What's wrong with Harleys?

[GregR1]

man how quickly this thread went from talking about Harley the BIKE to ranting and raving about the Harley rider. i thought it was gonna talk about the bike itse;f as a machine? there's jackasses on all sorts of rides - harleys, crotch-rockets, scooters, beemers, etc.

you guys went all over the place with this!

personally, when i ride, i wave at a guy or girl on a bike. i haven't got time nor do i care to figure out if it's a harley, a star, or an m50 with v&h pipes. doesn't matter to me at all.

i was actually looking at HD bikes when i was shopping around, and if the price was 25% lower i would have been VERY VERY close to buying one. they certainly had the features and design elements that i liked, but for a bit more than something comparable from the japanese makers.

never rode a harley, but when i have enough money to buy a second bike i'll try one out. i've run into groups of harley riders during our own group rides here, and they've been good (mind you, they were riding with Valks and V-Stroms, so that probably says something).

so, aside from the RIDERS being occasional snobs, what's bad with the MACHINE itself? price is a bit high, ok. do they steer like poo? are the suspensions crappy? are the motors actually reliable and able to stay cool despite being air-cooled?

[CruisingRam]

What you see , when you are talking the "harley rider"- is simply an outgrowth of the "bike boom"-

look at it this way- when someone goes with a pile of disposable income- and they are over 40, and they want to buy the "lifestyle"- but aren't really what could be called "MC enthusiast" with a very sophisticated knowledge of bikes before buying.

Same thing could be said for sportike squids- an unsophisticated buyer with a wish for the highest HP bike on the market but little to no real knowledge of bikes, bike models or the mechanics behind riding a super-machine like that.

It is just that the H-D population of "boutique buyers" is much larger than the other demagraphs right now, just because of the "fad" nature of the baby-boomer buying into this "lifestyle".

IT doesnt' reflect, logically, upon the MC itself, which has made some big strides in reliabily and lack of leaking over the last decade or so.

[GregR1]

so, let's shove the rider aside and look at the machine itself. regardless of whether it's a dentist or a drunken bastard that's riding the Sportster 1200 Custom, they're riding the same machine.

from what i've read, the HD's made during the AMF era were troublesome with poor build quality, but that era has ended around 20 years ago has it not? i mean, the AMF portion of it. didn't HD go back to being HD in the mid or late 80's? so, since that time, how have their machines compared to nomads and wings and whatnot?

i don't get it - why is it so damned hard to separate the machine from the man in these types of discussions? i mean, if i want to know how reliable or easy-to-fix a certain bike is, it's (mostly) irrelevant whether they wave at me or do charity work or murder children in shopping malls. i mean, i'm sure there's harley riders who are just as sane as Clint.

seems like a lot of non-harley riders are just as snobbish and opinionated as harley riders, since whenever a discussion of harley BIKES comes up it quickly spirals into a "they don't wave" pissing match.

don't get me wrong - i'm not defending harley at all, since i have no vested interest or bias either way, but don't you think that the non-harley people are just sinking to their own low when they aren't able to talk about a harley BIKE with the same sort of objectivity as when talking about bandits or gixxers or goldwings?



so, what's wrong with harley? with the BIKES?

or is the whole reason for the 7 pages of subjectivity simply a result of the answer being "nothing, there's nothing actually wrong with harley bikes, they're perfectly fine machines that just happen to cost a few bucks more, so let's divert our attention to something that we CAN hash apart for 439 hours"

[dcstrng]

<is simply an outgrowth of the "bike boom"->

Yep, I think this is correct… or perhaps put another, the more knowledgeable the rider the more likely they’ll appreciate the qualities of another machine even if they’ve never ridden one and probably never will… has nothing much to do with age of the rider or income either for that matter, but the question is, “do they know bikes…”

I usually try to make the AMA Flat-track races as well as the AMA Superbike events when I can find the time and when they’re in the area… The Flat-track event probably has a disproportionate number of fans riding Harleys, given that most of the bikes are sportster derived, but there is no shortage of Wings, Nomads, Ventures and the like in the parking lot… Conversely, at the Superbike event where there may never be another Harley derived bike, there is no shortage of Road Kings and Glides, etc., etc., in the parking lot… what there is, is a distinct/general absence of parochial posturing…

Those one dimensional owners often know little more about there own machine than what is in the glossy brochure, let alone what another might be riding… But I’ve gotten caught up in the stereotyping metric/Milwaukee lore myself… After riding a Shovelhead 30 years ago that leaked oil with some regularity, I was convinced they all still leaked (being then numbered among the metric crowd) only to find out that oil leakage hasn’t been much of a Milwaukee issue since the Evo come out in the mid eighties and is pretty rare after about `95 or so… Both are generally good quality bikes, but my slightly newer metric twin is the leaker, the Milwaukee remains embarrassingly dry by comparison – the only oil on the exterior is what I spill at oil change… of course neither could stay in the same county with a 600 sport-bike, so it all boils down to what one wants the bike for…

If one wants a bike to have their ego stroked, then one should hang with a crowd that will do that – often fairly brand specific… if one simply wants to ride, then it may not be the same mob … indeed, there may be no mob at all…

[Clint]

Well, frankly it is hard to seperate the man from the machine because the machine tends to define the man to such a degree. The machine is often intentionally chosen to create an image. Thus, they're inseparable on some level.

What's wrong with an actual HD motorcycle? Not much. They're overpriced, but that's about it. They're nice machines, for what they are.

[mtalicarox]

Originally Posted by RowdyRed94

Well, frankly it is hard to seperate the man from the machine because the machine tends to define the man to such a degree. The machine is often intentionally chosen to create an image. Thus, they're inseparable on some level.

What about people with a sportbike and a harley?

[GregR1]

Originally Posted by RowdyRed94

Well, frankly it is hard to seperate the man from the machine because the machine tends to define the man to such a degree. The machine is often intentionally chosen to create an image. Thus, they're inseparable on some level.

agreed, but the inverse isn't generally true. the man doesn't define the machine anywhere near as much (save for customizing, which is all post-factory work anyways, or special editions). thus, while it may be hard to separate the man from the machine, it should be easy to separate the machine from the man.

so, aside from a 20% premium or so, there's nothing mechanically or physically bad about harleys, right? and if a harley keeps resale value better, doesn't that 20% premium sort of disappear at selling time?

sitting in the showroom, i found most of the harleys to have a more comfortable position than the many of the v-stars and vulcans and others. never actually got to ride one, though, so might have to do that in the spring.

are there any particularly bad models in their lineup, generally speaking?

oh, and someone mentioned the separate engine and transmission. what's the benefit of that on a bike?

[CruisingRam]

My main issue with a H-D is "value"- there is nothing another bike can't do better, for less money, at this time. Huge savings in many cases. On a logical buy basis (which, doesn't even make sense to go there when discussing MCs, as the reason for buying isn't usually logical in the first place)

H-Ds are a horrible buy. They outperfom nothing in thier classes, and cost m more to do less.

Not craptacular machines or anything, or badly made anymore- but highly overpriced in class.

It is rare when someone will honestly compare apples to apples either.

An 883 is often compared to 1100 and 1300cc Jap cruisers- when, really, the best comparison is against a, say, Shadow Spirit 750. OTD for under 7k- possibly the best bang for the buck V-twin on the market today.

[HAMMERPETE]

Originally Posted by mtalicarox

What about people with a sportbike and a harley?

You just placed yourself in a different category. This should have been a question you answered for yourself.

[omegajim]

The AMF era ended in the early '80s and anything built after 1984 I would consider acceptable, if not a good concept of what a bike should be.

But yeap, some 20% more for nothing all that great.

Topping that, I know a guy with a late 70's Harley, hopped up six ways from Sunday and he can't get $5600 for the life of him. Same bike 4 years ago, gone in a month. Maybe less.

[texrider]

What I consider "wrong" about them, are the very things that endear them to their loyal followers. This includes; air cooling, separate gearbox that cannot share oil and cooling with the engine, relatively underpowered for displacement, relatively small tires, excess vibration, high MSRP.

I do admire their use of belt final drive, some of the design on the bodywork, the seemingly high level of quality chrome work, and that it's a big pushrod twin. I have come to appreciate a v-twin cruiser arrangement, and you have to give HD credit for making it widely popular.

I think a rider is best judged when not being propped up by his machine...

[dcstrng]

<I think a rider is best judged when not being propped up by his machine...>

Agreed, however I disagree on the attractiveness of the belt – I find them to be a lurking time-bomb just waiting to leave me on the side of the road some rainy night, forty miles out of cell-phone coverage… am thinking about converting back to chain… more maintenance, but far more predictable and chains rarely give up the ghost without telling a rider they’re getting sick...

But the larger point -- other than a period when I naively subjected my self to the Honda mystic, my only recent experience is with Kawasaki and Harley V-twins – I currently have one of each with comfortably over 100K between `em… Kawasaki (to the extent that it is marginally representative of the metric method) is a sophisticated design still maturing on execution… The Milwaukee effort is often derided for being based on a design that dates all the way back to total-loss lubrication and non-integral engine-transmission (just like, by the way, almost every four-wheel vehicle in existence…), but is refined within a gnats eyelash of what can be humanly achieved… I’m not a fan of the twinkie Harleys, purportedly even more refined, but in my opinion beginning to needlessly push the envelope… However, I’ve ridden my Evo all summer, 700 miles a week, in stop an go with temps hovering near 100 much of the time… air-cooled gotta love it… My Vulcan would have roasted me…

If one wants multi-power, then get a multi; they’re plentiful, inexpensive and almost totally fungible – usually breathtaking power and engineering… but except for a few purists, or poverty-stricken schmucks like me, who rebuilds a multi – throw it away and get a new one… Harleys surely don’t last any longer between rebuilds, but for a hundred bucks or so and a Sunday afternoon I can do a top end on my Evo, something which I’d not attempt on my Vulcan… Frankly, I find the separate engine-transmission to be an asset for shade-tree wrenching… after less than 60K I’ve got a main-bearing – or something equally ominous – going in the lower end of my Vulcan – what holds me back is need several weeks to work on it – split the cases, disassemble the transmission, order the parts my stealer won’t have, wait… etc., etc., all the fluids… etc., etc… complex, sophisticated design, but not simple, really unrefined… Harley (at least my Evo) highly refined, arguably antediluvian design -- but dead simple to work on (only current manufactured bike I’m aware of you can replace just about the whole lubrication system, including the oil-pump, with the engine still in the frame… let alone not splitting the cases…) and refine over the years so there are few surprises – entirely user friendly....

BTW -- vibration at roads speeds, the Evo wins above 70-75mph, Kawasaki is smoother below 45mph... but the Harley will pull from lower RPMs than the Kawasaki will tollerate -- comfortable bakc for Kawa 2000-3800, for my little Evo 1200-4500...

[GregR1]

are HD replacement parts (standard things for routine repairs) actually readily available and reasonably priced at the HD dealership? i'm thinking of things like belts, brake lines, seals, pads, etc.

are HDs really dead simple to work on for a home-mechanic? that's something that would be quite high on my list of "features" needed on a bike. case in point - on my Ninja, to replace the air filter, i have to remove the gas tank, which means i have to remove the seat, which means i have to remove the passenger seat too (and my luggage that's strapped onto it). kind of a long irritating chain of events if you ask me.

[dcstrng]

are HD replacement parts… actually readily available and reasonably priced at the HD dealership…

Pretty much that is correct… Although I shop prices and unlike “authentic” Harley riders I am not at all wed to HD name-brand parts… I’ll order from J&P or D-Kirk or JCWhitney (or even Wally World, whatever…) in a heartbeat…

Don’t misunderstand – I’ve got nothing against all sorts of bikes – and as I’ve mused elsewhere I have thought long and hard about a Connie (my knees are getting a tad too geriatric to tolerate a real crotch-rocket…), but one of the things that keeps me coming back to V-Twins is both of mine are carbureted – single, no balancing, simple – and with self adjusting valves, neither really needs a whole lot of gymnastics to do routine maintenance… part of that is because I’m sorta of familiar with the scoots, but I’m no professional wrench and probably take double or triple the time for more challenging wrenching than a qualified wrench… but oil/filter changes are a piece of cake… twenty/twenty-five minutes from tools out to ready for the road… and notwithstanding the Kawa's recent difficulties, they’re generally boringly reliable…

I’ve come home after deciding to ride my bike to the Midwest, changed the oil and filters and been gone from Virginia to the Dakotas in less than an hour, including packing… okay I cheat, I don’t totally unpack… These scoots have carried me 3500 miles in a 3-4 day weekend several times – with time for a restful Saturday and Saturday night date in the middle… The Harley is a tad better at this due to large fuel capcity and noticeably better gas mileage, but they both work…

But of course I don’t have nearly the raw performance of your Ninja and in the twisties I’d still be lumbering along long after you’ve disappeared into the next county… The Kawasaki has been a generally good bike, but not as reliable so far as the Harley, and the Kawa I’ve had to wait on the most basic part, like an axle nut, but pretty good nonetheless… parts-wise, Harley wins hands down – not just because of dealers (although they do stock most parts for recent models -- as well as acres of questionably helpful chrome), but the huge after-market industry that supplies HD parts… but Harley has it’s quirks – there ain’t no free lunch I guess… still, both are more or less basic bikes, and the Harley seemingly more basic (except for the electronics on my Ultra – now that I've figured that out, I'm qualified to pre-flight the space-shuttle) and I find just a bit more user-friendly…

[shmedly]

Harley Culture is the real issue being discussed here, not the bikes or riders. The (mc) types are a completely different animal than the Wild Hogs. Anyone who leaves their lane of travel is a bad rider no matter what they ride. Anyone who fails to yield when they can to a biker astride of the center line is a fool with a soon-to-be-rich lawyer.

But as a new Harley rider I see the best of the Harley culture. The HOG rallies and rides are fun and I am making some great friends. Harley riders are safe and skilled as far as I see. On par better they are more skilled than the metric riders I have been on rides with. I think this may be because for most Harley riders I know, myself included, this is not their first bike and they are older.

Their is a certain pride of ownership that relates back to the Harley aesthetic - lower tech American muscle and noise. The difference between a '69 GTO and a 2007 Subaru might be an example of the kind of difference between the appeal of many metrics and the Harley mystique. Harley's are just different, and their following is a big part of what makes them special and fun. That said, I rode my Suzuki along with my Harley friends for a year before getting my EG Classic and was always made welcome. But when I first sat on the Big Twin it was all over.

People who like quiet pipes and insist that everyone wear helmets (even when it is legal to not wear them) are fine with me no matter what they ride so long as they stay out of my business. But let's face it: there are people who enjoy telling other people what to do, or just feel compelled to do so, especially if it makes the world safer and more pleasnt for them and/or their "baby on board".

These people are generally not please-able anyway, so I usually don't bother listening to them or trying to conform to their opinions. The only thing they really want is the road (and the world) to be run their way. Experienced riders may have informed opinions, but when they try to force them on others they are really just playing the bigshot. These people may or may not ride, but they tend not to ride Harley's.

I like Harley culture for the bikes, but also because it embraces the idea of FREEDOM, an idea which is on the ropes in the USA and the world. Freedom goes hand in hand with personal responsibility. I have yet to meet a Harley rider who doesn't get this. I guess this means that Harley culture may always be at odds with the people who like telling other people what to do.

As for the (mc) types, they may ride Harley's but the real issue is they break rules and laws. They are not representative of the Harley owners I know and ride with at all. It is easy to tell the difference out there on the road between the HOGS and the legally-challenged club riders.

[Rickster]

Originally Posted by texrider

What I consider "wrong" about them, are the very things that endear them to their loyal followers. This includes; air cooling, separate gearbox that cannot share oil and cooling with the engine, relatively underpowered for displacement, relatively small tires, excess vibration, high MSRP.

I do admire their use of belt final drive, some of the design on the bodywork, the seemingly high level of quality chrome work, and that it's a big pushrod twin. I have come to appreciate a v-twin cruiser arrangement, and you have to give HD credit for making it widely popular.

I think a rider is best judged when not being propped up by his machine...

Tex, you and I usually agree on most isues that come up on this board, but you impressions on Harleys is way different than what I have experienced.

First off, one question. Why is air cooling bad? I see the motors lasting well over 1,000,000 miles, and with a lot less heat being blown on the rider, from the radiator.

Second, having a separate gear box, means you don't get heat transfer from the motor to the transmition, and the tranny oil stays cleaner, because you don't have the clutch plates dirtying it up. Also if there is a tranny problem, you don't have to take the whole motor appart to work on it.

Third, yes they are underpowered, but only if you rate them just on horsepower, there torque numbers are as good, or better than other V-twins, and let's be honest here, torque is where you get all your real world drivability from.

Forth, the tires may be smaller, but they hold the road just fine, and I get over 12,000 miles out of a rear on my Road King, and 50% more than that on the front.

Fifth, excess vibration only happens at idle, my Road King is smoth as silk from 20 mph on up.

Sixth, high MSRP also means high resale.

[dcstrng]

<Harley Culture is the real issue being discussed here…>

Oh, well I have no opinion or experience with that… somewhere in my distant past, I have Ironheads, Shovelheads, even an EL as well as the Evos, but no culture… not even sure where to get it – or what it would look like if I did…

[eb77k]

I am a Harley guy. So take whatever you want from that. There are huge divisions in the Harley world too guys. Try checking out The Jockey Journal "I hate AMF, I hate EVO's etc. etc."

I have won races on Harleys and loved it. I have enjoyed mellow cruises on Harley's and loved it. I have tortured many a sportbike dude with my overbored evo sportster with over length shocks and storz front end.

I came from a time when any bike was cool. AMF pumped the dough into HD to develop the evo. I own and ride several ironhead sportsters, along with several Italian and Japanese bikes.

The real performance in a bike comes from the guy riding it. I don't think the bike makes the man, but the man makes the bike.

[texrider]

Originally Posted by Rickster

Tex, you and I usually agree on most isues that come up on this board, but you impressions on Harleys is way different than what I have experienced.

First off, one question. Why is air cooling bad? I see the motors lasting well over 1,000,000 miles, and with a lot less heat being blown on the rider, from the radiator.

Second, having a separate gear box, means you don't get heat transfer from the motor to the transmition, and the tranny oil stays cleaner, because you don't have the clutch plates dirtying it up. Also if there is a tranny problem, you don't have to take the whole motor appart to work on it.

Third, yes they are underpowered, but only if you rate them just on horsepower, there torque numbers are as good, or better than other V-twins, and let's be honest here, torque is where you get all your real world drivability from.

Forth, the tires may be smaller, but they hold the road just fine, and I get over 12,000 miles out of a rear on my Road King, and 50% more than that on the front.

Fifth, excess vibration only happens at idle, my Road King is smoth as silk from 20 mph on up.

Sixth, high MSRP also means high resale.

Fair enough. I like water cooled for the added benefit of temperature stability. Running on a thermostat allows closer tolerances, more precise fuel and timing control, resulting in more power. Sometimes it's about keeping things properly warmed.

Having a separate trans is good for the things you mention, but has no way to cool itself, or filter it's lubricant.

They are indeed torquey.

I like bigger tires on big bikes. The ride is better, and load rating is higher. Larger footprint is more secure in all situations.

Agreed that the vibes are not as bad at speed.

Lastly, the more you pay, the more you stand to lose. In good times maybe you get a buyer or can trade right. Other times, maybe not. None of which matters if you bought a bike to ride and keep.

[omegajim]

I came from a time when any bike was cool. AMF pumped the dough into HD to develop the evo.

There's a guy who hit it on the head.

Brock Yates wrote a book about Harley, and a good one too.

Half of the book is lore and legend. The other half, how the business ran over the years; and Brock has these three points about AMF.

1) Without being bought out by AMF, Harley would've gone out of business, because it was losing money often as not.

2) The York PA plant was transferred to Harley because AMF had a plant that was empty, as most large conglomerates. All the tooling and equipment was paid for with AMF money as well.

3) This point is the most inconsistent and Yates says so. The York PA plant was brought online to build more bikes. Figuring more bikes = more money being the theory. However, AMF gave the go ahead for what became the "Evolution" engine. The same AMF that didn't hardly put a nickel into the company after the York PA plant came online. The insiders who bought out AMF knew this when they bought it; the general public didn't.

I have to get a copy of that book and add it to my collection.

Jim gets off the soapbox.