Total Motorcycle Community Forums

That'd be interesting to see. Harley is like the antonym of cafe racer. Plus, I don't think I've ever seen a cafe racer that big.

Aftermarket build Harley Dirt-tracker


Stock 1977 Harley Cafe Racer (This is a stock harley XLCR - built only in '77 and '78 )

earwig wrote:Many people say that they know someone with a crappy unreliable Harley... what they fail to mention is that Harley is probably 20 years old with 80,000 miles on it!

Yeah. A Harley should, in theory, last forever.

Simple physics - A large engine with low horsepower experiences less stress and wear than a small engine with high horsepower.

The average "big" Harley is usually around 1400 to 1500cc and only puts out about 60 to 70HP (e.g. a Fat Boy or Soft Tail Classic). Compare that to a Yamaha FZ6 putting 98HP out of a 600cc engine.

Those big Harley engines, putting out so little power, should last a long freakin' time and be quite reliable, in theory.

Dragonhawk wrote: Those big Harley engines, putting out so little power, should last a long freakin' time and be quite reliable, in theory.

In theory communism works

In theory i could convert my car to run on propane

In theory if i studyed i could do well at math


In theory things make sense that are in theory :-p



JWF

TechBMW wrote:Stock 1977 Harley Cafe Racer (This is a stock harley XLCR - built only in '77 and '78 )

the HD cafe racer I have seen riding around town is an XLCR, looks just like this bike

Dragonhawk wrote:

earwig wrote:Many people say that they know someone with a crappy unreliable Harley... what they fail to mention is that Harley is probably 20 years old with 80,000 miles on it!

Yeah. A Harley should, in theory, last forever.

Simple physics - A large engine with low horsepower experiences less stress and wear than a small engine with high horsepower.

The average "big" Harley is usually around 1400 to 1500cc and only puts out about 60 to 70HP (e.g. a Fat Boy or Soft Tail Classic). Compare that to a Yamaha FZ6 putting 98HP out of a 600cc engine.

Those big Harley engines, putting out so little power, should last a long freakin' time and be quite reliable, in theory.

I think what you are trying to get at is the internal stress caused by the piston, connecting rod and crank as rotating mass. Well, specifically, the piston and connecting rod pressing against the bearings on the crank. When the rotational speed (RPMs) of the engine go up, the forces increase because there is less time to move the same amount of mass. This means you actually ARE causing more wear on a motor by winding it up to redline. However, this should be negated by your engine's oil, or better yet, the additive package in it, that prevents metal to metal contact.

Spinning at slow speeds doesn't give you all that much return, though. Those bigger pistons and connecting rods on the Harleys mentioned require more force than the cute little pistons/con-rods on your average 600cc sportsbike. This, of course, means they require a good amount of force to change direction, too, and we're back at square one, where both kind of bike motors' internal wear is caused by just plain running.

Don't forget the relativley new Revolution Engine....In the V-Rod, Night-Rod & Street-Rod. These engines are State of the Art, especially for Harley.

I think they are on a winner here eventually when people realize just how good they are!

I'm about to find out by actually owning a Street-Rod, so we'll see.

CentralOzzy wrote:Don't forget the relativley new Revolution Engine....In the V-Rod, Night-Rod & Street-Rod. These engines are State of the Art, especially for Harley.

I think they are on a winner here eventually when people realize just how good they are!

I'm about to find out by actually owning a Street-Rod, so we'll see.

Of course it's a good engine, it's a Porsche.

Good one Meanie...

CentralOzzy wrote:Don't forget the relativley new Revolution Engine....In the V-Rod, Night-Rod & Street-Rod. These engines are State of the Art, especially for Harley.

Funny you should bring this up. I've been having some 'intense' discussions with two of my colleagues at work who ride Harleys. My thesis is that the Revolution engine is the strongest asset Harley Davidson has, and that they're under-utilizing it as a product platform, to their long-term disadvantage. I'm probably going to catch heck for this (never stopped me yet), but IMO the StreetRod and NightRod are "niche" products, with rather limited appeal. As the baby-boomer generation ages, I think touring-related bikes will be a growth market. I would be very interested in seeing a Revolution-based version of a big touring bike -a V-Glide? (Glide-Rod?) I've heard some rumor that Triumph will market a touring version of the Rocket next year. Yamaha/Star seems to be doing very well. I think every sale of a large Yamaha/Star touring bike is a lost sale of a Harley Revolution-engined product that isn't made yet.

One of my colleagues disagrees, using the argument that basing a touring bike on the Revolution engine would somehow "offend" the traditional Harley-buying population. IMO Harley has saturated their traditional market, there's no more growth potential there, and they should be reaching out to new markets. They can keep the traditional bikes in production also to maintain their connection with that part of the market

One of my father's investment funds has Harley stock, so I got my hands on their 2005 Annual Report. They're sitting on a mountain of excess liquidity, and talking about increasing dividends. Wrong. Invest it in new product development, real new product development leveraging their strongest asset, that Revolution engine.

There's no reason Harley Davidson can't compete head-to-head with the Japanese Big 4 in the big touring market on the basis of engineering and price. They've got the platform. They've got the cash. They've licked the assembly quality control issue. They've got the brand recognition and market penetration. Have they got the will?

Just one man's opinion. Flame away, boys and girls!

Jonathan