MoCo admitting their mistake?

[MadMax]

Interesting, but 5 years too late ..

Browser Update Required

[banquo]

This is the drive side main bearing, right?
Is there really an issue with the roller on stock 88s or 95s?
I can see an advantage of a taper roller in its ability to take greater transverse loading, but there shouldn't be any significant side load on a crank, and an angular contact ball bearing should be capable of withstanding what there is. Is it an angular contact that's fitted as stock, or a plain ball bearing...?
Is this something new for the worrier to worry about?
Finally, if this sleeve is used to adapt a taper roller bearing to the existing recess in the crank, and the usual fix is to machine the case to take the Timken, doesn't that mean that a smaller bearing overall diameter must be used?

Oh, and to answer the original question, yes, it does look like an admission, but no more so than offering the SE hydraulic cam chain system as a retrofit to earlier models. Seems that no matter what year you buy, there will be some fatal defect, but I suppose the fact that they are offering an upgrade is creditable. Of course, it would be much more creditable if they admitted the original design wasn't up to it, and offered a free upgrade.
I can't believe I just said that....

[panheadpete]

Ah. If this is the drive-side bearing, it's awfully reminiscent of the 70's Norton Commando fiasco where the roller bearing failed on the drive-side due to crankshaft flex, although the cure for that was a barrel shaped roller with which the corners didn't dig in; not sure about a taper-roller bearing but hopefully H-D have done sufficient testing to recommend it....but taper-roller bearings are meant to be adjustable, as in wheel bearings, as they are assembled and as they bed-in/wear; or I may be completely wrong, in which case someone will tell me, politely I hope...
(Now I'll see if me smileys are working again)
Cheers, Pete.

[Limey_Dave]

The crank end float is set up on asy and that's it for life of the build.
I always used 2 ballrace mains on my Triumphs and shimed behind the bearings to set end float.

Re Nortons,as I recall went to Superblends first with the Combat engine.
The originals held up ok for race milage at constant revs but failed in street use with repeated pulling away from low revs.
To go even further o/t they're a good upgrade for unit Triumphs by building up crank and grinding to metric size.

[MadMax]

Been away from the computer for a while playing with the latest addition - all 8lb 10oz of him! Well done my Mrs ...

Is this something new for the worrier to worry about? Ha ha! Could be!

The drive side plain roller bearing is exactly the same as the timing side roller in all 03 & later TC's. I think that we're reasonably safe unless performance work takes you above 100ft/lbs of torque which, let's admit it, does really wake up the otherwise docile stock motor. The Timken tapered roller is smaller in OD than the current roller so I'm guessing that the insert fits into the existing recess as Jake suggests. A major problem that can occur with the current setup is terminal big end thrust washer damage - Ask HarleyHog. The tapered Timken holds the crank captive and prevents any lateral float. From 03 - 05 the ONLY THING stopping your crank walking towards the cams is the compensator nut stack up assembly. I believe this is the reason for the reviewed torque procedure on 03's & later bikes. If the nut does come loose, I would be looking in the filter to check for brass particles.