Are harleys really that slow?

I want to share a story that addresses another reason people own Harleys. Almost two years ago, when I first become interested in XJ bikes I started going by the area motorcycle shops to get information on bikes in general. There is a shop near me that sells and services Harleys and I got to know the owner and his employees, a great bunch of guys. One day I noticed a sudden influx of bikes for sale and I asked why, wasn’t there a recession going on? The owner said most of the bikes were there on commission via their owners. He then proceeded to explain that most of his customers had brought their Harleys as future investments relying upon the Harley Davidson “mystic” to push their value up; they never really intended to ride them. Even he called his customers “yuppies”. Most of the bikes sat for several months, their prices too high for any offers. What are the owner’s biggest sellers today? Scooters.

 

& now for my 1/2 cents worth...

My natural inclination is that Harley riders at least around here often are snobs which has nothing to do with the thread question. It does though cause me to see them with some skepticism. To wit: yesterday I was riding & extended my hand to wave hi to a pair of harley riders running together and both of them obviously & intentionally in perfect synchronization, turned their heads to the right to snub me as we passed each other. I've seen this same exact childish thing happen often enough and only from Harley riders, that I honestly find it hilarious.

OK so I have a basic disinterest in Harleys but then to be fair, what are the bike comparisons in terms of "slow". I found this marvelous website which has the stats of most major bikes ever made. Here's the link to the page on it for my xj650 Maxim (they don't have the YICS listed)
http://www.motorcyclespecs.co.za/model/ ... _maxim.htm You can find your bike du jour on this page.

However looking at the horsepower, my 650 has 71HP and most of the Harleys I looked are in the 50-60HP range and weigh far more than this XJ.

I'm really not into going so fast I loose my licence or pay big $ for fines & ^ my insurance rates... so top end really doesn't interest me any but I found it interesting that the 650 does the quarter in 12.6 seconds

As a side note, I found it interesting how similar in stats all the XJs seem to be including mileage & quarter times.

So as to the topic "Are harleys really that slow?", the statistics on that above link otter answer most of your questions on any of the bikes.

 

Buuuut

Torque wins races, horsepower sells stuff

XJs have 40-50ftlb of torque, Harleys have 80ftlb....


So no, Harleys aren't really that slow, if you mean slow in a straight line. Still a big air cooled Vtwin isn't good for much other than going straight, giving low end power and making noise.

 

It's not just the V-Twin design that causes a low max horsepower design in a Harley, it's that the two cylinders are in the same plane, and use the same crank pin. That forces the engine to be very uneven, especially at idle. Any engineer with half a brain could see that immediately without even running a dyno test. But Harley doesn't sell performance, folks.

Of course, that is also what causes the "potato potato" sound of the Harley engine. And truth be told, Harley engines do have MASSIVE torque output at only 2500 rpm. Imagine a 1500 cc single cylinder. It's not too far from that. I would imagine, though I don't know, that would make a Harley easy, if not fun, to ride.

If it wasn't vibrating like a fat guy was jumping up and down on your tank. My friends brand new Harley...I swear the fender moves 3 inches back and forth at idle. He doesn't see the problem, but I don't think he's ridden anything other than V-Twins. And I think I've heard that the vibration is even another selling point. I don't get it.

Other V-Twins use two crank pins to allow a better primary balance in the engine and also a broader torque curve. And unless I am mistaken, such a tight, 45 deg V is uncommon if not never found in metric cruisers. There's a reason for that.

Ducati doesn't have any valve springs, and their 90 degree V-Twin with a desmodronic valve system allows engine speeds in excess of 11,000 rpm. Speed times force equal power, and Ducatis make a bunch of power when those two big cylinders are firing 11000 times a minute. And they win races.

I took a Monster for a test drive awhile back. I couldn't stand the vibration, but it felt awesome going from 50 - 80 mph. I won't be buying one though.

I probably will never buy a V-Twin, but unfortunately that limits my bike selection to sport bikes (inline 4), Beemers (boxer twin), and Triumphs (inline 3). Don't like sport bikes , can't afford another BMW :lol: , saving up for the Triumph! (or dumping 8 g's into my XJ!, honestly haven't decided.)

That's my preference though. How I personally like engines to feel. Lots of people like the V-Twin for it's higher low rpm torque availability, and with the proper gearing they do make nice cruisers.

 

just go look at the quarter mile times.

They may have a ton of torque, but their fastest bike, a stock VRod doesn't post faster times than any competent competitor.

 

dawsoner...that is a very common, but misleading, perspective on the relationship between torque and horsepower.

There are more elaborate treatises on the internet, but my favorite HEREis down right now, but I can sum it up with this:

Unless you are looking at the dyno graph, the peak torque and HP numbers don't really mean that much, especially looking at two completely different engine designs.

Imagine two engines...engine 1 with 10 ft-lbs of force output except for at 2750-3000 rpm where it has 100 ft-lbs of force, and then redlines at 3250 rpm

engine 2 has 20 ft-lbs from 1000 to 10000 rpm.

Engine 1 will have a horsepower peak of 100*3000/5252 or 57 hp. And a torque peak of 100 ft-lbs.
Engine 2 will have a horsepower peak of 20*10000/5252, or 38 hp. And a peak torque of 20 ft-lbs.

Engine 2 looks like it has both a lower torque and a lower hp, but if you were to put them both on the quarter mile strip, engine 2, with TWICE the available torque, and therefore horsepower, at MOST rpm ranges, would smoke engine 1. Of course it would be a long, slow race!

Unless engine one had the GEARING to keep itself at 2750-3000 rpm at all times. Like a CVT or maybe just 20 gears.

Then you could maximize the output of that engine, and it would be faster.

In the real world, it's all about WHERE in the rpm range the peak torque is. A harley engine seriously peaks just above idle. And it falls dramatically after that.

It won't be winning any races, and you may notice harley only publishes their torque peak number. Their horsepower peak number has been calculated at about 55 hp, less than half of any other engine of a similar displacement.

So to prove that rule you stated is false...for Harley, torque sells, but doesn't win races!

 

snip......

.....end snip

Hey! Don't forget the BMW K motors. Horizontal 4 cyl (originally 3 cyl). It's amazing how reasonably these bikes can be picked up in the used market. Smooth, comfortable, reasonable purchase price and long lived. Not unusual to get 200K + miles out of the engines. Parts prices? EXPENSIVE!!!

Loren

 

Are they 4 cyl? The ones I see appear to have two exhaust headers, but I haven't examined them that close.

 

here it is to prove it all, xj750 vs hardly 1200 watch in 720, much better
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYAClrkJV6c


the 750 wins, but the guy driving it sucks at take off, if you watch his other vids... so i think it would have done even better

 

No, torque wins races, HP sells cars.

Enzo Ferrari said that.

 

I had a '72 Sportster. It was slow. Quicker than the old Honda Rebel's, but still slow. Top speed on mine was about 65. Anything over 50 it rattled so bad, your whole body would go numb after about 5 min.

 

if torque wins races they should of never built the vrod it claims to only have 84 ft lbs i think the v rod isnt even in the same class. and before the vrod the sporty was the fastest harley and it doesnt make 80 ft lbs torque. just to prove my point if torque wins races how come a 502 boss hoss gets out run by 80 ft lbs hyabusa the boss hoss makes 420 ft lbs more but not important. everyones tastes are different . some people take beautifull bikes and make them into bobbers beauty is in the eye of the beholder. thats what makes everyone different if we were not we wouldnt need all the different bikes out there. i will be the first to admit a harley is no where near as dependable as a jap bike. i guess maybe were kinda jealus because we dont have that kind of money to put into a bike. we all have seen a harley we wouldnt mind having in our garage. but i think just about everyone on here will agree its a really good reason most harleys arent that fast from the factory they dont want law suites not all but most harley riders are mostly white collar workers that dont ride very much at all and party hardy dont respect what they got . could you imagine them on a 10 sec bike vs 14 sec bike. ive worked daytona bike week on main street ive seen just about everything did it for over 20 years

 

The relationship between torque and horsepower is difficult to understand. I have a very good explanation from a physics website below. I hope everyone does their best to understand the physics regarding the two measurements of engine output, torque and horsepower.

People often confuse power and torque because car enthusiasts tend to (unknowingly) use these words for different concepts. This is a physics site, so I'm going to go ahead and use the definitions from physics.

The full-throttle behavior of an engine can be approximately modelled as a device which has some function associated with it. This fixes the torque it can produce as a function of engine speed (rpm). This function is not at all constant, although engineers often strive to make it as flat as possible.

Regardless, given the torque function, there is an associated power . So if the torque is known at all speeds, the power is known at all speeds (and vice versa). You can't have one without the other.

Despite this, it is common practice for engines to be advertised only in terms of their peak torque and peak power. The engine speeds where those conditions may be found are also usually given. The peak power is very important for reasons I'll get to later, but the peak torque is essentially useless all by itself. The reason is that the gearbox can multiply the torque to (essentially) any amount whatsoever at an appropriate speed. But an ideal gearbox cannot change the power.

Staying with the ideal case, the maximum forward force that a car can produce is entirely determined by the power its engine is producing and the car's overall speed. So fixing speed, maximum acceleration is always reached by maximizing the engine's power output. It is the job of the transmission (and driver) to use the gearbox to keep the revs as close to the engine's power peak as possible if full acceleration is desired.

Modern transmissions have many closely-spaced ratios, so except at very low speeds (at the bottom of 1st gear), an engine may be kept close to its power peak for as long as desired. That means that a well-designed car that is driven well may produce a force . This depends only on the peak power (and velocity), and explains why the power-to-weight ratio is such a good predictor of acceleration performance.

Having said that, the torque peak is not completely irrelevant. Its position relative to the power peak is usually a good indicator of the size of the car's "powerband." Essentially, how high do you have to rev it in a given gear before the engine really gets going? Having a wide powerband is extremely important in everyday (or moderately aggressive) driving where you're not going to redline in every gear. It makes the car feel much more powerful even if the maximum performance is the same. Of course, a wide powerband is also useful if your have a poor transmission or don't want to shift as much.

Russ, differences in drivetrain inertia between reasonable designs are not usually not a huge effect. They're certainly significant, but I don't think I'd include them given the approximations already inherent in this sort of discussion.

 

i stand corrected - gear driven, single cam is a huge plus in my opinion. maybe not going to give best possible performance, but should last for ever and be easy to work on.

 

Truth be told... I've grown to like the "cricket" sound of my XJ. In fact, I call my beautiful Maxim; Cricket...

The other dark side is... I really like the low RPMs of the Harleys. I would like a 6th or 7th gear on my XJ 650...

OK... Now you got the skinny on me...

 

Here is how I learned torque and hp and how they relate...

Take a 55 hp harley. It's producing 78 ft lbs of torque. Rear wheel power. Modify it so that you can put a pully on the front big enough to lower the the torque to 20 ft lbs. The horsepower the bike has is absolutely pointless, then. If the torque is 20 ft lbs, you can hold it with your own strength. Now, without changing the gearing, raise the horsepower of the engine until it can turn the pully to to produce 78 ft lbs of torque again.
The gearing sets the amount of torque. The horse power sets what can be done to the gearing for best performance. The best performance means more speed.
If harley had another 100 horsepower, they could re-gear the tranny (same principal as larger front sprocket, smaller rear) and the motor would have the power it needs to turn the gear with the force they need to produce the best torque.
You can go 100 mph with fast enough rpms, big enough gears, and one hell of a long strip of asphault on 10 ft lbs of torque. You might not move at all with 80 ft lbs of torque and 10 hp.

Remember riding a geared bicycle? Remember how easy it was to pump the pedals when you are in first gear? You're the motor with the horsepower in that case. Your maximum h.p. is whatever you have in your legs. Guess how hard it would be to stop the rear wheel with you pumping with all of your might in first gear. Put the bike is it's top gear and now your having to use a lot more of your physical resources to pump the pedals and get the rear tire moving. You are still producing the same strength. But producing the same torque? Much more difficult.

Horsepower is essential if you want to have any kind of race-winning torque. Otherwise you just have the kind of torque that can move a 1000lb bike and two fat people up a steep incline with little effort and little speed.

 

Thats the differance between real bikers and Harley riders. Real bikers enjoy the finer points of all bikes and will ride with you or anyone no matter what they ride. Where Harley riders typically put down all other bikes but Harley's. Im not saying all of them, but a high majority do and every one knows it. Short minded and attitude driven. I wonder if they know the evalution motor was designed by Suzuki and the Harley Jacket I bought with my only Harley I ever owned was purchased at a Harley dealership and made in China. My 84 wide glide looked great, but no matter what I did to it, it didnt have balls to keep up off the line, top end or braking power enough to stop like my Kawasaki 550 spectra. I loved them both, but one was more thrilling to ride and the other looked better. Just my opinion I guess.

 

is that a fact? cuz that would be like rain on your wedding day. or 10,000 spoons when all you need is a knife.

 

or even a free ride that you just can't take. Haha... who woulda thought it figured.

 

I never thought I'd hear Alanis brought up in the middle of a conversation about bikes, haha.

 

...and from skeeter. You'd more expect (from his avatar) something like, "...Now fatty, he's a helluva guy but he sweats like a dancing mule. He likes to hang out at checker gas with the chets he knew from high school..." But ya gotta forgive him if he hesitates.

 

Im no expert either. Been riding since 1971. More of an expert on Huskys, pentons and macios from the 70's and 80's. I bought the bike and jacket at a harley dealer, a snap fell off the jacket within a month and under examination found the made in china lable. Said Harley Davidson on the back with a large eagle as well. I have no idea how I missed it when I bought it. I guess I just took it for granted it was made in the USA. I cant prove that the evolution motor was designed by Suzuki but it been brought up many times by many different sources and has metric bolts in it from what Ive heard and seen.

 

my brothers harley is quick... giant engine, low to the ground and it pulls HARD in very gear. My butt slides back on the seat every time I hot rod his bike.
We drag race a little and my bike does not have a chance.

 

I have rode 4 distinctly different kinds of Harley from a wide glide to a bare bones scary to ride chopper. None of them are anywhere near as fast as my maxim. The only time I wondered was the first 6 feet off the line but very quickly that changed. Stump pulling torque but you have to shift too much, I was shifting into second and this 1200 was shifting into third and was about 100 feet behind me. But each to there own I know some Harley guys that are cool one guy even told me he bought one so he would have something to work on when it broke. Have you ever watched the special on the V-rod from Discovery channel? Watch it and compare some of the high tech stuff they did to make this bike so cool that Yamaha did with the V-max in 1985. And I believe the V-rod motor was designed by Porsche?! I think.

 

I don't know.....my dad has an '04 Road King Custom. Just the basic 88 cubic inch v-twin, as usual. But when we dragged we were neck-at-neck when he had a little head start. I did like how my $600 bike kept up with his $20,000+ bike, however. My uncle did say that Dad's bike sounded "a little loud" (wink, wink) to which I replied "So you didn't hear my bike?" and he replied "HELL NO!" I will be investing in a 4-into-1 exhaust this season...

 

Whats a harley

 

Not just Harleys, I have a thing against most engines that are less than 4 cylinders. It seems to me that an inline-4 would be the smoothest and most reliable common motorcycle engine today. Otherwise you have concepts like inertia forcing the engine to work against itself. It may make good low-end torque, but it also spends less than half of the day in power stroke.

All I need now is the money for that radial engine bike I've been meaning to build. Just gotta get someone I know to part with a Wright R-1820 engine...

 

Two completely different animals. I have a xj650, and I have a Harley heritage softail. If I want to zip around town or play around on fairly short rides I'll take the xj. If I'm going on a ride to Daytona I'll take the Harley.
I reach for another gear on the Harley occasionally out on the road......So you can imagine how many times I hunt another gear on the xj. As I said earlier....two completely different animals....but I enjoy both. Yes, Porsche
did do a large part in developing the v- rod.

 

I couldnt agree more with this one!! I used to swear I would never ride one of those over priced, noisy, slow things. Then I rode one......Then I bought one.......Then I bought a nicer one.........Now I want a bigger nicer one!!

If you do the wrenching yourself and buy the parts online its not that expensive, But god help you if you take it into the local Harley shop!!! They will take all the money in your pocket and the lint too if they can get it!!! Fricken crooks those guys.

The only other sh@$ty thing is that you have to deal with all the doctors and lawyers going through their mid life crises, trying to relate to you. Listen guys take the Harley shirt, hat, jacket, necklace, helmet, sunglasses, socks, boots and tough guy bandanna off and then we can try to communicate!! We get it.........YOU RIDE A HARLEY.

Thats the worst thing about rideing a Harley hands down.

Are they really that slow though? yes...... But Cadillac's are not meant for speed

 

LOL bug. You can take 5 or 6 good guys and pu them in matching vests. Then you've got 5 or 6 a@#hol#@ s. Lot of truth there.

 

Don't completely knock them they can be made to run. A friend of mine had an 883 change over to 1200 big cams 12.5 compression was a very fast harley. Ran right with a friend of mines v65 sabre and 1000j kawasaki he couldn't take the sabre but if he got the jump sabre couldn't run him down to over 100. It also had a problem it had to run on av gas.
I don't own one but have respect for them.
BUGEATER how can you compare a harley to a Cadillac Have you seen the new caddys they are in the performance world now. Sorry i know the big bikes motors are rubber mounted But any motorcycle that will shake the fizz out of your beer should not be compared to a caddy lol. I love to pull up to a light in the car and look at some of them when everything on the bike is shaking to the point its blurry. They are not all that way

 

What is your $600 bike? Harley has torque but no zip, they feel pretty fast but my 750 cleans up on them when attempts have been made. Well not the v rod.

 

The little sporty's are rubber mounted too now! Mine is not its part of the enjoyment in it. Its a pretty bad ass feeling to have that thing rumbling under ya. Its an odd sense of pride to have to tighten everything up on your bike after a long ride or bragging about how you just rode from Vancouver to Sturgis and cant feel your ass anymore!! Not for everyone sure......but definitely for me! And when you have some old guy come up and he tells you "I rode one in the war and blah blah blah" and you see the look in his face... there is a mutual understanding there that cant be explained.

cutlass79500, You missed my analogy, I suppose I ment the old caddy's, you know...the boats. Harleys are not meant to be race bikes and in my opinion the V rod was the wrong direction but like the caddy everyone has to adjust to the markets needs.

 

OK, I'll buy what you are saying, but tell me, why is it that Honda, Yamaha, Suzuki and more of the Japaneese bike makers are imitating the Harleys, not only in looks, but in the sound. Honda first began making their bikes to look like Harleys in, or around 1974. Next came the imitation of the sound.
They did it for those that really wanted a Harley but could not afford one. Granted, a Harley is not as fast as some of the metric bikes, but that was not the intent to begin with. I have a Yamaha XJ750 Maxim. It is a very good running and handling bike. I also have a 1984 Honda V65 Magna, two 1985 Honda V65 Magnas, a 1985 V65 Sabre, two 83 Honda V65 Magnas, a 1985 Honda VT1100 Shadow and a 2007 Harley Davidson FDGWG Dyna Wide Glide.
The Dyna Wide Glide is 1540cc (96 cubes) handles in slow tight turns excellently and has extremely good balance, looks good, sounds good and gets a lot of attention every time I ride it. I have had people call out from the sidewalks when I stop at a stop light, "Beautiful bike". Problem is that I owe $7500 on it.
You want speed, the V65 Magna held the Guiness book of world records from 1983 - 1986 as being the fastest production bike straight out of the crate at 10.2 seconds and top speed of 172 MPH. I have not and will not run it a WOT, I like to think I have more sense than that. The V65 Sabre runs like a scalded dog also. My VT1100 Shadow is very comfortable, handles well and is pretty fast. I have not run it hard to find out.
There is a reason why the metric bikes were made to imitate the Harleys, if you don't know why now no use to try and explain. Getting back to the original question, If you wiped out a big Harley it is because most Harley riders on the street don't ride hard. I prefer to hear my Harley lug in the lower RPM range because I like the sound (unlike some, but apparently a lot do like it or they would not buy a Harley imitation). They are an American tradition. But, this is a Country (so far) that everyone has a right to choose how they want the wind in their face.
Now, getting back to the original question. Think about it, do you want to try and stop a half ton of steel on two wheels at 120 MPH? Big difference between a Harley and a 400+ pound bike on take off and stopping. Not to mention that most Harley riders have already gone through your stages and have decided to tone things down a bit and exercise some responsibility. I really don't know any Harley riders that race from stop light to stop light.
A bike does NOT have to go above the mid 5000 RPM range to be fun to ride, the only requirement is that you get wind in your face. Another thing to consider, no one has to be a "Buy American at all cost", but that is why the Chinese are quickly on their way to totally controlling the USA, and another reason why nothing is made in the USA. Enough from me.

 

Re: Buying American.

There's a lot of people that would like to have another option, and right now if you want a sport bike or a standard or a dual-purpose or dirt bike or ATV or even a scooter, you can't buy one made in America. The Japanese and British have models that compete with Harley, why doesn't Harley have models to compete with them?

I really do wish Harley would open up their product line a bit. They just don't have very many different models, and they're not all THAT different to begin with. I hope they take a cue from Triumph and start building a vast array of motorcycles for different types and different purposes. Instead, they got rid of Buell, the closest thing they had to variety in their product line. IMO, they should have just put "Harley" on the side of them.

I just don't understand the company I guess....you would think that branching out would be a good business decision.

 

Misc thoughts on the subject based on experience tru the years.........

A 4 cam OHV can be made to run as hard as one has $s to spend, the experience to screw it together & most importantly a Rider that understands what has been built and what it will and won't do........The harder they run, the shorter the fuse......

V-Toads.....rode one once, not interested in riding another anytime soon.......

Big Twins are well.....Big Twins.....Ya either love em or ya don't

Real Sportsters have Iron cylinder heads.........Iron bikes for Iron Riders with fire in the gut....................my how things have changed

The current Nitro twins are based on a solid block-offset cylinder-solid crank (YES) 4-Cam OHV developed from the Top Fuel wars of the past 50yrs....Currently the quickest and fastest N/A motorcycle in the 1/4 mile on the planet is using one of these engines.......Not one HD part in em.........These things are REAL FAST!

Made in America....They were at one time, just a corp product currently.....

Buell S-1 Lightning...( Tube frame).......HOT ROD!.... and they go round corners & stop too.....Build the engine to your taste ( refer to first entry) & you have a secondary road / rain bike whithout peer...........my next project when the 7/11 is finished.......Will it take a Busa in a straight line?....doubtful......

does it matter?......

Not to me......

And THAT is the bottom line.....Motorcycles are a Cowboy thing....Build what ya like & ride the wheels off it.....Ignore the team/borg collective/mutual admiration types, they will return to the couch & the telly soon enough

 

IMHO I dont feel like spending 20k plus for a stock bike regardless. I wouldnt even do that with a car for the most part. A prime example of something I do not understand about harley guys(at least the ones I know) like my dad and brother, they got an 05 low rider and an 06 heritage softail, rode for a year or two and have done nothing but let them sit since. And they both payed 20k each. While my xj is ridden almost everywhere by me but I havent been riding as much lately because I have some issues that need to be taken care of before I go out of state with it or anywhere outside the city(oil leak, jets, front brake rebuild of EVERYTHING, spare TCI) But once I get all of that done I probably wont get off of the bike. Another thing is price. A 87 sporty frame for like 1500?I bought my bike completly running and driving(needed tires) for 950. Why are they so ungodly expensive?

 

The vibration is why you always see the girl on the back of the harley!

It's like comparing apples + oranges. Different bikes have different purposes. IMO, its image over function. Not much different than comparing a busa to a gold wing... or choosing a bike to go cross country.... would you take a kawisaki eliminator 125 or a road king custom?

The one thing that annoys me is the weekend warriors who (think they) are old biker dudes cause they got a harley. I got a guy down the street that rides his harley an hour or 2 a day on the weekend., but only if the weather is nice. Then he spends 6 hours washing and polishing....

 

Part of the reason, they can be. As long as people (including my own mother, she bought a Sportster) are willing to pay that much, HD will make money.

Meanwhile, I didn't want my wife to spend much more than a grand for my bike, so I found a decent XJ and talked the guy down to a grand even. Same theory, just in reverse.

 

Have an 82 XJ650RJ from new and still really like it. Never thought I would ever like cruisers, but now also own an 1100 V-Star with the Virago engine. Harley makes a nice bike, but they cost too much for me; seem to have a number of owners who have them to say they own one, versus because they are hard-core riders (look how many are for sale with ulta-low miles).

That said, when I rode from the east coast to Colorado years ago, we mostly saw Gold Wings and Harleys, so they do have folks that love to ride too.

 

Ride what ya' want to ride. Great movie tho... :lol:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFqxYg9EuhQ

 

My '82XJ or my '74 Ironhead Sporty.....I wouldn't consider either one a fast or slow bike, they both go fast enough to kill me. They both are a pain in the ass to find parts for and parts cost roughly the same. One is finicky about the gas I put in it the other will devour anything I put in it. They both draw attention and I'm constantly being asked questions about them. The late model and big twin Harley riders snub me no matter which one I'm on but then again so do the crotch rockets. Its not the bikes, it's the a-holes on them.

 

Oh man...sometimes I wish we could "like" posts!

 

My first bike when I was much younger was a 250 Harley sprint which I totally modified. I had a great time with that bike but over the years I have had many others including yamaha's, Honda's, BMW, Triumph 650 Bonneville and others. I personally believe that each bike is an expression in one way or another of the individual which rides it. Harley's are great but as I have learned their are many great bikes to say the least. The nice thing with the XJ's is that the individual can pretty much make it just about anything his little heart desires, a very adaptable machine but in truth I would still prefer an American made bike if I could afford one, like a classic bike. Each to their own tastes, I in one way or another like most of them. grunt007, XJ750 SecaR (81), Mi.