| Author | Message | ||
     Midknyte |
As I understand it, one of the reasons the transmission on HD's (and the Buells) is so large, or appears to be so large, is because it [the drivetrain] is not incorporated into the engine itself, but is rather a separate unit. Feel free to correct me if I am wrong here in addition to my question... Why is this? Does it allow HD to [more] easily manufacture a variety of engines for themselves and those who have contracted from them? That would make sense to me. Just curious... | ||
| Firebolt020283 |
contracted from them??? buell is owned by h-d | ||
| Midknyte |
Not Buell. I thought that HD builds engines for other bike mfr's that make one-offs or like Big Dog (or whatever the name of that biker maker is...). Maybe contract is the wrong word. Small line bike builders that buy and use HD engines. (Message edited by midknyte on August 01, 2004) | ||
| Firebolt020283 |
i think the trans question is more on the lines of acessiblity to be able to work on it in the event of a problem; or beacuse there are so many different drive traines out there ie belt and chain drives but this is just my thoughts it also might just be because thats the way its been done for so may years why change it now? | ||
| José_quiñones |
On the big twins you are correct, the transmission and the engine are two separate pieces bolted together. For the XL/XB, VRod engines, the transmission is inside the engine, ie it's all inside the same engine cases. For the XL/XB the crankshaft output is connected to the clutch via a primary chain. On the Vrod it is done with gears. It's big and heavy because it's overbuilt for durability and to deal with the torque. On the old XL/Tube Frame buells there was a trap door so you could service the transmission without splitting the cases. This is no longer the case for the new XL/XB engines, you have to split the engine appart to get to the transmission. The tradeoff is serviceability vs case rigidity. Rigidity won. |
