| Author | Message | ||
     Slyfox |
MY '09 XB12XT ("A") has been replaced with an'09 XB12XT ("B"). I had the impression from H-D that "B" has the improved axle/bearing set ala the 2010 XB12XT. How can I be sure? Another Bueller wants to trade wheels and he has an '03 XB9. | ||
| Froggy |
The 2010 is the only year the XBs had the 3 bearing wheel from the factory, but it is possible that your 09 has the 2010 wheel and axle from being swapped in later in its life. If you look closely at the seals on the bearings, the 03-09 wheels have “6006” on them as that is their size. If it has a different number (I forget which) it is the 2010 wheel and bearings. The 2010 wheel has a black coated axle, while 03-09 came with a silver uncoated axle. The black axle is backwards compatible with the older wheel (but not the other way around), so that isn’t always a perfect indicator. | ||
| Lets_go_riding |
Hello, this is the first time I have ever posted on any website. I have a 2006 Ulysses, and this week I needed to replace the rear wheel bearings, my 4th time. The rear disc side pressed in nicely, but the drive side dropped right in without needing any force. So the first question is; is this safe and should I ride the bike? The second question is, why do I need to replace the rear wheel bearings every time I replace my rear tire. Thank you in advance. Jon | ||
| Froggy |
Hello Jon, welcome to the board. There is an issue on the Ulysses models in particular that the drive side wheel bearing can fail prematurely, the only fix for this is the 2010 wheel that I mentioned in the post above. The issue with the bearing dropping right in is due to the hub being damaged, likely from having the bearings failed and replaced several times. The cheap solution is to have the bearing JB Welded to the hub, I know people who have done that with great success, but in my personal opinion you are better off buying the new wheel. The 2010 wheel beefs up the bearing size to support greater loads, in addition to having a second set of bearings on the drive side and additional external dust seals. American Sport Bike sells the revised wheel, and I highly recommend having them install the bearings for you. You just need to transfer over your sprocket and brake rotor. http://americansportbike.com/newdir/Item/17330 (also need the axle/bearing kit http://americansportbike.com/newdir/Item/17902 ) The cause of the bearing failures vary, from excessive load, water intrusion, and incorrect axle installation. The revised wheel fixes all of that, and assuming you don't over tighten the axle you should not have any failures ever again. | ||
| Lets_go_riding |
Froggy, thank you for the information. So the wheel is roached. I can use some JB weld to hold the bearing in place, but when this bearing goes, which it will the wheel will need to be replaced. Was there ever a recall for this issue? From an engineering standpoint the 3 bearing set up makes a lot of sense. | ||
| Al_lighton |
Correction: The 17330 wheel Froggy linked to above does NOT need the axle bearing kit bought separately, it comes with it. The bearings are still NOT installed, but the price includes the axle/ bearings, and seals. That is NOT true for the black or red 2010 wheel, http://americansportbike.com/newdir/Item/17901 or http://americansportbike.com/newdir/Item/17905 . Those wheels do NOT come with the axle/bearing kit, and you must purchase that separately (17902 for XB, 17903 for 1125). But either way, you're probably better off having us press the bearings in prior to ship. It's worth the $20 I charge to do it if you don't have a press and the specific instructions for doing it. Al | ||
| Lets_go_riding |
Al, thank you for the clarification. I am going to get the new wheel. I did the "cheep" fix for now, so I can ride this weekend. Do you have the wheel currently in stock? | ||
| Al_lighton |
All three colors (metallic mag Uly Wheel, black, and red) are presently in stock. Al | ||
| Willywbl |
Heading out west for a few weeks. My 2006 Ully has 25,000 on the clock with original drive belt and rear bearings. The belt has some light fraying on the outside edge. What could cause this? Bearings seem fine but would like to replace them before the trip and figured I might as well replace the belt as well.I am looking for suggestions for best parts and price for these items. | ||
| Froggy |
Will, 25k is a good amount of miles on the bearings and belt. They can likely last another 25k, or they can fail tomorrow. The fraying of the belt is normal for its age. I do recommend replacing both if you have a long trip coming up. You can roll up the old belt like a bandsaw blade and pack it as an emergency spare. American Sport Bike sells the belt and bearings http://americansportbike.com/newdir/Item/17176 http://americansportbike.com/newdir/Item/17170 | ||
| Longhorn |
Is there a point to changing the belt on my 06 Uly if it looks ok? (no cracks or fraying.) Don't know the history on the belt, I have 21k on the clock. Getting ready to put a new rear tire on. I think it's the original, it's the Dunlop D616. I have a new set of Bearings I got from American Sport Bike, and from what I'm seeing on other post I guess it's the thing to do when changing the tire. | ||
| Froggy |
Longhorn, the belt is going to eventually fail. About 20k miles is when I personally recommend changing the belt, and like I mentioned above keep it as an emergency spare. Brand new belts are tight and can be difficult to install, so it is best to do it when like in your situation when you are doing tires. The broken-in used belt will install without any resistance, making it great in an emergency if you are on the side of the road with limited tools and supplies. | ||
| Reepicheep |
I agree with frank, at 20k miles, make the original belt a spare (I carry mine in a side bag) and put a new one on. Then just run that forever knowing you have a spare to use to get home and order a replacement if you do have a break. At 20k you would be way past the "replace chain and sprockets" interval for a chain drive bike anyway. | ||
| Longhorn |
Thanks for the info on the belt, I'll get one coming. I am really loving this bike, I have had many in my life and it is the one I am enjoying more than any other! So.. much fun to ride, comfortable and very good mileage!! It came with a tank bag and the frame for bags on the back, but no bags. Any clue as to what brand will work on the frame and where to get them? It has the longer screws to mount the frame so I am assuming that it was a Buell OEM frame. | ||
| Fobyfo |
I'm going to jump in here as this looks like the best place to post my findings on the rear bearings of my 2009 XT. I found the bearings notchy when replacing my tires. They should be silky smooth. I went ahead and put everything back together so I could ride while I procured new bearings. I found the SKF bearings at a local supply. After reading discussions on this board I was prepared for a collapsed spacer tube. I thought that if I found it collapsed I would fabricate a new one of something more substantial. I removed the wheel and looked over the bearing assy. My first observation was that the inner races couldn't turn independently. That didn't support the collapsed tube theory. I went ahead and removed the bearings and tried to match the tube length to the bearing lands. Unfortunately, I didn't have any way to take accurate measurements in my shop at home so I did some crude rigging that indicated the tube was, in fact, longer than the bearing lands. This would result in the bearing inner races being loaded out from the center plane of the wheel. In order to get a better idea I went ahead and installed one of the bearings and inserted the tube and took a flat washer to lay across the end of the tube and get a relationship to the bearing outer land on the wheel. I was able to rock the washer significantly. I would estimate around .050". I ended up shortening the spacer tube some to lessen the interference as much as I was comfortable. When I reinstalled the 2nd bearing the inner races were still locked together so I didn't totally unload the bearings. I, personally, wouldn't be uncomfortable with the tube being the same as or slightly shorter than the distance between the lands on the wheel. These bearings are designed to take thrust loads but that is not their primary function. Someone with more knowledge of bearing design might be able to shed some more light on what we should be seeing here. The main thing I want to share with you is the observation that the bearing inner races on my bike were loaded outboard by a tube that was too long and not inboard by a tube that was collapsed. I attribute my bearing failure to excessive thrust load on the bearings by the long tube. | ||
| Reepicheep |
Longhorn, the Hepco Barker bags should fit. Post a picture of them if you want to be sure, or google up a picture somebody else posted. They are pricey, and they have a couple of stuipid fragile design elements like the latch and the straps to keep the open lids from coming all the way down, but both can be economically replaced if you break them, and if you are gentle with them when open both will last fine. Once sealed up, the bags are pretty strong in my experience (including playing superman over the back of a Corolla). Bags were torn from bike, ripping mount out of frame, but didn't come open. | ||
| Reepicheep |
Fobyfo, I think the critical measurement "from scratch" would be the length of that spacer under the compression load of the axle at the recommended torque. The measurement "from the factory" is likely the unloaded length. Also, I'm not sure those bearings are designed to be seated all the way in. That would just make the machining of the wheel that much more critical, for no gain. Better to machine the races just a shade deep, and let the axle spacer do the spacing on those inner races. (This is based on common sense, I didn't do well in my mechanical engineering classes  ) | ||
| Al_lighton |
Bill is correct, Please go read the thread here: http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/messages/142 838/474350.html In that thread, you'll find both the nominal lengths and tolerances for the spacer tube, as well as important information about how the bearings should be installed. Bottom line: if you press both bearings to the hilt, you've destroyed both of them. Only the brake rotor side bearing gets pressed to the floor, the other side gets pressed to the spacer tube. And that means that if you don't press by both the inner and outer race, AND support the first bearing by both the inner and outer race, you've also likely destroyed your bearings. But none of that changes the fact that the pulley side bearing in two bearing wheel is being loaded higher than it really should be. The three bearing rear wheel is a very good thing.... Al | ||
| Fobyfo |
I'll admit that I didn't read the procedure very thoroughly before proceeding but, that doesn't change my observations that are, I think, quite relevant. The inner races of the bearings were tightly loaded evidenced by the fact that I could not turn them independently. That tells you there is no collapse of the tube. Has anyone observed the spacer tube being loose when experiencing a bearing failure? As far as overloading radially I can't see how the dynamic design load of around 13,000 lbs is going to be exceeded by anything we are going to do to this bearing. That rating is for each bearing and we have 2. I have never experienced rear wheel bearing failures on a motorcycle. The fact that we are seeing them like this bothers me. I don't think the weakness is the bearings. | ||
| Reepicheep |
the collapse of the tube is dynamic. It acts like a spring when the axle is torqued and applies a compression force along the long axis of the spacer. Release the compression and the spacer expands again. Overtorque the axle and you risk exceeding youngs modulus for the aluminum, and instead of being a spring it's just mashed. The bearing is then axially loaded because the inner race has moved too far. Like Al said, the 2 bearing (as opposed to 3 bearing) design probably works in theory, but is on the ragged edge, and is failing frequently in practice. (That being said, I am on my third Buell, over 100k miles cumulatively, and I have never had a wheel bearing fail. I follow the manual to the letter for install and removal of the rear wheel, and no HD dealer ever touched that axle). | ||
| Al_lighton |
I think that's pretty much spot on, Bill. Though you just meant Yield Strength, not Young's Modulus. The yield strength is the stress where the material deforms plastically instead of elastically, where Young's modulus is just the spring rate of the material in the elastic zone. But I knew what you meant. In a PERFECTLY installed bearing, the two bearings would be installed in such a way that the spacer tube was preloaded slightly when the wheel wasn't installed, and then when the axle was torqued down, the elastic deformation of the spacer tube from the axle torque would exactly counter that preload. In this case, there would be no side loading on the bearings in either direction in the installed condition. If the bearings are pressed in as I've described above with both races supported when pressed so that no load of one race occurs relative to the other, the spacer tube would be tight in the wheel (by the amount of the elastic deformation of the spacer tube), and neither inner race would spin independent of the other. But if that condition occurs because one race has been displaced relative to the other during the installation process, the bearings are already likely damaged. Al | ||
| Reepicheep |
Like I said, I did poorly in my ME classes. I knew it was some constant of something or other. | ||
| Reepicheep |
(And my other important disclaimer is that I never leave town without new bearings and a spacer tube, shipped from Al, in the right side bag.) | ||
| Fobyfo |
I don't disagree with what you say here. As far as the "perfect installation" there is more to the story. Perfection would include what you said. In addition, the bearings would be parallel and coaxial and stay that way in operation. That is often where the faults lie. I have little doubt about the approach I took since I accomplished setting the 2nd bearing to the pocket land resulting in it being fully supported both axially and radially. I am puzzled why the design results in one of the bearings not being fully seated - especially by such a large dimension. My main curiosity is why we are seeing what appears to be excessive failures. I am having trouble accepting the collapsed spacer tube theory. | ||
| Reepicheep |
Fair enough. We can establish that the three bearing wheel seems to solve the problem, both before and after Buell adopted it. What we can't really say for sure is what problem it is solving and how it is solving it. Anecdotally, there seems to be a good correlation between carefully following the installation instructions in the manual and increased bearing reliability. Correlation does not mean it is causal. But it doesn't mean it isn't causal either. | ||
| Fobyfo |
Agreed. I question the 3 bearing solution for a couple of reasons - 1) it adds complexity for, at least to me, no apparent reason. We can't be exceeding load capacities and, if we are, adding a 3rd bearing is not the solution I would offer. I'm a believer in the KISS principal. 2) Kind of an extension of 1, but it becomes much more difficult to keep everything aligned. The axial and parallel relationships are much more difficult to maintain. I'm still interested in what is happening. Is anyone seeing the spacer tube rattling around in there when taking a wheel down? |
