PDA

View Full Version : WHY SHOULD I NOT BUY A NEW SPORTSTER


TWISTED
17th January 2005, 00:41
I AM LOOKING INTO GETTING A NEW BIKE. WANTED TO SEE THE PROS AND CONS OF THE NEW SPORTSTERS.

Shark Doctor
17th January 2005, 00:46
Well, Twisted, welcome to the right place to get those answers, though you must first understand that we are biased. Help us get to know you better. Tell us a bit about your riding history and what draws you to a Sporty and we'll all offer why we like the thrill and freedom of the best ride around!!!

Welcome to the Forum!!!

dabronco
17th January 2005, 00:48
They look cool. They're rubber mounted,They look cool. They're fast.They look cool. They handle well, They look cool. A B.T. isn't twice as good even though they're twice as much $$$,They look cool. I'm an Ironhead driver and I REALLY like the 05's cuz... well... They look cool!!!

XLFREAK
17th January 2005, 00:49
Yeah, and while your at it, think of all the reasons you should not have sex tonight.

TWISTED
17th January 2005, 00:50
I KNOW ABOUT THE SPORTSTERS I HAVE A 75' I WANT TO DO MORE RIDING THEN WRENCHING. MOST OF MY BUDDIES WITH H-D (EVEN THE NEWER ONES) SEEM TO DO A LOT OF WRENCHING. WANTED TO SEE IF IT FOLLOWS TRUE WITH THE NEW SPORTY. :smoke

Nightboy
17th January 2005, 00:59
Simply put the 04' and later Sporty's are the best built HD's ever. Total redesign from the ground up that uses the proven XL motor/tranny design.

Shark Doctor
17th January 2005, 00:59
One of the most appealing aspects of Sportsters to me is the freedom you have to make the bike do and be whatever you want. If you want a hot street bike, you have that right out of the box. You can wrench it yourself, or not, add performance upgrades to ANY extent you are willing, or just run it stock: nothing lost.

If you want a cruiser, solo or two-up, fine. Add a windshield, seat, and saddlebags - VERY EASY BOLT ON/BOLT OFF - and you have your road bike. You do NOT sacrifice performance and ability to pull a two-up load load by making these switches. The latitude to go either way is just not there, at least not to the same extent with a similar outcome, in larger bikes and, in my opinion, many of the other H-D models.

Emphasis here is on EASE OF SWITCHING identities. The Sporty is the schizophrenic of motorcyles, a multiple personality disorder that is not one you want to treat, it is its greatest attraction!

dmraco
17th January 2005, 01:23
I have 2 bikes, a 2002 softail and a 2005 sportster custom. I'll take the sportster over the softail any day. Its faster, smoother (can you believe it!), get better gas milage, more comfortable (5'9", 155lbs), and I just love the way it handles! Its also cost about $6000 less then most Big twins. With the new rubber mount motor and larger gas tank, it really is a nice bike to ride over long distances. The only reasons I would suggest getting the big twin are:

--you just have to have that look of a softail or ultra
--you mostly do long distance riding (the RKs and ultras are the Caddys of motorcycles)

This is just my 2 cents and the sporty suits my riding style. It varies from cruising to slightly aggressive, mostly 150 miles a day or less. I usually take 2 or 3 300 mile trips a year and sporty should be fine. riding 2 up is not a problem on the sporty but if I were to do it a lot, a road king would be the bike for me.

Give them both a shot. Try them out. Sit on them and ride if you can. This is a good place to star but I am sure you will get may different opinions.

One this to remember...Never be ashamed of owning a sportster. They are tough as nails, look good, and will smoke most stock Big Twins! Just ask the 2003 Dyna I ride with! Anyhing newer that 2004 will prove to be a satisfying ride!

Nightboy
17th January 2005, 01:35
Sorry, but being the owner of a softail myself, I do have to say that nothing beats the feeling of a big twin with over 100 foot pounds of torque from off idle to over 6000 rpms on a heavy cruiser. You feel like your riding a tank on steriods! =)

bud095
17th January 2005, 01:41
i think alot of the wrenching is more "tinkering" than any thing else maybe im wrong or im lucky! im not sure.

wickedsprint
17th January 2005, 01:49
the new ones are nice..allbeit heavier..less lean angle..harder to work on..and they lost the adjustable suspension..the only thing they do better is vibrate a hair less. They are only really faster than the 03 and previous customs..the new roadsters are basically the same HP as a 1200 sport except the new ones weigh 67lbs more...just decide what is important...less weight and adjustable suspension or less vibration.

Nightboy
17th January 2005, 02:51
the new ones are nice..allbeit heavier..less lean angle..harder to work on..and they lost the adjustable suspension..the only thing they do better is vibrate a hair less. They are only really faster than the 03 and previous customs..the new roadsters are basically the same HP as a 1200 sport except the new ones weigh 67lbs more...just decide what is important...less weight and adjustable suspension or less vibration.

Lean angle on the new 1200r is comparable to the old actually. As for working on them, where do you get off stating their harder to work on? Just the opposite. My wife owned one of the older ones, I wrenched em, and found them no easier. With alot of little quirks.

Frame and the geometry of the component layout has been streamlined. Rear suspension fork is now properly centered with the engine and tranny fully centered in the frame for better weight distribution. Also the rear swingarm and axle has been beefed up with a 1" unit instead of the .75" axle that had alot of flex in it, hurting its performance in cornering due to excessive flex. Stock shocks? Nope they arent adjustable,they are OK, nothing impressive but I was never fully impressed with the old adjustable units either. If someone is really serious about performance, they are going to change em out anyway for an aftermarket unit.

As for the stock HP rating of the motor, who really cares? What matters is the potential of the motor itself. And even the new 04' and up Sporties have been improved.B esides the slick rubber mounts the motor has, the engine itslef has had alot of small improvements made to it. A new 2 piece rocker box design drasitcally cuts down on the inherant leaks the 03' and older Evo's had.The crankcase has been reengineered to rid us of the leaky tappet blocks. Plus the heads on the 1200 motor are HD's best designed ever(they are the new 04' XB heads), with the most performance potential of all Buell/HD heads that have ever been produced for the xl1200(Yes, they are better than the T-Storms), that include improved valve geometry and a load of potential in their flow characteristics.

There are alot of other nice touches in its design layout, but they are too numerous to list. But if someone is looking over a Sporty for purchase and plans to wrench it himself, then be sure to take a very close look at the older designs and compare them to the new Sporties. No comparison. But there shouldnt be either. The old Sporty was designed MANY,MANY years ago.

wickedsprint
17th January 2005, 03:11
I was mainly reffering to transmission work, everything else is similar, and there are plenty of people buying the XL1200S shocks and forks to tell me they do a pretty good job. They still took more steps backward with the 04 than forwards I'm afraid. The 1200 sport has pretty good heads as well...The only advantage is they vibrate less and maybe in theory they will leak less down the road..disregard the few owners here with warranty claims for oil leaks ...and the rocker issues can be solved with a breather. Heck you say not that much of a difference inlean angle..the new dynas have more lean angle than the new sporties...you cannot deny it, and the superglide sport is as quick almost as the 1200 roadster...they are making the sportser a "kinder gentler sportster" Lets not forget the plastic oil tank. Lets see how many of the racing teams switch over to the trapdoorless engine combo..I already read somewhere they turned them down and decided to stay with the old style...fact is..they took a good sportster..and neuterted it in alot of respects. If they kept the factory adjustable suspension and the trap door I could live with the weight gain...but when you combine that many hits just for a smoother engine..I don't see the point..especially when I don't even really think mine vibrates all that much. The new ones were not worth it to me.

collinsb
17th January 2005, 03:32
They look cool. They're rubber mounted,They look cool. They're fast.They look cool. They handle well, They look cool. A B.T. isn't twice as good even though they're twice as much $$$,They look cool. I'm an Ironhead driver and I REALLY like the 05's cuz... well... They look cool!!!

Yeah, but they are also cool looking!
Billy

alleydude
17th January 2005, 03:40
Yeah, but they are also cool looking!
Billy

LMAO! Yes, they are!

mikeLI_77
17th January 2005, 03:45
One of the most appealing aspects of Sportsters to me is the freedom you have to make the bike do and be whatever you want. If you want a hot street bike If you want a cruiser, solo or two-up, fine.

Emphasis here is on EASE OF SWITCHING identities. The Sporty is the schizophrenic of motorcyles, a multiple personality disorder that is not one you want to treat, it is its greatest attraction!
I think shard doctor pretty much explained the main reasoning of a sporty's appeal pretty good.

Nightboy
17th January 2005, 04:14
there are plenty of people buying the XL1200S shocks and forks to tell me they do a pretty good job.

Sorry but no current factory HD shock has the potential of a quality aftermarket unit like Progressive for instance. Just because someone buys a factory shock, it doesnt make it better necessarily. I could care less how popular a part is.

They still took more steps backward with the 04 than forwards I'm afraid. And you have still yet to show one valid area where the new 04' Sporty has gone "backwards" SO I am going to counter all your points now on this last paragraph you posted.

The 1200 sport has pretty good heads as well...The only advantage is they vibrate less and maybe in theory they will leak less down the road..disregard the few owners here with warranty claims for oil leaks .. Its well known with all speed shops (Like Nallin Racing for instance)that the new 1200r/XB heads are the best heads HD has produced to date with the most potential. Im sure the old 1200 sport heads are good too, but they dont have the same potential and the new ones.

As for your "vibration" comment, I havent a clue as to what your talking about. All your sentences and ideas are getting mashed together and your starting to NOT make any sense.

As for the leaking rocker boxes. The old XL1200's had a 3 piece rocker design with alot more seals that can fail. The new 2 piece rockerbox has less seals to fail and is structurally more ridgid now.

Heck you say not that much of a difference inlean angle..the new dynas have more lean angle than the new sporties...you cannot deny it, First off the lean angle of the Dyna models will range from 29 to 31 to 34 degrees. The Sport has a 34 degree lean angle, the basic dyna and custom will have a 31 degree lean angle and the lowrider has a 29 degree lean angle. The 1200R has a 32 degree lean angle, the older 1200s has a 32 degree lean angle too if Im right, if not I know its within a degree of the new 1200r roughly. So what does this all mean?? In reality not much. The lean angle of any bike can be increased or decreased with suspension mods. Does one specific lean angle garentee a bike will handle better? Not at all.

and the superglide sport is as quick almost as the 1200 roadster OK, ok lets put this silly comparison to rest. Its funny that you mention the Dyna Sport model. My wife had the choice narrowed down to the new Sportster 1200r and the new Dyna Sport model. We had about $16,000 saved up in the piggybank for her bike and she had narrowed the choice down to these 2 bikes. She ended up quickly taking the 1200r. Wanna know why? Because she could get the 1200r and have $6,000 left over to upgrade the bike to make it run the way she wanted it to. So with the $6,000 she got new cams,lifters,pushrods,roller rockers,Stage 3 headwork,exhaust,AC,ignition module,pistons,jugs,HD oil cooler,clutch,shocks,SS braided lines throughout,forkbrace,lots of little chrome and painted parts throughout to customise the way it also looks.

So now lets take a look at the big picture again.

Would you take a new 04' 1200r that puts out over 110whp and 85 ft pounds of torque throughout the powerband, with numerous imrpovements to the suspension and braking to handle the extra power, or a STOCK Dyna Sport for the exact same money? Its pretty clear what the best bang for the buck was for her. Id love to see a stock(or even modified) Dyna sport try and even keep up with her bike.

they are making the sportser a "kinder gentler sportster" Lets not forget the plastic oil tank. Lets see how many of the racing teams switch over to the trapdoorless engine combo..I already read somewhere they turned them down and decided to stay with the old style...fact is..they took a good sportster..and neuterted it in alot of respects. If they kept the factory adjustable suspension and the trap door I could live with the weight gain...but when you combine that many hits just for a smoother engine..I don't see the point..especially when I don't even really think mine vibrates all that much. The new ones were not worth it to me.Again your missing the BIG picture. Who cares about a stock plastic oil tank? Arent you aware that they already make aftermarket units to replace that item? Id rather have a "plastic oil tank" knowing my swing arm is now properly centered in the frame improving geometry. The bike may come "tamer" from the factory, but it has more potential now than it ever did. Just give this new platform a few more years and you will see loads of trick aftermarket go fast goodies for it. There is already a load of them and the bike is just in its 2nd year.

But before you go thinking the new Sportster is "neutered", you should see if you can keep up with my wife's ride now, which BTW does have adjustable preload and damping in the shocks.

wickedsprint
17th January 2005, 04:58
The lean angles for the sport are 37.5/37 degrees, a bit further off your claim of within a degree of a 1200R.

I was mainly refering to the fork legs, yes the progressives are a bit better. I am sorry you cannot understand my typing..I am afraid I have not had to type a paper properly since I graduated from college *shrugs*


The heads may not be as good as the newer ones..they are very close..and I think the sport actually makes more power...either 69 or 72 depending on what source you believe.

You did not understand it before..the vibration is a moot point...it doesn't bother me.

I will be glad to race your wifes bike...it is not a huge deal if I get beat *shrugs*, hell my 500CC dirtbike will trounce both of them to 95 ish mph, I did not buy this bike to race. I bought it as a bike that i can keep for a very very long time and the 04s are going to be harder to service when they hit the end of their life span..they are making them more like a japanese bike and less like the sportster I have grown to love. If I wanted a fast motorcycle I would go japanese or italian like my previous 12 bikes, last one being a VMAX.

I can put better heads and suspension on my bike and make it 100 plus hp just as easily as the newer motors within reason...if you internally balance the 1200 solid mount the vibes all but dissapear for the sensitive riders.

But alas you cannot make the transmission easier to work on with the newer models..and they are still heavier...and those are my biggest hangups.

And friend..it is YOU who is missing the big picture..in that we have two different desires for our motorcycles..I prefer crude and older school..hell I would rather it have a kickstart if I could. You seem to desire refinment and a finished product. I bet all of your cars and trucks probably have automatics too. The best thing is that we both have bikes we love and are happy with. I'm going out for the rest of the evening..so whatever you write tonight will at least go uncontested till tommorow..have fun -Tony

Darhawk
17th January 2005, 05:33
Wickedsprint and Nightboy can argue all night. Take it from an old fart who's riden since 1966.............buy the new Sportster. If you want to wrench it, then do so. If you don't want to, then don't. It'll be your damn bike, do what you want with it. But I will tell you this, there'll be a smile on your face the whole time doing it. :D

Nightboy
17th January 2005, 05:35
The lean angles for the sport are 37.5/37 degrees. Actually you are correct here. But this is also very decieving. The old 1200s also sits up more than an inch higher off the ground raising the COG. This wont necessarily mean that it will take a turn better. But again its really a moot point, because the new version Sporty with different suspension can either be raised or lowered just like the old Sporty.

The heads may not be as good as the newer ones..they are very close..and I think the sport actually makes more power...either 69 or 72 depending on what source you believe. Kind of a moot point also. The old Sporty comes with a slightly higher CR stock, but the heads dont flow as well as the new Sporty, they are about the same stock in reality. But who keeps their HD's fully stock these days?

You did not understand it before..the vibration is a moot point...it doesn't bother me. I could also care less on this.



the 04s are going to be harder to service when they hit the end of their life span..they are making them more like a japanese bike and less like the sportster I have grown to love. I cannot agree here. You have still yet to show one area on how the bike is easier to service in reality. But if you associate superior engineering and refinement with a Japanese bike, then HD is going in the right direction.

As for transmission work, not sure what is in store, but give the bike a few years to mature on the market. The more that are made, the more demand there will be for mfg. to make quality aftermarket parts(like cases with trap doors etc). As for the weight I really cant say much there, alot of the difference is in the frame and swingarm, both which have alot less flexing in them now which in their own way will improve ride and handling. But as you even stated yourself, your not racing the bike.

alleydude
17th January 2005, 12:18
Wow. I think I woke up to the wrong forum this morning.

flathead45
17th January 2005, 12:35
ya here we are , all sporty riders and them ,bamm, someone here starts talking anti sporty

man I think I need a beer

I'm wondering how a person can tell the differance between a lean angle of 37* and 37.5* when your on the road (oops I just went 1/2* too far)

to answer the question at hand ... no a sporty ain't the perfect bike , but its a damn good one

alleydude
17th January 2005, 12:40
There's a new invention fer ya. Like curb feelers, only lean feelers. Little springy things that you clamp onto your forks between the triple trees, so when the bike leans far enough over you first drag the lean feelers. Saves the footpegs and pipes. $29.95 for bare metal, $49.95 for the chrome.

flathead45
17th January 2005, 12:45
wonder if I could use the tilt-o-meter thats in my jeep :laugh :laugh :laugh :laugh :laugh :laugh :laugh :laugh :laugh :laugh :laugh :laugh :laugh :laugh :laugh

alleydude
17th January 2005, 12:47
Does it come in chrome? :D

flathead45
17th January 2005, 12:49
I don't know , mine is faded clear plastic

like I want any chrome on my bike, jeshh

alleydude
17th January 2005, 12:51
Okay, can it be painted flat black, then? :eek: :yikes

flathead45
17th January 2005, 12:52
sure , anything can be painted flatblack , but it makes it kinda hard to read then ;)

alleydude
17th January 2005, 13:02
That's why you need my LEAN FEELERS! :headb Best of both worlds!

flathead45
17th January 2005, 13:08
ok, which ones sould I get , the 37* or the 37.5* lean feelers ?

and do they work with the old style generater electrical system?







oh god , now we're just getting too stupid (even for me)

alleydude
17th January 2005, 13:09
LMFAO!

:laugh :laugh :laugh

Lostwheel
17th January 2005, 15:27
Why? It fit's right through the kitchen door for easy winter storage.Try that with a B.T. :smoke

dabronco
17th January 2005, 15:28
Wickedsprint!!!nightboy!!! Don't make me turn this car around!!

Darhawk
17th January 2005, 16:01
ok, which ones sould I get , the 37* or the 37.5* lean feelers ?

and do they work with the old style generater electrical system?







oh god , now we're just getting too stupid (even for me)Oh hell, just use training wheels, then you'd no longer have to worry about the lean. Now to the rest of the bs these two argued.......dang, I don't even know where to begin????:wonderlan

flathead45
17th January 2005, 16:09
thanks dar , I love you too (kissy kissy)

Desertfox
17th January 2005, 16:21
Sorry, but being the owner of a softail myself, I do have to say that nothing beats the feeling of a big twin with over 100 foot pounds of torque from off idle to over 6000 rpms on a heavy cruiser. You feel like your riding a tank on steriods! =)


Where'd ya get a soft tail with 100 ft.lbs.? The new ones only have 85. Musta had some serious engine work.

Darhawk
17th January 2005, 16:28
thanks dar , I love you too (kissy kissy)Oh Christ...........I thought this was our little secret, I hope Will and Billy don't read this :yikes

wickedsprint
17th January 2005, 16:40
The title of the thread was "why should I NOT buy a new sportster?"..I stated precisely why I didn't.The sensitive softail owner comes after me with "where do you get off saying" All I stated was the newer ones are harder to work on(no tranny trap door)..have less lean angle (32 compared to 37 ish), they weigh more (about 70lbs) and they aren't any faster than a sport. (both around a 13.2 quarter mile) I was just putting up the differences for the new thread starter...it still comes down to why buy a sportster? Some people buy them to have fun on an old fashioned design that is more true to the way a sportster has been designed for the last 40 years...some buy them to be more like a big twin...my guess is he wants a baby big twin..which is cool...but not for me.

The same type of people buy corvettes with automatics and try to justify them as still being a sports car.

dabronco
17th January 2005, 16:47
See that old blue thang in my signature? It's faster than some, slower than most, has obnoxious drag pipes,(cuz Ironheads hafta have drags, it's the law,) Drips oil like it oughta, has more cam noise than,...well just about anything, has more freakin cool oozing from it than I can stand, and I'm gonna ride it today. I don't give a damn what it's lean angle actually is, when the pipes drag, that's far enough! I know how much torque I have, relative to: " Can I pass this clown or do I wait?" Getting into a HUGE pissing contest about minute details between this model, that year, etc., is just plain stupid. If the bike you want, has the features you want, at the price you're willing to pay, THEN BUY THE DAMN THING. While you guys are wearing out yer keyboards arguing about whose OPINION is correct, I'll be riding my loud,drippy, rattling, cool-ass,thirty year old dinosaur, and loving it!

wickedsprint
17th January 2005, 16:54
I agree arguing about minute details is silly..but the thread starter asked for differences and lean angle happens to be one of them, I like the sporty in your pic, if more of the ice melts I'm headin out for a ride as well. And as long as we are talking about wearing out keyboards..I see your post count is higher than mine friend :) Here is a LONG thread from the old forum the thread starter should read...it discusses the differences over like 13 pages..ha.

Click me.http://xlforum.net/oldxlforum/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=4729&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0&sid=053bb7725b369807e690104a6e767b80

dabronco
17th January 2005, 17:03
I apologize fer the rant, I just hate to see forum members getting too heated in their discussions w/ each other. :)

flathead45
17th January 2005, 17:03
I think we all need to "curb" our "feelers" here a bit this is "leaning" into a "bad angle" and soon the "trapdoor" will slam shut causing a "loud pipe" clang and it might "drip" into other aspects of .... oh damn it you know were this is going ;)

alleydude
17th January 2005, 17:08
TWISTED started it!

dabronco
17th January 2005, 17:11
:p :p :p :p :p :p

flathead45
17th January 2005, 17:13
finger pointing will not be tolerated , go stand in the corner and think about what you did :smoke

wickedsprint
17th January 2005, 17:15
One more question...he stated the lean angle was only due to the xl1200S sitting higher...well the 1200R actually has a higher seat height...is this just a difference in seats? The 1200S has maybe an inch more ground clearance, judging from the 03 spec sheet in front of me, maybe that is why..just trying to figure out why there is a 5 degree difference in lean angles, maybe different pegs or something simple.

alleydude
17th January 2005, 17:20
Sigh...

http://www.harleydavidsonbikers.com/forums/images/smilies/beatdeadhorse.gif

flathead45
17th January 2005, 17:21
truth .....................

wickedsprint
17th January 2005, 17:24
Like you guys have never had silly discussions or worthless posts on here, at least we are actually discussing harleys and not showing pictures of pancake ladden rabbits :) If this bothers you this much...you always have the option of not replying.

dabronco
17th January 2005, 17:26
Alleydude! You get your ass over here and clean my screen!

alleydude
17th January 2005, 17:27
Like you guys have never had silly discussions or worthless posts on here, at least we are actually discussing harleys and not showing pictures of pancake ladden rabbits :)

Hey, I was SERIOUS about the lean feelers. Geeeesh! :cry1

wickedsprint
17th January 2005, 17:29
Hahahaha...I bet we could find a way to integrate them into the headsets for talking with other riders..like a buzzer or a bitchin betty or something "WARNING...LEAN ANGLE..WARNING"

flathead45
17th January 2005, 17:30
ok discuss away , this is me not posting

but I will say this and then I'm done with this thread....

these are harleys we're talking about here not corner carving jappa rockets , I have never sat in a bar disussing the lean angle or ride hight of a harley , most convo leans to "nice paint or kool you got more chrome "

I now leave you to your original topic so have fun

alleybabe
17th January 2005, 17:31
you all need shirts that say do not play well with others

dabronco
17th January 2005, 17:31
PULL UP! PULL UP! PULL UP! PULL UP!

dabronco
17th January 2005, 17:31
But we play well with ourselves!

wickedsprint
17th January 2005, 17:35
I am still a motorhead at heart..so actually numerical descriptions still apply..but sure I reckon they got nice paint and whatnot too.

dabronco
17th January 2005, 17:48
And they look cool!

wickedsprint
17th January 2005, 18:20
So two muffins are in the oven..one says to the other..."it's friggin hot as hell in here"..the second muffin says.."holy sh&$ a talking muffin"

Nightboy
17th January 2005, 18:48
Where'd ya get a soft tail with 100 ft.lbs.? The new ones only have 85. Musta had some serious engine work. No HD comes with even close to 85 foot pounds stock. Mine actually peaks at around 120 foot pounds of torque, but yes, there was extensive engine work done.

The title of the thread was "why should I NOT buy a new sportster?"..I stated precisely why I didn't.The sensitive softail owner comes after me with "where do you get off saying" All I stated was the newer ones are harder to work on(no tranny trap door)..have less lean angle (32 compared to 37 ish), they weigh more (about 70lbs) and they aren't any faster than a sport. (both around a 13.2 quarter mile) I was just putting up the differences for the new thread starter...it still comes down to why buy a sportster? Some people buy them to have fun on an old fashioned design that is more true to the way a sportster has been designed for the last 40 years...some buy them to be more like a big twin...my guess is he wants a baby big twin..which is cool...but not for me. Im not sensitive at all. Im just stating the obvious from working on both the new and old Sportster. But lets be realistic here. You bring up one reason how they are "harder" to work on(no tranny trap door), but I can counter that with a dozen other things on the bike that have been improved upon and that will actually require LESS maintenance for a perspective buyer long term.

My debate partner here also mentions about the lean angle being greater. Well when the stock shocks raise the COG over an inch, of course it will have a greater lean angle, but it sure doesnt mean it will handle better. And as I also stated, with the new Sporty, all it takes is swapping out the stock shoocks to alter the lean anlge if ever needed(which I feel isnt).But lean angle will not help the fact that the XL1200 motor assembly on the old Sporty is not fully centered in the bikes frame.

Wickedsprint also mentioned that the new Sporty is closer to a Japanese bike than the old Sporty,LOL! but someone forgot to tell him where the shocks on the 1200s come from. I know SHOWA isnt Japanese for Harley Davidson! LOL The new Sporty actually has fewer overseas imported parts on it that the old Sporty! Just a little trivia for you.

Also weight was asnother debate argument: The new Sporty is 60 pounds heavier(557 vs. 497). Some of that weight is in the frame and forkarm(which have substantially less flex now and will naturally improve handling and feel becuase of that).But about 20 pounds of the difference is also in the stock exhaust hidden crossover bracket. If you go to an aftermarket exhaust and lose this bracket, you will have saved alot of weight right there. So IMO the weight isnt as big of a deal as Wickedsprint made it out to be. We were able to shave off close to 35 pounds on my wife's Sporty when doing its makeover.

But then we have him trying to compart a Dyna Sport that is $6000 more than a Sporty, TO A SPORTY. So I made an argument leveling the playing field on adding $6000 worth of performance parts to a Sporty and making the investment even at $16,000 regardless of which bike you bought. So that argument becomes a bit useless.

Then we have the "heritage" argument. IMO for Wicked to state that the new Sporty is not true to its heritage and is less a Sporty is just plain silly. My SO bought the new Sporty so that she could have all the fun and advantages of the new breed, without all the inherant flaws of the older design thats been around for countless years. Best of both worlds for her.

One more question...he stated the lean angle was only due to the xl1200S sitting higher...well the 1200R actually has a higher seat height...is this just a difference in seats? The 1200S has maybe an inch more ground clearance, judging from the 03 spec sheet in front of me, maybe that is why..just trying to figure out why there is a 5 degree difference in lean angles, maybe different pegs or something simple.

Actually they both have a seat height of 28" stock. But more ground clearance will give you a higher lean angle. Funny thing though, if the new Sporty is raised an inch higher, it will have a lean angle of roughly 40 degrees. Gotta love the new frame. It rocks.

wickedsprint
17th January 2005, 18:51
Give it up hoss. :), I think it is safe to say neither of us is going to convince the other, you have yours, I have mine, and neither of us would trade for the other..which means we both got a good deal. Besides you ride a BT, I wouldn't expect you to embrace what a sporty is meant for.

dabronco
17th January 2005, 18:53
Breath in...breath out.....Breath in...breath out.....Breath in...breath out.....

wickedsprint
17th January 2005, 19:02
Actually if you wanna get hellaciously technical..the 1200R has a .1 inch higher seat height..as long as we are nitpicking details.

Nightboy
17th January 2005, 19:06
Actually if you wanna get hellaciously technical..the 1200R has a .1 inch higher seat height..as long as we are nitpicking details. Yeah, and considering the new seat is a full 1" thicker than the badlander seat that the 1200s comes with, Im sure it is. Just swap out the seat for the exact same one the 1200s has and now the 1200r is .9" lower. ;)

wickedsprint
17th January 2005, 19:07
Disregard.

dabronco
17th January 2005, 19:08
:headbang :headbang :headbang :headbang :headbang :headbang :headbang

wickedsprint
17th January 2005, 19:09
You said it dabronco....still waiting for him to make an actual argument without writing a friggin mini novel.

Nightboy
17th January 2005, 19:09
Disregard.Positive. The stock 1200r has alot more padding in it. We have both seats already for the direct comparison. The Badlander seat sits lower in the frame.

Desertfox
17th January 2005, 19:09
Can we please end this?

wickedsprint
17th January 2005, 19:10
How much more comfortable is it? That is my only real complaint with my bike.


Dfox..noone is forcing you to read it all and respond.

Nightboy
17th January 2005, 19:13
The Badlander seat is pretty hard and fine for short crusing ditances(like under 100 miles). The stock seat is pretty comfy though, just not the best lookin in my book.

Shark Doctor
17th January 2005, 20:26
TWISTED-

So... was there ANYTHING in this thread that even remotely addressed your original question?

My suggestion: buy a Yugo.

Barry Clark
17th January 2005, 21:06
Sorry, but being the owner of a softail myself, I do have to say that nothing beats the feeling of a big twin with over 100 foot pounds of torque from off idle to over 6000 rpms on a heavy cruiser. You feel like your riding a tank on steriods! =)
Yeah, but that is if you have done work to it. You do the same work to a sporty and ....oh boy.

Nightboy
17th January 2005, 21:19
Yeah, but that is if you have done work to it. You do the same work to a sporty and ....oh boy.

Sporty has a different ride/feeling all together. My wife loves it. And from time to time I like taking a spin on it too. But they just dont have that same stump pulling torque potential down low as a large displacement big twin does.

dabronco
17th January 2005, 21:37
That's great if you're into farm implements.

Nightboy
17th January 2005, 21:44
That's great if you're into farm implements. LOL! Sorry but I wouldnt trade my Night Train "farm implentation" for any bike. But Ill tell you one thing, I have left many a Sporty in my dust. The only Sporty I have ran across that will keep up with me is my wife's Sporty. There is no replacement for cubic displacement in my world. Just my thing.

alleydude
17th January 2005, 21:46
A wise old Sporty rider once said:

"If we have to explain, you wouldn't understand."

barry1967
17th January 2005, 22:11
I just want to see this sporty's Dyno Sheet when he's done.

lefty
17th January 2005, 22:40
:clap This thread seems to be losing steam. . . .I've got some questions that can be addressed that won't engender any strong feelings that are related to the original question. They are:

:D At what lean angle is the rider displaying the biggest nads?

:D Why is an older S less of a girl's bike than a newer C or R?

:D Seat height - How does it affect your relationships?

:D Does size matter or is how you use your 883cc more important? And if you are packing 1250cc or more, does that make you the man? But if you are a woman packing 1250 or more, just what does that make you?

:smoke Too much thinking, head hurts. . . . . .

Lefty (social arsonist)

alleydude
17th January 2005, 22:44
:clap This thread seems to be losing steam. . . .I've got some questions that can be addressed that won't engender any strong feelings that are related to the original question. They are:

:D At what lean angle is the rider displaying the biggest nads?

:D Why is an older S less of a girl's bike than a newer C or R?

:D Seat height - How does it affect your relationships?

:D Does size matter or is how you use your 883cc more important? And if you are packing 1250cc or more, does that make you the man? But if you are a woman packing 1250 or more, just what does that make you?

:smoke Too much thinking, head hurts. . . . . .

Lefty (social arsonist)

YES! I mean, NO! I mean...

Oh crap.

dabronco
18th January 2005, 00:32
Well I just got back from my charity ride. (I was riding not for myself but all you folks in the frigid...everywhere else!) I have made the following observations; My '77 XLH has a lean angle of 97 degrees, develops 678 footpounds of torque, and has 412.7 horsepower. It'll do the quarter mile in just under 3 seconds and still drips oil. Of course these numbers are subject to an error of +/- 97.4% cuz I did all my measuring with a stick, but I think they are still purty good!

alleydude
18th January 2005, 00:37
Yup. Sounds about right for a '77. :tour

maddog
18th January 2005, 00:46
I KNOW ABOUT THE SPORTSTERS I HAVE A 75' I WANT TO DO MORE RIDING THEN WRENCHING. MOST OF MY BUDDIES WITH H-D (EVEN THE NEWER ONES) SEEM TO DO A LOT OF WRENCHING. WANTED TO SEE IF IT FOLLOWS TRUE WITH THE NEW SPORTY. :smoke


The guys wrenchin' old sporty's are fixin'em.
The guys wrenchin' newer sporty's are doing Maintainence (so they don't have to fix'em.)
P.S. If they're doin' their own maint. it's probably because they enjoy it.

barry1967
18th January 2005, 01:23
Hey Dabronco,

Now you know all those numbers are different if ya was using a metric stick.

dabronco
18th January 2005, 01:32
It wuz just a stick.

HrdlyDangrs
18th January 2005, 01:32
........MAN MUST WRENCH HIS OWN HARLEY.......

barry1967
18th January 2005, 01:34
A stick can be many things.

alleydude
18th January 2005, 01:40
Many things can be a stick.

wickedsprint
18th January 2005, 03:27
There is no replacement for cubic displacement in my world. Just my thing.

Go race a 1000CC yamaha R1...it will go faster than your BT without leaving third gear...not an exxageration considering first is good for right at 100 mph.

Rondall
18th January 2005, 03:32
Go race a 1000CC yamaha R1...it will go faster than your BT without leaving third gear...not an exxageration considering first is good for right at 100 mph.


Is that with or without Lean Feelers installed?

XLFREAK
18th January 2005, 03:46
Is that with or without Lean Feelers installed?
With. They're factory installed under the footpegs. :D

Nightboy
18th January 2005, 03:50
Go race a 1000CC yamaha R1...it will go faster than your BT without leaving third gear...not an exxageration considering first is good for right at 100 mph.
Gotta love those apples to oranges comparisons you throw out....... :clap

wickedsprint
18th January 2005, 03:55
It is not apples to oranges when you state there is NO replacement for displacment. It is not my fault your world does not mirror reality.

dabronco
18th January 2005, 04:00
All motorcycles have their forte'. The Sporty is for having fun, and the B.T. is for farm chores.

HrdlyDangrs
18th January 2005, 04:02
The Answer to the question "WHY SHOULD I NOT BUY A NEW SPORTSTER" is......CAUSE I REALLY WANT A BIG TWIN!!

There has never been a JAP bike made that can match the 'Class' of a Harley-Davidson Motorcycle........I could give a rat's ass if they went 400 mph....they got NO SOUL...NO CLASS.........If you look closely on the back of my 74XLCH rear fender it reads....YES ITS FAST....NUFF!.....NO, That don't mean to say that its Fast....Its just means its FAST ENOUGH!!

wickedsprint
18th January 2005, 04:04
HAHA! Well said. The only real Bt worth owning is the FXDX..but not worth the cost..the people who pay MSRP or anywhere close to MSRP for the BTs are really funny..because the HDS all use the same engine and brakes..they are THE definition of economy of manufacture..yet people pay whatever they ask..the sporty is the only reasonably priced HD right now.

Desertfox
18th January 2005, 09:24
Pretty much ANY bike you buy retail from a Stealership over 1000 cc is over ten grand. My son was pricing a new BMW 1100 cruiser. $17000. Honda Valkyrie $24,000. Kawasaki Vulcan, $14,000. Yamaha Royal Star, $16,500. Suzuki Boulevard, $11,500. About what you would pay for a BT. Harleys are priced very competitively with other big cruisers, and hold their resale much better. A much better value for the money. but the thing I really like about H-D is that they are built BY Americans, FOR Americans.

missyd
18th January 2005, 11:21
:shhhh '04 & '05 Rubberducks aehem Sportsters are for sissies! :shhhh
Buy a pre '04 one for the real dose of vibrations! :shhhh :shhhh :shhhh

This is my personal opinion ... :smoke

gordy
18th January 2005, 12:06
Why would I suggest not buying the new sporty... we'll they appear to be turning it into the style of a jap bike thats trying too look like a sportster. They have lost the classic sportster tank and Aircleaner, given it a very over manufactured oil tank cap, and a battery cover that looks like its come straight from a Jap cruiser! Add the extra weight and the transmission change I'll stick with the pre 04's.
Rubber mount, I dont really see the point get the bike over 10,000 miles and they smooth right out anyway . Leaking rocker covers put some decent gaskets in and say good bye to the leak.

As for power etc. I couldnt really care less never brought the sporty for speed just for the look and the old style technology and thats why I assume most people got theirs . If I wanted a 140mph plus bike with silky smooth running and engineering I'd go back to the boring as hell Jap bikes.

But thats just my view
Gordy

alleydude
18th January 2005, 12:19
Has anyone mentioned they look really cool?

gordy
18th January 2005, 12:22
I think they look less cool than the pre 04 sportster s

LVBOATDOC
18th January 2005, 12:32
I KNOW ABOUT THE SPORTSTERS I HAVE A 75' I WANT TO DO MORE RIDING THEN WRENCHING. MOST OF MY BUDDIES WITH H-D (EVEN THE NEWER ONES) SEEM TO DO A LOT OF WRENCHING. WANTED TO SEE IF IT FOLLOWS TRUE WITH THE NEW SPORTY. :smoke
The reason their wrenchin on the bikes is because their busy puttin on new chrome and all them other goodies. And we all know that Harley rider are never satisfied with theie ride ! Chrome parts and go fast parts are like sex, you can never get enough and always want more :laugh

nutsy
18th January 2005, 13:35
cant we all get along,by rodney king. :tour

XLFREAK
18th January 2005, 14:07
Because they look cool... and have a 150 series rear tire, some stylish not so functional mirrors, rubber mounted engine with very little vibration, bigger cooling fins, stronger lighter faster higher redline 1200/Buell engine, redesigned swingarm, 1 inch rear axle and you can check the oil without having to wash the oil off your hands before you paw the lifestyle wardrobe at the harley boutique.

Lostwheel
18th January 2005, 14:30
One of the reasons manufactuerers go out of business or lose the following is by not keeping up with the times.The new bikes are for some and not others.Everything has it's pro's and con's.One thing that we cannot disagree about is the fact that it is a hell of a machine by anyone's standard.Kudos to Harley for keeping the line "fresh" so to speak.Same with the V-Rod.Lot's of folks can't stand the bike but that's the beauty of living in a free society and being able to choose what it is we do or ride. :xlrocks

alleydude
18th January 2005, 14:32
Amen. I love my Ironhead, but the wife's '04 is an awesome bike in it's ownright, and I love the new Custom tank. :tour

jwillie
18th January 2005, 17:08
I think that Alleydude has had all of the right answers and has definitely been precisely responsive throughout this thread. Alleydude, you are my hero.

Nightboy
18th January 2005, 17:36
It is not apples to oranges when you state there is NO replacement for displacment. It is not my fault your world does not mirror reality. Actually there is no replacement for displacement. But lets ask this first?

1. The R1, is it an old fashioned V-twin design? NO ITS NOT. Its an in-line liquid cooled 4 cylinder
2. If Yamaha made a larger version(designed specifically for performance like the R1) of their 998cc inline 4, its going to naturally have more torque and hp due to increased displacement. And this would now be an apples to apples comparison.

Why would I suggest not buying the new sporty... we'll they appear to be turning it into the style of a jap bike thats trying too look like a sportster. They have lost the classic sportster tank and Aircleaner, More, misinformation here. 1200r still has the 3.3gallon peanut tank last I saw. Still had the old fashioned ham can AC last I saw. As for the battery cover/oil tank covers, at least now they look like they BELONG on the bike. On the old Sporty's they looked like an afterthought in design coming from the BT's.

I feel there are some jealous pre 04' sporty owners here if you ask me! :smoke

alleydude
18th January 2005, 19:17
Ya know, ten years from now, when all the new Harleys have gone liquid cooled, fuel injected, shaft drive, EPA, politically correct, bla bla bla, there will be people that will scream the merits of those wonderful new bikes, and those that still love the old air cooled, (some)carbureted gems we ride now. And there will be those that will proclaim that those old-timers are jealous of those wonderful new models.

Food for thought.

Nightboy
18th January 2005, 19:23
Ya know, ten years from now, when all the new Harleys have gone liquid cooled, fuel injected, shaft drive, EPA, politically correct, bla bla bla, there will be people that will scream the merits of those wonderful new bikes, and those that still love the old air cooled, (some)carbureted gems we ride now. And there will be those that will proclaim that those old-timers are jealous of those wonderful new models.

Food for thought.

Ill probably be on the bandwagon screaming the new merits too. THough I kind of doubt shaft drive will one of those improvements. I see right hand drive setups(on the BTs) and FI(well its already here, hopefully they will improve to a true closed loop design) coming along though, with liquid cooling as an iffy possibility and best, and only if they can find a way to hide/integrate the radiator into the lines of the bike.

flathead45
18th January 2005, 19:35
why is a right hand drive better?

I just don't see the merrets in right side drive

back in the 30s when hd was first building the "v" & "U" motors they went with left side drive to prevent transmission turque( the twisting or spinning of the trannie on it vertical centerline) that they were having with the 45"er , thje added horsepower of the big twin was too much for the setup of a righthander

now I know that new b/t's have the motor and trannie bolted together but I would think that the same torque would apply only this time it would try and spin the whole assembaly around , more so with high horse power motors (100 ponys and up)

gordy
18th January 2005, 20:55
More, misinformation here. 1200r still has the 3.3gallon peanut tank last I saw. Still had the old fashioned ham can AC last I saw. As for the battery cover/oil tank covers, at least now they look like they BELONG on the bike. On the old Sporty's they looked like an afterthought in design coming from the BT's.

I feel there are some jealous pre 04' sporty owners here if you ask me! :smoke

wouldnt know about the 1200r it doesnt interest me as I have a custom but the in my opinion they have taken a step back with the custom. sorry the covers still look like they belong on a Jap cruiser,,,If is was jealous I'd buy one but as it is I'd rather buy another make altogether than a new sporty. Or maybe a factory motor and build a sportster that I liked
:rolleyes:

wickedsprint
18th January 2005, 21:38
Yeah nightboy..I could have just as easily gotten an 04 or rather an 05 with the upgraded rear axle, I chose to get the 03 sport even when they had deals on the 04s for 500 BELOW msrp at my dealer cause they were not selling. fact is..if I hate the 03(which I don't) I can always get an 05 down the road..but trying to find an XL1200S with less than 1600 miles is still fairly difficult..and I was extremely happy when I found mine.

XLFREAK
18th January 2005, 21:45
I'm still confused as to how they "took a step back" with the new generation Sportster.

A woman I know has an '03 883 Custom. Mine is an '04.

Her rear footpeg mounts are just welded to the swingarm. Mine are bolted to the frame ahead of the swingarm. Her oil tank is exposed, mine is covered. Her battery is also exposed, whereas mine is covered. The overall finish on her bike isn't quite as nice as mine, something even she'll attest to.

The new generation Sportster is an improvement in every way over the previous bike. No vibrations, stiffer frame, better engineering in the engine, etc. So I can't pull the tranny out of a 'trap door'... How many times does one rebuild the tranny on a $7500 bike in 75,000 miles anyway?

wickedsprint
18th January 2005, 21:46
Night boy, your argument about displacment makes no sense, are you drunk? You earlier stated "there is NO replacment for displacement", this is a false statement no matter how much you try and politic or twist around the words hoss. If there was NO replacment for displacment a 600 CC twin would not be making more power and TQ than your 1450cc farm implement. If you wanna compare Vtwins..let us discuss suzukis SV650 or TL1000, which will dominate your 1450 in every performance category at half the displacment with the same number of cylinders. Its answer to your half assed "NO" replacment for displacment theory..POWER to WEIGHT ratio. All your displacment does you no good with added weight and a design that does not facilitate easily revving. I am still waiting for you to make a credible and coherent argument. I am not holding my breath.

wickedsprint
18th January 2005, 21:52
sport·y Audio pronunciation of "sporty" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (spôrt, spr-)
adj. sport·i·er, sport·i·est

1. Appropriate for sport or participation in sports.
2. Exhibiting sportsmanship; sporting.
3. Flashy; jazzy.


When you take away things that make the bike "softer"..it becomes less "sporty"..that is why some can make an actual argument that it is going away from what the sportster is supposed to be..the sportster is not supposed to be practical or comfortable..it is supposed to be obnoxious fairly lght etc...a hooligan bike if you will. when you make it heavier..ditch the adjustable suspension..make the transmisisons harder to service and then compromise its lean angle and not really make it any faster than the previous sport model..you have done things most would argue make it less "sporty"..even if some aspects make it a more civilized motorcycle they make it less of a sportster at the same time.The sportster is not supposed to be civilized. When you put more crap on the bike for cosmetic reasons over function...etc..the oil tank is supposed to be just that..an oil tank..it doesn't need to be a friggin work of art.

XLFREAK
18th January 2005, 22:13
Following that logic, my Fox body Mustang GT should be a better "sports" car than my current '02 Mustang GT. Even though it's heavier and refined, it's superior in every way to my old 92, which was as much a hooligan car as there ever was.

wickedsprint
18th January 2005, 22:19
A mustang is not a sports car, a sports car comes with just two seats. But some would argue your fox body was sportier :) I don't think your 02 is superior..it is easier to get power from the 5.0 than the sohc 4.6 mill, and the suspension components that fit your 02 also fit the 92...both setup correctly..the 92 would wipe the floor with the 02. I am glad to see a mustang fan in here, I had a fox body 5.0 in high school..they are truly fun cars. This is actually a perfect argument between the 04s and previous. The newer stangs are heavier and stiffer but in the process have lost alot of the character and appeal for most of the diehards.

PlanB
18th January 2005, 22:23
Soooooooo.....after over 2,300 viewings and 115 posts, how have we helped this young gentleman with his question? In summary, Twisted, I think you can see where when it comes to bikes, it's "different strokes for different folks"...my philosophy is "variety is the spice of life"...you don't have to limit yourself to just ONE bike! A lot of us are biased when it comes to our pre and post '04 Sportsters (don't believe it? Go back a few posts!) ...I know now I'll always have a Sportster in my fleet, and it'll probably be my most ridden steed, but I DO like having lots of bikes in my garage to pick from! Test ride as many bikes as you can, make a list of pros and cons for each one, then try to make a decision on one...betcha can't pick just one! If money's a factor, do some serious shopping, get one you can afford, and get out on that road! You just can't buy better therapy than being on two wheels!

Bert, I think we need a "debate thread" for when our distinguished members have a difference of opinion...then all of us could observe them and assign points for each round they enter! Kind of like a boxing match! We could take bets on who wins, let the moderators be the judges, and the money would go to the XLforum general fund or emergency member's fund! Plus if(?) things get heated, condenscending, or flaming occurs, it would be out of the general public's viewing so threads like this can be relaxingly viewed! This suggestion is not to put any "alpha males" into "time out"...just give them a place to play !

gordy
18th January 2005, 22:26
The newer stangs are heavier and stiffer but in the process have lost alot of the character and appeal for most of the diehards.

This is also what I meant by taking a step back the sportster is moving forwards with technical improvements in the motor but its lost some of its character and to me and many others I know its appeal.

But your never going to please everybody

alleydude
18th January 2005, 22:30
This is also what I meant by taking a step back the sportster is moving forwards with technical improvements in the motor but its lost some of its character and to me and many others I know its appeal.

But your never going to please everybody

I agree. The EVO ruined the Sporty.

sorry :laugh

gordy
18th January 2005, 22:36
:D :laugh

wickedsprint
18th January 2005, 22:36
haha! I am sure this debate raged at that time too...or when the sporty got electric start..etc

alleydude
18th January 2005, 22:38
:xlrocks

:D

flathead45
18th January 2005, 22:38
or overhead valves :smoke

Nightboy
18th January 2005, 22:52
Night boy, your argument about displacment makes no sense, are you drunk? You earlier stated "there is NO replacment for displacement", this is a false statement no matter how much you try and politic or twist around the words hoss. If there was NO replacment for displacment a 600 CC twin would not be making more power and TQ than your 1450cc farm implement. If you wanna compare Vtwins..let us discuss suzukis SV650 or TL1000, which will dominate your 1450 in every performance category at half the displacment with the same number of cylinders. Its answer to your half assed "NO" replacment for displacment theory..POWER to WEIGHT ratio. All your displacment does you no good with added weight and a design that does not facilitate easily revving. I am still waiting for you to make a credible and coherent argument. I am not holding my breath.

Um, my statement for displacement makes alot of sense. Your just trying to twist my words. And of course power to weight ratio is the true key. But are you trying to tell me that a Suzuki SV650 is an apple to apple comparison with a heavy cruiser touring bike? Lets get real here.

Ill give you an "apples to apples" comparison here: Take a stripped down 70' Cuda with a V8 340 small block. Match it against another stripped down 70' Cuda with a big block 426 HEMI. Even with the larger motor both vehicles are within 200 pounds of each other weight wise. But the 426 puts down about 300 more foot pounds of torque and over 400 more hp. The weight ratio is still superior with the larger 426 in the enginebay. This is where an "apples to apples" comparison is done.

Now lets look at an "apples to oranges" comarison. Well take that same 70' Cuda with a 340 small block v8 and pit it against say a 96' Toyota Supra with an inline 6 and twin turbos. I think its obvious what kind of comparison this is. And its basically what your are doing. Your taking an old style heavy cruiser bike and pitting it against a bike that was made for a completely different purpose. So who really cares? Want to compare an R1 or a SV650? Well then compare it to another bike in its class.

I think it was quite obvious that I was comparing my air cooled vtwin 1600cc cruiser with basically another air cooled vtwin cruising bike, albeit a slightly smaller one. Hell, put the XL1200 into my frame, do you think it will pull my bike as quickly as my converted 1450cc(now 1600cc)will? NO. It lacks about 40-50 foot pounds of torque throughout the rpm band.

Take your SV650, keep the frame and shove a larger displacement motor that has the same performance characteristics as the original one, and your going to get potentially more torque and HP.

Take a Honda SC'd 2.1 litre motor and bore it out to 2.6 litres, your going to naturally get better torque and hp figures(which I did in my ride), I didnt add any weight doing it either. Are we getting the picture Im trying to paint here?

So I will say again: There is NO replacement for displacement.

Now lets hit a few other of your comments:

the sportster is not supposed to be practical or comfortable..it is supposed to be obnoxious fairly lght etc...a hooligan bike if you will. Your right here, but your portraying the new Sporty to be incapable of this. Completely untrue.

when you make it heavier..ditch the adjustable suspension..make the transmisisons harder to service and then compromise its lean angle and not really make it any faster than the previous sport model..you have done things most would argue make it less "sporty"..even if some aspects make it a more civilized motorcycle they make it less of a sportster at the same time. First off, only the 1200s came with "adjustable" suspension(Japanese suspension of all things, remember this OTHER argument of yours?), not all Sportys came with this. Does that make of of them less of a platform to work on?Most pre 04' Sporty's lacked adjustable suspension, so is their platform anything less than a 1200s? NO. Some people could care less about the stock parts on the bike.Alot of people just strip em off to add their own touches to make the bike into what they want. My wife runs Progressive 440's. Even if the new Sporty's came with the SHowa's we would have still tossed em in favor of the 440's. Also your weight issue. The 04'/later does come heavier from the factory. But alot of the weight is easy to shave off. Our Sporty now weighs in at 509 pounds, only 12 pounds heavier than the old 1200s. And this is without even trying to shave off weight. Its amazing what the bike will weigh after dumping the stock exhaust,front fender,stock rear shocks,jugs, and seat will do. All of these parts ended up being heavier than the aftermarket/HD replacement. What really matters here is the platform(read: frame,motor combo)to work with, and the new platform has just as much(if not more)potential as the old platform. Who cares what the bike's stock specs are? Its the actual finished product that you make it into that counts. Im sure all here will agree no matter what year Sporty they have.

As for the tranny trap door. Hey your right here, it doesnt have it. For racing purposes this is obviously a big deal, but what about for folks who are just daily drivers? Im not in a competition to see how quickly I can get into and work on my tranny. But a heads up, there are 3 different mfg's who will be making cases for the 04' and up that will come WITH the trap/acess door. So if it really is a big concern to racing/sport folks, it is about to be adressed.

As for the rubber mounts and the "work of art" oil tank. Sorry, but alot of folks LOVE this feature.Us included. My wife had an older Sporty. We both dig the new streamlined lines of the bike and the rubber mounts dont hurt the performance, but she loves the fact that she doesnt get fatigue in her wrists and forearms anymore. So she feels that she has the best of both worlds. Power to weight ratio? Your right, that is what matters, and her new Sporty's power to weight ratio is just as good as the old Sporty in reality. She even has an extra 50cc's to make up for the 12 pound difference. :tour

pilot
18th January 2005, 23:03
An extra 50cc? So the new ones are 1250??

XLFREAK
18th January 2005, 23:06
A mustang is not a sports car, a sports car comes with just two seats. But some would argue your fox body was sportier :) I don't think your 02 is superior..it is easier to get power from the 5.0 than the sohc 4.6 mill, and the suspension components that fit your 02 also fit the 92...both setup correctly..the 92 would wipe the floor with the 02. I am glad to see a mustang fan in here, I had a fox body 5.0 in high school..they are truly fun cars. This is actually a perfect argument between the 04s and previous. The newer stangs are heavier and stiffer but in the process have lost alot of the character and appeal for most of the diehards.


Both cars share the same platform, which is in and of itself the biggest downfall to those cars. It was never engineered as a performance platform when it was designed, and Ford's engineers did some fantastic things with it.

But stock for stock, the 2005, as refined as it is, is a VASTLY superior car.

But hey... it's a Mustang... Just like my bike is a Sportster. There's much to be said for having a vehicle with 40+ years of heritage behind it. :tour

Nightboy
18th January 2005, 23:10
An extra 50cc? So the new ones are 1250??No, the new ones are 1200cc stock. We ditched the stock 2 piece iron lined jugs in favor of the stronger, lighter, 1250cc Nikasil jugs from Millenium.

pilot
18th January 2005, 23:11
I gottcha, thats cool.

gordy
18th January 2005, 23:12
" the "work of art" oil tank" why take a simple plug design and over complicate things

"Who cares what the bike's stock specs are? " quite a few people as the majority of bike riders just add chrome accessories rather than tearing into the bike itself

flathead45
18th January 2005, 23:22
hey , with this post , this thread is only 50 posts away from being the number one replyed to thread , its now number two

pilot
18th January 2005, 23:34
Been reading these posts and figured, hell, I'll join the fray. Okay, I have an '02 883C, taxes paid, etc. Cons?
1. Vibration, thats about it. Good thing is it settles between 75-85 mph which is where I ride when on the highway. Pros? 1. Vibration, it lets me know shes ALIVE. The look is more classy, yet strong. Quite literally it is a perfect bike IMHO. Now when the '03's came out I couldn't wait to see one, I thought they would do something really special for the 100th. I was really let down when all they did was raise the price and give it a few decals, stripes, and emblems. Oh, how cute. So I waited patiently for the all new '04's to come in. I had heard all these great things, like more HP and a wider rear tire, etc. I even had the Wife okay with me trading in my '02 if I wanted. Well, I still have my '02. I didn't need a starter bike, which is how the '04 felt to me. Out of curiosity, how many people here with '04 and '05 models, this is your first bike? Or first bike since high school etc.? To me they took a lean, mean, streetbike and cheapened it with cheap plastic covers, smaller diameter grips, rubber mounts and more dead weight. If the sportster and the vrod are any indication as to where Harley is headed, man. As for a car comparisson that you guys seem so set on arguing, its like a '63 stingray with chrome bumpers and personality and class, and a new vette, that just kinda looks like any modern sportscar. Neither the new Sporty or Vette do much for me. By the way, to the original poster, get what you like, we're all full of shit here.

Nightboy
18th January 2005, 23:38
" the "work of art" oil tank" why take a simple plug design and over complicate things I didnt know the "work of art" oil tank is overly complicated? Someone want to chime in and tell me how it is? I know we dont get oil all over our hands now everytime we check the oil. Cant be that "overcomplicated".
"Who cares what the bike's stock specs are? " quite a few people as the majority of bike riders just add chrome accessories rather than tearing into the bike itself Then I guess the argument about content of Japanese parts,lean angle,trap doors,overly complicated oil tanks(LOL! this one just kills me! LOL!) etc are also pretty pointless. Normally people who look at these specs, also do alot more to their bikes than just add a few "chrome acessories". :eek:

XLFREAK
18th January 2005, 23:44
hey , with this post , this thread is only 50 posts away from being the number one replyed to thread , its now number two
46 now...

BTW... it sounds like some of the guys on solid mount Evo sporties are trying to convince themselves they're on the superior bike. :D

pilot
18th January 2005, 23:54
46 now...

BTW... it sounds like some of the guys on solid mount Evo sporties are trying to convince themselves they're on the superior bike. :D

45... I was convinced the first time I sat on a new one. :) :tour

Nightboy
18th January 2005, 23:57
Been reading these posts and figured, hell, I'll join the fray. Okay, I have an '02 883C, taxes paid, etc. Cons?
1. Vibration, thats about it. Good thing is it settles between 75-85 mph which is where I ride when on the highway. Pros? 1. Vibration, it lets me know shes ALIVE. The look is more classy, yet strong. Quite literally it is a perfect bike IMHO. Now when the '03's came out I couldn't wait to see one, I thought they would do something really special for the 100th. I was really let down when all they did was raise the price and give it a few decals, stripes, and emblems. Oh, how cute. So I waited patiently for the all new '04's to come in. I had heard all these great things, like more HP and a wider rear tire, etc. I even had the Wife okay with me trading in my '02 if I wanted. Well, I still have my '02. I didn't need a starter bike, which is how the '04 felt to me. Out of curiosity, how many people here with '04 and '05 models, this is your first bike? Or first bike since high school etc.? To me they took a lean, mean, streetbike and cheapened it with cheap plastic covers, smaller diameter grips, rubber mounts and more dead weight. If the sportster and the vrod are any indication as to where Harley is headed, man. As for a car comparisson that you guys seem so set on arguing, its like a '63 stingray with chrome bumpers and personality and class, and a new vette, that just kinda looks like any modern sportscar. Neither the new Sporty or Vette do much for me. By the way, to the original poster, get what you like, we're all full of shit here.

I dont think you've been reading over the posts too carefully, because if you have, then you would know about the improvements.

1. Vibration: You say its both bad and good. We already know the cons, but the "pros" is kind of geared towards both bikes still. The new ones still "vibrate"(especially with a highly modified motor), but not to the point where your arms get a heavy workout. Trust me on this one. I would hate to be riding my wife's 1250cc now if it was solid mounted.
2. Looks, hey thats a personal preference, I wont argue your feelings, but our feelings are that the new Sporty has much cleaner lines that look in line with the bike. No ugly crossover pipe(that looks absolutely silly)in front of the motor, and the seat/rear fender/oil tank cover lines flow much better, looking like they were designed into the bike, not an afterthough.
3. This is my wife's 2nd Sporty. BTW where do they put "plastic covers" on the new Sporty? You sure you got the right bike? New Sporty has all metal sheetmetal still, including the oil/battery covers. Fit and finish are also up a notch. What would you expect from a CAD designed bike?
4. As for hp, the 1200r and 1200c do come with more hp. You dont fully realise it until you dump the stock AC and mufflers for some quality aftermarket ones. Plus its known that the 1200r/XB heads are the best ever produced for the EVO xl 1200. If your going to "test ride" one. You need to do it on one that at least has had the basic bolt on(aka: harley tax) mods done. If you went from your Sporty(which has the mods already)to an EPA regulated new Sporty, do you really think its going to give you a good comparision? Doubtful, I can already tell you the new bike felt Sterile to you. The same with us when we did our test ride. My wife's old Sporty had alot of mods done to it, so testing for power response we knew would be a waste. Do yourself a favor and find someone with a new Sporty that has done some significant mods to it, youll have a different impression. We sure did. :bump

HotRodSporty
18th January 2005, 23:58
Wow, I hope the newbies dont read this ignorant crap! Why dont wicked and nightboy call each other, get a room or something, as long as we dont have to listen to people taking every little minute point and make a huge deal out of nothing. I have a wife who can do that for me. Wicked I dont think your making any freinds here in this post. And I wont say anything about nightboy.
I love all sporties,I have my preferences and why I like each one but I am not going to argue with anyone about any of them. Some people need to find something else to do with there time it seems like. Who cares what you ride as long as your riding. :bump :smackh :headbang :headbang :boohoo :headb :help1 :hijack :why :luvsport :helpsign :xlrocks :wtf :nocomment :bye

Nightboy
19th January 2005, 00:05
Wow, I hope the newbies dont read this ignorant crap! Why dont wicked and nightboy call each other, get a room or something, as long as we dont have to listen to people taking every little minute point and make a huge deal out of nothing. I have a wife who can do that for me. Wicked I dont think your making any freinds here in this post. And I wont say anything about nightboy.
I love all sporties,I have my preferences and why I like each one but I am not going to argue with anyone about any of them. Some people need to find something else to do with there time it seems like. Who cares what you ride as long as your riding. :bump :smackh :headbang :headbang :boohoo :headb :help1 :hijack :why :luvsport :helpsign :xlrocks :wtf :nocomment :bye

You can say whatever you want about me. Its all in good fun to me. Wicked knows Im right. Its obvious when his argument has been wittled down to a "trap door" and the "overengineered" oil tank, while he sidesteps the important issues, like improved and strengthened frame and swingarm geometry,engine case,heads and rockerboxes.So lets all pick on the oil tank and how it lacks making a mess! :p :clap

alleybabe
19th January 2005, 00:09
Plastic covers... aw come on now. what else can you find to complain about.. and HP since when did it become a race. My 2004 883c can keep up just fine with the big guys or an iron head of which i also own. my 2 cents..,.

alleydude
19th January 2005, 00:10
Personally, I love them all. I really hate the "my bike is better than your bike" mentality. Harley HAS to evolve or it will perish. Maybe not in the next year, or the next ten, but it will go away without keeping up with the times. It answered to all the people complaining of the vibrations. It answered to the need for better oiling. It answered to the people that wanted a bigger gas tank. It answered to the people that were trying to make their Sportys more like the big twins, in that it geve them forward foot pegs and more custom styling. It gave the '04's more horsepower and better cooling.

The line cannot stay stagnet. They still offer the peanut tank, and if there is ever a demand, SOMEONE will offer a rubber to solid mount conversion kit, but I doubt this will ever happen.

Sportsters ROCK, every damn one of them. Ironheads are the last of the old school Harleys. They have a personality all their own. I love the early '80's XLS Roadster with the bigger tank (like the one I have on my '77). I love the '83 XLS with the mini Fat-Bob tank. I love the early '60's bikes with the Walnut tank. I love the XR-1000, and the XCR-1000. XR-750's KICK BUTT.

The EVO's are great, great motors and a needed upgrade from the aging Ironhead. The 1986 1100cc is a grand, rare bike by itself. The 883 is a thowback to the original Sportsters, and a welcome relief to the wallet in both MSRP and insurance.

Rigid Sportys are cool and easy to do if you're into those sort of things. I love Sporty Riders. Here is a group of people that don't need to justify to themselves why they ride their bike because it's all about the ride. It's about getting in sync with the vibes, and becoming one with the Sporty. It's not about horsepower numbers, it's about horsepower FEEL. It's about cool, but not a cool you have to advertise, it's just there.

You can like what you want. I love them all, and wouldn't kick ONE of them out of my garage.

Damn, this Winter crap sucks.

flathead45
19th January 2005, 00:11
for give me if I'm wrong ( cause personaly I don't give a rats ass for new bikes ) but isn't the oil tank plastic on the new sportys with just a metal sidecover

alleydude
19th January 2005, 00:12
for give me if I'm wrong ( cause personaly I don't give a rats ass for new bikes ) but isn't the oil tank plastic on the new sportys with just a metal sidecover

I think the cover is plastic, don't know about the tank itself. I could go look, but I'm a lazy :censor .

barry1967
19th January 2005, 00:13
Yep, plastic tank with a metal cover.

alleybabe
19th January 2005, 00:16
you are probably correct. i was only making a point since people being knit picky .

alleybabe
19th January 2005, 00:18
yep went downstairs to check it out too.

Nightboy
19th January 2005, 00:19
for give me if I'm wrong ( cause personaly I don't give a rats ass for new bikes ) but isn't the oil tank plastic on the new sportys with just a metal sidecover Yes it has a metal Slip cover that fits over it. I wont get into the discussion of why they went to a plastic/ABS tank, but it partly has to do condensation inside when a bike sits for awhile without being started up.

pilot
19th January 2005, 00:24
Public apology, I actually do like all Spoties too, especially the XR's, just personally prefer the rigid mounted ones. Apologies if I have offended anyone here.

Nightboy
19th January 2005, 00:28
Public apology, I actually do like all Spoties too, especially the XR's, just personally prefer the rigid mounted ones. Apologies if I have offended anyone here. You dont have to apologise to me. We both know Im right to begin with! :bump :laugh :chop :cheers :drinkbeer :thinkbeer :angry :rolllaugh :boohoo :burnout :danceman :lolsign :smiliesig :dankesaig :usa3 :flasher :horseride

74FeHeadXLH
19th January 2005, 00:37
Amen Allebabe...these guy's need to "sit down , shut-up, and F'n RIDE", plastic covers, trap this ,trip that what the :censor the arguin for, bottom line is these new ones are regesigned , if you don't like the results.....go buy a :censor metric :censor cruiser........LONG LIVE IRONHEADS.....I'm going to also buy a 05 1200 Custom real soon tooo....Mike 74xlh :smoke

Nightboy
19th January 2005, 00:40
Amen Allebabe...these guy's need to "sit down , shut-up, and F'n RIDE", plastic covers, trap this ,trip that what the :censor the arguin for, bottom line is these new ones are regesigned , if you don't like the results.....go buy a :censor metric :censor cruiser........LONG LIVE IRONHEADS.....I'm going to also buy a 05 1200 Custom real soon tooo....Mike 74xlh :smoke They "regesigned" the new Sporty's too?!?!?! Didnt know that! :smiliesig

Barry Clark
19th January 2005, 00:41
HAHA! Well said. The only real Bt worth owning is the FXDX..but not worth the cost..the people who pay MSRP or anywhere close to MSRP for the BTs are really funny..because the HDS all use the same engine and brakes..they are THE definition of economy of manufacture..yet people pay whatever they ask..the sporty is the only reasonably priced HD right now.You know i thought that too but then I am looking at these bikes from the point of view of a guy who has a Sportster mentality. My thinking has always been, if I was going to own a big twin, it would be the Softail Standard; the most no-frills version they had and just build it from there. In the end, however, I just couldn't get away from the thought of owning a Sportster. After riding a BT then a Sportster off the showroom floor, I knew that even letting my eyes wander a bit was a mistake. The BT was nice, but not what I wanted; sure there was power, but it wasn't conveyed to asphalt like the Sportster's was. ;)

Barry Clark
19th January 2005, 00:46
Personally, I love them all. I really hate the "my bike is better than your bike" mentality.Damn straight. I have ridden everything from a 75 Iron to a 2005 EVO sporty and they were all fun and Sportsters. Each of the year models that I rode, I could just imagine what those bikes must have been like on the rode when they were new. Did the '05 has as much metal as the '75? No. Did the '75 has as much natural yank as the '05? No. It wouldn't bother me one bit to own either bike or any in between.

74FeHeadXLH
19th January 2005, 00:46
Can't argue with your logic man, you win LOL Mike74xlh

collinsb
19th January 2005, 00:49
I AM LOOKING INTO GETTING A NEW BIKE. WANTED TO SEE THE PROS AND CONS OF THE NEW SPORTSTERS.

The original post! Approximately 150 posts later, it's time to advise each of my little biker buddies, that all of your bikes look like a vintage Maytag washer (see below), sitting next to my nice shiney Sporty. If you disagree, then you are just jealous that I have the best, and only real Sportster. I sure am glad that I bought the best one. I think it is a certain gift that I possess. I seem to always pick the best stuff to buy. I also have the best car, the best TV, the best boat, the best dog and, and, and, and, of course, the best wife. If you ever want to know what is the best, there are two credible sources to get information. #1 is me, Billy or #2, you might try Consumer Reports, though not as reliable.

Billy Bestbike
http://www.storyhouse.org/judithpic2.jpg

stevo
19th January 2005, 00:50
OK OK OK ... kiddies.. it's startin to look like a kindergarden a liitle lunch..


To the ORIGIONAL question....

Pros for a sporty

Looks....most bikes are bought from the heart NOT the head.. so ya gotta like it and either do or don't, simple

Total cost of ownership..... they are cheaper to maintain and repair as there is a large aftermarket and most parts are interchangable... yes even on the new '04-'05's... also most minor servicing work can be done by yourself (altho I recomend at least once a year take it to a GOOD mechanic to do the little bits you've missed)

Heritage... it has a lineage that goes back a looooooong way.. they were oroigionally the sports bike of their day.. they were used for trials, enduro's, road racing and flat track.

Tecnological improvemnets ... the current sporty is tech wise very superior to it's predecessors.

Cons....

Origional purchase price.... when ya look at what ya can buy from Japan for the same money..... they fall a bit behind in the performance per $$$ area.(but I refer back to service and repair costs)

The new ones, although drawin on their heritage have softened a great deal... HD now has the Buell in it's stable so the sporty doesn't need to be the sports bike anymore....hence the new ones are really baby Dyna's... more suited to cruising than scratchin.
Then again look at who buys these bikes.. they're a bit softer than the ones who bought the origionals.... HD is building to the market.


These are just a few points...

I bought my sporty off a blank piece of paper.. I sat down and wrote down what I wanted out of a bike and what I was going to using it for and what I expected it to do...

I then worked out roughly the % of each type of riding so I could then multiply each point by that %

WHen I narrowed it down to a few bikes I lined them up on paper and awarded them points for each heading...

I WANTED a new Ducati .. HA

My checklist was somethin like this

Cost.. initial purchase and insurance

Comuting.. ease of use, luggage

Maintenance ...cost and ease

Crash repair ... cost and ease

Touring ... comfort and fuel economy/range, one up only

Scratchin ... fun factor

Drag racin... reliability

Customising ...both bike and motor


A buell actually came out top of the list but the 1200S bumped it because I was looking at starting my own business doing engine work and I figured most people would identify with the Sporty as a Harley, where I wouldn't get the brand identification with the Buell.... in '98 no one knew what a Buell was..
ANd the 1200S had a lot of the things I was looking for anyway.. hotter motor, adjustable suspension etc etc

Since I bought the sporty it has not let me down and has done everything I asked of it.. it's currently in pieces to go ut to 88" as to keep it in good 11's I had to lose some of the mid range tractability... I want that back and the only way to get my mid range torque AND the HP is to go to more cubes.

I've owned a few bikes since I first bought the sporty as wellas many before hand...
Since I've had an '02 900SS Ducati.. too much of a pain to use ona daily basis...great in the twisties but shit everywhere else.
'90 GSXR1100 with a 1216 Wiseco kit in it......good bike and a close allrounder to the sporty
'03 GSXR1000 which I've streetfightered... this is my daily ride at the moment and it does everything well... it runs 10's it wheelstands at will off the throttle, good fuel economy, expensive on tyres, great for stuntin, great for general comuting.......

BUT I MISS MY SPORTY... the sporty was an extension of me and I could ride it at it's limit for long periods of time, I toured on it (although that % was not very high on my origional list) even doin nearly a thousand miles in one day.
It' vibrated and talked to me, I could tell when the weather changed by how it ran.

It has a soul........ and these new bikes although they do everything well.. seem to lack that....the imperfections are as much a part of the character as the good points.....

Are we perfect NO....but our parents/spouses still love us anyway....... NUFF said

barry1967
19th January 2005, 00:50
Actually I think the BT's use two motors. The A and B. One is counterbalnced as to not vibrate the riders too much. After all for 14-18 grand, we can't have a sore tushy now , can we? I rode a softail once. Thought a was sitting on a vibrating 2x12.

thunderpaw
19th January 2005, 01:10
What I don't mean won't hurt me...

kim

dwardy
19th January 2005, 01:42
I like cheeze!!!

:rolllaugh :smiliesig :yoyo :band :hipg :spineyes :wonderlan :laugh :boohoo :burnout :eek :hipgrl :rockband :horseride :Shower



:clap :clap :clap :clap :clap :clap :clap :clap :clap :clap :clap :clap

woody95
19th January 2005, 01:46
Well I am now totally confused. Don't get me wrong as I feel this is for the good. Let me explain. After listining to all the opinions in this thread, I think I will keep my 95 883/1200. I was going to sell her and by an 05 Superglide. Even went to the dealer to see what I would get for trade in. Here in Canada the prices for Harley's have dropped quite a bit since our dollar has risen to about 90 cents US. Still with a bare bones price of $16,349 and a trade in of $4,200 it was going to cost me $15,000 out the door. Its all about the almighty dollar. For another $3,000 I could have my Sporty doing 100hp and 95ft/lb. So its not hard to do the math. New is out. Old stays in :clap
Thanks for helping with my delema :tour

Bob

Nightboy
19th January 2005, 01:51
Well I am now totally confused. Don't get me wrong as I feel this is for the good. Let me explain. After listining to all the opinions in this thread, I think I will keep my 95 883/1200. I was going to sell her and by an 05 Superglide. Even went to the dealer to see what I would get for trade in. Here in Canada the prices for Harley's have dropped quite a bit since our dollar has risen to about 90 cents US. Still with a bare bones price of $16,349 and a trade in of $4,200 it was going to cost me $15,000 out the door. Its all about the almighty dollar. For another $3,000 I could have my Sporty doing 100hp and 95ft/lb. So its not hard to do the math. New is out. Old stays in :clap
Thanks for helping with my delema :tour

Bob I can see 100whp no problem, but 95 foot pounds of torque? Thats pretty hard to do with a 1200cc. Hitting 85 foot pounds is an accomplishment in itself in my book.

collinsb
19th January 2005, 01:51
I like cheeze!!! :rolllaugh :smiliesig :yoyo :band ap

Dwardy,
Cheese is not good! I don't like cheese! I'm a bologna man, myself! It would be a better world if people ate more bologna and less cheese! Please consider changing your opinion!
Billy

Nightboy
19th January 2005, 01:53
I'm a bologna man, myself! It would be a better world if people ate more bologna Im sure you look great eatin bologna too....................

Shark Doctor
19th January 2005, 02:04
I prefer hard cheese 'cause, man, you know soft cheese has too radical a lean angle, and Billybadassbolognamucnhingsportsterrider, you're just wrong man, so buy a Yugo and eat cheese.

alleydude
19th January 2005, 02:14
I only like the old cheese.

alleybabe
19th January 2005, 02:15
I like the smelly Cheese

Darhawk
19th January 2005, 02:43
http://russianfoods.com/showroom/product06E37/vendor003E7/pimages/69B009.jpg


+

http://www.fromages.com/img/board/robuchon266200.jpg

=

How to Make a Bologna and Cheese Sandwich
by Maggie




Get two pieces of bread and slice of cheese.
Get two pieces of bologna.
Take one of the pieces of bread.
Put the cheese on the bread.
Put bologna on the cheese.
Put the other piece of bread on top.
Eat it and enjoy it. "Yum!" "Delicious!"
http://www2.lhric.org/pocantico/taverna/00/j0232293.gif

wickedsprint
19th January 2005, 04:06
Nightboy..you are one cocky induvidual for someone who does not even own a sporty. I still don't think you are right about most of the details..because what you forget is that what you can do to a new 04, you can also do to a 1200 rigid..you don't think there is any extra weight to be removed from our bikes?..then you talk about buying aftermarket engine cases for the trap door to make them like a rigid case, aftermarket adjustable rear shocks..not sure if anyone makes front adjustables, usually people just buy the 1200S frontlegs. So lets see..the hardcore person buys an 04/05, replaces the engine cases suspension etc..when they could have just taken a 1200S and gotten it internally balanced for alot cheaper. There is an outfit (forget the name) that internally balanced a hotrod 1200S and nicknamed it the 1200SS, supposed to be pretty wicked..and stilla rigid mount. The rubber mounting is a bandaid to a problem only sensitive people are concerned about. The rigid frame means nothing to me if it adds that much weight. I am not sidestepping your arguments because I think you are right..quite the oposite..I just don't have the time to sit in front of the comp all day today...I went for a ride instead. Everytime you post one of your opinions I sidestep it with an actual fact, the lean angle..the weight..the HP, the quarter mile times etc...and fully adjustable suspension includes the fork legs hoss..not just the rear shocks. I still maintain there ARE replacments for displacment..called forced induction or higher revolutions. Just doubling displacment is not the most efficient way to add power...there are other more fficient means which counter your "no replacment for displacment" ignorance. You sound like a camaro driver. The fact that you state the new sportster is a better bike for your WIFE shows that it is leaning away from being what a sportster should be. I am not saying the new sporties are junk..they may run pretty well and be stiffer..but they are not what I come to associate when I think of a harley davidson sportster. I don't think you get it.

74FeHeadXLH
19th January 2005, 04:13
Yea what sprint said....and a balogna sandwitch..a piece of the smelly cheeze....AND :bump :bump

Broncodog
19th January 2005, 04:38
It's a trick question...............cause there is no reason not to buy a sporty! :D

stevo
19th January 2005, 04:39
OK guys that's enough......time out.......

:smackh :headbang :madhead :cloudmad

I'm just about to move this to the off topic section........


There was a legitimate question... answer it sensibly or go to a different thread..

Nightboy
19th January 2005, 04:45
I still don't think you are right about most of the details..because what you forget is that what you can do to a new 04, you can also do to a 1200 rigid. One thing you cant do is change the poor frame and swingarm geometry of the old Sporty or the fact that the engine and tranny are not fully centered in the frame itself.
you don't think there is any extra weight to be removed from our bikes?. did I ever say that? No. But one thing I can say, there is less weight to remove from your 1200s than there is from the 1200r.One quick example the 1200s doesnt have a 20 pound exhaust crossover chamber underneath the belt drive does it? No. It has a small light tube going across the pushrod tubes. You save some weight on the thinner rear tire. You save weight with the stock Badlander seat. Get the picture? There is more to subract on the newer Sporty than there is on the older one.
Everytime you post one of your opinions I sidestep it with an actual fact, the lean angle..the weight..the HP, the quarter mile times etc...and fully adjustable suspension includes the fork legs hoss..not just the rear shocks. You just sidestep alot(especially the basic frame and swingarm themselves and how the motor is properly centered in them to begin with),but you sidestep facts, not my opinion,and you fail to comment on the bikes obvious(like your fact on the transmission trap door being in every post, while sidestepping the fact that the tappet bores/covers are significantly better on the new cases)improvements.

Your only "facts" between the 2 are the tranny trap door(which does nothing for performance when the bike is in motion), and the rubber mount/solid mount argument(which again does nothing for performance EITHER WAY). The lean angle is null(as it can be changed on either bike if its truely a concern), the weight issue is really null, quarter mile time is similiar in stock configuration, yadda yadda yadda.

What isnt null though is the new stiffer frame and new swing arm and rear axle assembly, how the motor is now centered in the frame,the motor case's improvements in 2 key areas, the new 2 piece rocker box,the new heads, and the "overengineered" oil reservoir as you call it. ;)

Ill take these over a pair of "Japanese" Showa adjustable rear shocks and front cartridge shocks(that can easily be swapped out) on an old outdated "underengineered" offset frame/offset swingarm/offset motor assembly and the "trap door" for the transmission anyday! ;)

wickedsprint
19th January 2005, 04:53
You have shown me no facts as to the inferior frame geometry or the off center engine or proof that you can get your lean angle to 40 degrees, until you show me factual proof..I am just ignoring those arguments because I don't believe them. Your car is not centered left to right either because last I checked you sit on the drivers side and not in the middle. Seems to work well for them..even bonafide race cars short of formula one and indy types are not perfect side to side. HD must have gotten it right because my tires wear evenly on the sides and it tracks straight, this alone tells me your argument doesn't have that much merit. You also mention you'll take a new roadster over another bike..you don't own either of the bikes that are in discussion, you own a BT and obviously want a sporty that is closer to the way your BT rides..congrats...you got it.

I am done with this discussion..call it a concession if it makes you sleep better at night..as I already stated..we each have a bike we like and the other doesn't want...that's a two side win if you ask most people.

stevo
19th January 2005, 05:01
OK the sand pit is closed...