There is a thread here asking about
the difference between a RK and a Sporty.
I ask…
Why do most folks think that the RK
is the defacto tourer.
There are other BTs out there...
what’s the deal with the RK?

There is a thread here asking about
the difference between a RK and a Sporty.
I ask…
Why do most folks think that the RK
is the defacto tourer.
There are other BTs out there...
what’s the deal with the RK?

umm, maybe because it's the king?

There are other BTs out there...
what’s the deal with the RK?

It's not called the "Road Serf"... :rolleyes:

I prefer the glide to tour with.

King looks too outdated for me...:geek:geek:geek

I'm partial to the Dyna T-Sport myself.
Just bought one in fact....

Actually I've ridden RK and EG a lot, but I still prefer the Sportster.

An RK can be made to look like a diffrent bike every time you take it out a Glide cant be changed with out some mods !

Yes, and No...

IMHO, the FLHX is THE best BT made....bar none...

That being said, its not the be all, end all BT, but its certainly MY favorite....

Lottsa RK riders trading for Road or Street Glides. (See HD Forums,Touring Section.)

The BEST HD Touring bike is the Road Glide. With the frame mounted fairing you feel none of the wind buffeting that you do with the fork mounted fairings and windshields of the EG and the RK.

The BEST HD Touring bike is the Road Glide. With the frame mounted fairing you feel none of the wind buffeting that you do with the fork mounted fairings and windshields of the EG and the RK.


The UltraClassic ElectraGlide comes stock with the most accessories, that's why I bough mine. You would think that Harley would offer an UltraClassic RoadGlide.

There seem to be a number of forum members
with BT experience. Some with either now,
just a Sporty, or a BT and a Sporty.
Perhaps there is some hidden meaning there.
OK… going back to the original question.
Obviously, for those that have, or have had a BT,
it might be one of several different models.
But… it seems that the RK is the one name,
that MOST often pops up when talking BTs.
BTs seem to have the same engine and,
not counting the softails, similar frames.
Is it the various options that set them apart?
Appearance aside, is the RK actually
functionally different or in any way better,
than its BT brothers?

There seem to be a number of forum members
with BT experience. Some with either now,
just a Sporty, or a BT and a Sporty.
Perhaps there is some hidden meaning there.
OK… going back to the original question.
Obviously, for those that have, or have had a BT,
it might be one of several different models.
But… it seems that the RK is the one name,
that MOST often pops up when talking BTs.
BTs seem to have the same engine and,
not counting the softails, similar frames.
Is it the various options that set them apart?
Appearance aside, is the RK actually
functionally different or in any way better,
than its BT brothers?

Well just for starters not all BT models have exactly the same engines.
There are two basic TC engines,the rubber mounted engine that comes in all touring and Dyna models and the TC B counterbalanced engine that comes in the solid mounted frames all of which are Softail models.
Then there are the CVO models that have the bigger Screaming Eagle 110 cid engines vs the std. 96" BT which both come in rubber mount and B counterbalanced versions.
These two basic designs behave very differently,the non balanced rubbermount bikes tend to vibe and shake a great deal more at low speeds or at idle like sitting at a stop light.
However once underway they smooth out more and more becoming very smooth at highway speeds even up to 100+mph.
The B motors with counterbalancer action are glassy smooth at idle and low and modest speeds up to about 70mph but above that they start to buzz and vibe some and this can be felt through the bars and footpegs or boards via the solid mounted engine.
All the rubbermount bikes have a traditional swingarm rear suspension like the Sportster albeit it bigger and longer,
The Softails have a rear section of the frame that moves with a hidden shock set up under the bike to give it the look of the old hardtail bikes but without the harsh ride,not as smooth as a regular swingarm and shocks but better than a hardtail and still retaining the old school look.
Finally the front end geometry of the touring bikes is different than any other bikes on the market and it makes the big heavy FL line handle quite well at low speeds and also turn very quick and sharp,even sharper lock to lock than a Sporty I might add.
This is accomplished buy using special reversed triple trees that mount the forks behind the steering head and at an almost sportbike like short rake.
They turn quick and respond especially well to countersteering needing very little leverage on the bars to turn.
The most sporty Sportster the 1200R has a rake angle of 29.6 degs and the Electraglide's is just 26degs,that's almost a sportbike rake,Honda's CBR1000RR is at 23.3 degs.
There are many other differences in different Dyna models,Softail models(including springer front ends) and touring models but that's the basics layed out for you. ;)

There is a thread here asking about
the difference between a RK and a Sporty.
I ask…
Why do most folks think that the RK
is the defacto tourer.
There are other BTs out there...
what’s the deal with the RK?

I don't know that anyone would make that claim when push comes to shove.

I think the RK is EXCELLENT and arguably the most VERSATILE tourer (it's certainly the only one where the shield pops off in the summer), and you can strip it down naked in seconds, where a glide with integrated tour pack is gonna take more work to get to that point.

But any glide with a fairing and lowers is going to be at least a marginally better tourer than an RK. If only from the additional comfort and in additional weather protection points of view.

The BEST HD Touring bike is the Road Glide. With the frame mounted fairing you feel none of the wind buffeting that you do with the fork mounted fairings and windshields of the EG and the RK.

I never had a single problem with wind buffeting from the fork mounted windshield of the RK. Total non issue.

I always like the RG, but fixed fairings can also freak you out. I prefer non-fixed fairings personally.

There seem to be a number of forum members
with BT experience. Some with either now,
just a Sporty, or a BT and a Sporty.
Perhaps there is some hidden meaning there.
OK… going back to the original question.
Obviously, for those that have, or have had a BT,
it might be one of several different models.
But… it seems that the RK is the one name,
that MOST often pops up when talking BTs.
BTs seem to have the same engine and,
not counting the softails, similar frames.
Is it the various options that set them apart?
Appearance aside, is the RK actually
functionally different or in any way better,
than its BT brothers?

The RK PROBABLY comes up so much because it's a slightly more versatile tourer. From a style and fun standpoint the King is the one FLH that can get naked.

anyway, the RK is the same motor/frame/chassis as the rest of the FLH (touring) family.

So are you asking is it functionally better than Dyna or Softail chassis - well, yes and no.

The FLH chassis is generally the largest and most comfortable of the big twins, but to make it still handle so well, especially at low speed, the steering head is the steepest of the BTs (and positioned in reverse relationship - tree-to-head as compared to the other BTs).

Softails, especially the FL, can be pretty comfortable too, but they don't have the suspension travel (or air suspension) of the RK (or FLHs). They also don't have the dual disc brakes or the quicker steering.

Dynas are generally quicker handlers than an RK (though a raked, foward control wide glide doesn't have much of an advantage over an FLH). And Dyna's too can be pretty comfortable, but generally not nearly as much as an FLH, especially 2-up.

It's all a sliding scale with the Sporty on one end and the FLHs on the other - handling performance on one end and comfort on the other.

Generally speaking I'd say it goes

Sporty ---> Dyna ----> Softail -----> FLH

You loose a little of the quick handling and gain a little more comfort (especially 2-up) as you go to the right of the scale.

Also, keep in mind this is an oversimplification.

For instance, an FXST may handle as well or better than say a FXDWG.... so there will be some overlap in models from different platforms.

That make sense?

Kev

The BEST HD Touring bike is the Road Glide. With the frame mounted fairing you feel none of the wind buffeting that you do with the fork mounted fairings and windshields of the EG and the RK.

I second that!:banana :clap

I always like the RG, but fixed fairings can also freak you out.

I'll bite. How can it freak a person out? I have heard most of the arguments but none water.

The UltraClassic ElectraGlide comes stock with the most accessories, that's why I bough mine. You would think that Harley would offer an UltraClassic RoadGlide.

Yeah, I wish they would also. I WOULD buy it.

Yeah, I wish they would also. I WOULD buy it.

You get to do it yourself, Bert!!!!:banana:banana:banana

I'll bite. How can it freak a person out? I have heard most of the arguments but none water.


It's all a case of what you are used to.

I've owned two fixed fairing bikes (and ridden a couple of dozen more).

The first time that you move the bars and the fairing/speedo etc DON'T MOVE kinda gives you a knee jerk reaction that something is wrong.

Also at night, when you turn the bars and the headlight doesn't move kinda freaky at first.

You get used to it obviously, but when I jumped back and forth between bikes I'd usually enjoy the non-fixed fairing more.

Ya know what was REALLY funny, do you remember when the RG came out?

It came in a sorta burnt' orange color, almost copper.

And the fairing itself looked exactly like a Luftmeister fairing which were popular on BMW airheads.

Well, at the time I just happened to own an R80/7 with a Luftmeister fairing in almost the EXACT same color. The lines were nearly the same.

http://www.gigabikes.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10081/R80justlineminesmll.jpg

And the fairing itself looked exactly like a Luftmeister fairing which were popular on BMW airheads.



Actually the basic style of the RG fairing goes back 28 years to Harley's first purpose built touring bike the 1980 Shovelhead FLT Tourglide,incidentally also the first rubbermount Harley engine and the first Harley with a 5 speed gearbox. ;)

http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d173/y2keglide/untitled-4.jpg

It's all a case of what you are used to...

The first time that you move the bars and the fairing/speedo etc DON'T MOVE kinda gives you a knee jerk reaction that something is wrong.

Also at night, when you turn the bars and the headlight doesn't move kinda freaky at first.

You get used to it obviously, but when I jumped back and forth between bikes I'd usually enjoy the non-fixed fairing more...

I haven't ridden more than 600 miles one way, but made a Minneapolis-Chicago and back trip on them twice per year (I90). 90% of the time they were fixed fairing bikes (unfortunately none were big tourers; 600CBR, 750 Kaw with touring package, once on my Sportster). I learned on a bike with a huge fixed fairing, so I got used to it.

After putting that HUGE fairing on my Sportster (pics in gallery), I would go to a fixed setup in a heartbeat (if it was easily removed). Now that I am in Milwaukee, the trip down 94/294 to Chicago has construction, all open+midwest flatlands = gusty winds, and full of semi trucks (about 3-4 trucks per car after midnight when I drive back). Between these three things, I have really noticed the effect of the handlebar mounted fairing, where (on the same trek) I barely noticed any issues on the CBR with its full body fairing.

Edit: Of course, mine could also be affected by the mounting, as the mounts allow for slight imperfections in angle.

Just my opinion.

Actually the basic style of the RG fairing goes back 28 years to Harley's first purpose built touring bike the 1980 Shovelhead FLT Tourglide,incidentally also the first rubbermount Harley engine and the first Harley with a 5 speed gearbox. ;)


Ah yes, but the Luftmeister equipped Airheads pre-dated that too by probably a decade...

I was just amused at how close both the lines AND THE COLOR were between my R80/7 and the then brand new RG... what was old was new again. ;)



I learned on a bike with a huge fixed fairing, so I got used to it.

After putting that HUGE fairing on my Sportster (pics in gallery), I would go to a fixed setup in a heartbeat (if it was easily removed). Now that I am in Milwaukee, the trip down 94/294 to Chicago has construction, all open+midwest flatlands = gusty winds, and full of semi trucks (about 3-4 trucks per car after midnight when I drive back). Between these three things, I have really noticed the effect of the handlebar mounted fairing, where (on the same trek) I barely noticed any issues on the CBR with its full body fairing.

Edit: Of course, mine could also be affected by the mounting, as the mounts allow for slight imperfections in angle.



I think you hit the nail on the head when you said you GOT USED TO IT and at the end of the day I think that's the biggest factor.

I've only put maybe, hmmm 40-50k miles on bikes with fixed fairings, as opposed to hundreds of thousands of miles on bikes with handlebar mounted windshields. I've literally NEVER had a problem with crosswinds or buffeting that could be attributed to the windshield.

I've had some smaller/lighter bikes that suffered a bit from the size and age of their chassis (Honda Ascot VT500, BMW R65, BMW R65LS).

IRONICALLY my R1100RS with the fixed fairing suffered BADLY in crosswinds (probably combination of taller suspension, sport radials and half-fairing that caught the sidewinds). But compared to say my RK, it felt much more unstable at times. I actually preferred to ride the RK in bad rain or storms, which was a problem since I'd bought the RS as my "foul weather" bike. :doh :laugh