Is this good or bad for HD?

[chornbe]

Fwiw, my two harleys were as (and at times more) reliable as my Japanese bikes. I think some of you need to actually own sone other bikes or take a wider interest in the market place.

New harleys are on a par with everything else.  

[st ryder]

Well put.  So does that make them the polar opposite of Honda?

Not to be brand specific, but if you want to compare, it's better to look at what the bike delivers. If you have a bike, well, let me put it in the context of my personal experiences, when "I" had bikes that were pretty fast, and thought to be dependable and were nice to look at, I always wanted "something more." I remember saying to myself, "I'm tired of owning 'kids' bikes'." What I wasn't in touch with at that time was that I was looking for something that had a more distinctive if not storied motorcycling heritage or even "pedigree", not just another weekend recreational product for reckless speed freaks, produced en-mass by a huge conglomerate as part of a diversified line-up of motorised products including lawnmowers and personal water craft and snowmobiles and ATV's and rototillers etc. Who can offer such *motorcycles*? Not the big four IMO.

If your spirt gets all happy on one of theirs, imagine how it might sing when riding a "real", yes, I said it, a real motorcycle from a company whose only motorised product is and always has been motorcycles, and motorcycles with something so different about them that others can't claim it as theirs even if they reproduce it. Think HD exhaust note, think Ducati desmo, think Moto-Guzzi transverse 90* a/c, think Triumph a/c P-twin, think BMW boxer, (yes, I know, they make cars, but they started in the motorised vehicle business by making bikes after WW1, and they don't make snowmobiles afaik) etc.

I think, there's something "more" to be found in those brands, and it's usually not about being the fastest in a group ride or the cheapest to maintain.  It's about linking yourself up with a glorious motorcycling past, in order to find your motorcyling future.   (I recently found myself looking at an excellent example of an older bike like one of the ones I used to have, and I had to think the purchasing bug through I was so smitten by it, and came up with the answer: just like old lovers, one can't "go back" and expect to be happy for very long)

YMMV, and I'm sure it will.  

[chornbe]

EXCELLENT post!!!

[bomber]

I presently ride a Triumph and  Buell, but I've also owned Yamahas, Suzukis, a Bridgestone, a BSA, and a Knucklehead Harley.

To my mind, they were all of em "real" motorcycles -- some were certainly better motorcycles than others, but each had it's place -- horses for courses, and all that.

You may wish to link youself to a past (or, more realistically, the version of a past that a marketing exec concocted), and, to be honest, it IS all about pleasing yourself (this motorcycle thing is supposed to be fun), so please do what makes you smile.

Personally, I see no down side to riding something that is made by a company that also makes snowmobiles, or one that started out making firearms, or tractors for that matter. If it makes you grin, that is all that matters.

[thatguy]

Most of the Post AMF improvements were a result of AMF R&D.   You don't buy a company and "Suddenly, the product works,"

Bingo!!!!!!!!Winner!!

1.)Alternator-1970
2.)5 Speed trans-1980
3.)Rubber mounted drivetrain-1980
4.)Electronic Ignition-1978
5.)Vacuum controlled advance/retard-1980
6.)Valve stem seals-1979
7.)Disc brakes-1972
8.)Belt drive-1982
And the final gift that truly saved Harleys ass-
9.)The Evolution Engine.

I understand it was introduced in '84,2 years after the buyout took place. However if you remember the introductory ad campaign stated it was 5 years in process before introduction. The original Evo was state of the art manufacturing and materials. That slipped as corporate greed took over but the first couple years they were truly outstanding powerplants. And as for the '70s problems does anyone remember '70s cars? Or anything made in the '70s? Par for the course.

[BobW]

^ Not too many objective points please, this is a Harley thread so emotions and insults are the norm  

They're great bikes, but HD made bad business model choices and kicked themselves in the nuts with all these bad loans, shame on them. There may be a bunch of younger folks that like the idea of a Harley, but it is obvious the current riders are getting older (I know I'm a long way into my AARP years so I can recognize another old fart). Call bull shit all you want, but living near the Blue Ridge Pkwy, The Dragon, et al, I can watch 100's of HD riders on any given day in the summer and very few are "kids". The reality is all brands are suffering in this bad economy and the more $ being spent to pass noise and emission standards will force HD and many others with "old" engines to change or be a fond memory. Chris, I agree with your comment reference learning about the brands, many good posts on this forum by many folks and some of them are even accurate  

I'm going to go lurk on the BMW section for some good fun, they just made up a big picture of orange Kool Aid and I think the KTM guys are going to make a raid any minute now to recapture their flag.

Cheers Everyone. Save the serious shit for winter  

   

[Pshrynk]

They build a seriously good product, personal likes and dislikes aside. For the class of bike, it really is king of the hill.

Would that be the antediluvian class of bike?  

[Pshrynk]

New harleys are on a par with everything else.  

Having ridden a number of new Harleys recently -- I beg to differ.

[chornbe]

Having ridden a number of new Harleys recently -- I beg to differ.

I'm talking quality and reliability (which was the topic in question), now how you liked it for a given purpose.

[Pshrynk]

I'm talking quality and reliability

Are you honestly saying that a Harley Cruiser is as reliable, and is engineered as well as a Honda Cruiser?

[chornbe]

Are you honestly saying that a Harley Cruiser is as reliable, and is engineered as well as a Honda Cruiser?

Having actually owned two Harleys and two Honda cruisers... yes.

[Pshrynk]

Never mind, you're brainwashed.  

[chornbe]

If I were, I would still have them.

I can appreciate the qualities of an item without being "brainwashed".

Which qualities, exactly, are so much better on bike-A vs. bike-B? I'll be happy to compare based on actual ownership, test rides and working on an untold number of bikes over the 20 years.

Please note, I didn't say any other bikes were "bad" when compared to Harleys. You asked me if I thought the Harleys were as good as, an my answer is a resounding yes.

[Playinthestreet]

Never mind, you're brainwashed.  

Those who've never had Harleys are brainwashed. Those who've had 'em, along with other brands, can make objective comparisons.

[Scratch33]

Harrrrrr!!!

FTFY  

[Pshrynk]

Those who've never had Harleys are brainwashed. Those who've had 'em, along with other brands, can make objective comparisons.

Why does this always turn into such a pissing match?  Why do you Harley guys have to fight to the death rather than actually deal with objective reality?  

I have a Triumph (second one in a row) & I am not under any delusion that it's reliability is as good as Honda or  Suzuki or that it's initial fit and finish is completely up to BMW standards.   It may be close.... but no cigar.  

I'm not saying that HD's are not reliable -- just not as reliable as.   Saying Harley is on par with Honda in terms of reliability, especially when taking into account Honda's technological innovation and complexity is ludicrous.

IMO it seems that lots of Harley owners have a severe case of cognitive dissonance that comes into play because of the outrageous prices Harley charges.  

[fastfreddy]

I, for one, would love to own a Harley. If for no other reason than to support an American company.

But it seems pretty much they only make cruisers, and I don't want a cruiser. If they'd put a V-rod engine in a FJResque package, I would be very interesed.

Another thing is that I don't want to buy into the "lifestyle". I am not now, nor will ever be, a "biker". I am a motorcyclist, and motorcycles, to me, are transportation. Not a toy, or a trophy, or a status symbol. If you took those aspects os HD away, what do you have left? Bikes that couldn't compete in the marketplace at those prices.

[chornbe]

Funny post.

Why does this always turn into such a pissing match?  Why do you Harley guys have to fight to the death rather than actually deal with objective reality?  

Objective reality? When you calculate the sales numbers, the on-road miles ridden (very important number, there!), the frequency and duration of down times, the customer satisfaction (if such can *truly* be quantified) of the manufacturers, and other such hard-data facts, THEN you can talk about "objective reality". Until then, everything... EVERYTHING... is subjective.

The ONE time my Street Glide wouldn't start it was because of the dealer mechanic not properly clamping a fuel like when he replaced the fuel tank.... after I crashed the bike in a 30*, windy and rainy day, taking a previously submerged roadway at nearly 2x the posted cautionary number. On what planet is that the bike's fault?

The ONE time my Sportster didn't start was because *I* left the key on and the battery deep-cycle drained for over two weeks. I had to buy a new battery. How is that the bike's fault?

You asked if I thought Harleys were as good as the Hondas. I said yes, based on *MY* experiences which include owning several of each, working on countless numbers of EVERY marque over the last 20+ years, and riding a nearly combined 50,000 miles on my two Harleys over 2 years doing nothing... NOTHING... but routine maintenance. Not one single repair that I didn't cause.

I have a Triumph (second one in a row) & I am not under any delusion that it's reliability is as good as Honda or  Suzuki or that it's initial fit and finish is completely up to BMW standards.   It may be close.... but no cigar.  

Sounds pretty subjective to me.

I'm not saying that HD's are not reliable -- just not as reliable as.   Saying Harley is on par with Honda in terms of reliability, especially when taking into account Honda's technological innovation and complexity is ludicrous.

Prove it. Objectively. PLus... I'm not saying Hondas aren't reliable. You asked about par...  Technology...? Honda JUST this year put FI on the remaining Shadows... a model that's been around for over 20 years, based completely on Harley's success making v-twin cruisers. Harley has had FI available since 1995, and across the entire model range since 2004. What other technology, seriously, is needed on a cruiser? Don't talk about Goldwings and RR/SS bikes; keep it in context.

Get sales numbers, get miles ridden!!! and compare downtimes and frequency. Until then, you're just pissing in the wind with baseless opinion. How many Harleys have you owned and actually ridden, year 'round, cross country, doing everything from loaded-down touring to walking away from lesser riders on far "better" bikes?

IMO it seems that lots of Harley owners have a severe case of cognitive dissonance that comes into play because of the outrageous prices Harley charges.  

Some do, sure. And a larger number of people who have never, admittedly WILL never own, ride or rent a Harley just enjoy regurgitating the same stupid baseless bullshit because picking on Harley is the cool thing to do.

The bikes are fine... in fact, they're damned good bikes. They don't make anything with "sport" in the intent ("Sportster" is a name thought up in the 50s - what Honda from the 50s is still an American icon to this day?). This isn't blind allegience to Harley... Hell, I don't even OWN one any more and frankly, don't see myself getting another one. What this is... it's fact, it's open-minded opinion and it's taking a look at a product in the marketplace that has been narrowly defined, built within its design criteria, and has done very, very well as such.

They make cruisers. They make tourers. You could argue against the notion they make sport standards; I'll grant that as a very grey-area thing. And in what they DO make... they succeed; there's a reason they're copied right down to the speedometer mount. I'm just saying... And if you doubt the copy, look at Honda's VLX600 (Soft Tail copy) and the new Shadow RS and Shadow Phantom - direct ripoffs of the Sportster Low and Sportster Iron/Nightster.

Please note... I'm making ZERO defensive claims regarding the riders. You're talking about just the machines; the cold, hard, fact-based, metal and plastic objects in space.

You wanna talk about douchebag owners? I can point to many. Lots on Harleys. Lots on Gixxers. Lots on Goldwings. Lots on Beamers. Lots on Triumphs. But I can also point to 'Wing, beamer and Harley owners that are some of the nicest people, and some riders that you couldn't keep in sight on your absolute best days... and some of them are on Harleys.

It's just a bike, man. Like any other... it's just another bike. Get over yourself(ves).

[Pshrynk]

I, for one, would love to own a Harley. If for no other reason than to support an American company.

Another thing is that I don't want to buy into the "lifestyle". I am not now, nor will ever be, a "biker". I am a motorcyclist, and motorcycles, to me, are transportation. Not a toy, or a trophy, or a status symbol. If you took those aspects of HD away, what do you have left? Bikes that couldn't compete in the marketplace at those prices.

Ding, ding, ding, winna, winna, chicken dinna!!!!!

Exactly -- what tangible difference(s) makes a HD Rocker $20,000 and a Honda Fury only $13,000?!?!?!?!!?!?!

[chornbe]

I, for one, would love to own a Harley. If for no other reason than to support an American company.

But it seems pretty much they only make cruisers, and I don't want a cruiser. If they'd put a V-rod engine in a FJResque package, I would be very interesed.

Another thing is that I don't want to buy into the "lifestyle". I am not now, nor will ever be, a "biker". I am a motorcyclist, and motorcycles, to me, are transportation. Not a toy, or a trophy, or a status symbol. If you took those aspects os HD away, what do you have left? Bikes that couldn't compete in the marketplace at those prices.

Wholly agreed.
Posted on: June 28, 2010, 01:05:26 PM

Ding, ding, ding, winna, winna, chicken dinna!!!!!

Exactly -- what tangible difference(s) makes a HD Rocker $20,000 and a Honda Fury only $13,000?!?!?!?!!?!?!

Uhm... American labor workers, unions, wicked expensive health care, expensive US real estate... And the fact that the bikes are built to a higher standard, often using metal where most of the Japanese bikes use plastic, considerably better paint quality - and have you seen that hideous seam on every Honda fuel tank over the last 20+ years. Cruisers are image machines; that's a black eye on an otherwise fine machine. I'm not justifying these points - I'm simply explaining these well-known, quantifiable factors, and points made within the market place, by actual buyers, for years.