Visited a H-D Dealership

[Rogue]

Okay.  I told myself I would never do this, ever, but my friend talked me into checking out their bikes.  Since he was a very good friend I went along.

The only bike that even remotely interested me was the Xr1200.   Even that was just okay (too long and not so attractive in my opinion).  However, it does look like an evolution of an old design.  Kind of like a Guzzi Griso 12v SE.  The XR1200 was priced competitively so it looks like a good one.  But I know this bike does not sell much here in the US.  All the pirates.....ahem, customers were interested in the chrome laden, white wall tired retro-looking models.  

I was however, appalled at the prices of many of the bikes!  I mean $30k for a bike that looks totally retro?  Also, the biggest headscratcher for me is, why oh why do all H-D's look so old?  I saw pictures of a 1998 Road Glide in a book and I swear that it looked just like the 2012 Road Glide!  Yes I know the hardware is all new but to me, this is like selling a 1966 Mustang that looks exactly like a 1966 Mustang in 2012 as a new 2012 model and asking premium prices for it!  

Why?  WHY?  

They even have a "new" model called a "72" and it looks like a chopper circa 1972, complete with white wall tires!  WTF?  

They sell this shit and people buy it?  Now, I'm all okay with retro as long as it has a retro-price.  Like for example the Royal Enfield Bullet or the Triumph Thruxton or Bonneville.  But dayum!  $25k-$30k for a bike that looks like it hasn't changed in 20 years along with performance that hasn't improved much either?  I mean, people pay $30k for a Gold Wing but that bike is thoroughly modern in every way with performance to match.  But a Street Glide is not even fast.  I really am not getting the attraction of buyers to H-D.  Not one bit.  I'm not trying to bash, but even my wife who knows nothing about bikes could not believe how expensive those "old bikes" were!  

If I think about this logically, since the bike looks old and has no performance advantage, it must be the look and the image that people buy into.  It's the only logical conclusion.  The stereotype is hard to deny here from the perspective of an outsider looking in.  I honestly don't know how H-D is able to stay in business selling this stuff.  To me, I would feel ripped off if I bought a $25k H-D that looks old and didn't go like stink because I could buy an equivalent BMW or Triumph that would go fast, handle, stop, and look sleek, like a modern motorcycle should.  I mean, even the Mini and the Mustang have both evolved and they look retro-yet modern at the same time.  They also perform the way a modern high performance car should.    

[Mr.Black]

 

[bluemax]

Let me be the first to say,
"If I have to explain it to you, you wouldn't understand".    

[Mastros2]

Although I am not interested in the cruiser market anymore, Harley is VERY good at selling an image.  From their advertisements to their clothing and other odds and ends, HD caters to a customer that wants that image.  

If I had a dollar for every potential new rider who said, "If I learn how to ride, I want to buy a Harley", I would be $100 richer!  Probably a tad more but you get the idea.  

[Kraz]

Well - HD's don't have the top end HP - but I will say that I like that the power is available down low.  A smooth pull from idle w/o having to rev the shit out of your motor is a good thing.  Even most of the other twins I've had don't have that.  Shit - my S2R1000 in stock form wouldn't hardly run below 4k, but the HD's I've ridden could roll around almost at idle w/o complaint.

Not that that's worth 30k, but few of their bikes are that expensive.  The ones that do have full luggage, fairings, radios/CD/MP3 players, and a nice sound (in stock form) to boot.  They sell b/c not many other bikes offer that - at any price.  Throw in the image of a badass on the open road and you have yourself a business model.

I want one (or two).

[sprk_sprd]

If I think about this logically, since the bike looks old and has no performance advantage, it must be the look and the image that people buy into.  It's the only logical conclusion. 

Seriously, I have trouble believing you just figured this out?    

[county]

The thing about Harleys is they weigh more than FJRs so what you got is this very stable sport touring platform.

[J-Mac]

  Shit - my S2R1000 in stock form wouldn't hardly run below 4k, but the HD's I've ridden could roll around almost at idle w/o complaint.

They only complain when you twist the grip.

 

[keppyou812]

You would appearantly not be one of Harley's "core" customers, as they claim. That is the excuse they gave for getting rid of Buell.

As for the question as to why...   I still can't rationalize it in my mind either.  Goes with the Apehanger bars, and the choppers that can't do anything except in a straight line, or sitting there looking pretty.

As for the weight making for a stable touring platform, well then so does a cement truck, but you don't see me throwing a sleeping bag in one of those, and taking off for the weekend.  

I guess it's like the "Jeep" thing. We just wouldn't understand...

[TwoWhldTerror]

Let me be the first to say,
"If I have to explain it to you, you wouldn't understand".    

I do not ride a Harley but from what I know, and what friends that do ride HD's say, there is a huge amount of truth to this statement.

You either get it or you do not, and yes the "club" aspect of riding a HD, the image, does play a big part in it.

[Flyer]

I don't get it, but they don't get my Ducati either, so it's a wash...
What's good for Harley is good for motorcycling.  

[ninjaridaz]

... All the pirates.....ahem, customers were interested in the chrome laden, white wall tired retro-looking models.  

I was however, appalled at the prices of many of the bikes!  I mean $30k for a bike that looks totally retro?  Also, the biggest headscratcher for me is, why oh why do all H-D's look so old?  I saw pictures of a 1998 Road Glide in a book and I swear that it looked just like the 2012 Road Glide!  Yes I know the hardware is all new but to me, this is like selling a 1966 Mustang that looks exactly like a 1966 Mustang in 2012 as a new 2012 model and asking premium prices for it!  

Why?  WHY?  

They even have a "new" model called a "72" and it looks like a chopper circa 1972, complete with white wall tires!  WTF?  

They sell this shit and people buy it?  Now, I'm all okay with retro as long as it has a retro-price.  Like for example the Royal Enfield Bullet or the Triumph Thruxton or Bonneville.  But dayum!  $25k-$30k for a bike that looks like it hasn't changed in 20 years along with performance that hasn't improved much either?  I mean, people pay $30k for a Gold Wing but that bike is thoroughly modern in every way with performance to match.  But a Street Glide is not even fast.  I really am not getting the attraction of buyers to H-D.  Not one bit.  I'm not trying to bash, but even my wife who knows nothing about bikes could not believe how expensive those "old bikes" were!  

If I think about this logically, since the bike looks old and has no performance advantage, it must be the look and the image that people buy into.  It's the only logical conclusion.  The stereotype is hard to deny here from the perspective of an outsider looking in.  I honestly don't know how H-D is able to stay in business selling this stuff.  To me, I would feel ripped off if I bought a $25k H-D that looks old and didn't go like stink because I could buy an equivalent BMW or Triumph that would go fast, handle, stop, and look sleek, like a modern motorcycle should.  I mean, even the Mini and the Mustang have both evolved and they look retro-yet modern at the same time.  They also perform the way a modern high performance car should.    

Welcome to the dark side.

Leave while you still can.  I love it when hd owners try to convince me to buy a hd.  It's ridiculous fun.

[falcofred]

 Harley is VERY good at selling an image.  From their advertisements to their clothing and other odds and ends, HD caters to a customer that wants that image.  

This is an understatement, Harley is the BEST at selling it's image, their bikes aren't my thing, but they are marketing geniuses, no company has brand loyalty like H-D.
Apple, Coke, Levis come close, but how often do you see an Apple, Coke, or Levis trademark tattooed on someones body?

[Cricket1]

This is an understatement, Harley is the BEST at selling it's image, their bikes aren't my thing, but they are marketing geniuses, no company has brand loyalty like H-D.
Apple, Coke, Levis come close, but how often do you see an Apple, Coke, or Levis trademark tattooed on someones body?

Correct, they are at the pinnacle of marketing. But the sad fact is that the motorcycles are completely secondary.  Its ALL about image, brand loyalty and being an 'merican made Union product. They could be selling dump trucks, or limo's and it wouldn't matter, because the rest of us "just don't get it".

-oh wait, I think they do sell limos and dump trucks already  , ones with 1972 styling to boot !

[rgbeard]

I am sorry but I had to review the OP, and see from what year it was posted.

I thought this thread would have been covered long long ago.

[county]

As for the weight making for a stable touring platform, well then so does a cement truck, but you don't see me throwing a sleeping bag in one of those, and taking off for the weekend.  

And yet many of our members continue to laud the virtues of the FJR...

[ray916mn]

So much of motorcycling is about lifestyle statements, emotion and marketing.

It is all over the industry and the rule rather than the exception.

Look at the plethora of adventure style bikes arriving on the market with virtually no off road capability (eg. Honda HC700X). In some cases it is a good thing. ICON has probably done more to get young riders in proper safety gear than any safety PSA, by making it fashionable. Their style has done much to replace the wifebeater, backward baseball cap, saggy pants and flip flops as the uniform of young riders. I can't help but think how much mioney and of a positive impact on rider safety the Hell's Angels could make if they came out with a line of Hell's Angels branded riding gear. It could be argued that the adventure touring trend has done much to reintroduce the "standard" bike back into the market, opening up and making exciting a host of better choices for riders to start on as first bikes.

Motorcycling is a luxury industry. Motorcycles are luxury items for the most part, not necessities, and the industry produces and markets products with this in mind. To think our choices are beyond the marketing messages of the industry is a bit delusional in my opinion. We may not buy the messages that HD sends, but we are certainly at some level buying the marketing messages, makers of our bikes of choice send.

[SprintRSrider]

The thing about Harleys is they weigh more than FJRs so what you got is this very stable sport touring platform.

County, this made me  

[kyzrex]

With all due respect.......shouldn't you at least test ride one before you go off on a rant?  I will totally agree that they are IMO very overpriced for the initial purchase.  However, historically, they have held very high resale value, even though that is not so true anymore.  I will say that I have rented a few and really enjoyed riding them, as long as I kept my expectations in line with what they were.  Actually the new ones handled much better than what I expected, and the roadglyde I rented was extremely comfortable.  I still wouldn't spend the money they asked for a new one, but I did come away somewhat impressed with the design and build quality.  

I also will point out tht there are plenty of young riders that go out and buy the latest 600 or 1000 supersport just so they will look cool.  Ain't just a Hardly thing.

[Kootenanny]

Okay.  I told myself I would never do this, ever, but my friend talked me into checking out their bikes.  Since he was a very good friend I went along.

I thought you had a Buell?  Two of 'em, in fact?  So, you never, ever went into a Buell dealership?

My first experience in a Harley boutique was a direct result of my interest in Buells.  Of course, I got a crash course in marketing strategy--both the good (Harley) and the bad (Buell), but...I did go in.  Indeed, I've visited quite a few.  No-one does the "motorcycle boutique" thing quite like Harley (well, Ducati comes close, but they still insist on hiring guys who actually know something about the product...Harley has learned the trick of hiring cute young chicks who don't need to know a thing to be effective sales aids ).

[Rogue]

Koot, I have been to the dealership before but I always went straight to the Buell section.  I glanced over at all the chrome and my eyes hurt so I stayed away.  This time was different.  I had time to really look closer and view the pricetag, talk to the sales staff, etc.  The words "style" AND "performance" was used in their language quite often.  I get the style.  But the performance?    I kept quiet and didn't tell them I rode Buells because I had a feeling as soon as they found out I did, they would drop the "performance" from their vocabulary.    

[Rogue]

With all due respect.......shouldn't you at least test ride one before you go off on a rant?  

To be honest, BEFORE I think about test riding a bike I would desire to have, I first check performance statistics and test reviews and IF the performance and looks of the bike appeals to me and I'm ready to buy then I test ride .  It has to be faster than most cars to begin with.  After that, looks.  This is why I never test drove any HD....none meet the minimum criteria of performance.  To me, performance is the very core of motorcycle riding experience.  Otherwise, I may as well drive a car.  This is also why I said the XR1200 is the only model that appealed to me.  I did not say ALL H-D are crap in my eyes.  Having said that, the XR1200 has LESS performance than the least performing Buell V-twin (Lightning XB9S).  So......no test ride.

[Rogue]

Seriously, I have trouble believing you just figured this out?    

I didn't just....I was indeed curious if there is something in there that I missed.  I thought maybe there was substance behind the image.  Perhaps there is, but it does NOT lie in the performance category.  That is the part I'm left wondering....so the image and portrayal of Henry Fonda and Dennis Hopper riding across Arizona is the substance behind it all?  That is the part I just don't get and probably never will.      

[Rattlehead]

Okay.  I told myself I would never do this, ever, but my friend talked me into checking out their bikes.  Since he was a very good friend I went along.

The only bike that even remotely interested me was the Xr1200.   Even that was just okay (too long and not so attractive in my opinion).  However, it does look like an evolution of an old design.  Kind of like a Guzzi Griso 12v SE.  The XR1200 was priced competitively so it looks like a good one.  But I know this bike does not sell much here in the US.  All the pirates.....ahem, customers were interested in the chrome laden, white wall tired retro-looking models.  

I was however, appalled at the prices of many of the bikes!  I mean $30k for a bike that looks totally retro?  Also, the biggest headscratcher for me is, why oh why do all H-D's look so old?  I saw pictures of a 1998 Road Glide in a book and I swear that it looked just like the 2012 Road Glide!  Yes I know the hardware is all new but to me, this is like selling a 1966 Mustang that looks exactly like a 1966 Mustang in 2012 as a new 2012 model and asking premium prices for it!  

Why?  WHY?  

They even have a "new" model called a "72" and it looks like a chopper circa 1972, complete with white wall tires!  WTF?  

They sell this shit and people buy it?  Now, I'm all okay with retro as long as it has a retro-price.  Like for example the Royal Enfield Bullet or the Triumph Thruxton or Bonneville.  But dayum!  $25k-$30k for a bike that looks like it hasn't changed in 20 years along with performance that hasn't improved much either?  I mean, people pay $30k for a Gold Wing but that bike is thoroughly modern in every way with performance to match.  But a Street Glide is not even fast.  I really am not getting the attraction of buyers to H-D.  Not one bit.  I'm not trying to bash, but even my wife who knows nothing about bikes could not believe how expensive those "old bikes" were!  

If I think about this logically, since the bike looks old and has no performance advantage, it must be the look and the image that people buy into.  It's the only logical conclusion.  The stereotype is hard to deny here from the perspective of an outsider looking in.  I honestly don't know how H-D is able to stay in business selling this stuff.  To me, I would feel ripped off if I bought a $25k H-D that looks old and didn't go like stink because I could buy an equivalent BMW or Triumph that would go fast, handle, stop, and look sleek, like a modern motorcycle should.  I mean, even the Mini and the Mustang have both evolved and they look retro-yet modern at the same time.  They also perform the way a modern high performance car should.    

Boy, where to start.....
1st of all, my condolences for having to experience such a horrific event in your life.  

The XR1200 is a giant leap in the right direction but, IMHO, falls way short of being competitive with other "sporty" standards; the engine is too weak, the chassis WAY too heavy and the price is WAY too high. Unless the one you saw was discounted below MSRP (quite possible) there is no way it is "competitively priced". Almost $12g is too much considering there are MUCH more capable bikes out there for less (Street triple for example). The XR is about 5 steps backwards from what Buell was producing and a bit of a slap in the face to those of us who really liked Buell and what he was trying to accomplish.

The prices are appalling, pretty much across the board. The entry level Sportster (883 Superlow) is the only one that is priced reasonably given the market segment it's in. All the rest I'd say are worth about 75% of what the asking price is (a $20k road sofa is probably a $15k bike with a $5k badge on the tank. They are nice bikes and generally well made but I could never overlook the performance shortcomings given the price premium. It's FAR too easy to get a quality bike with better performance from another make for less cash. For my money, Victory is the FAR better buy, although their styling seems to be polarizing to most.

As far as the styling, well that's a totally subjective matter. Personally, I like their styling a lot but I HATE the compromises in performance that are made in the name of styling. A super low slung bike looks cool but lack of any appreciable cornering clearance or suspension travel is definitely NOT cool in my book. The fact that their best handling bikes with the most clearance are their road barges (aside from the XR) is a BIG turn off for me.

Harley sells an image and they are the BEST at it. The bike and it's performance is secondary (or possibly further down the list in some cases) . Because the market is so HUGE for image the prices follow accordingly. Is a Street Glide worth $17-20k? based on performance and quality absolutely not; based on what the market will bear, yup.

My wish is that one day Harley will cut back on the "classic" models a little (not eliminate them, there is a VERY lucrative market for them) and add a few "sporty" options into the mix. A Dyna setup more like a Yamaha Warrior would be cool, a Sportster that more closely resembled a tube frame Buell but with a modern powerplant would be wicked. A V-Rod with Ergos a normal human being would like would be awesome (kinda like the "Street-Rod" from a few years back).

[Rabon1]

I see that all 14 buyers that bought Buells are still mad at Harley.  

[Rogue]

Well - HD's don't have the top end HP - but I will say that I like that the power is available down low.  A smooth pull from idle w/o having to rev the shit out of your motor is a good thing.  Even most of the other twins I've had don't have that.  Shit - my S2R1000 in stock form wouldn't hardly run below 4k, but the HD's I've ridden could roll around almost at idle w/o complaint.

My Firebolt XB12R had a smooth pull down low.  It was one of the things that made it a joy to ride in the city--lots of low end torque and strong midrange.  I rarely revved it past 6k RPM.  When I did rev it to redline, it had a decent top end.  The best of both worlds.

[ray916mn]

Koot, I have been to the dealership before but I always went straight to the Buell section.  I glanced over at all the chrome and my eyes hurt so I stayed away.  This time was different.  I had time to really look closer and view the pricetag, talk to the sales staff, etc.  The words "style" AND "performance" was used in their language quite often.  I get the style.  But the performance?    I kept quiet and didn't tell them I rode Buells because I had a feeling as soon as they found out I did, they would drop the "performance" from their vocabulary.    

The language used is all relative to the target market for a product.

Let's say for example that the heart of the HD market is targeted at guys suffering from a mid-life crisis who regularly drive mini-vans and four door sedans popular a mid-sized rental cars. To this audience the performance of virtually any motorcycle is likely to be pretty exciting and makes sense to  emphasize in marketing materials.

Of course these words are lost and rightfully might be considered ridiculous by people outside of the target market.

[Rogue]

I see that all 14 buyers that bought Buells are still mad at Harley.  

I'm mad at H-D yes.  But my point was the shock of their pricing of low performance, retro bikes, which left me wondering why people buy them and pay those prices for that.  That's all.  

[Rattlehead]

To be honest, BEFORE I think about test riding a bike I would desire to have, I first check performance statistics and test reviews and IF the performance and looks of the bike appeals to me and I'm ready to buy then I test ride .  It has to be faster than most cars to begin with.  After that, looks.  This is why I never test drove any HD....none meet the minimum criteria of performance.  To me, performance is the very core of motorcycle riding experience.  Otherwise, I may as well drive a car.  This is also why I said the XR1200 is the only model that appealed to me.  I did not say ALL H-D are crap in my eyes.  Having said that, the XR1200 has LESS performance than the least performing Buell V-twin (Lightning XB9S).  So......no test ride.

Agree 100%. To me, a bike is a performance machine and should perform accordingly. That's not to say they should all be laying down 10sec. 1/4 miles but they should be able to defend themselves from Honda Civics.  

I've always wanted to see a Bone stock Buell XB12 Lightning go head to head against one of the race prep XR1200's they have in that V&H series.  I think it would be quite the eye opener as to what a step backwards the XR was/is.

[Rogue]

The XR1200 is a giant leap in the right direction but, IMHO, falls way short of being competitive with other "sporty" standards; the engine is too weak, the chassis WAY too heavy and the price is WAY too high. Unless the one you saw was discounted below MSRP (quite possible) there is no way it is "competitively priced". Almost $12g is too much considering there are MUCH more capable bikes out there for less (Street triple for example). The XR is about 5 steps backwards from what Buell was producing and a bit of a slap in the face to those of us who really liked Buell and what he was trying to accomplish.

Here, here!  I'm with you on all points Rattlehead.  I'm glad i'm not the only one who can see this.

I do think the XR1200 is competitively priced against a few bikes in its class--the Moto Guzzi Griso 12V and the BMW R1200R.  The XR cost a bit more though but it's in the ballpark.  It does have the advantage of having massive dealership support.  But yes you are 100% correct.  They took the performance of the Buell XB12S Lightning SS and took it a few steps back.  That's another one in my "WHY-List" that leaves me scratching my head.  

[Rogue]

Of course these words are lost and rightfully might be considered ridiculous by people outside of the target market.

I agree with you.  

You sound like you work in marketing.  

[Kneescrubber]

I'm pretty sure Henry Fonda and Dennis Hopper never rode Harleys together.

[Kootenanny]

Koot, I have been to the dealership before but I always went straight to the Buell section.  I glanced over at all the chrome and my eyes hurt so I stayed away.  This time was different.

So, you never had the friendly H-D salesman gently steer you away from the Buells while uttering "How about this nice Sportster?"

Maybe the dealerships you were going into were bigger...up here, the "Buell section" consisted of maybe one Lightning and one Firebolt, tucked in a back corner behind the ceiling post where they wouldn't take away important retail space from the Harleys.  There were no specific Buell personnel, either in sales or parts (I had to physically take the parts book and show them what "frame pucks" were...).

I don't mind looking at Harleys (or the cute young chicks they hire at the boutiques... ).  In the Trev Deeley dealership in Vancouver, there is a small motorcycle museum which is definitely worth looking through.

Oh, and BTW, I have ridden a few demo Harleys...one was even the Street Rod that Rattlehead mentioned.  Not one of them made me want to trade in my Firebolt--which is interesting, because AFAIK one of the ideas behind Harley's ownership of Buell was that they'd be kinda like "starter" Harleys, to develop brand loyalty with the expectation that Buell owners would eventually "trade up" to a Harley--something which AFAIK seldom, if ever, happened.  And yes, I'm still pissed at H-D, to the point I will never, ever buy one of their products, even in the unlikely event I should ever desire one (kind of the opposite of the brand loyalty they were initially hoping to achieve...).

[ray916mn]

I agree with you.  

You sound like you work in marketing.  

Guilty as charged. Use to work in marketing before I retired.

[Rogue]

I'm pretty sure Henry Fonda and Dennis Hopper never rode Harleys together.

They did.

According to them, Dennis Hopper did NOT know how to ride well at the beginning of the film.  So both of them rode often (off film) as Fonda helped Hopper to get acquainted with riding.  

I saw the interviews when the DVD was released.  

I liked the movie (except the weird ending).  I thin the bikes on that film as appropriate for that period in time.  That period in time was also around when H-D gave up the performance part of the equation and went on down the road (so to speak) on an image branding because they could not match what was coming out of Europe and Japan.  Maybe they didn't want to because they found enough sheep to buy their products on image alone.  

I find that very sad.  I mean, there is a loyal following of Royal Enfield bullet owners around the world.  I understand that and can see the attraction to those who want to harken back to the purity of the riding experience, along with the appropriate look and feel.  H-D does that part extremely well.  But as to my previous analogy, a Royal Enfield Bullet 500 cost $6k and it's probably worth something like $4k but what's a couple of thousand?  H-D it seems sells the same image and perception but their products sell upwards of 3 times that of the Bullet.  Even when compared to the Triumph Bonneville, H-D models still sell at almost twice as much.  There are that many people who buy into that?  I see that as the biggest marketing genius of all time or the biggest rip-off.  Maybe both.    

[Testcase]

They did.

According to them, Dennis Hopper did NOT know how to ride well at the beginning of the film.  So both of them rode often (off film) as Fonda helped Hopper to get acquainted with riding.  

I saw the interviews when the DVD was released.  

Psst.

*nudge*

That was PETER Fonda.

[Rogue]

Oh, and BTW, I have ridden a few demo Harleys...one was even the Street Rod that Rattlehead mentioned.  Not one of them made me want to trade in my Firebolt--which is interesting, because AFAIK one of the ideas behind Harley's ownership of Buell was that they'd be kinda like "starter" Harleys, to develop brand loyalty with the expectation that Buell owners would eventually "trade up" to a Harley--something which AFAIK seldom, if ever, happened.  And yes, I'm still pissed at H-D, to the point I will never, ever buy one of their products, even in the unlikely event I should ever desire one (kind of the opposite of the brand loyalty they were initially hoping to achieve...).

Koot, I always thought fondly of the Sportster 1200.  I thought someday I would own one (when I was much older and lost the desire to go fast).  

Now, never.  The XR1200 is a distant maybe..... but the Griso and BMW still outpace it at similar prices so guess what?  Still no.  

Yes, the dealerships I went too were huge!  They had a whole section of the store devoted to Buell.  I applaud that.  I did go visit a couple of dealerships with token Buells on their showroom (two or three) and I never returned to them.  There was no point in it.  

[Kneescrubber]

Just playin' with ya Rogue.  

[Testcase]

Yes, the dealerships I went too were huge!  They had a whole section of the store devoted to Buell.  I applaud that.  I did go visit a couple of dealerships with token Buells on their showroom (two or three) and I never returned to them.  There was no point in it.  

I didn't know such a thing existed. Around me they were always a token presence which irked me to no end.  

[FBRR]

I've ben riding MOTORCYCLES since 1962. I've never felt the need to belittle what someone else rides. Of course "back then" we all rode Motorcycles, even if it was a Yamaha 80 or Honda 90. Big bikes for us were X6 hustlers, Big Bear Scramblers and 305 Hondas. Any "new guy" on any bike was welcome to ride.
I've also owned many different bikes from Honda, Yamaha, Triumph, HARLEY, and Kawasaki.( Including an H1, and C14 along with a "Samuri"350)
Having been both exposed and experienced to ride many fast and not so fast bikes, I find it funny that some feel they must put down a Harley rider.
I ride motorcycles and right now a Harley is well built and paint fininsh and yes Chrome are far superior to "other" cruisers. And anyone that wishes to belittle Harley ( I know the lifestyle crap makes them the target) But  Honda or "Star" cruisers are the same ride! So why do OU care if someof us wish to go slow in comfort and enjoy the wind!

New riders seems to feel they must "justify" what they ride by downgrading what others have. I should say I also have a Rolex and know a timex is cheaper and keaps better time! SO WHAT! I also appreciate the craftsmanship in "things." ( And yes I've also owned a 1941 ChrisCraft in the 90's that had far "better/faster/less labor intensive" boats available. I never felt the need to tell guys riding/boating" something other than what I have how foolish they were that they weren't rapping their nuts into the tank everytime they hit the brakes!( I miss carving curves, but I don;t miss the backache, and leg cramps, after riding 12 hours in a day!) But I also would NEVER ask,
What you see in YOUR bike! you obviously decided it was what YOU wanted!

New riders are NOT motorcyclist if they think what you ride on two wheels MEANS SQUAT to ANYONE else!

Ride Safe, wave or don't, but I do miss the old days when EVERYONE was happy to see another guy riding a BIKE on the road!

P.S.
I don't "wear" a bike I ride one. It's not a lifestlye, it's what I do. I've had five or six motorcycles before I ever owned a car!
I ride a Harley today!

[FBRR]

P.S.S.
I came on the site today to see what if folks were talking about the new 1400 MotoGuzzi. ( another bike that is really outdated and isn't as fast a many and has the dreaded V-Twin engine, what the heck are those guys thinkin'??

[DogBoy]

Thanks for the thread. I was wondering if HD had radically changed their approach since the last seven hundred discussions on this subject.

[Hardware]

I've ben riding MOTORCYCLES since 1962. I've never felt the need to belittle what someone else rides. Of course "back then" we all rode Motorcycles, even if it was a Yamaha 80 or Honda 90. Big bikes for us were X6 hustlers, Big Bear Scramblers and 305 Hondas. Any "new guy" on any bike was welcome to ride.
I've also owned many different bikes from Honda, Yamaha, Triumph, HARLEY, and Kawasaki.( Including an H1, and C14 along with a "Samuri"350)
Having been both exposed and experienced to ride many fast and not so fast bikes, I find it funny that some feel they must put down a Harley rider.
I ride motorcycles and right now a Harley is well built and paint fininsh and yes Chrome are far superior to "other" cruisers. And anyone that wishes to belittle Harley ( I know the lifestyle crap makes them the target) But  Honda or "Star" cruisers are the same ride! So why do OU care if someof us wish to go slow in comfort and enjoy the wind!

New riders seems to feel they must "justify" what they ride by downgrading what others have. I should say I also have a Rolex and know a timex is cheaper and keaps better time! SO WHAT! I also appreciate the craftsmanship in "things." ( And yes I've also owned a 1941 ChrisCraft in the 90's that had far "better/faster/less labor intensive" boats available. I never felt the need to tell guys riding/boating" something other than what I have how foolish they were that they weren't rapping their nuts into the tank everytime they hit the brakes!( I miss carving curves, but I don;t miss the backache, and leg cramps, after riding 12 hours in a day!) But I also would NEVER ask,
What you see in YOUR bike! you obviously decided it was what YOU wanted!

New riders are NOT motorcyclist if they think what you ride on two wheels MEANS SQUAT to ANYONE else!

Ride Safe, wave or don't, but I do miss the old days when EVERYONE was happy to see another guy riding a BIKE on the road!

P.S.
I don't "wear" a bike I ride one. It's not a lifestlye, it's what I do. I've had five or six motorcycles before I ever owned a car!
I ride a Harley today!

See, you're a motorcyclist who happens to currently ride a Harley.  

Then there are the diehard Hardley faithful, who opine things like:  "If it ain't a Harley it ain't shit"(which is correct IMO  ); ask non-Hardley riders, "When are you gonna' get a real bike?"; and can only justify it all with, "If I gotta' explain it to you, you wouldn't understand".

Now please step aside while S-T.N illuminati carry on with our regularly scheduled Hardley Ableson bashing...

[Rogue]

I've ben riding MOTORCYCLES since 1962. I've never felt the need to belittle what someone else rides. Of course "back then" we all rode Motorcycles, even if it was a Yamaha 80 or Honda 90. Big bikes for us were X6 hustlers, Big Bear Scramblers and 305 Hondas. Any "new guy" on any bike was welcome to ride.
I've also owned many different bikes from Honda, Yamaha, Triumph, HARLEY, and Kawasaki.( Including an H1, and C14 along with a "Samuri"350)
Having been both exposed and experienced to ride many fast and not so fast bikes, I find it funny that some feel they must put down a Harley rider.
 

What I don't find funny is when so many H-D riders and owners put down (insert brand) riders because they're not on a H-D.  Believe me, I've had my share of that and there are way more of them.  Having said that, I'm not putting down owners, just wondering what the real attraction is for someone to plunk down that much money for a retro-machine that has retro performance.  THAT is what I don't get and will probably never will.  I don't think that kind of mentality is present in any other segment of any market.  Not in cars, not in bikes, not in home electronics, nothing, nowhere.  

[FBRR]

"What I don't find funny is when so many H-D riders and owners put down (insert brand) riders because they're not on a H-D. "
Yup! and they are DUFFESSES TOO!

[ConPilot1]

So to summarize and this thread they are still heavy, slow, chrome plated dildo yachts that nobody's quite sure why they are purchased and occasionally ridden.

[ShervinRRR]

I have some most awesome ideas for mass reduction

My ideas of the past have received reviews of the most acclaim.

[staedtler]

The language used is all relative to the target market for a product.

Let's say for example that the heart of the HD market is targeted at guys suffering from a mid-life crisis who regularly drive mini-vans and four door sedans popular a mid-sized rental cars. To this audience the performance of virtually any motorcycle is likely to be pretty exciting and makes sense to  emphasize in marketing materials.

Of course these words are lost and rightfully might be considered ridiculous by people outside of the target market.

that's right, everybody has a bullseye...

my guess is that HD marketing is not genius, they just happened to have a very unsophisticated target audience, (easy prey)...
i cannot tell you how close i came to getting an RT just because of this promo vid, not even a test ride or anything.



lately, this one is heavely flirting w/me...

[Royal Tiger]

As long as people want what they sell, they will make them.  It's a no brainer on their part.

[axelwik]

I went to a Harley dealership on Saturday to meet up with someone. Was on my Ducati. When I got back on the bike to leave I noticed that one of the dim-wits outside in their pirate costumes had put my bike in gear to see if it would fall over when I hit the start button.

[Kootenanny]

I went to a Harley dealership on Saturday to meet up with someone. Was on my Ducati. When I got back on the bike to leave I noticed that one of the dim-wits outside in their pirate costumes had put my bike in gear to see if it would fall over when I hit the start button.

Perhaps it was a good samaritan who put it in gear to keep it from falling over on its own (any bike should be left in gear when parked...).

[Kootenanny]

I've ben riding MOTORCYCLES since 1962...yadda, yadda, yadda...It's not a lifestlye, it's what I do...

You'll fit right in with mxstone:  http://www.sport-touring.net/forums/index.php/topic,69835.0.html

[Rattlehead]

I've ben riding MOTORCYCLES since 1962. I've never felt the need to belittle what someone else rides. Of course "back then" we all rode Motorcycles, even if it was a Yamaha 80 or Honda 90. Big bikes for us were X6 hustlers, Big Bear Scramblers and 305 Hondas. Any "new guy" on any bike was welcome to ride.
I've also owned many different bikes from Honda, Yamaha, Triumph, HARLEY, and Kawasaki.( Including an H1, and C14 along with a "Samuri"350)
Having been both exposed and experienced to ride many fast and not so fast bikes, I find it funny that some feel they must put down a Harley rider.
I ride motorcycles and right now a Harley is well built and paint fininsh and yes Chrome are far superior to "other" cruisers. And anyone that wishes to belittle Harley ( I know the lifestyle crap makes them the target) But  Honda or "Star" cruisers are the same ride! So why do OU care if someof us wish to go slow in comfort and enjoy the wind!

New riders seems to feel they must "justify" what they ride by downgrading what others have. I should say I also have a Rolex and know a timex is cheaper and keaps better time! SO WHAT! I also appreciate the craftsmanship in "things." ( And yes I've also owned a 1941 ChrisCraft in the 90's that had far "better/faster/less labor intensive" boats available. I never felt the need to tell guys riding/boating" something other than what I have how foolish they were that they weren't rapping their nuts into the tank everytime they hit the brakes!( I miss carving curves, but I don;t miss the backache, and leg cramps, after riding 12 hours in a day!) But I also would NEVER ask,
What you see in YOUR bike! you obviously decided it was what YOU wanted!

New riders are NOT motorcyclist if they think what you ride on two wheels MEANS SQUAT to ANYONE else!

Ride Safe, wave or don't, but I do miss the old days when EVERYONE was happy to see another guy riding a BIKE on the road!

P.S.
I don't "wear" a bike I ride one. It's not a lifestlye, it's what I do. I've had five or six motorcycles before I ever owned a car!
I ride a Harley today!

If you are a “motorcyclist”, as you claim to be, then the insults in this thread really don’t apply to you and there’s no reason for you to get worked up over them unless you’re a Harley zealot. If you are what you say (this is the internet, I could claim to be a professional bodybuilding millionaire with a genius IQ if I wanted   ) then surely you see the “lifestyle” marketing Harley does and surely you despise it as much as the rest of us.

I’m going to hit on a few points in your post though, I’ll try to do them in the order you wrote them just for clarity.

“been riding since 1962”. That would obviously indicate that you are an “older” rider (no disrespect meant). I think it’s quite clear, based on the millions of Harley “discussions” on the web, that there is a GREAT generational divide in how younger and older riders view bikes. As I was growing up motorcycles were just breaking the 10 second barrier in the ¼ mi and reaching performance milestones that no car could achieve. The Yamaha V-Max was the bad boy on the block and if you wanted comfort and reliability a Goldwing was the ONLY way to go (Harley was still struggling with reliability issues). The GSXR was first appearing and sportbikes as we know them today were being birthed. The performance and reliability of bikes was progressing by leaps and bounds and Harley was always being left in the proverbial dust. In my generation, Harley has never been “top of the heap” and, in fact, was struggling to survive for the most part. Harleys were always “those leaky bikes your Dad rode in his hippy years”. They never represented anything positive like performance or quality.
To me, motorcycles have always been performance machines and Harley has never been in the game (it was the late 60’s when Harley was last competitive in performance). I will still ride anything, and enjoy it, but for my hard earned money I expect a certain level of performance. No current Harley fits the bill for me.

Not sure what to make of the “new riders” comment.    It seems to be to be a way to put down anyone who hasn’t been riding 50years in a very passive/aggressive manner. There are plenty of riders who are far from new at the game that simple despise Harley. If that means their putting down Harley to “justify” what they ride in your mind then so be it.


The Rolex/Chris-Craft comparison.
Personally, I think of a Rolex as nothing more than an over-priced status symbol (much like a Harley) and I’m unimpressed by them (also much like a Harley). I don’t spend money to gain status as I feel it’s a ridiculous pursuit, so therefore I see little value in such things. Harleys, to many, have become a status symbols and the prices have followed accordingly.

To say a Harley is a precision machine though, like a Rolex, is a bit “off the mark”. Google “Harley crank run-out” sometime to see the kind of “precision” Harley builds to. They build a very mediocre machine and dress it up in the best looking wrapper in the business. It’s like a lump of coal placed in a perfectly finished, intricately carved wooden box. Their fit and finish is top notch, no denying that, but the motorcycle, as a whole, is simply average at best. I’m not saying Harleys are junk and that their no better than their AMF days ( they’re far from it in all truthfulness) but they are far cry from a precision crafted machine either.

As far as the Chris-Craft, when you buy a classic anything you expect a certain amount of work to be needed and you expect a certain performance trade-off vs. something new. Now imagine if you bought that 1941 boat brand new in 2012, complete with the performance deficit (but with better maintenance requirements), and paid premium dollar for it. I own a 69 Mustang and I love it dearly but, if I bought a 2012 Mustang and it looked and drove like that 69 I’d be sorely disappointed in it, not matter how good the fit and finish was. That’s what Harley offers, a gussied-up version of a very old machine sold at a premium price and that’s why so many just don’t “get” the Harley thing, like the OP.

By relying so heavily on “Lifestyle” marketing and focusing entirely on one market segment (classic cruisers) Harley has turned their back on a good number of riders that would love to be able to support “the home team” but have no respect for that team or its rabid fans. That, I think, is where a lot of the angst comes from, not from jealousy or the need to "justify" another brand.

[falcofred]

Where is Raj when we need an expert on H-D?

[Kootenanny]

By relying so heavily on “Lifestyle” marketing and focusing entirely on one market segment (classic cruisers) Harley has turned their back on a good number of riders that would love to be able to support “the home team” but have no respect for that team or its rabid fans. That, I think, is where a lot of the angst comes from, not from jealousy or the need to "justify" another brand.

And this is why "all 14 buyers that bought Buells are still mad at Harley." (to quote Rabon1).  Look at the current EBR machines...unaffordable, yes, but these COULD have been built by Buell as a division of H-D, and probably at a competitive cost, had H-D allowed Buell a little more time and freedom.  But, no, Mr. Wandell decided to spend AS MUCH MONEY to kill Buell as H-D had put into the company since initial purchase (including purchase costs)

[Royal Tiger]

Perhaps it was a good samaritan who put it in gear to keep it from falling over on its own (any bike should be left in gear when parked...).

This.

We had a girl on a GSX-R on a group ride park her bike in neutral and it slowly worked it's way back towards the other bikes, still on the kickstand.    We stopped it before it hit any.  It did go a good 20 feet though.

As for falling over, when I turn the key the green neutral light would be a first clue if it was in gear or not, and I always check by rolling back and forth.  I also always pull the clutch to start the bike, even with the interlock bypassed so it would start in gear if I choose to do so.

[ConPilot1]

Perhaps it was a good samaritan who put it in gear to keep it from falling over on its own (any bike should be left in gear when parked...).

NOBODY should touch anybody's motorcycle, PERIOD. FOR ANY REASON. Unless you're helping get somebody's bike upright again with them.
If you think there is a problem with a parked bike, attempt to find the owner and notify them.

[Kootenanny]

NOBODY should touch anybody's motorcycle, PERIOD. FOR ANY REASON. Unless you're helping get somebody's bike upright again with them.
If you think there is a problem with a parked bike, attempt to find the owner and notify them.

Bullpucky.  If I see someone's bike in danger of falling over, I'll fix it...for example, if the sidestand was sinking into sand, turf, or hot asphalt, I'd try to find something (a rock, whatever) and put it underneath.  If I see someone's bike in danger of rolling forward off the stand, I'd put the bike in gear.  Sure, if the rider is right there, I'd simply tell him...but if he ain't, I'm not gonna go out of my way to find him, if it's easier to just fix the problem.  I'd hope other riders might do the same for me, rather than just stand by and let my bike fall over ("Gee, man, I woulda stopped it, but I never touch anyone else's bike...).

Now, moving a bike to make room for a car in a parking stall (which has happened to mine), that's different.  Sitting on or otherwise messing with someone's ride, also not on.  But putting it in gear to keep it safe from rolling off the stand, that's just being a good neighbour


(Sorry for the rant, but...I can't believe, first, that anyone would intentionally leave their bike in neutral when parked, or second, be annoyed when someone puts it in gear for him.  He's obviously never seen a bike roll off the sidestand...)

[Cablebandit]

NOBODY should touch anybody's motorcycle, PERIOD. FOR ANY REASON. Unless you're helping get somebody's bike upright again with them.
If you think there is a problem with a parked bike, attempt to find the owner and notify them.

This.  How did they even know it was in neutral unless they were already messing with it.

[Kootenanny]

This.  How did they even know it was in neutral unless they were already messing with it.

Excellent point, and I admit that I wouldn't know if a bike was in neutral unless I actually saw it start to roll (see Royal Tiger's post above).

But, then, how would they know the bike isn't in neutral, either?--according to axelwik, his bike was put in neutral so the guys could see if it would fall over when he tried to start it.  I think that's going a bit far on his part.  More likely, he left it in gear himself (parked it correctly by accident) and didn't realize he'd done so.

I know most of us don't have any respect for Harley riders; but while I'm not enamoured of their products, I'm not going to badmouth anyone because of their choice of motorcycle (although some find it necessary to badmouth my choice...).  And I think that assuming that some guys who happen to be standing around outside a Harley shop put your bike in gear for nefarious purpose is assuming a lot, unless the rider actually saw or heard something that would raise his suspicion.  

[ConPilot1]

Of course if I saw a bike in immediate danger of falling over, like creeping on the sidestand or sinking in hot asphalt, of course I'd intervene.

But to take it upon yourself to see that my bike is in gear? To take your foot and step on my gearshift lever while I'm not there, because it's something that
you "think" should be done?? No way. Don't touch my bike.

BTW my Connie's been spit upon at local bike events where the majority of the crowd is doo-raggers. So yeah I wouldn't put it past and HD rider to do what the Ducati rider thought.

My animosity towards HD and the general crowd has been generated by them. Sick of being screamed at out of truck windows, wiping lugies off my seat,
or just listening to their comments about my riding suits or my "jap crap"  when I'm making my way through a crowd to go get a drink.

[Kootenanny]

Of course if I saw a bike in immediate danger of falling over, like creeping on the sidestand or sinking in hot asphalt, of course I'd intervene.

But to take it upon yourself to see that my bike is in gear? To take your foot and step on my gearshift lever while I'm not there, because it's something that
you "think" should be done?? No way. Don't touch my bike.

OK, we agree here. I was only suggesting, if I saw something actually imminent.

BTW my Connie's been spit upon at local bike events where the majority of the crowd is doo-raggers. So yeah I wouldn't put it past and HD rider to do what the Ducati rider thought.

My animosity towards HD and the general crowd has been generated by them. Sick of being screamed at out of truck windows, wiping lugies off my seat,
or just listening to their comments about my riding suits or my "jap crap"  when I'm making my way through a crowd to go get a drink.

Hmmm...maybe it's because of where I live (likely, actually), but I've never had anyone spit on my bike or scream at me out of a truck window.  I've had one or two Harley guys give me some mild ribbing about my "Jap bike" , but I've also had some nice compliments from these guys.  And...well, I've also had a few of these guys convinced my bike has a turbine in it  BTW, the worst vitriol I've heard against my bike has been from a Ducati rider!

[Royal Tiger]

Of course if I saw a bike in immediate danger of falling over, like creeping on the sidestand or sinking in hot asphalt, of course I'd intervene.

But to take it upon yourself to see that my bike is in gear? To take your foot and step on my gearshift lever while I'm not there, because it's something that
you "think" should be done?? No way. Don't touch my bike.

BTW my Connie's been spit upon at local bike events where the majority of the crowd is doo-raggers. So yeah I wouldn't put it past and HD rider to do what the Ducati rider thought.

My animosity towards HD and the general crowd has been generated by them. Sick of being screamed at out of truck windows, wiping lugies off my seat,
or just listening to their comments about my riding suits or my "jap crap"  when I'm making my way through a crowd to go get a drink.

We probably don't live all that far apart.

I'll admit I have seen some strong hardley loyalty down near York, but around here I even get waves from 90% of them.  The north central part of the state seems to be trying hard to become the next West Virginia, so maybe you ran into some short bus graduates.

[misanthropist]

I am severely allergic to group identity and have had some run-ins with Harley owners in my time.

That said I would definitely consider buying one.  Right now, I think their build quality is fairly good.  I took an '08 XL1200R out last week and really enjoyed it.  Was it a similar bike to my GSXR?  Obviously not.

I know this girl who goes to see all kinds of movies, then bitches about how they are too lowbrow.  She complained about one movie a couple of years ago, comparing it repeatedly to "Babette's Feast", which as far as I can tell, is her idea of the peak of cinema.  The movie?  "Transformers 2."

If you go to a movie that says, in the opening credits, "Based on the toys by Hasbro" and you expect something other than a bunch of rockem sockem robots smashing each other to bits while various things explode, you are a fucking moron.  Do not complain that "Die Hard" had insufficient character development, and that the eurotrash supervillains should have been experiencing an existential crisis.  Shut the hell up.  It's Die Hard.

Harley Davidson builds Harley Davidsons.  If you go in thinking, "hey, let me sling this through a few hundred miles of tight turns and see if it compares to my ST1300", the problem is not with Harley Davidson.

They are what they are.  The few I have ridden (which have all been fairly recent) have been good bikes of that sort.  I have half a mind to buy the sportiest Dyna I can find.  I think the bikes are okay...you just have to understand that they are not built to do the same thing a Blackbird is.

If you want to drill holes and you buy a palm sander, don't whine about the engineers at Black and Decker.  Furthermore, if the idiot fanboys of the palm sander manage to sink to ever lower depths of idiocy, don't confuse that with the ability of the tool to actually sand something.

I have been threatened by HD guys in two different states simply for parking a Yamaha outside a gas station (Arizona) and a restaurant (Virginia).  I had a whole bar full of HD riders watch some crackhead try to steal my bike and do nothing other than mock me when I got back for not riding a "hog".  I have had plenty of negative experiences with that crowd.  But as I have aged I've developed the ability to hate the "if I rode, I'd only ride a Harley" culture AND the "that bike sucks, I've only ever rode Harleys" culture without specifically hating the bikes HD manufacture.  They do what they're supposed to do pretty well these days as far as I can tell.

[caddydaddy]

Hmmm...maybe it's because of where I live (likely, actually), but I've never had anyone spit on my bike or scream at me out of a truck window.

The day after I bought my Triumph, I took it for a ride up to a lake in Maine.  I stopped for a rest and some dude in a truck drove by and shouted "Get a Harley!".  I was thinking "I want something that runs!"  

Before I bought my bike, I was looking at Buells.  The ever so helpful Harley dealer guy said to me "Why do you want one of those?"    No wonder Harley dropped Buell!  

[dan88z]

I think HD's touring bikes are nice. The metrics, aside from the Goldwing, have been trying to catch up to the full bagger for a long time. My friend has a Road Glide and I'd ride one of those. The other bikes do nothing for me. My Vulcan 1600 was a lot more bike than a dyna or soft tail and was half the price.

The stories of loogies on your seat or bikes being knocked down, that's the stuff that makes me fume. The best is "get a real bike" from some jackhole in a car with the HD stickers all over it. Hey, at least I'm riding! These are the same people who say "it's not what you ride, it's that you ride" and other cute quotes. As long as you ride a HD I guess. This is the main reason I avoid any bike events/ bike weeks. A few friends and I went down to the Timonium bike show recently. You'd think that 90% of the people rode their bikes because they were all dressed up like they had ridden to the event in the snow. It was a leather pirate convention.

[black hills]

H-D is in business to sell bikes and almost as importantly branded merchandise, both of wich they appear to do fairly well. best not to think about it too much

[Royal Tiger]

It was a leather pirate convention.

 

Classic!  

[Kootenanny]

Before I bought my bike, I was looking at Buells.  The ever so helpful Harley dealer guy said to me "Why do you want one of those?"    No wonder Harley dropped Buell!  

I got a bit of that--as I said in an earlier post, my dealer did try to sell me a Sportster.  I told him no, I wanted the Buell, and I told him why--the salesman knew far less about the XB Buells than I did, to this day I feel I should have charged him a consultancy fee.  I also got a bit of razzing from some of the shop customers, old guys in Harley leathers who asked why I was interested in "that little plastic bike."  But it was good natured fun, I never felt they were demeaning, they just didn't understand my outlook.

BTW, I do love my Firebolt--it is a motorcycle in the entire sense of the word.  It has enough power to be exciting, but not so much that I can't twist it hard and thrash it a bit; it handles very well; the look is clean and spare, the chassis is composed and competent, and the engine vibrates at idle and thrums along at speed.  As for Harley shutting down Buell...at the time, Buell was growing faster than H-D, and selling pretty good...the closure had nothing to do with sales AFAIK.  (BTW, they didn't just "drop" Buell--indeed, there were several serious offers to purchase the brand, but Harley wouldn't sell.  They spent serious money to break their contracts and shut it down.  If you look at what EBR is producing now, you'll see what might have been possible under H-D's ownership if their new CEO hadn't been so close-minded.)

[caddydaddy]

 As for Harley shutting down Buell...at the time, Buell was growing faster than H-D, and selling pretty good...the closure had nothing to do with sales AFAIK.

Selling pretty good, but they probably would have sold great if the asshole Harley salesmen didn't despise Buell and turn customers away!

[Royal Tiger]

Selling pretty good, but they probably would have sold great if the asshole Harley salesmen didn't despise Buell and turn customers away!

There is a Buell fanatic on SBN who posted he took his 1125 in for service and they asked him when was he ready to trade that in for a real bike.  Yep, that's how you expand your sales base.

[Powder Addict]

There is a Buell fanatic on SBN who posted he took his 1125 in for service and they asked him when was he ready to trade that in for a real bike.  Yep, that's how you expand your sales base.

Back in 2002 I was thinking of getting into riding (just prior to when I got my license) and though I really liked the look of the Buells.  I did some research, and thought I'd go check one out in person, just doing some further research.

I went into the HD dealership, wandered over and started looking at a model.  No one came over to help, which I thought was a bit odd.  I finally went over to a salesman, and asked him the price on one of the models.  He wouldn't even look up at me, and quoted an outrageously high price.  I walked out, and haven't been back in a HD dealership since.


It's not just the bikes, it's the whole attitude the brand carries.  For a brand that sells "individuality", they sure don't give others the "individuality" they so loudly preach.  

[bomber]

If you are a “motorcyclist”, as you claim to be, then the insults in this thread really don’t apply to you and there’s no reason for you to get worked up over them unless you’re a Harley zealot. If you are what you say (this is the internet, I could claim to be a professional bodybuilding millionaire with a genius IQ if I wanted   ) then surely you see the “lifestyle” marketing Harley does and surely you despise it as much as the rest of us.

By relying so heavily on “Lifestyle” marketing and focusing entirely on one market segment (classic cruisers) Harley has turned their back on a good number of riders that would love to be able to support “the home team” but have no respect for that team or its rabid fans. That, I think, is where a lot of the angst comes from, not from jealousy or the need to "justify" another brand.

This makes me chuckle a lil bit -- first, you post about people being narrow minded and target fixated so they buy an HD, then you state that "surely," another rider must agree with you.

Blaming damn near anything to do with HD on what YOU perceive to be a generational divide is, er, inaccurate (I see many folks below 40 on them, and not a few in their 20s).

HD is not in business to further motorcycling, to hold closely to what YOU perceive a motorcycle to be, or for any other reason than to make money for their owners. If you were nearly as successful as HD in turning investments into profits, you'd likely be out riding somewhere exotic (hell, me too).

The halt pointing fingers and laughing at the blind -- I simply love irony.

[Mr.Black]

I just left our local HD shop. The G and I are out and about adventuring so we stopped in. Say what you will and rag all you want, there is a quality that the machines have that is very intriguing. They've come a long way since I had mine. The hype and attitude that accompanies them is nothing short of revolting but I wouldn't mind owning another one someday.

[ConPilot1]

Well I'd like to add that I am the very proud owner of a pair of Harley Davidson waterproof boot covers and I own several Harley Davidson brand bungee cords.

These are quality items right here and every HD owner should be proud  that their merchandise rocks.  

[atadaskew]

They sell this shit and people buy it?  Now, I'm all okay with retro as long as it has a retro-price.  Like for example the Royal Enfield Bullet or the Triumph Thruxton or Bonneville.

What's retro in pricing about the Enfield - $6700 for garbage, or the made in Thailand Triumph - $9000?
The cheapest made in the USA Harley Sportster is $8K, and comes with perfect fuel injection, perfect paint and chrome etc.  It is what people want when they buy a cruiser.  Which is why Harley makes them and sells them.  How is it so hard to understand that they are a business focussed on building and selling what the market wants?

You obviously don't like Harleys, which is cool, but to write a frothing at the mouth piece on it is kinda childish.  There's a reason all the Japanese mfgs copy their bikes.  But Harley is now doing really well in sales, while the Japanese are not.

Why don't you write a thread complaining about Japanese copy cat cruisers?  

[Kootenanny]

Selling pretty good, but they probably would have sold great if the asshole Harley salesmen didn't despise Buell and turn customers away!

Yes, this is true...AFAIK, Buell actually had their best sales in Europe, where they were not tied to H-D's dealer network (they'd be sold in shops that carried Triumph and Ducati, etc.), and where Harley is not such a divisive factor in the riding community.

My point was, Buell was selling well enough to be growing faster than H-D itself.  Here H-D was, with an in-house brand that was small enough and innovative enough to actually develop a new customer base.  I'm a perfect example--I'd never have gone into a Harley boutique if not to look at the Buells.  And yet, Buell was still a separate brand name--no reason for the H-D faithful to get upset.  Especially looking at what EBR is doing now, I believe Buell really could have been the "American sportbike" company so many seem to desire, had Wandell been a bit more visionary.  But no, he decided to go turtle and "focus on their core business" of producing large, retro cruisers.  (Not that there's anything wrong with cruisers, but not everyone wants to ride one...)

[axelwik]

NOBODY should touch anybody's motorcycle, PERIOD. FOR ANY REASON. Unless you're helping get somebody's bike upright again with them.
If you think there is a problem with a parked bike, attempt to find the owner and notify them.

^This... There was absolutely no danger of this bike falling over, rolling, etc. Since there are no ignition interlocks on the bike it can be started with only a turn of the key and push of the starter button. This is why I park it in neutral when it's not on a hill. If I wasn't straddling the bike it probably would have fallen over.

Should have gotten a clue when the jackass in the pirate costume in front of me nodded to his friends in my direction when I was about to start the bike.

[caddydaddy]

What's retro in pricing about the Enfield - $6700 for garbage, or the made in Thailand Triumph - $9000?
The cheapest made in the USA Harley Sportster is $8K,

Not all Triumph Bonnevilles are made in Thailand, FYI.  Quite a lot are still made in England.  And you can't really get hung up on the "Made in..." Since even Harleys have lots of foreign parts on them!

[gritsngravy]

What's retro in pricing about the Enfield - $6700 for garbage, or the made in Thailand Triumph - $9000?
The cheapest made in the USA Harley Sportster is $8K, and comes with perfect fuel injection, perfect paint and chrome etc.  It is what people want when they buy a cruiser.  Which is why Harley makes them and sells them.  How is it so hard to understand that they are a business focussed on building and selling what the market wants?

You obviously don't like Harleys, which is cool, but to write a frothing at the mouth piece on it is kinda childish.  There's a reason all the Japanese mfgs copy their bikes.  But Harley is now doing really well in sales, while the Japanese are not.

Why don't you write a thread complaining about Japanese copy cat cruisers?  

The whole biker bullshit redneck confederate flag flying inbred meth mouth thing is a turn off, regardless of make they chose to...I use the term loosely.....ride.   I gave the cruising thing a try, rode a Honda VTX 1300 for three years and yes it was a so called copy cat caused it SUCKED just as bad as every HD I tried.   Honda got that HD function down just right!

Cruisers, riding in formation or large groups definitely isn't for me and I'm willing to live & let live but sadly it's the typically HD mounted mouth breathers that keep on with their dim witted crap.   About the funniest thing I've witnessed happened here in Nor Cal was  when an ape hangered potato putz machine riding clown flying the stars & bars took his hand off the left grip to flip me off ( I was on my vfr at the time ) and nearly crashed when he hit some rough pavement.  

There are assholes everywhere but these guys go out of their way to diminish the inherent brilliance of the human species.

[Royal Tiger]

The whole biker bullshit redneck confederate flag flying inbred meth mouth thing is a turn off, regardless of make they chose to...I use the term loosely.....ride.   I gave the cruising thing a try, rode a Honda VTX 1300 for three years and yes it was a so called copy cat caused it SUCKED just as bad as every HD I tried.   Honda got that HD function down just right!

Cruisers, riding in formation or large groups definitely isn't for me and I'm willing to live & let live but sadly it's the typically HD mounted mouth breathers that keep on with their dim witted crap.   About the funniest thing I've witnessed happened here in Nor Cal was  when an ape hangered potato putz machine riding clown flying the stars & bars took his hand off the left grip to flip me off ( I was on my vfr at the time ) and nearly crashed when he hit some rough pavement.  

There are assholes everywhere but these guys go out of their way to diminish the inherent brilliance of the human species.

 

I would be more OK with their "rolling roadblock" formation riding if they would willing yield to faster traffic.  Nothing like a pack of them doing UNDER the speed limit on a twisty road and holding everyone that can lean up.  I thought the first rule of motorcycle riding was don't ruin the other guys ride?  No one says they have to get over their heads for the sake of someone else, but arrogantly slowing down and making hand gestures to faster riders is fostering the "brotherhood"?  

[Rattlehead]

This makes me chuckle a lil bit -- first, you post about people being narrow minded and target fixated so they buy an HD, then you state that "surely," another rider must agree with you.

Blaming damn near anything to do with HD on what YOU perceive to be a generational divide is, er, inaccurate (I see many folks below 40 on them, and not a few in their 20s).

HD is not in business to further motorcycling, to hold closely to what YOU perceive a motorcycle to be, or for any other reason than to make money for their owners. If you were nearly as successful as HD in turning investments into profits, you'd likely be out riding somewhere exotic (hell, me too).

The halt pointing fingers and laughing at the blind -- I simply love irony.

Not sure I agree with your analysis but I can agree to disagree.

In all honesty, I can’t see how anyone who knows about bikes or knows about Harley (and their less than gleaming past) could find their marketing to be anything but revolting; enormously effective, but revolting none the less. This is my opinion though and should be taken as such.

You claim that my viewpoint, based on my experience, is totally off base and then back that up with your viewpoint, based on your experience? There’s that irony you love so much. I stand by my opinion based on what I have personally observed. Your observations are different. That doesn’t make either of our opinions or theories wrong, just not from the same perspective.  

I don’t expect Harley to totally conform to what I perceive a motorcycle to be. It seems to me though (again, my opinion) that they’ve focused quite hard on building what one generation (albeit a very large one with plenty of expendable cash) perceives a motorcycle to be, and made a LOT of money in the process. They’ve thumbed their noses at the rest of us though, or simply said, in not so many words, “if you want an American made bike you will buy what we think a motorcycle is because we don’t care what you think.”. The mismanagement and final closing of Buell reinforced that notion to me.
That kind of arrogance annoys me, especially from a company that faced death several times for building uncompetitive bikes (or most recently, from shortsighted greed), has had NUMEROUS failures and took 25+ years to figure out how to make a bike that stays together and keeps its fluids internal. Maybe in another 25 years they’ll figure out how to make more hp than Db’s (even at the current EPA limit) or how a fully functional suspension works (tounge placed firmly in cheek) .

[bomber]

Fair enough -- about the only difference between us is that you are far more concerned about other people's reaction to HD's marketing than I . . . . this isn't uncommon, as many sites have HD slagging threads -- they seem to make some folks feel good. Of course, you may be simply writing that way and feel completely different, as this is, as you pointed out, the internet ;-}

I've ridden a fair amount on an 09 Big Twin, and it's a great mile eater if you are on less than interesting roads -- that's not an application I am much interested in, but it's a great bike for what it purports to be.

Their marketing doesn't speak to me at all (nor to you, it would seem), but I don't think the Iron Tower is gonna miss having us for customers. They are doing just fine without us.

Oh, and btw, as a Buell owner, I, too, was very disappointed by what I feel was HD's very short sighted decision to shut the doors . . . .but again, they are in business to generate revenue and profit, and it's tough to argue with success . . . .

[Rattlehead]

Fair enough -- about the only difference between us is that you are far more concerned about other people's reaction to HD's marketing than I . . . . this isn't uncommon, as many sites have HD slagging threads -- they seem to make some folks feel good. Of course, you may be simply writing that way and feel completely different, as this is, as you pointed out, the internet ;-}

I've ridden a fair amount on an 09 Big Twin, and it's a great mile eater if you are on less than interesting roads -- that's not an application I am much interested in, but it's a great bike for what it purports to be.

Their marketing doesn't speak to me at all (nor to you, it would seem), but I don't think the Iron Tower is gonna miss having us for customers. They are doing just fine without us.

Oh, and btw, as a Buell owner, I, too, was very disappointed by what I feel was HD's very short sighted decision to shut the doors . . . .but again, they are in business to generate revenue and profit, and it's tough to argue with success . . . .

Think of my rantings as more of a "writing project" more than anything. In the real world I'm a pretty laid back guy and nothing really gets under my skin; on the internet I'm a keyboard warrior.   OK, maybe I'm just a long winded blowhard, but I'm OK with that too.
I actually find peoples reactions and opinion on the whole "Harley thing" to be very interesting. I like to study/ponder it in my free time. Me personally, I have very negative feelings about it (I tend to form VERY strong opinions about things I'm interested in) but it doesn't really affect my daily life, only my internet one.  
I'm always open to another point of view though, so long as the person can keep it civil and carry on an intelligent conversation.
Feel free to call me out on anything you disagree with.

[atadaskew]

The whole biker bullshit redneck confederate flag flying inbred meth mouth thing is a turn off..

I enjoyed my Harley but was going to sell it (before I could I was t-boned) because , well, it just wasn't my thing...

[Kootenanny]

In all honesty, I can’t see how anyone who knows about bikes or knows about Harley (and their less than gleaming past) could find their marketing to be anything but revolting; enormously effective, but revolting none the less. This is my opinion though and should be taken as such.

I disagree...I mean, advertising is what it is.  Marketers like to say, "Sell the sizzle, not the steak"--in H-D's case, they're selling a mythical "lifestyle" that only incidentally includes owning a Harley.  But, Suzuki does the same thing--only their "mythical lifestyle" is all about racing and performance (including a lot of bench racing).  It's advertising, pure and simple...perhaps mildly distasteful, but if you want to see truly disgusting advertising, look at the American pharmeceutical  industry (which actively promotes hypochondria to sell unneccesary drugs...).

[ConPilot1]

Well I know when I ride with my usual peeps, my buddies' wife Diane and I flip off entire H-D dealerships when we go by.
It's great fun, especially when there are pirates outside oooooooing and ahhhhhhing over their parked boat anchors.

Shes' bad. Total instigator but we have a ball when we ride together.  

She hates the f*ckers.  

[atadaskew]

She hates the f*ckers.  

I dunno man, that seems to be an extreme emotion.

Normally such emotions are a foil to cover up hidden desires.

Just sayin'...

[ConPilot1]

I dunno man, that seems to be an extreme emotion.

Normally such emotions are a foil to cover up hidden desires.

Just sayin'...

Well you go and try to pull that little bit of Freudian generalization on her.
Smart mouth her and she'd rip your head off. Just sayin'.


Nothing subtle about the woman that's for sure, but her and her husband Al are great people.
We've been riding together for a couple years and have a GREAT time together.

I've been trying to get them on STN but I don't think they have the time. I know Al lurks here and there.....

[atadaskew]

Well you go and try to pull that little bit of Freudian generalization on her.
Smart mouth her and she'd rip your head off. Just sayin'.

Just sayin', unless she got wronged somehow - a Harley dood kicked her puppy - that is an awfully strong reaction to something that really has nothing to do with her.

Going around and flippin' people off who have no idea who you are.  There's something underlying there.

[ConPilot1]

Just sayin', unless she got wronged somehow - a Harley dood kicked her puppy - that is an awfully strong reaction to something that really has nothing to do with her.

What are you another STN frakking armchair psychoanalyst now? Another expert on human behavior.  

It's no different than the usual tongue-in-cheek common everyday Harley bashing that goes on. Mostly all for fun, but yes, we really don't care to associate with them for
the various reasons that have been beat to death here.

Going around and flippin' people off who have no idea who you are.  There's something underlying there.

I'll make sure and let the next batch of pirates who flip us off know that you expressed dismay at that.

[Kootenanny]

Nothing subtle about the woman that's for sure...

I see she's a BMW snob...

[ConPilot1]

I see she's a BMW snob...

I don't blame her. That bike is the shit man. I think her and Al have 5 or 6 bikes between the two of them, and an old Honda 305 resto project in the basement.

[Kootenanny]

I don't blame her. That bike is the shit man.

I think you may have missed my point...

[Mr.Black]

I fucking hate those BMW bitch snobs!!!!

[ConPilot1]

I fucking hate those BMW bitch snobs!!!!

Be nice. these are very dear friends of mine. Almost family.

[Mr.Black]

Be nice. these are very dear friends of mine. Almost family.

I hate you for liking such people.

[Rattlehead]

I disagree...I mean, advertising is what it is.  Marketers like to say, "Sell the sizzle, not the steak"--in H-D's case, they're selling a mythical "lifestyle" that only incidentally includes owning a Harley.  But, Suzuki does the same thing--only their "mythical lifestyle" is all about racing and performance (including a lot of bench racing).  It's advertising, pure and simple...perhaps mildly distasteful, but if you want to see truly disgusting advertising, look at the American pharmeceutical  industry (which actively promotes hypochondria to sell unneccesary drugs...).

I despise all advertising. I find it almost insulting most of the time. Harley's advertising department just happens to be the most effective in the motorcycle industry.  
I find their particular style though to be arrogant, misleading and downright hypocritical at times. I mean sure, Suzuki plays the racing card but at least they have a successful racing history to back it up. There's substance behind the image (it's still annoying but at least there's something behind it).
Harley likes to portray themselves as this great American Icon with this rich history behind them when truth is, they've about went under numerous time for building total crap, for a complete inability to compete, or for pure and simple shortsighted greed (the most recent reason). Harleys "rich history" has been a roller coaster of modest successes and epic failures (VR1000 anyone?). It wasn't until they played the "lifestyle" card that they truly became successful. Their products alone could never seem to get them off the ground as a company. I have no respect for any company who's entire success is built off of smoke and mirrors or some storied past that only existed through rose colored glasses.

[atadaskew]

I'll make sure and let the next batch of pirates who flip us off know that you expressed dismay at that.

Does that really happen to you?

In my 25 years of riding in CA I have never had anyone, on any bike, flip me off.
Ever.

[ConPilot1]

Does that really happen to you?

In my 25 years of riding in CA I have never had anyone, on any bike, flip me off.
Ever.

California and Northeast PA are two very, very different worlds my friend. I've done both for extended periods of time.

Neither have I in CA.

[atadaskew]

California and Northeast PA are two very, very different worlds my friend. I've done both for extended periods of time.

Neither have I in CA.

Wow.
Ok, I take it all back.
 

[Gary B.]

I despise all advertising. I find it almost insulting most of the time. Harley's advertising department just happens to be the most effective in the motorcycle industry.  
I find their particular style though to be arrogant, misleading and downright hypocritical at times. I mean sure, Suzuki plays the racing card but at least they have a successful racing history to back it up. There's substance behind the image (it's still annoying but at least there's something behind it).
Harley likes to portray themselves as this great American Icon with this rich history behind them when truth is, they've about went under numerous time for building total crap, for a complete inability to compete, or for pure and simple shortsighted greed (the most recent reason). Harleys "rich history" has been a roller coaster of modest successes and epic failures (VR1000 anyone?). It wasn't until they played the "lifestyle" card that they truly became successful. Their products alone could never seem to get them off the ground as a company. I have no respect for any company who's entire success is built off of smoke and mirrors or some storied past that only existed through rose colored glasses.

Thank you for putting MY thoughts into words.

[TwoWhldTerror]

To be honest, BEFORE I think about test riding a bike I would desire to have, I first check performance statistics and test reviews and IF the performance and looks of the bike appeals to me and I'm ready to buy then I test ride .  It has to be faster than most cars to begin with.  After that, looks.  This is why I never test drove any HD....none meet the minimum criteria of performance.  To me, performance is the very core of motorcycle riding experience.  Otherwise, I may as well drive a car.  This is also why I said the XR1200 is the only model that appealed to me.  I did not say ALL H-D are crap in my eyes.  Having said that, the XR1200 has LESS performance than the least performing Buell V-twin (Lightning XB9S).  So......no test ride.

This is fair, and certainly within your purview as your own individual requirements. However, those are YOUR requirements, not everyone else's. Nor is your definition of the "motorcycle riding experience" the same either. No I do not ride a Harley, but when I get the dual sport to add to the stable along with the FJR, "performance" certainly will not be the reason why, at least not by the criteria you are utilizing.

With that said, HD's are WAAAAYYYYY to $$$ for my blood, at least new ones.

[Tpoppa]

HD only sells motorcycle to support T-Shirt sales

/thread

[Kootenanny]

I despise all advertising. I find it almost insulting most of the time. Harley's advertising department just happens to be the most effective in the motorcycle industry.  
I find their particular style though to be arrogant, misleading and downright hypocritical at times. I mean sure, Suzuki plays the racing card but at least they have a successful racing history to back it up. There's substance behind the image (it's still annoying but at least there's something behind it).
Harley likes to portray themselves as this great American Icon with this rich history behind them when truth is, they've about went under numerous time for building total crap, for a complete inability to compete, or for pure and simple shortsighted greed (the most recent reason). Harleys "rich history" has been a roller coaster of modest successes and epic failures (VR1000 anyone?). It wasn't until they played the "lifestyle" card that they truly became successful. Their products alone could never seem to get them off the ground as a company. I have no respect for any company who's entire success is built off of smoke and mirrors or some storied past that only existed through rose colored glasses.

OK, I can't believe I'm actually gonna defend Harley--I despise them due to their treatment of Buell.  But...the thing is, they never DID go under.  Which other major American motorcycle company can say that?  Indian went under...were all their products "crap?"  How about Crocker? or Cyclone? or Ace?   The list goes on...

As for the "lifestyle card," well, keep in mind that that wasn't their original idea.  It was created in Hollywood (how more American can you get?) and Harley simply adopted it--successfully, I might add.  Harley is a good example of "give the customer what they want"--the problem is, if you aren't "their customer," their ads won't attract you.  Reminds me of watching a beer commercial with my cousin, who works in TV advertising...I said something about how idiotic and juvenile the ad was, and he laughed and said, "They don't care--you aren't their customer!"  The ad was aimed directly at 20-ish year old guys, who make up the vast majority of that brewer's customer base; I thought it was stupid, but the guys for whom it's intended probably thought it looked cool and fun.  In the same way, while you might find H-D's advertising "disgusting," a lot of guys might find it inspiring.

Oh, and back to Suzuki--once again, sure the company has a strong history of racing (so does H-D, BTW, just a few decades earlier).  But "Own the Racetrack?"  I mean, come on...just how many GSX-Rs ever actually see a track?  Suzuki is advertising the dream that if you ride one of their bikes, you too might ride as well as Mladin (or whoever the current Suzuki champion is).  Now, every sportbike maker does this (it is a huge part of the reason factories sponsor race teams in any series), but it's no more misleading for Harley to say they're an iconic American motorcycle company (which they are), or that if you ride a Harley, you'll be seen as a "badass dude" (which is partially true as well, since Harley's image is strongly positioned in American culture--even little old ladies know what a Harley is, and what to think of a guy who rides one).  

[DogBoy]

All good points and well said Koot. However, Suzuki won't sell any R6s or R1s no matter how good their ads are.

[Kootenanny]

All good points and well said Koot. However, Suzuki won't sell any R6s or R1s no matter how good their ads are.

 

Fixed.

(I admit, much as I can't tell various Harleys apart--or even tell them from the clones--I can't tell the latest GSX-Rs, R1s, ZX-10Rs, or CBRRs apart without looking at the tank badge...guess I'm not their target market any more than I am Harley's...)

[atadaskew]

With that said, HD's are WAAAAYYYYY to $$$ for my blood, at least new ones.

New 2012 HD 883cc Sportsters start at $8K.
Which is less than some Honda 750cc cruisers.

[Tpoppa]

New 2012 HD 883cc Sportsters start at $8K.
Which is less than some Honda 750cc cruisers.

True.  But isn't the draw of owning a HD being acknowledged by others on HDs?  And HD riders know that a Sportster isn't a real HD.

[atadaskew]

True.  But isn't the draw of owning a HD being acknowledged by others on HDs?  And HD riders know that a Sportster isn't a real HD.

I see plenty of Sportsters being ridden with other Harleys.  There doesn't seem to be a problem.
Interestingly the best selling models are the cheapest - the Sportsters - and the most expensive - the gussied up touring rides.

Butt of course, that doesn't help a bashing thread.

[TwoWhldTerror]

New 2012 HD 883cc Sportsters start at $8K.
Which is less than some Honda 750cc cruisers.

OK...let me be clear, any Harley *I* would buy is too expensive. Though to be honest, not really when you look at it. No matter what though, I would not ride a Sportster. My HD riding friends do not look down on them per se' but say they ride like shyte compared to the rest of the models.

[bomber]

They say many things . . . . I'll lay you even odds that most of "them" havn't ridden a sportie . . . . in teh right hands, they are HUGE fun, and quick enough to be very entertaining . . . .

I will admit, though, that maintaining an entertaining pace will teach you a lot about preserving momentum, and not using the brakes ;-}

[ConPilot1]

I have and it was the most uncomfortable and retarded feeling SOB I've ever had my ass on in my life.

[Rattlehead]

They say many things . . . . I'll lay you even odds that most of "them" havn't ridden a sportie . . . . in teh right hands, they are HUGE fun, and quick enough to be very entertaining . . . .

I will admit, though, that maintaining an entertaining pace will teach you a lot about preserving momentum, and not using the brakes ;-}

Once you sort out a Sportster they are a very fun bike and quite capable. I had one and I could tell right away that there was HUGE potential in that thing. Some 13.5" Progressives, some thicker fork oil and some preload spacers completely transformed the way that bike handled.
Problem is, it takes several grand worth of suspension, brake and engine upgrades to begin to realize a Sporty's full potential. From the factory they are total crap for anything but profiling on perfectly smooth boulevards (1.5" of travel??? 24deg of lean??? REALLY???). The exception to this was the "Roadster" models and the Sportster "Sport", both of which are long out of production.  
The Sportster and a now extinct Street Rod are the only 2 Harley's I have any desire to own. Both will require me to come accross a huge pile of cash though as a Sportster will require quite a bit of tinkering to get it to where I want it (they are the perfect platform for tinkering though) and Street Rod isn't cheap to buy and kind of hard to find.

[Rattlehead]

OK, I can't believe I'm actually gonna defend Harley--I despise them due to their treatment of Buell.  But...the thing is, they never DID go under.  Which other major American motorcycle company can say that?  Indian went under...were all their products "crap?"  How about Crocker? or Cyclone? or Ace?   The list goes on..........

They survived by buyout (by a bowling ball company of all things), CRAZY lop-sided Government intervention or ridiculous loans from private investors (not to mention a little "under the radar" Gov't bailout $$$), not from pulling themselves up by their bootstraps and building a better bike or tightening up their business practices (sub-prime loans to boost sales=short sighted, BAD idea). They did finally get their quality inline but it took them 30-some years to do that. By all accounts they should have gone under. They're not the rough and tough survivor they like to portray themselves as, they just lucked out and found others carry their burden or take the bullet for them.

I can't speak for the other mfg's but Indian was killed by greed and bad business practices, the same thing that nearly killed Harley moer than once. If Harley hadn't had so many crazy successful years prior to the crash this time there wouldn't have been any saving them either. Ol' Mr. Buffet Is only gonna loan so much to them at 15% interest you know.

[atadaskew]

Problem is, it takes several grand worth of suspension, brake and engine upgrades...

That also applies to any Japanese cruiser.

Basically if you want a cruiser that stops, turns and manages bumps stock like a proper motorcycle, you are looking at Italian bikes.  Either a Guzzi Cali or the Ducati Diavel.

Triumph's cruisers - at least some of them - come close but even they have mediocre suspension.

[Rattlehead]

That also applies to any Japanese cruiser.

Basically if you want a cruiser that stops, turns and manages bumps stock like a proper motorcycle, you are looking at Italian bikes.  Either a Guzzi Cali or the Ducati Diavel.

Triumph's cruisers - at least some of them - come close but even they have mediocre suspension.

Yamaha (Star) Warrior. Quite possibly the best cruiser ever made. I've ridden a couple and they are fabulous bikes; good power, comfortable, good suspension, plenty of ground clearance and great "character".  
As far as the "other" Japanese cruisers, I agree for the most part; some aren't bad and some are "bottom shelf" to be sure. I'd really like to take a ride on an M109 sometime though. I think there's potentential there for a good cruiser as long as Suzuki didn't screw it up.

[black hills]

Yamaha (Star) Warrior. Quite possibly the best cruiser ever made. I've ridden a couple and they are fabulous bikes; good power, comfortable, good suspension, plenty of ground clearance and great "character".  
As far as the "other" Japanese cruisers, I agree for the most part; some aren't bad and some are "bottom shelf" to be sure. I'd really like to take a ride on an M109 sometime though. I think there's potentential there for a good cruiser as long as Suzuki didn't screw it up.

did a 700+mile day on a VTX1800, it wasn't bad

[Tpoppa]

They say many things . . . . I'll lay you even odds that most of "them" havn't ridden a sportie . . . . in teh right hands, they are HUGE fun, and quick enough to be very entertaining . . . .

The sportster is the most fun HD I have ridden, although I do think they are looked down on by many in the HD crowd.  The least fun I've ever had on 2 wheels was on a 2011 Fatboy that I had as a loaner for 10 days...it was genuinely unpleasant to ride, I kinda wanted to kick it into the woods and walk home.

While the sportster was the most fun HD, it wouldn't crack the top 50 most fun motorcycles I have ridden.  The most fun cruiser for me was a 3rd gen Magna 750.  I'd love to see Honda make a 4th Gen Magna with the VFR1200 motor   :finishedrambling  

[atadaskew]

 I'd really like to take a ride on an M109 sometime though. I think there's potentential there for a good cruiser as long as Suzuki didn't screw it up.

That bike has wicked shaft drive driveline lash.

Harley's belt drives are smooooooth.

[Rattlehead]

That bike has wicked shaft drive driveline lash.

Harley's belt drives are smooooooth.

Oh good, so they did screw it up.  
Never been a big fan of shaft drives. I loved the feel of the belt on my Buell but I had a REALLY hard time letting myself trust it for trips. It just takes so little to damage, and ultimately snap, a belt.   They sure are smooth at putting down the power though.  

[Kootenanny]

I loved the feel of the belt on my Buell but I had a REALLY hard time letting myself trust it for trips. It just takes so little to damage, and ultimately snap, a belt.   They sure are smooth at putting down the power though.  

I kept the original belt on my 2003 Firebolt for twice the recommended time period, finishing with a 3-week tour down to California last summer.  I figured it'd lasted until then, and still looked good...had a new belt hanging on the wall in the garage, but I was more concerned about problems with the new belt than the original.  Not a hiccup; when I did replace the belt after the trip, I found a single small hole in it--after 6 seasons and 50K km, living on a gravel road...that old belt is now my "emergency replacement" on the garage wall.

I'm sold on belt final drive!  (not so much on chain primary, though...that should be gears...).

[bomber]

My experience with Buell belts was less wonderful than you guy's . . . . I got very tired of hear Samual Jackson's voice in my head, saying, "muthah fugging bigg ass snakes flying through the sky!"

I convered the MaDeuce to chain . . . . .

[Rattlehead]

My experience with Buell belts was less wonderful than you guy's . . . . I got very tired of hear Samual Jackson's voice in my head, saying, "muthah fugging bigg ass snakes flying through the sky!"

I convered the MaDeuce to chain . . . . .

Had I kept my Buell a chain conversion was #1 on my mod list. I like the rugged simplicity of a chain as well as the easy final gearing changes. I don't see chain oiling as the horrible job to be suffered through that some guys do, especially with the simplicity and relatively clean chain wax they have out there.

[Robus]

I'll be adding a Road Glide to the garage in a week or so.  

[ConPilot1]

I'll be adding a Road Glide to the garage in a week or so.  

Well I think you should relinquish the RT to me then, since you'll need room in the garage for that big fat pig of a thing.  

[TwoWhldTerror]

I have and it was the most uncomfortable and retarded feeling SOB I've ever had my ass on in my life.

Pretty much what my friend and his wife said...and she owned one for 1.5 years! She said "if you had let me get the Fat Boy first I would have had another 1.5 years of comfortable, fun riding".  

[Rattlehead]

+1

I had a tricked out 883 that I maintain was one of my more fun and entertaining bikes to date. It was challenging, it would hold a line, I could keep up in the turns, and while it had no discernible top-end rush, I got a few tickets and I tickled triple digits more than once.

Very fun bike.  

I had my 883C tuned to perfection and I ran it up to an indicated 115mph before. She was almost done though. It might have been able to hit 120 on the speedo so maaaaybe 110 actual. Thing is, that bike would seriously get your blood pumping at that speed where my Busa is practically a snooze at 100. That 21" front wheel and the somewhat spongy frame did not inspire confidence over the ton.   It was fun though.

[atadaskew]

The Boz brothers learned their racing chops on Sportsters.

[Royal Tiger]

After what Harley did to PA, no one form this state should back them.  They flat out blackmailed the government into tax breaks and other under the table incentives, or they were going to board up the York plant and move to Kentucky, where that state was waving fist fulls of cash as an incentive.  I hated Rendell, but he knew losing a thousand jobs in already depressed York would not bode well for him, so he buckled.  Yes, I realize ALL big businesses play that game these days, but while we are in a budget shortfall, it's good to know Hardley-Ableson gave their CEO a huge bonus while we look at more tax increases while they pay even less.

[keepergale]

After what Harley did to PA, no one form this state should back them.  They flat out blackmailed the government into tax breaks and other under the table incentives, or they were going to board up the York plant and move to Kentucky, where that state was waving fist fulls of cash as an incentive.  I hated Rendell, but he knew losing a thousand jobs in already depressed York would not bode well for him, so he buckled.  Yes, I realize ALL big businesses play that game these days, but while we are in a budget shortfall, it's good to know Hardley-Ableson gave their CEO a huge bonus while we look at more tax increases while they pay even less.

So are you enjoying the jobs and taxes created by the manufacture of your Ducatis instead?

[Royal Tiger]

So are you enjoying the jobs and taxes created by the manufacture of your Ducatis instead?

My father in law worked there and some of his friends.  He left on his own and everybody loyal to the former plant manager got forced out.  

While no state likes to lose jobs (which is why your representatives spend tons to make sure San Diego's military installations never fall under BRAC) Harley pays even less in taxes now.  

[Royal Tiger]

They're a for-profit, publicly-traded business. Their first and foremost obligation is to maximize the returns to the shareholders.

Oh, I agree, and I said other companies do it, which is still a problem.  When GE paid no taxes on $5B in revenue, and roads, bridges, and vital infrastructures are falling apart, the gravy train needs to end.

[ConPilot1]

After what Harley did to PA, no one form this state should back them.  They flat out blackmailed the government into tax breaks and other under the table incentives, or they were going to board up the York plant and move to Kentucky, where that state was waving fist fulls of cash as an incentive.  I hated Rendell, but he knew losing a thousand jobs in already depressed York would not bode well for him, so he buckled.  Yes, I realize ALL big businesses play that game these days, but while we are in a budget shortfall, it's good to know Hardley-Ableson gave their CEO a huge bonus while we look at more tax increases while they pay even less.

RT is totally right here. They absolutely blackmailed PA with the York factory, yadda yadda and what he said.
+1

One more reason not to patronize the bitches. Seriously.
They threatened to shut it down, people freaked and people were let go, and it was a big clusterfuck and Harley management played their chess game with a big local economy.  Who wins? Who knows. CEO's get the big automatic deposits in their checking accounts I'm sure.

And Rendell was just another corrupted connected prick up here in the great state if PA like all the rest of the politicians. He pounded this state into red ink so bad it's not even funny, and the potholes got deeper and deeper.

[DogBoy]

The Boz brothers learned their racing chops on Sportsters.

Not really. They raced dirt track for years in Northern California; mostly singles on short tracks. The old 883 series paid fairly well and it was easy to find dealers to support a team or rider (HD is still pretty good about this for the XR1200 series) so it attracted a lot of young talent. Ben was racing a privateer RC45 for Zero Gravity while also racing in the 883 series and before ever getting a factory ride in AMA. Yes, they raced Sportsters but it was just a very small part of their racing careers and only after many years of racing other bikes.

[TwoWhldTerror]

They're a for-profit, publicly-traded business. Their first and foremost obligation is to maximize the returns to the shareholders.

Only because that is how the "system" is setup today. Does not mean it should be that way or that we cannot change things.

[Playinthestreet]

Only because that is how the "system" is setup today. Does not mean it should be that way or that we cannot change things.

What's the "system" in Japan??  

[Kootenanny]

This "system" of which you speak...

He's talking about the "system" which puts shareholder profit first and foremost--ahead of product quality, treatment of employees, environmental concerns, everything.

[atadaskew]

Well, wut I got out of this is you know Harley is making a good product if the complaints aimed at them are related to business ethics.

Remember the good ole days of oil leaking, doo rag wearing, breaking down Harley bashing?

[black hills]

He's talking about the "system" which puts shareholder profit first and foremost--ahead of product quality, treatment of employees, environmental concerns, everything.

they pretty much go together as the profits won't continue without the rest

[Cricket1]

they pretty much go together as the profits won't continue without the rest

Oh come Black Hills, don't you know?  Companies are supposed to be in business to treat employees well, help the environment, heal the sick, tend to the poor, etc.  What is this profit you speak of??  Must be some evil rich guy sceme to screw all the hard working folks. 

[black hills]

Oh come Black Hills, don't you know?  Companies are supposed to be in business to treat employees well, help the environment, heal the sick, tend to the poor, etc.  What is this profit you speak of??  Must be some evil rich guy sceme to screw all the hard working folks. 

what was I thinking

[Kootenanny]

Oh come Black Hills, don't you know?  Companies are supposed to be in business to treat employees well, help the environment, heal the sick, tend to the poor, etc.  What is this profit you speak of??  Must be some evil rich guy sceme to screw all the hard working folks. 

So, you're happy that so many jobs are "outsourced" to Asia just so the shareholders (who've done nothing but purchase stock in the company) can make a profit?

I have nothing against profit (I run my own business), but I do disagree with business practices which are designed to maximize profit at the expense of the people doing the actual work (although, I also realize that 12-year-olds in China need to make a living, too ).

[Kootenanny]

Come up with a better system. Stock holders keep many companies afloat by buying in.

Well, a start would be to allow boards of directors to plan for long term viability rather than short term profit.  As it is now, many (most?) shareholders want the fastest ROI possible, and damn the long term consequences.  This attitude can influence decisions such as plant locations (for example, moving operations to a foreign country with cheap labour).