1988 400WR?

Hi all, noob here, I thought this would be a great way to introduce myself and also tap into the collective knowledge of this forum.

I have just acquired a 1988 Husqvarna 400WR (it was supposed to be a '86 but that's another story), but I don't see much information on 400's in this production year.
The closest I have found so far is 430WR models, could this be an 1987 built bike that was sold new here in Australia in 1988? It has an Australian compliance plate date of 02/88.
The frame number is 3T 000846 and it is hard to tell the difference between the '87 and 88 models, is there an easy way to pick them apart?
I need to replace most of the plastics, rebuild the rear shock and replace the fork seals, but on the bright side, it has a freshly recovered seat, two new tyres and receipts for around $2500 worth of engine components/work.
The previous owner didn't know how to correctly fit the gear shift return spring so it wouldn't select gears, and the kick starter would not engage due to incorrect fitting of the pawl plate/spring.

You can see the heads of the countersunk allen screws have been ground down, what a b1#@h it was getting them out! Once I had them out I noticed that one of the 6mm threads in the clutch cover has been enlarged to 8mm, so there is evidence of some less than professional work in the past.
When looking at the parts catalogue, there are two small spacers that are meant to sit underneath that plate, but they were not fitted on mine, which is the cause of the issue.
It has had what I would call the beginnings of a cosmetic restoration, the frame and engine have been painted, so "some" of the work has been completed already.

One thing that is bothering me is a groove in the centre of the teeth on the ring gear, it appears as though something has been in contact with it but I can't see what could make contact.
I will add a photo of it so that you can see what I mean.

This bike will still be pulled down to check previous work, I like to know that machines have been assembled correctly and safely before I put my life in the hands of someone unknown!
I did own a '86 400WR many years ago and I am hoping this one lives up to the memory I have of the original. Stay tuned for more to come!

I wasn't aware of an 1988 wr430 however there is a column in the parts sheet. Just from the first page I looked at it shares a frame with wr240, wr250EU, and the 430autoEU. I don't know of a way to tell 87 and 88 apart, some fork internals and the intermediate starter gear loosing a champher might have occured around there. That intermediate strter gear might have been changed in the repair work and caused the wear on the ring gear you see. If you have the cover and clutch off closely inspect the bore of the starter gears and the needle bearings as I have found that spot in poor condition a few times around that year.

the front brake will be better than your ol 86

I thought the 400 was superseded by the 430 for the 1987 model year. Maybe for USA import at least.

Thanks for the replies, Fran I have the clutch cover off at the moment, the bore and needle roller appear to be in good condition but I will have a closer look, I will also look at the starter gear to see if it is chamfered.
I managed to download the spare parts list for 1988, it lists both the 400 and 430 so I assume different markets received different models?
Good call on the front brake Troy, I do recall a VERY long downhill that had the front brake lever moving ever closer to the handlebars the further I travelled down the hill, that was one weak point of the '86, only ever happened once though.
Does the frame number help identify my bike? I can't find any other bikes with that frame number prefix either.
Tony.

I know for sure there was a 430WR in 88, I have one. I also owned a 87 430CR & from my research there were no changes from 87 to 88. The 87's were the last of the Swedish bikes. The 88's were a carryover from 87. There is an 87 WR400 model listed here: http://www.huskyclub.com/model.htm As far as I can tell the 400's are the same as the 430's except for displacement obviously. Good luck with your bike...it looks really good. Many of us on here have fallen in love with our early single shockers.

yup, i have an 88 xc250. only difference to an 87 is serial number, that i know of.

Great to know oldbikedude, thank you! I had suspected that development may have ceased around the time of the move from Sweden to Italy. The guy I bought it from told me that he looked up the frame number and insists that it was one of the last 600 Swedish built bikes, I know that doesn't mean anything in terms of value or collect-ability but it would be cool to think it was one of the last of a breed.
I have tried to look up any information to verify this but no luck so far, does anyone know if there is a way of working this out?

I'm not sure where to go for that serial number info. It would be cool to find it's one of the last ones made. The bike looks real good. What does the engine work receipt say was done to it?

I just went through the receipts again and realised I added an invoice and a statement, so the total was right around $2000, it included piston kit, gasket set, rebuilt crank, labour and all new bearings, Husky parts are expensive here in Australia!
I added a photo of the ring gear, I am still scratching my head trying to work out what could have done this?

Also included is a photo of the clutch cover, I am told this is the aluminium updated cover and from memory the water pump pocket behind the impeller was much deeper than this on the magnesium covers, anyone else have any more recent photos of a magnesium cover in good condition, if any actually exist!

I will have to ask the PO where he obtained the information about being a late Swede, I have read (not verified) that the '88 models were Swedish components assembled in Varese Italy and it would appear that mine would have been built in '87 before being shipped down under.

This is what I was thinking as well. It would be great to know when our bikes were actually built. My 88 was bought new from the dealer in 91. As a three year old left-over. That groove in the gear looks to be lined up with the kick start or shifting components? Water pump looks like both my 87 & 88. I was wondering if the 88's were actually made in 88'.

The thing that makes me think it isn't the kick starter pawl it that it's about the same thickness as the ring gear. I'll have to play detective tonight and work it out.

I spent a while looking at the pictures. It looks like the clutch cover was spray painted on with the cap off and the black paint on the clutch resulted that hasn't moved. Would something getting stuck in the primary gear between two teeth work it's way around and hit all the teeth on the clutch? Probably 33/76 if I recall correctly. A lot of metal particles came off that gear. I found a picture of a bad 1988 kick starter gear. The needle bearing from this gear most likely made damage on a lot of gears, it was bad and there was damage. Note how nice yours looks yet the crank has been at least billed as rebuilt which seems inconsistant. I seem to think I have seen damage like that but can't place where.

I can see a bit of wear on the impeller where it rubbed against it's housing which is pretty normal and on the less wear than usually found side at least for me. I do not see a nut holding on the primary drive gear on the crank or the slot for the water pump shaft to engage which seems odd. I don't think the angle is so that stuff should be hidden.

makes you wonder if someone forgot to mix gas or dirt was ingested. bike looks way too nice to need crank work. the crank and rods are super tough in these, along with the top end as well.

I am hoping that the reason for all the engine and gearbox bearings being replaced is because of the metal that came off that ring gear, I won't know without completely dismantling the engine, I may run it first and see how the gearbox sounds, there is no evidence of metal in the bottom of the clutch area so hopefully it was cleaned out when the bearings were replaced. Something has definitely been contacting the ring gear, but seemingly not something floating around in there if that makes sense, something that can stay in one spot and wear against the gear teeth. It's a bit of a mystery.

The other strange thing is the primary gear has no damage, so either it has been changed or whatever caused was only in contact with the ring gear. Oh and the nut and slot for the water pump are here, it's just my shitty photography on my phone.

could the kicker pawl have got out and lodged somewhere underneath causing that ruckus??

I don't think so, it almost has to be something that is semi attached that is making contact with the gear, but I won't discount anything at this stage, it is possible but I can't see how it could go all the way around on one gear and not contact the other.
If it were something jammed between the case and the gear, it would smash the case, maybe it did, if it were something between the ring gear and the primary gear then there would be damage to the primary gear, but you would think it would be localised instead of all the way around the gear.
Maybe there was some catastrophic failure at some time in the past, but the only evidence remaining is the gear damage?

8788, member: 60069"]The other strange thing is the primary gear has no damage, so either it has been changed or whatever caused was only in contact with the ring gear. Oh and the nut and slot for the water pump are here, it's just my shitty photography on my phone.[/quote]


The only component that I can think of that could cause this kind of damage is the knuckle on the kick starter that holds the pawl, since the pawl runs inside the kick starter gear, if the kick starter shaft were wound too far forward, I think it may be able to contact the gear.

It would have sounded a bit wild!

If you look at the photo that shows the inside end of the kick starter shaft protruding from the mating surface of the clutch cover, then look at the distance that the ring gear sits proud of the mating surface in the second photo, I think that is what caused the damage, particularly since the clutch rotates clockwise, it would do that damage in no time since it would catch the shaft rather than rub against it.