2011 Harley Davidson 883 SuperLow

[Rabidsnipe]

Harley Davidson introduces revamped 883L, the new SuperLow

http://www.motorcycle.com/manufacturer/harley-davidson/2011-harleydavidson-sportster-superlow-89807.html



Visually, the SuperLow appears to be pretty much the same low-to-the-ground model that’s become a favorite these past few years among first-time Harley buyers and women riders. Now here’s the catch: in reality the SuperLow is an all-new model that’s only based on the low-rider theme. In truth, the SuperLow checks in with new suspension calibrations front and rear, new wheel and tires sizes, new fork and gas tank, even a new and better-padded solo seat.

I know this probably won't get a lot of play here, but I think this is exactly what this model needs.  Larger fuel tank (up to 4.5 gallons), more suspension travel, 17" rear and 18" front (with tubeless tires), more padding in the seat, and tweaked suspension.  Very interesting...

[Rincewind]

Nice looking paint job.  I prefer that lower-profile tank to the peanut-styled one.  Glad to read of the suspension improvements.  

$7999 is a good price!  $8499 for two-tone.

http://www.harley-davidson.com/en_US/Motorcycles/superlow.html

[Guy]

With that paint scheme, it sorta reminds me of a Bonneville  

[chornbe]

BUT HARLEY DOESN'T DO ANYTHING RIGHT AND DOESN'T KNOW HOW TO ATTRACT BUYERS AT ALL AND THIS SUCKS AND HARLEY SUCKS AND YOU SUCKS FOR THINKING THIS DOESN'T SUCK.

Just getting a head start on the uninformed, baseless and close-minded bashing.

Continue on...  

[1KPerDay]

Tweaked suspension. Yeah that 1.4 inches of travel is going to feel positively luxurious.  

[Rabidsnipe]

As excited as I was about the new model, one thing really put me off reading through the spec sheet:

2010 883 Low: Lean Angle 29/31
2011 883 SuperLow: Lean Angle 24.4/24.7

I don't know how big of a difference 5 degrees will make on a bike like this, but I really wish they wouldn't have reduced the angle even further.  It was already pretty low.

I was encouraged to see the running order weight drop from 583 to 563 even after adding 1.2 gallons of fuel.

[Rincewind]

As excited as I was about the new model, one thing really put me off reading through the spec sheet:

2010 883 Low: Lean Angle 29/31
2011 883 SuperLow: Lean Angle 24.4/24.7

I don't know how big of a difference 5 degrees will make on a bike like this, but I really wish they wouldn't have reduced the angle even further.  It was already pretty low.

I was encouraged to see the running order weight drop from 583 to 563 even after adding 1.2 gallons of fuel.

Bottom line is - get a Bonnie or Guzzi if you want to lean, in retro-style for this price.  Or put out the extra cash for a Harley XR or XR1200X.  

[ConPilot1]

Looks like just another Sportster to me.

[falconati]

Well, they got the price point right.

[bomber]

With that paint scheme, it sorta reminds me of a Bonneville  

I was thinking the same thing -- I woulder if HDI knows they should be aiming at the Bonnie in their product planning meetings?

[Rabidsnipe]

I was thinking the same thing -- I woulder if HDI knows they should be aiming at the Bonnie in their product planning meetings?

Whether they realize it or not, it is this bike's primary competition. I've been jonesing for a twin since riding the NT and 796 las t winter. I want something different from the FZ1, something laid back and retro. It is really between the v7 classic, Bonnie, and this new Sportster.

[desert_rider]

BUT HARLEY DOESN'T DO ANYTHING RIGHT AND DOESN'T KNOW HOW TO ATTRACT BUYERS AT ALL AND THIS SUCKS AND HARLEY SUCKS AND YOU SUCKS FOR THINKING THIS DOESN'T SUCK.

Just getting a head start on the uninformed, baseless and close-minded bashing.

Continue on...  

It's gettin' old.  

BTW - It is a good looking paint job.

[bomber]

Whether they realize it or not, it is this bike's primary competition. I've been jonesing for a twin since riding the NT and 796 las t winter. I want something different from the FZ1, something laid back and retro. It is really between the v7 classic, Bonnie, and this new Sportster.

The 05 Bonnie in our motorpool has been as reliable as a stone ax, needing only gas, oil tires (it's really easy on em, as it's light) and an occasional hug -- runs like a watch every time.

It LOOKS retro, for certain, but it works like a modern bike, complete with acceptable suspension from the showroom floor (the rear shocks are gonna get replaced this winter)  . . . . I'm a fan of sporties, in general, but, for me, dollar for dollar, the Bonneville is in a different league altogether. Highly recommended.

[Rabidsnipe]

The Bonnie is nice.  From a handling/sporty stand-point it is the obvious winner.  However it does lose a few points for its chain drive and valve checks when compared with the Sporty.  However, I think the Sporty and Bonnie are both a few steps ahead of the Guzzi from a dealer/accessory standpoint.  Each bike has its own strengths and weaknesses as well as different engine configurations between the set.  At the end of the day, it will probably come down to the test rides.  Hopefully I can get on the Bonnie and Sporty this weekend.  The Guzzi will have to wait until I can make it up to Tulsa.

[bomber]

You're in lucky, as both sets of dealership (in the main) offer test rides . . . . . .

[atadaskew]

 However, I think the Sporty and Bonnie are both a few steps ahead of the Guzzi from a dealer/accessory standpoint.  Each bike has its own strengths and weaknesses as well as different engine configurations between the set.

The Guzzi matches the Bonnie for speed, but has the advantage of much easier maintenance.  Shaft drive, screw adjust valves sticking right out there in the open with its perky jugs.
Dealer/accessory standpoint? Er, umm, hmmm....
 

[Skee]

That actually looks like a motorcycle I might want to ride...

...right up to about the first corner.

I think it might be a good bike with a decent set of shocks.  I didn't just say that did I?  Been at work too long.  Need  

[falconati]

The Bonnie is nice.  From a handling/sporty stand-point it is the obvious winner.  However it does lose a few points for its chain drive and valve checks when compared with the Sporty.  However, I think the Sporty and Bonnie are both a few steps ahead of the Guzzi from a dealer/accessory standpoint.  Each bike has its own strengths and weaknesses as well as different engine configurations between the set.  At the end of the day, it will probably come down to the test rides.  Hopefully I can get on the Bonnie and Sporty this weekend.  The Guzzi will have to wait until I can make it up to Tulsa.

I predict you will want the Bonnie.

[chornbe]

It's gettin' old.  

What's getting old? The never-ending stupidity that happens around here whenever someone mentions Harley? Or the fact that 99.9% of the posters here never owned one, never rode one and STILL profess to know EXACTLY how badly they suck and EXACTLY how horrible they are? Or the fact that people who KNOW EVERYTHING continue to be just flat out WRONG about everything they rag on Harleys for?

Just trying to find out where the line is...

[atadaskew]

What's getting old? .....

Just trying to find out where the line is...

I just like it how peeps say what will save Harley is them building a 600cc sport bike.  Even though the Japanese 600cc sportbikes are collecting dust on the showroom floors, and Harley is still doing better than any of the Japanese mfgs in this economy...

[chornbe]

I just like it how peeps say what will save Harley is them building a 600cc sport bike.  Even though the Japanese 600cc sportbikes are collecting dust on the showroom floors, and Harley is still doing better than any of the Japanese mfgs in this economy...

It must be all the sucking, and all the time spent holding guns to buyers' heads making them write the checks. That's gotta be it.

[Rincewind]

The Bonnie is nice.  From a handling/sporty stand-point it is the obvious winner.  However it does lose a few points for its chain drive and valve checks when compared with the Sporty.  However, I think the Sporty and Bonnie are both a few steps ahead of the Guzzi from a dealer/accessory standpoint.  Each bike has its own strengths and weaknesses as well as different engine configurations between the set.  At the end of the day, it will probably come down to the test rides.  Hopefully I can get on the Bonnie and Sporty this weekend.  The Guzzi will have to wait until I can make it up to Tulsa.

I would get some quotes on Harley maintenance before it gets the automatic win in that category.  The difference against the Triumph may be less than you think, if both are dealer-maintained.

[greywolf]

They are a good begniner bike for the inseam challenged , my X started out on an 883 Low .  Yes overpriced , under valued , but also easy to ride and confidence inspiring.  They are actually quite fun on the twisties, no sport bike , but entertaining for neophites .



I think the 1200's are a lot better value , as they have enough power that you don't outgrow them so quick.

[Rabidsnipe]

...if both are dealer-maintained.

Which, for me, is highly unlikely.

Went and looked at the new SuperLow at Harley Davidson World.  They just received it in the Birch White color this week.  Up close the bike looks very nice; standard Harley stuff.  The wheels look sharp in person and it would surprise me if these don't turn up on some of their other Sportster models. The seat to handlebar relationship was nice, but I worry the pegs are too far forward.  

They didn't want me to demo the bike, though, because I wasn't in "buy if I liked" mode.  Although I was disappointed, I can understand considering I wasn't going to buy it and it is their only copy of a brand new and greatly improved model.

[chornbe]

Maintenance on a Sportster is a joke. Anyone taking it to the dealer is truly mechanically challenged.

Oil filter - $8
Synth oil, 3 qts. - $... whatever
10W/40 or Harley Primary oil, one qt. $6.

Air filter every... 20K? miles. $14.

The Big Twin bikes (Dynas, Soft tails, Touring frames) add primary chain adjustment (45 seconds), and a third hole for oil (trans lube), which adds another 15 minutes.

The occasional re-torquing and normal stuff. Of course there's always things like steering head bearings and wheel bearings, fork oil changes, just like on any other bike, but in 50,000 miles of Harley ownership, the routine stuff was it. Engine oils, fork oils, flushed brake fluid on both bikes after 2 years of riding.

The routine stuff... That's it. That's all. Simple. Cheap. Easy. Takes 20 - 40 minutes, depending on your comfort with tools.

[Rabidsnipe]

All good points. In the end it will come down to the ride.

[bomber]

Maintenance on a Sportster is a joke. Anyone taking it to the dealer is truly mechanically challenged.

Oil filter - $8
Synth oil, 3 qts. - $... whatever
10W/40 or Harley Primary oil, one qt. $6.

Air filter every... 20K? miles. $14.

The Big Twin bikes (Dynas, Soft tails, Touring frames) add primary chain adjustment (45 seconds), and a third hole for oil (trans lube), which adds another 15 minutes.

The occasional re-torquing and normal stuff. Of course there's always things like steering head bearings and wheel bearings, fork oil changes, just like on any other bike, but in 50,000 miles of Harley ownership, the routine stuff was it. Engine oils, fork oils, flushed brake fluid on both bikes after 2 years of riding.

The routine stuff... That's it. That's all. Simple. Cheap. Easy. Takes 20 - 40 minutes, depending on your comfort with tools.

do the new Sporties NOT have a a primary chain adjustment? Curious, cuz the Y2K lump in my garage sure does . . . . .

[Rincewind]

I stopped at the local Harley dealer on Saturday, just for fun.  They had one of the new XR1200X models there, which I drooled on.  Right beside it was one of the new low-models.  It wasn't this new Superlow, it was the Forty-Eight.  I was blown away at how incredibly low, thin, and minuscule that bike appears.  It made me feel like a giant.  The XR was normally-sized, and the Forty-Eight felt like 1/2-scale!

I nearly fit in my back pocket and took it home for my kids to play with.  And I already ride what many consider a small bike!  

[Geoff]

Only Harley could add new tires and shocks to a Sportster and call it a new model.  It probably took more time to write the press release than it did to update the bike.  

[stromgal]

This part in the linked article made me

"Wider triple trees spread the legs ever so slightly for the new lighter-weight wheel, in the process giving the bike a more masculine appearance"

I guess they must be talkin' 'bout the proverbial wide stance...

[steve.m]

would it be impossible to build a sportster that handles, not an XR but an actual sportster?  I mean, take all the low bikes and put a standard set of shocks and forks on there.  I had a friend of mine pshop my bike with the normal suspension, with the bobbed fender, i thought it came out looking pretty damn cool.  plus the idea of a sporty that could lean AND look cool with the bobbed rear was pretty alluring.

[chornbe]

would it be impossible to build a sportster that handles, not an XR but an actual sportster?  I mean, take all the low bikes and put a standard set of shocks and forks on there.  I had a friend of mine pshop my bike with the normal suspension, with the bobbed fender, i thought it came out looking pretty damn cool.  plus the idea of a sporty that could lean AND look cool with the bobbed rear was pretty alluring.

The only thing mine was missing some a few more degrees of lean angle which would have as simple as getting 14" shocks and different mufflers (the stock lower-shock mount hits the stock mufflers when you add longer shocks). Mine did pretty well with the 13.25" shocks on there and the fork rebuild I did. In fact, stock length forks are fine if you keep the 19" wheel and good rubber is available for that whee.. It's really the back end that needs to be raised more. (mine was NOT a lowered model).

The biggest drawback to the bike's handling is the 28948248 pound wheels, once you address the ride height.

[1KPerDay]

would it be impossible to build a sportster that handles, not an XR but an actual sportster?  

No... Chris Horny-Bee did it...

edit... delayed simul-post

[kevin_stevens]

The only thing mine was missing some a few more degrees of lean angle which would have as simple as getting 14" shocks and different mufflers (the stock lower-shock mount hits the stock mufflers when you add longer shocks). Mine did pretty well with the 13.25" shocks on there and the fork rebuild I did. In fact, stock length forks are fine if you keep the 19" wheel and good rubber is available for that whee.. It's really the back end that needs to be raised more. (mine was NOT a lowered model).

The biggest drawback to the bike's handling is the 28948248 pound wheels, once you address the ride height.

What about the flexible swingarm pivots?

KeS

[1KPerDay]

You're thinking of the FL.

[UFO]

SupersLow, such an unfortunate name.

[chornbe]

What about the flexible swingarm pivots?

KeS

You're thinking of the FL.

*nods*

The sportster has a standard bearing pivot swing arm and it's pretty stout.

[Oilhed]

Tweaked suspension. Yeah that 1.4 inches of travel is going to feel positively luxurious.  

I love the looks of the superlow, except the low part!  Use the same design with the XR1200X motor and tall suspension.

[Mr.Black]

Looks like just another Sportster to me.

I would have to concur.

[steve.m]

all i can say is jump on a sportster with a full travel suspension with the rear preload dialed as tight as possible and a 3/4 spacer added under the fork caps and you will be pleasantly surprised.  despite the harley name (i hate the slow rev of the 96 cu-in motor) the sporty still has a lot of sport on the street despite 50 years of dormant design.

[Rabidsnipe]

Finally rode one of these today.  My quick impressions.

Good.
What a neat motor.  Nice and smooth at 55 mph.  Pulls nicely from a stop.  Stock sound is great.  Weight feels down low which makes for easy low speed handling.  Low seat height makes getting feet down very easy.  Very easy clutch pull.

Bad.
Turning left at a very large intersection, I scraped the left foot peg.  Hmm... that can only be a bad sign of things to come.  The ergos were way off for me.  Handlebars were too high.  The pegs were also too high and too far forward.  My lower leg was about perpendicular with the ground and knees were higher than my hips.  The pegs also seemed very wide from side to side.  With my feet on the rubber portion of the pegs my legs were several inches from the tank.  When I asked about relocating the pegs further rearward or down, they suggested using the passenger pegs.  The seat felt nice and padded but is shaped in such a way as it prevented me from scooting back to get more comfortable.

Overall, I think this could make a great bike for someone shorter than me (I'm 5'10" w/ approx 32" inseam).  The fact that I scraped a peg on a bike that I was trying to baby since it only had 10 miles and was a demo bike really bothered me.  As I got more comfortable with the bike, I assume I'd be scraping parts all over the place.  That is my only hesitation about suggesting to a new rider.  I wouldn't want them to be afraid of leaning into a turn because they might scrape something.  In summary, V7 Classic > Bonneville >>> SuperLow.

[falconati]

But the Bonnie doesn't sound angry  

[Galo]

What's getting old?  

Well, for one, Harley's penchant for adding new paint and a couple tweaks to a decade-old design is getting old....mighty old. Pun absolutely intended

The never-ending stupidity that happens around here whenever someone mentions Harley?

It's not stupidity. In fact, the vast majority of the posts here re: Hardleys are spot-on. They are well built bikes, lovely to look at, sound sweet as hell when fitted with reasonable pipes and when ridden properly by a competent rider, can haul the mail quite well. It just happens that 'competent riders' make up about 1% of the Hardley riders, so.....our generalizations are  pretty spot-on accurate/

Or the fact that 99.9% of the posters here never owned one, never rode one and STILL profess to know EXACTLY how badly they suck and EXACTLY how horrible they are?

Sorry, far more people than you give credit to have ridden Hardleys, myself included. I had a 100th Anniversary Fat Boy in my garage (my nephew's) for two winters and rode it often, and never took it beyond 70 as I could not stand the buffeting from the windscreen nor leaned it more than 20 degrees because it would grind bits everywhere. That's not a motorcycle in my book....that's a rocking chair on two wheels.

Or the fact that people who KNOW EVERYTHING continue to be just flat out WRONG about everything they rag on Harleys for?

I don't profess to know much more than the averagely-competent motorcyclist, but I know enough to know that anything essentially unchanged for decades is, well, decades old. Time to move on....

Ahh, BTW, 560 lbs with (har har har) 47 horsepower.....that's a joke. Betcha a big Burgman will blow by it. The typical Bonnie weighs 150 lbs less and has north of 60 hp, so.....it's not even close as a 'comparo' bike.

[Mr.Black]

Well, for one, Harley's penchant for adding new paint and a couple tweaks to a decade-old design is getting old....mighty old. Pun absolutely intended


It's not stupidity. In fact, the vast majority of the posts here re: Hardleys are spot-on. They are well built bikes, lovely to look at, sound sweet as hell when fitted with reasonable pipes and when ridden properly by a competent rider, can haul the mail quite well. It just happens that 'competent riders' make up about 1% of the Hardley riders, so.....our generalizations are  pretty spot-on accurate/


Sorry, far more people than you give credit to have ridden Hardleys, myself included. I had a 100th Anniversary Fat Boy in my garage (my nephew's) for two winters and rode it often, and never took it beyond 70 as I could not stand the buffeting from the windscreen nor leaned it more than 20 degrees because it would grind bits everywhere. That's not a motorcycle in my book....that's a rocking chair on two wheels.



I don't profess to know much more than the averagely-competent motorcyclist, but I know enough to know that anything essentially unchanged for decades is, well, decades old. Time to move on....

Ahh, BTW, 560 lbs with (har har har) 47 horsepower.....that's a joke. Betcha a big Burgman will blow by it. The typical Bonnie weighs 150 lbs less and has north of 60 hp, so.....it's not even close as a 'comparo' bike.

Yeah but when it comes to a Harley you really must remember that the ONLY important thing is,

You look marvelous!

[atadaskew]

 It just happens that 'competent riders' make up about 1% of the Hardley riders, so.....our generalizations are  pretty spot-on accurate/

So pretty much the same as any brand, outside Moto Guzzi...