So Funny! By JR (Read 1,946 times)

[JR]

Feb 15, 2013 20:27:41 GMT -6 kz1000st said:

One important difference. Victory is 15 years old and has moved from the original 92C to the Vegas, Kingpin and Vision. I would bet that before I pass they'll introduce a modern sportbike and an entry level machine. Harley has dumped Buell "To concentrate on our core business". Eric Buell was building bikes with modern features and engine in the 1125R, not to mention surrounding Harley engines with modern frames and features in the XB-9 and Ulysses.

Core business at Harley has meant more of same old/same old. What did you say
"if you're planning for the future you need to leave the past behind, Harley is doing a good job" Not dumping Buell they didn't

Guess what? Eric Buell didn't do the decent thing and drop dead when Harley shut him down. He formed Eric Buell Racing (EBR) and produced the 1190S.

Buell also was the original mover to develop and build the V-Rod engine, the only thing modern about Harley. That engine appeared in 2001. Twelve years later and not one new engine. Not exactly "planning for the future".

Want real, stark contrast? Harley sells $30,000 CVO bikes that are nothing more than modified standard Hogs. Honda builds a 1800cc six cylinder Gold Wing for $27,000. BMW also builds a 1600cc six for about the same money. Explain the logic of that to me.

I could go on. I spend way too much time reading and studying bikes. I sat in High School History with a Cycle Guide stuck inside my text book so the teacher wouldn't see it.

Oh, and in 1960 I was eight years old. I did start riding on my own in 1962 when I turned ten. Before that I was passengering with my Dad on Triumphs that are Classics today.

You're still missing the point, I've never said Harley was ever going to make a modern bike, why should they? They have a loyal faithful crowd that still dresses, breathes, and will only ride them.

Harley sells $30,000 CVO bikes that are nothing more than modified standard Hogs. Honda builds a 1800cc six cylinder Gold Wing for $27,000. BMW also builds a 1600cc six for about the same money. Explain the logic of that to me.


Easy to explain, people like the look and will buy them. People that buy these bikes aren't all wound up in how, what and how good they may or may not ride, hold up, etc. they want "the look". Most people who buy these bikes have more money than sense as the old saying goes.

That's why a 15 year old company is still making the look too, even wanting the sound.





That look can for sure be contagious!

JR

[kz1000st]

That look can for sure be contagious!

Not to me. At least not with clanking pushrod, two valve motors. If I ever decided to buy a V-Twin it would be a Victory since what's inside counts more than what's on the outside.

That's why Polaris will own the American market one day. You see JR, time and clean air regulations will catch up to Harley and they'll have to build a new engine. Then they'll be like everybody else and suffer by comparison. Well maybe not. You see, the people in India and China will probably save their bacon when they're the ones building engines for Harley and they're pretty smart.

[JR]

Chinese? Did you say Chinese? Yep, that's what I thought you said:








Even they like the look.

JR

[kz1000st]

Oh Wow. They have one there already to do R & D on! Thank heavens. Maybe they'll rid of us that boat anchor of an engine by copying a Victory or some Japanese engine. Things are looking up.

When did they build a factory in China to improve the bike? This is the first I've heard of it. Made in Shanghai, I like the ring of it.

[bobf]

That Harley engine is not a boat anchor. It is really the development of part of an aircraft radial engine.

But I am sure most already knew that.
.

[kz1000st]

I'm sure this might be an unusual thing for people to accept 110 years later but the V-Twin was developed because it fit in the triangle shaped forward section of a bicycle frame that all motorcycles were based on at the turn of the 20th Century. It wasn't because of its mystical powers, uncommon torque or any of the other hyperbole that people have been fed by Milwaukee. It fit inside a bicycle frame. If that isn't antique technology I don't know what is.
Flat head motors were marvelous devices for their time. They worked, they were simple and durable. Would you pay 21st Century dollars for one in your car? If people kept it in their heads what Harleys are, holdover engineering from the 1950s, they might stop spending unearthly sums of money on them. Even the British gave up on non-unit construction, except for Norton, by 1960. New British bikes are multi-cylindered, overhead cam and some of the best in the world. Not quaking technology that's 60 years past due.

[kz1000st]

And take a look at this.

.motorcycle-usa.com/744/15588/Motorcycle-Article/Indian-Motorcycles-Big-Plans-for-Bike-Week.aspx" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">.motorcycle-usa.com/744/15588/Motorcycle-Article/Indian-Motorcycles-Big-Plans-for-Bike-Week.aspx

Introduction of a new engine two years after buying the company! I doubt Harley could ever do that. Plus this.

Indian Motorcycle, the original American motorcycle company, announced its power-packed schedule of events for Daytona Bike Week 2013, which takes place March 9-16, 2013 in Daytona Beach, Florida.

"Original American Motorcycle Company"-Pow, Zing, boom! I guess that makes Harley number two. How long after feeding that line to a gullible American public will Harley look like a pretender?