| Author | Message | ||
     Canucklovingbrit |
Anybody know what was different with the '07 XB crank, compared with other years, that resulted in some failures? Being the owner of an '07 12R, I'm curious & concerned! | ||
| Terrys1980 |
It seems to be more of a Uly issue and not just '07 but late '06 too. http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/messages/142 838/648773.html | ||
| Froggy |
No changes, it was just a manufacturing defect. | ||
| Bike_pilot |
No changes compared to prior years, the '08 and newer got a larger diameter journal and different oil pump setup (more flow i think). | ||
| Canucklovingbrit |
Thanks for the replies. The Uly engine is identical to all other XB engines, right? Or are there some differences? If it is identical, what would cause crank failures on Uly's primarily, rather than all XB engines? Environmental circumstances, eg riding on rougher terrain?? | ||
| Froggy |
Most XBs are garage queens. Ulys are more likely to get ridden. There just aren't many 06/07 XBs out there with 20,000+ miles, and next to none with 50,000. The crank was always a weakspot on the older XB, ask anyone that raced with them, they just can't take the higher RPM abuse, part of the reason for the change to the beefer crank in 08. | ||
| Bike_pilot |
Yes I think that's it exactly - the crank in the uly should be identical to other XBs of the same year, just most XBs don't get huge miles put on them. I tend to think its not rpms that are killing them, especially in the case of the Uly which is probably typically ridden in a more sedate manner than say a 'bolt. Not that rpms can't kill them, just that riding like grandma won't save one that's prone to failure from failure I think (and several have reported failure and stated that they ride in a sedate, low-rpm manner). Anyhow, this plus the higher rev limit is why I ponied up for an '08+ model. | ||
| T9r |
I've got an 2004 XB12R with a little over 24k miles on it and had the crank failure. I wound it up lots... so I would say that higher revs shorten the crank life, which is already prone to failure. | ||
| Bike_pilot |
Sounds reasonable. I've also known old slow guys on Ulys to loose cranks with low(ish) miles as well. | ||
| Canucklovingbrit |
What's a 2007 XB12R, bone stock, in immaculate condition worth - with a failed crank? Not that mine has failed yet, but with 23,000 miles on it, seems like I'm getting into the "danger zone!" That said, looking at this list http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/messages/142 838/648773.html, there are quite a few with way more miles that haven't been affected, a couple with 100,000 miles!!! Friggin' outstanding! Also, all those that failed have a "4" as the first number of their VIN! Mine has a "5"!! Coincidence? OK, I'm grasping at straws here! | ||
| Froggy |
The 4 means it is a bike for the US market, the 5 means it is an export model. Crank is the same on both, the amount of reported export bikes is low due to many of their owners not being on Badweb. | ||
| Reepicheep |
I think it was a bad heat treating deal or something... so it could be as narrow as the ones in the middle of the autoclave are good, and the ones at the edges are bad, on odd tuesdays, after lunch, when "Bob" was working the shift (as we all know Bob was a drinker). Or whatever. The data was pretty alarming when it was rolling in, and is for sure far worse than Harley Davidson should have delivered to Buell Motorcycle Company. But over time it has not been growing much at all... so as alarmed as I was getting, it's just one of those things now. Hope it won't be me, probably won't be me, but if it is I'll fix it or replace it and move on. I'm in much worse shape than you... the bikes almost right before and after me have failed. | ||
| Merc16 |
I heard the same fear and dread when I had my '84 Honda Sabre 700 with the notorious cams. Funny, I read later that the reason the cam issue never showed up in pre-production test bikes was the factory test riders always let the engine get up to operating temperature before they rode. Not just warmed up. |
