scraping hard parts is one of the things that turns me off cruisers. The last one I owned got too much scraping at times when I wasn’t looking for sparks. — like almost every time I tried to make a right turn above 40kmh. Surprise scrapes are a bit unnerving.
I scrape my floorboards all the time. Since the course and increased confidence in flopping it right over I've started scraping new bits beyond those LOL.
I will agree that a cruiser is limited when it comes to spirited riding. But I like the challenge.
I scrape my floorboards all the time. Since the course and increased confidence in flopping it right over I've started scraping new bits beyond those LOL.
I will agree that a cruiser is limited when it comes to spirited riding. But I like the challenge.
Yamaha made an 11 speed racer in the 60s.
There was no stop at 11th gear so if you lost count, you'd shift 9>10>11> 1.
Michelle Duff could count to 11.
Why does everyone seem to assume that if you don't like harleys it's because you've never ridden one? I've taken many demo rides on them and it just reinforces my dislike. For example sitting on one in full leathers and still almost burned my right leg on the pipe. Push rods and pre-unit construction in the 21st century??
As a designer style over function always bothers me. Then again I find Apple guilty of the same thing but both companies have no shortage of customers.
I've ridden bunches of HD's, Victory's and metric cruisers.
The HD's had the widest spread of performance by far - braking, acceleration, turning etc. What should have been easy braking required extreme force to activate the front brakes, some stopped nicely. Some were easy to turn, others were not. Some caused me extreme lower back pain, others OK.
The metric cruisers were the most comfortable for me overall - not even a contest. Second were Victory (Hammer S was great, Magnum hurt my back much worse than any "extreme" level sport bike) and lastly, the HD's were overall the least comfortable.
As with Timtune, I can't understand the design over function aspect. How can a company regurgitate basically the same product for 50 years, refusing to advance with the times suddenly start crying because their sales are down?
So, people claim that I don't like HD's because I don't own one. Tried them, my gf really wants me to get one, but just no. Not gonna happen.
Why does everyone seem to assume that if you don't like harleys it's because you've never ridden one? I've taken many demo rides on them and it just reinforces my dislike. For example sitting on one in full leathers and still almost burned my right leg on the pipe. Push rods and pre-unit construction in the 21st century??
As a designer style over function always bothers me. Then again I find Apple guilty of the same thing but both companies have no shortage of customers.
Every once and a while a product has the basic framework that meets a customer's needs for a very long time, all that's really needed is some periodic restyling and upgrades. Think about the air cooled Beetle (65+years), Boeing 737 (50+ years), Honda SuperCub (60+years). These products have stood the test of time, they have had periodic upgrades -- they developed a loyal following that met the expectations of their customers enough to keep them in production. Seems like an enviable position to me.
Perhaps the end of the potato-potato-potato HD is coming, if so it's not coming all that fast. HD still gets more for their bikes than anyone else -- even more than those high-tech marvels from Japan and Germany.
There is a market for style over function and it's big. A $100 Timex Expedition has more tech than a $7K Rolex Oyster, A $45 Basspro Extreme will outperform a $2300 Keepall Bandouliere 45 travel bag, and my $1 BIC does a better job than my MontBlanc Meisterstuk.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.