Why are Harleys cool?

[HYPERR]

I have a problem with your initial premise, that they are cool. Harleys were a lot cooler when they were made by the same company that makes bowling balls.

Pans > Shovels

[BRUMBEAR]

[HYPERR]

LOL repost but still funny and I haven't seen it for a while.

Buells are totally cool!
My favorite Buells are the Tubers from the mid 90s to 2002.

[BRUMBEAR]

This is a few pics from the weekend
http://www.njbuellowners.com/forum/view ... &start=110
We ended up having
3 tubers
1 xb9
1 xb12scg
3 1125 R
2 1125CR
1 GSXR 1000
1 ZX14 ( could not stay on the little roads we ride headed home)
1 xb 12 xt
1 xb12X
I actually loved my HARLEY ENGINE BUELL but I sold it once I got the rotax engine CR
I don't hate HD I just love sticking it to em
You wanna see a bunch of WTF are they faces when we stop it's actually kind of funny. I always get who makes Buell? Ducati? I usually just say SURE!!!

[HYPERR]

I actually loved my HARLEY ENGINE BUELL but I sold it once I got the rotax engine CR

I love the tubers when it had the sportster engine and you could still see it before they started hiding it.

[JackoftheGreen]

Indulge me while I advance a theory...

I don't intend to start a flame war either, and I realize I'm a little off-topic since I'm actually suggesting a reason Harley's *aren't* cool, but this is a question I've spent a bit of time thinking about. I know we've got a few motorcycle mechanics here on the boards, and I'm sure one of them will respond to this post and either credit or debunk my theory. Either is cool with me, because I'm genuinely curious...

Here is the extent of what I actually know about Harleys, as far as their technology and mechanics are concerned. I know that other than the V-Rod and Buells, Harleys are still air-cooled. That's all I actually *know* about the bikes.

In reviews and comparisons I've read both in print magazines and on the internet, I've been *told* that across the board, Harleys are underpowered. In comparisons with other motorcycles of comperable engine sizes, the reviews I've read have all reported less HP and slower acceleration for the HD models than their metric counterparts. So that's what I know, and what I've been told. Here's what I *think* I know.

I'm not yet a knowledgeable motorcycle mechanic, but I have a few years working on cars and I know my way around engines fairly well. So when I'm told that two engines of similar displacement have markedly different HP numbers, my first assumption is that the engine generating less power has less agressive intake, compression, and exhaust backpressure profiles than the stronger engine. I *think* this is true with HD engines -- that across the board they have lower compression ratios, cooler exhaust gases and less agressive intake characteristics (intake port size, etc) than other engines. Again, that's just what I *think*, because I've been told their engines generate less power than others of similar size.

My conclusion is, of course, that all the 'detuning' being done at HD is to keep overall engine temperatures down, which is necessary because they're all air cooled rather than liquid cooled. This begs the question -- why does Harley insist on air-cooled engine architecture? I think we can all agree that liquid cooling is fairly well vetted and can be called solid technology. The extra weight and the drag of running the pump on liquid cooled engines is more than compensated for by the power that can be gained from higher compression ratios and hotter (more restricted) exhaust valves and pipes. So when I ask myself why HD chooses to stick with air cooled engines, despite suffering from a reputation of using outdated and obsolete engine architecture, I can only come up with one answer.

It's a sound thing.

I *think* it's that simple. We all know what I'm talking about -- go outside and fire up your metric, liquid cooled bike. Let it sit and idle and just listen to it for a minute. I'm sure it sounds tough, maybe you've got performance pipes or an intake. Maybe your bike screams like a raped angel. I don't know, but one thing I do know is that, like with my bike, there's a sound or sounds under all that tough roar that doesn't sound so cool. A little rubbery whiny squeak, a whooshing and a lub-dub sorta sound. Maybe a bit of a squeal that reminds of you a 1984 Toyota Celica in reverse. We all know those sounds are there too, under our tough exhaust rumble, and we choose to ignore it or pretend it's not there. That's the sound of your coolant system shunting your 50/50 dilution of water and antifreeze through the hoses and water jackets and thermostat and radiator. It's not a great sound, but it's sure as hell the sound of efficiency.

HDs don't make those sounds, of course, and I believe that's all there is to it. You make an engine ballsier, you have to make it run hotter. If it runs hotter, you need the efficiency of liquid cooling, and if you have liquid cooling, you have a handful of sounds that detract from a throaty exhaust roar. So I *THINK* that over at HD, they're crippling their bikes and letting the metrics have their monopoly on power, just so that when an HD owner fires up his ride, he doesn't have to listen to those whiny, whooshy little squeaks and groans from a liquid coolant system. And I simply can't help but feel that, once you've willingly and happily neutered your product so it can sound cool, you've lost any street cred you might've had.

So, someone tell me if I'm on to something here, or if I'm barking up the wrong tree. If I'm wrong about why HD engines generate less HP than the metrics, can someone tell me the real reason? And can anyone suggest a practical reason HD sticks with air cooled engines?

[dr_bar]

If Harleys are under powered, it's only in stock configuration... Though I have to admit, I've come across some pretty strong pulling stock Harleys. Once you start adding on the Screamin' Eagle kits, wowser, those things are quick. So, if Harley intentionally makes them under powered, as you say, then maybe it's all for a different reason, so they can sell you the Screamin' Eagle kits...

And I could be way off base as well...

[BRUMBEAR]

Lets look at it this way an HD engine has push rods and old style valve springs on the valve train vs a Ducati which has smaller displacement but desmodici valve train (overhead cam no valve spring).
The HD motor will generate a lot of torque but will pretty much grenade at anything over 9000rpm without quite a bit of work. The desmo can run well and generate power well past 12000 rpms. A good fuel delivery system and variable timing make up other huge power differences.
The I4 engine will have very low torque unless it's a new Yamaha but will scream up to 16000rpm and keep generating power even without desmo valves but with much smaller displacement.
What it all comes down to with engines is moving air and heat is not your friend.

[BRUMBEAR]

I actually loved my HARLEY ENGINE BUELL but I sold it once I got the rotax engine CR

I love the tubers when it had the sportster engine and you could still see it before they started hiding it.

Not so much hiding it as need to keep the weight low(trilogy of tech) and eventually water cooling I gotta say the power on the CR is way snottier than on the XB but I am not really that good that I can use it all. That is why I love the XB platform the tubers are just sexy but the XB IMO was the best for handling braking adjustable suspension and not so much power that you can't use it. I smoked so many liter bikes on the back roads with my little XB in the straights they would just crush me but a ridge line or a riverbed no contest even with me being a fat old guy the young guns would just shake there heads all I can say is ride one really ride one and you will see what I mean.

[IntoTheWind]

I have a problem with your initial premise, that they are cool. Harleys were a lot cooler when they were made by the same company that makes bowling balls.

Having owned one of those (and still do), I'd say they were one of HD's (AMF) biggest pieces of crap they ever marketed. I have rebuilt or replaced most everything that came stock on it. First thing that went was the hydraulic lifters. Floated them (and screwed up the valves) the first month I had it. I became a very good HD wrench. I think cool isn't the term that is in question. Macho ... that is what it was. It was a mans bike. Took a man to start it and ride it. If you couldn't kick it over ... get a rice grinder. Of course that was then and now is now. When HD took the kick start off, they nutted the bike. I do realize this is a taboo subject these days. But ... I couldn't resist. (No I didn't read all 29 pages)