The 2003 came with the Barrett. I do not know what springs are in it, but in either case, guaranteed it will work better than any stock clutch.

My guess is it the 2003 is just the regular Barrett. The 108ci Patric Racing motor has a good amount of torque and the Barrett unit works great.

A stock Barrett will be more than sufficient. I really enjoy the Barrett. By comparing the design to the flex plate, it appears to be a something that will last longer than the flex plate design.

Yamaha should have had the bikes stock with the Barrett set up.

BikerRon wrote:
http://roadstarclinic.com/component/option,com_fireboard/Itemid,187/func,view/catid,14/id,1028480/#1028480

Yes, I had already read that thread (but thanks for pointing it out.) That was why I asked the question. My concerns with the thread are because the "Barnett" bearing is the same as the stock one. The side load bearing implies that it is only designed for pressure from the load side, but the clutch pack and springs provide load from both sides, even though the predominant side will be without clutch apply.

So far, I have only found two reports of bearing failure in a Barnett clutch.

You’re not grasping the design concept of an angular raced bearing. The force is only applied to one side to over ride the spring pressure and release the clutch. Let the clutch out and the spring(s) engage the clutch and freeplay in the cable leaves the bearing at rest.



Oh, and there are more Barnett bearing failures than what you’ve read about in here.

For 10-12 bucks it’s cheap insurance to keep from going back in there to find a disintegrated bearing in the future.

Your call.

I understand the bearing design just fine. My main issue is lack of detailed understanding of the operation of our clutch.

I am assuming that the apply plate is never freewheeling. For vibration and flywheel effects alone, I am assuming there has to be a load on the bearing at all times (just changes from lighter load in clutch release and heavy load in apply, or vice versa if my understanding is wrong.) Like I said, I do not really have good understanding of the mechanics of the design.

Since the Barnett uses the exact same part as Yamaha, I would assume if there was a bearing problem, it would be well published by now (maybe even a recall.) I could easily understand bearing failure if it was not seated correctly (wobble under spin) resulting in the spread of the bearing sleeve.

I'm not trying to say I think you are wrong, just that I feel there is not enough data to make me feel the need to make a change.

I AM wondering if I should just stick to the Barnett stock springs instead of the HD springs (to avoid "too much" lateral load on a stock engine.)

BikerRon wrote:
http://roadstarclinic.com/component/option,com_fireboard/Itemid,187/func,view/catid,14/id,1028480/#1028480

Great post Ron! Thank you!

For us Canucks https://www.amazon.ca/Bearing-Angular-17x35x10-Bearings-VXB/dp/B002UEFJ1Y

I am assuming there has to be a load on the bearing at all times (just changes from lighter load in clutch release and heavy load in apply

The load on the bearing is only present when the clutch lever is pulled to counteract the spring that is clamping the clutch plates together.

Release the lever to engage the clutch and the bearing load is non existent. Provided you have what is called freeplay in the cable.




Since the Barnett uses the exact same part as Yamaha, I would assume if there was a bearing problem, it would be well published by now (maybe even a recall.) I could easily understand bearing failure if it was not seated correctly (wobble under spin) resulting in the spread of the bearing sleeve.

The stock bearing is load rated for the whimpy pressure plate spring. Hence, no problems as to failure.

If I was going to replace a stock setup with a heavier clutch I sure would want to replace the stock bearing with a better one.

G_C. Study the exploded view of our clutch layout.

Note: part number 32 is labeled as a ‘Rod-Push 1’ but actually is pulled against the bearing towards left side of the engine by #7 (also mislabeled as it pulls #32) when the clutch is disengaged. Part 7 has a pinion gear that when rotated, pulls against part 32’s rack gear on one side of it. . Think rack and pinion gears.

Any questions as to what does what, throw them out there.

https://www.partzilla.com/catalog/yamaha/motorcycle/2009/road-star-xv17awyr/clutch

That all gets replaced with the Barrnett clutch.(Not the push rod but the bearing and plate) I have 1 setting in front of me and the new bearing is already installed. Numbers 24-29 all go in the can when a Barrnett is installed.

davej wrote:
That all gets replaced with the Barrnett clutch.(Not the push rod but the bearing and plate) I have 1 setting in front of me and the new bearing is already installed. Numbers 24-29 all go in the can when a Barrnett is installed.

Yea, but from what I’ve read, the Barnett comes with a bearing not unlike what the stock setup had.

He mentioned not understanding how our setup functions thinking the bearing has a load, to some degree, all the time.

A few have posted their bearing failures with the Barnett setup on RSC’s FB page.


https://imgur.com/gallery/LpsoP