks, chassis and a wider rear tire.
Shipments of the 2006 Dyna had been delayed but resumed after a change to production, he said.
Harley-Davidson shares rose $1.20, or 2.2 percent, to $55.67 in Wednesday afternoon trading on the New York Stock Exchange, amid a general gain in market prices on optimism over consumer spending this holiday season.
Actually, what you've just described is more like heat-induced pre-ignition or self-ignition (aka dieseling), which while it can also result in detonation, is not detonation.
Detonation occurs when the air-fuel mixture in part of the cylinder reaches a critical point and then flashes over in an exposive manner (ie detonates), in advance of the flame front reaching it. Things that contribute to it include temperature and the time for flame propagation to ignite all the fuel in the normal manner. It's actually a very complex subject that wasn't at all well-understood until the 40's, and still isn't well understood by many people who work with engines for a living.
Yes, I did get a little hot and bothered and make some injudicious comments. I hereby apologize for those.
I think you already schooled me on the importance of H-D in motorcycle land-speed records. Was that you? I fully acknowledge the superiority of H-D style engines in certain types of motorsport.
I'm old enough to be a grandfather, so calling me "kid" would seem a bit innapropriate. Please note, I'm talking about real children, and real grandchildren here. Not dogs and cats that I just call, "son."
I told you I did not mean to offend you or anyone else. Although I am very much capable of doing so.
Oh please tell another lie Pinochio. Your charming picture urinating on a Harley-Davidon logo wasn't supposed to offend?
Harley owners are like democrats. isn't supposed to be insulting in a conservative forum?
Harley's success is built in the fact that people are not very smart, isn't supposed to be insulting to Harley owners?
The picture of the t-shirt that called Harley owners special ed students wasn't supposed to be insulting?
You should also read the Harley owners manual. Gives no mention about the workings of the bike as far as matenance, spark plugs, tires, controls, oil, etc. It tells you how to shave your goatee. What beer to drink. Exactly how to prop your legs in the air while riding, etc. isn't supposed to be insulting?
Please, tell another lie. Tell us again how you didn't mean to offend me or anyone else. By all means, we'd love to hear it the second time through. Now you're not only a jerk, but a damned liar to boot.
You got the obvious part, anyway....:)
So you pull away from a stop and then stay in the same gear and stay there right up to 75 mph?
I know what you mean, but when discussing specifics, and comparing the performance of different types of engines, your definition is a little vague.
BTW, I can ride all day between 80 and 160 km/h (50 and 100 mph) in one gear on my bike. It's just that my useful powerband runs from say, 5000 to 9000 rpm, instead of say, 2500 to 4500 rpm. Which is to say that I've got a fairly flat torque curve. (actually it peaks around 6500 rpm and slowly decrease from there)
BTW, it's not that I hate the sound of loud pipes (although many cruiser "straight" pipes just sound obnoxious to me), I just believe that in the long run making too much noise will hurt all of us.
The Lucas motto: "Get home before dark."
And that's fair. Loud pipes do have a potential for abuse. I take a lot of care rolling into the neighborhood to not blip the throttle.
Was there a subtext that I missed?
Maybe that a purple CM400 is a suitably gay bike for someone like Prince? I dunno.
Unfortunately, too many guys don't take that care. The guy across the street has a rather loud Wide Boy, and when he or his buddies pull away from his place they without fail do so at full throttle making as much noise as possible. And everyone within earshot (that I can see) flashes them a dirty look.
I keep hearing that argument, but in practice, the Harleys are far more durable. All I have to do is count the crappy AMF Harleys vs. the Hondakawayamazukis of the same era. The Japanese bikes outsold the Harleys by a wide margin, yet the Harleys remain on the road while the J-brand bikes are gone.
The old technology of the Harley motor, combined with the improved steel of recent times create a motor that is astoundlingly long lived, easy to maintain and reliable. Even the mechanically challenged, like me, can replace the top end every 100K miles or so.
All of that high tech stuff wears out and costs a lot to replace. I'll stick to 1930's tractor technology.
Here's another one of my bikes with crappy old technology that has outlived all of that high-tech stuff.
Pushrods forever! (I love them old Vespas too)
The Lucas motto: "Get home before dark."
Lol! Now that was funny.
"The Japanese bikes outsold the Harleys by a wide margin, yet the Harleys remain on the road while the J-brand bikes are gone."
That's because they've been rebuilt, probably more than once. Of course, parts for those old Harleys are readily available, whereas the supplies of them for most Japanese bikes are disappearing. But some older Japanese bikes have started to reach the level of collectible, and a market in repro parts for them is developing. Of course, the Japanese also made huge technological strides every couple of years, whereas parts for Harleys tend to be usable in many model years. Not a knock against either one, in my opinion, just a different frame of mind. In fact, I agree with you, and as I've said if I wanted to touring rig I might well choose Harley, and the ease of rebuilds and availability of replacement parts would be part of the reason. But at the 10,000 miles a year or so I've currently got the time to put on my bike, it'll last until I'm sick of it and ready for a new one. And meantime I'll be riding a bike with higher performance and better handling than any of those "classics", which is important to me. Apparently it's not so important to you, which is fine with me.
"So you pull away from a stop and then stay in the same gear and stay there right up to 75 mph?"
In fact, I can. My Harley delivers over 100 pound feet of torque from 2400 to 6000 rpm. It's a little hard on the clutch, but no problem.
My Concours had pretty good torque, but it's no contest. The motors are like night and day, buzzy horsepower vs. raw torque. Each has its purpose.
If you want to have some fun, test ride the Triumph Rocket III. It delivers 147 pound feet of torque at 2400 RPM and over 120 at idle. Of course, you could always try a Boss Hoss with a 502 crate motor, but that's just ridiculous.
I had a 62 pan in a 58 frame. . Looked stock enough, but had andrews "B" grind cam, with .58 lift, and andrews close ratio 1st/2nd tranny. The front exaust rocker had to be refitted because the push rod to it kept snapping off the arm (too long). 44 mm SU carb, worked great, and especially so in the higher elevations. Ran like a well oiled sewing machine, kinda hard to start (10.5/1 pistons). Put average of 8,000 to 10,000 miles a year, never had major problems. Even the oil drip was cool, because I ran a belt drive primary, and redirected the chain oiler to the back chain instead. (did make the rear rim dirty on long trips !). Comfort was no problem, regular trips from sacto to LA 5-6 times a year, always looked forward to same.
Those who bad rap HD's either are totally envious, or wish to build up their choice/affordability by bad rapping another bike.
Hey, my next door neighbor Johanna just bought one of these exact bikes.(the one in the picture)
The Boss hoss doesn't have much real world torque as the Rocket III. The raw power is there in the boss hoss, but it's squandered by the bike's weight. Sort of like a Abrahams tank. 1500hp and 2200 pounds of torque, but it's used up just moving tonnage.
" Those who bad rap HD's either are totally envious, or wish to build up their choice/affordability by bad rapping another bike."
Bingo. Anyone who bad raps anyone else's bike deserves scorn. Every bike is fun (well, all but a couple I have owned).
Only the cases and heads of my '48 Pan are stock. All of the internals and the sleeves have been replaced over the years. As you can see from the picture, I have an S&S oil pump and a Mallory 12v electronic ignition. The frame is a 58 Duo-glide with a Santee weld-in hard tail (very stupid move by a previous owner). The tanks are 68. The front end is an early Wide Glide with dual 10" disk brakes.
In its next iteration I plan to put a black, stock springer from a current model on the front. I want the disk brakes but would prefer the classic fork style. I have the pogo stick seat, but probably won't ever put that on again. Same for the floorboards. I have a set of 2000 Indian Chief forward controls with the brake pedal in front of the foot. I think I will use the right side setup but keep the mousetrap clutch. The primary is 1.5" belt drive already with a Barnett clutch.
I have considered getting a Duo Glide frame and swapping the motor out, but I'm too lazy.
Hey, I had a Concours, too. Good value, but a dog in the engine department compared to my ZRX1100 (the 1200 is even better in every way) and my DL1000. Both are smoother and more flexible than the Concours was.
I'd love to test ride a Rocket III. Maybe I'll get out on one this year.
"My Harley delivers over 100 pound feet of torque from 2400 to 6000 rpm"
Nice numbers, by the way. What's the displacement?
You are right. Power to weight ratio makes a hella difference. I have ridden a RocketIII. Unbeleivable torque. But the power to weight ratio is the whole point behind our arguement. I know you think that my whole point is to bash and insult harley riders. Most of those things were retaliations. nonetheless, I apoplogize. You are talking to a grandfather as well with 30 years on two wheels. And I ride sport bikes.
If you wanted to eliminate the mouse trap, Can do so by getting the later model shorter clutch rod, cut off the vertical part close to where the bend is, and drill out the tip to accept the end of the clutch cable, the throw then becomes enough the disengage the clutch, because the cable is now closer to the pivot point. Just need to get one of them horsheshoe shaped cable end holders that bolt to the seat post just below the coil. Some just like the looks of the moustrap. Kinda like running the early style oil filter.
Overall, you ride looks and sounds very usable.
Bland is OK -- thanks for the read.
I know nothing about motorbikes but I find the thread very interesting.
"Nice numbers, by the way. What's the displacement?"
Note: Those numbers aren't from the '48. They are from an S&S 113ci motor on an FXR.
My 95ci Electra-glide is way better for touring.
I get about 8hp from my 1966 150cc Vespa and its fun too.
"Some just like the looks of the moustrap. Kinda like running the early style oil filter."
I like the mousetrap because I can hold it with one finger in traffic. It was a great design. I had to put one of those White Bros. "Sissy boy" clutch assist extensions on my Electra-Glide. The 95ci clutch spring was just too tiring in traffic.
Nope definitely not the first recall, though Harley has done a good job of making them as minor as possible.
If I got you confused with someone else then I offer my sincere apologies. I do admit I get lost sometimes trying to figure out who is posting to whom on this board.
I have never said a harley is faster. You seem to be accrediting things to me I haven't said.
Lucas is what really hurt the British bikes imho.
OK my fault. You said V-Twin.
Well you have helped me put my foot in my mouth. It seems I truly was giving credit to yyz for things he didn't say.
YYZ my apologies once again, I was wrong for engaging you like I did.
Thanks, I find your knowledge of this subject very impressive too.
That is another good point about the rice bikes. I remember staying on a busa till around 80mph(it's been a few years so with time I could be being more dramatic) I was in the big bear mountains and going from as low as around 20mph up to around 80mph give or take. It was suprising and nice how it's power band incresed at those higher rpms.
I would say at this point there probably isn't a bike I haven't rode. Though I must say those darned BSA's and all that opposite shifting and crap like to got me killed a couple of times.
Longevity for the most part just depends on how you treat and take care of your scoot. Yes all companies have a failure rate but all in all I doubt any bike is more reliable at this point.
S'alright. We all got a little carried away. Well, I did anyway. I do apologize for my name-calling.
I must admit I've been surprised over the years to learn just what can be done with a Harley-type motor, given enough dollars for high quality parts. Several of the production-based top speed records at Bonneville are held by Harley-engined machines. Apparently there's almost no limit to how big of jugs you can bolt onto the stock engine cases of these engines, and with the right internals still get them to hold together (at least for a while :) )
"Longevity for the most part just depends on how you treat and take care of your scoot."
That Triumph Rocket is a freakin monster. man it is smooth though.
You'd be suprised at how nice and nimble those Boss Hoss's really are. I am a service center for them and ride them often. I recently rode with with a donovan racing motor in it, 740hp with a 200shot of nitro. It was also probably the best handling Boss I have ridden.
I remember the punch line being: you can only fit one dirtbag on a hoover!
"You'd be suprised at how nice and nimble those Boss Hoss's really are."
I followed a group of about 20 Boss Hoss's through the Black Hills from Deadwood to Keystone once. I was surprised how well they handled. I was cruising right along on my FXR with a tricked out motor (although it was leaned out quite a bit for the altitude). The Boss Hoss's were much better than I expected in the corners and I had to hit the throttle hard on the straights to keep up.
That's what confuses the moto-geeks about Harley's. They were designed and built in the Great Mid-West, the land of the tractor. Since the first Harley's were built in a shed, the peripheral components available to HD, such as ignition, oiling and lights were essentially from vendors that supplied tractor companies such as Deer and Massy Ferguson. Many engineers at HD had tractor company experience before working for HD. A Harley is not British "Bike" or Japanese "Rice Rocket", it's an American "implement".
The first thing I do with a harley when I get it in my shop for reselling purposes is tear down the motor and have is balanced, ported polished etc. Harleys are really choked down a lot and the gains per dollar are amazing with just a little bit of work.
Like I said earlier I have nothing against the rice bikes and even spoke highly of many of them. They just have their place, just like Harleys do. When it comes down to it the straight aways and open roads are still ruled by Harleys, cornering etc are ruled by the rice/racer type bikes. I think trying to put one into the others realm is just a practice in futility. yes you can make the rice bikes quick but for the money and time to really make them compete seems like a waste of time to me. I have taken many a rice racer bike and strutted them out lowered them the whole bit it seems like they should have bought a different bike to begin with.
This joke apparently has a number of punch lines.
"the dirt bag is on the outside"
is the one I'm familar with.
The question is, what do they have in common.
OH yea, they will flat out move. There is nothing else like them with all that available power they are putting out. Until someone rides one they have no idea what torque and horsepower are. I can sit on one of the 350's and eat anything up in a straight line either from a stop or rolling. Yes you are right they handle much better than most folks realize. We had a Boss Hoss demo down at my shop this last summer and you wouldn't believe how many of those big ol' boys were just plain scared to ride something that big. I am 5'9" and hover at about 200lbs so I am average height and weight and even after getting on one and smoking the back tire and horsing around on one these guys still were intimidated.
The Italian company Moto Guzzi actually did start out making farm machinery. Their trademark 90-degree v-twin with a longitudinal crank was originally designed to power some sort 3-wheeled vehicle, I think.