Total Motorcycle Community Forums

It's no surprise to me that opinions are so widely varied on the "new" XR1200X (designed for the 2008 Euro market)

SlingVTR understands perfectly: It's EMBARASSING. as a sport model.

I suspect anyone seeing them on the racetrack would be enlightened. The XR1200 support race classes for the superbike series in the USA and Canada are back again, (and we had 883 Sportster and Buell stuff in the past as well). Eric and Ben Bostrom were dirt track guys who raced 883s. I remember later seeing one of the Bostrom's riding SMOKING FAST when "testing the waters" of 750 Superport on a CBR600. The guy was heads above the others riders. But back to the 883 class --- Laguna Seca back in the early '90s. They were loud like Nascar, but slow. The racing was nose-to-tail, and Laguna is very tight/slow circuit, and a best case for showcasing slow bikes, but engines expired often. Oil containment was a problem. They soiled the track and were a detriment to other race classes because of this.

Harley's big marketing budget works --- race promoters and sanctioning bodies are eager to please companies with open wallets. This is probably the ONLY reason that they are on the track. And people will race anything, including lawn tractors. Even 20 years ago the race hogs were way below par. That was the 883 Sportster class then - probably because the lower-output engine was more reliable than the XR1000 (if it existed back then in production trim). The Sportster engine and frame are OLD OLD OLD.

The 23 second difference in lap time on a typical circuit, say with a 1:30 lap-time is so unbelievably huge, ESPECIALLY when comparing a normal street guy on a VTR1000, (NOT a VTR1000SP/RC51 as I fathom from his posting "my vtr" and the info in the avatar) "than the fastest XR all weekend" being RACED by professional, paid, athletic 20+ year veteran ex-WorldGP/WorldSBK/NationalSBK riders like MacKenzie and McWilliams on the XR. Sooo it's is EVEN MORE ASTOUNDINGLY pathetic for the XR. It means the difference in lap-times is probably closer to 35 or 40-seconds a lap!!

A stock Ninja 250 would blow the doors off an XR1200 by a good margin too, or an OLD Suzuki SV650. Way more advanced frame, engine, rims, tires, etc. Sure the XR has been updated - but by how much? That Evolution engine dates back to 1984 (i think) --- I dont care what suspension is bolted to that frame, it's 1970/1980 street bike technology. A 1960 vintage Norton Manx will probably smoke the thing too because it's not dragging an extra 150 pounds of steel around the track. Sportbike builders know the most important adage for roadracing is LIGHT is RIGHT.

The sportster frame worked as a dirt track racer because the traction is much lower on dirt compared with a road circuit. Dirt flat-track racing doesnt stress the chassis nearly as much. The XR750 was designed for dirt track and had a long history mainly because it was the only bike used for dirt-track racing, which is largely an American only sport which in turn is completely unappreciated by Europeans and Japanese who have a long history of roadracing (both on closed-circuits and open-roads). Kenny Roberts smoked Harley on the dirt tracks with the wild Yamaha TZ700/750 roadracer when "set up" for dirt-tracks and the TZ was quickly banned.

The efforts and skills Erik Buell applied in tackling a sportbike using ANY Harley engine is under appreciated. The magnitude of his 20+ years of effort is pretty astounding! Buell designed some magnificent solutions yet it wasnt until he was able to have Rotax design the 1125 engine (a design itself based upon the earlier Aprilia RSV1000 engine Rotax made), that he finally found a satisfactory package. I must admit the easly Firebolt's were very cool street-fighters, but that is as close to a pure sportbike as he really ever got. Engineering a work of art from opposing worlds -- flaws and all. Very cool for a street bike.

I never see XRs on the street. They probably do not sell well here. Harley owners and Harley dealers do not understand sport bikes at all. They understand cruisers, choppers, baggers... custom and chrome, and touring bikes. This is partially why even a miracle man like Buell failed for Harley in the end. But really I think Harley failed Buell. Most every other manufacturer, including Hyosung builds a much better sport bike. Sportbike riders want performance not dead weight.

But as in cars, even a 1955 Chev Nomad is no match for an AC Cobra or a race bred Ford GT40.

Here's a pic of a classic XR750 dirt tracker. This is what an XR is supposed to look like and many aftermarket firms have made nice dirt track replica XR street bikes over the years. Harley is late to the game and missed the mark by 20 years+ especially if one were to even hope to compare it to ANY sport bike built in the last 20 years. Those thick-headed apes at Harley have learned nothing from Buell, but lucky for them they have cruisers down 100%

I was seriously thinking about buying this bike a couple of years ago. I may be somewhat tempted again if they come out with the X in orange. They need to do something about the weight and the anemic power however. I mean why does this thing weigh twice as much as the XR750?

Regardless I still voted awesome because I like it!

I found out a dealer about 100-200km from where I am is having demo rides tomorrow on the new Harley. A guy I work with has a TourGlide (PowerGlide?) (something-Glide? it's a touring rig) and he thinks the XR1200 is cool. I wouldnt mind riding a Nightster or something with a springer front-end to see what they are like... and I could take an XR for a spin too... might go check it out...

no orange/black, weird. maybe canadian colors are different.

Seeing that you have a Hypermotard, i cant see any way any Harley can touch it, other than a road-legalized VR1000. I rode a friends Hypermotard a few years ago and loved the torque from 0-10-grand... (linear and broad) power like a V-Max in a light-weight chassis. Reminded me of how great the original Suzuki TL1000S was... but the Motard ergos are a bit too upright and footpegs are too far forward. Needs a bit of a forward canted position just to attempt to keep the thing from monoing everywhere, etc..

QuietMonkey wrote: Seeing that you have a Hypermotard, i cant see any way any Harley can touch it, other than a road-legalized VR1000. I rode a friends Hypermotard a few years ago and loved the torque from 0-10-grand... power like a V-Max in a light-weight chassis.

The torque curve on the DS1100 engine is nowhere that broad. It's not that strong down low and it runs out of steam at high rpm. The midrange thrust is phenomenal however. Not to sound like a cliché but it has tons of "real world power". Which means it's got the kind of powerband that makes you feel like a hooligan and laugh out loud as you twist the throttle.
The bike has nowhere even close to the power of a V-Max, probably less than half. It is afterall an antique relic, a 2 valve air cooled L-Twin. That being said, I think the DS1100 is arguably the "perfect motorcycle engine". I think you probably know what I mean by that.

To clarify:

As I recall I mentioned to him that I thought it was pretty solid all the way through the powerband but it did hit harder by 4000 and I remember not looking at the tach beyond that because the front end was constantly hovering in 2nd and 3rd while not trying to loft the thing -- i tend to work at keeping bikes down to get solid launches. It's hard to recall with perfect hindsight, but I am sure it was still pulling hard above 8 or 9. I may have short shifted knowing the torque curve would easily carry it. But I tend to rev bikes (roadracing old-school two-strokes, then FZR400 - 14000 RPM, R6 - 15000+RPM, although I have had the polar opposite street bike, SRX600 - 6500RPM). At the time I rode the HyperMotard I had (strangely enough) an old and dog slow triple, which makes things a little tougher to judge, and hadnt ridden a decent fast bike since borrowing a 2006 Gixxer6, but I think my sense of real speed is well honed, having roadraced an R6, etc. and other smaller displacement bikes. And having just ridden the Harley XR1200 today, I can tell, for sure that my sense of speed is not that far out of wack... more on XR later. Some bikes have very mellow but wide powerbands, like a CBR900RR, and others rev much more freely. I also had a friends Monster 800 (kinda disappointing) to compare the Hypermotard with.

I'm not comparing horsepower numbers directly with a Vmax (145 claimed at the time) and I suspected you mightve thought that by the quick post I did), but I am comparing the linear nature of the power that nice solid thunk and the constant thrust that a Vmax gives right off idle and all the way through the revs with V-boost being a bit of an advantage around 6Grand. And despite what many people say about Vmax's they weigh a ton and dont accelerate as fast as people think. It's just that they accelerate everywhere. I was roadracing at the time, and didnt find the Vmax to be as fast as most people, I just loved it's easy nature of going fast, the torque like a muscle car.

The Vmax (note: I am also talking about the original 1985-2007 Vmax not Gen-2 Vmax) was also geared very low -- something like 145 MPH, and the Hypermotard is likely also geared quite low, so I would bet the quarter-mile times are probably really close to a Vmax, which I think did 10.9s or something, and current 600s can probably match or better it. I think I will go look at a Vmax and a Hypermotard review since I dont really spend time being a numbers guys much anymore.

note: I was referring to the Suzuki 1996(?) TL1000S not the DL1000. The TL has 130 genuine horsepower and was a freaking awesome street bike-- people (including journos) complained that the front end was sketchy (becuz it wasnt on the ground you idiots!) so Suzuki detuned the bike in 1997 or 1998 changing the ignition box, etc.... anyway. Suzuki built a great bike there.

In other news: it turned out I didnt have to go to the Harley demo ride in Kamloops and due to some lucky connections was able to ride an XR1200X locally on a nice sunny day, and also ride a couple other Harleys. The only other interesting one ridden (since I rarely ride cruisers) was the Sportster "48". I'll write about the XR1200 tomorrow morning. To be brief - I enjoyed the 48, but the XR was dissappointing for a number of reasons. The Hypermotard is fairly archaic (I've even ridden Pantah 650s and 750s), being air-cooled has huge disadvantages for sure, so it makes a great comparison to a XR1200. If you think a Pantah is old ---haa! Harley wins again I think... i better go check the actual dates, because a 1930 Scott Flying Squirrel seems like a more advanced design than the Sportster.

Rode the XR1200X: 30 minute stint, briefly down highway, onto a little backroad loop and back into town for some urban feel.

To be brief, this bike is 50% styling exercise, 20% sport, 30% standard.

A 2011 bike that feels a lot like 1981 bolted to 1990. Old air-cooled, push-rod power plant design has been updated a bit and mounted well enough to be decently smooth with some torque, and character (that's character not horsepower - it doesnt have enough of that for a 1200).

It starts to put out decent power just as it hits that old-skool redline of about 6.5K rpm, while a Ducati Hypermotard is really flying until at least 8000 rpm. The seat/bar/footpeg placement was like "we think it goes like um --this?-- but we also think you are short and like to ride cruisers most of the time. We forgot all the smart things Buell showed us." Really.

It's like H-D woke up in a hospital bed with amnesia and just plum lost the last 20 years and went back to 1980, built a 20-year old standard, that's as long as a cruiser, with a ridiculously wide engine (oh sorry, engine, primary drive and transmission assembly - because "we think we had it right in 1965 or for sure by 1970, so we didnt want to make it any smaller in the last 40 years"

Chassis:

Nothing definitive because it was a loaner, but at slow speeds (<120km/h sweepers) it's stable like old Ducati's -- probably due to the lowwwww center of gravity and because it's longish at 60 inches and doesn't have complete junk (for suspension) attached to it. But I didnt try to make it do anything special. I rode it like a standard. Even a Monster is only 57-inches and pure sports are 55 or 54 inches typically.

The braking felt about 1990 era... good enough for a street ride but nothing like even my old 1999 R6 for power or light feel, and a light-year away from the one-finger Brembos on the Ducati Monster 800 I rode a few years back, or the superlative brakes on the last decent real sportbike I rode, a 2006 GSXR600. The Harley is heavy and the control feel probably mimics what Harley riders are accustomed to. Nothing "bad" about it necessarily, just *nothing* like more recent stuff from other sportbike manufacturers.

Styling: Looked better in person, with the aluminum exhaust cans rather than "black black and more black" in the photos i've seen.

Ergo's: No good for me. Far too low a seat height. Maybe a 5'6 person would fit best. Standard bar not bad, but too high given the low seat height.

Clutch was fine, but it's not like I really tested it. The shifting has a long throw, is pretty chunky, but no problems. Downshifts fine with a little blip, and I play-shifted more than normal for kicks. Sounds good.

As for power, I liked it for what it is... a street standard, not a sportbike. It's time to shift after 6000-6500 although i think is 7000... when you are just getting to the point that you are thinking hey this thing is coming on really well... where a Hypermotard is saying no problem, buddy, i can keep pulling like a supercharged freight-train for a couple thousand more. The Harley power-to-weight probably gives acceleration comparable to the Monster 800, but does it differently because of the torque, giving better low-end and no revs. Of course 50% more displacement, will do that. I prefer the power characteristics of the XR1200 over the Monster 800, but that is the only part of the bike which is better. The powertrain packaging, etc are nowhere near any current bike i can think of.. one of the worst charcteristics is the wide wide engine/primary-drive/transmission. The top of the bike/fuel-tank area is narrow, but your legs are another 12 inches apart down low, so you cant grip the tank properly and use you abs to gain leverage for steering inputs. It sucks. Again not a proper sort bikpe, just a standard bike that's a bit flawed... some people may like it for it's odd character.

Price: $13,000 Canadian

For a reasonable comparison:

The 2011 Ducati Monster 1100 Evo (another old air-cooled design) has another 10-hp claimed, the same torque (although at higher revs), and 150 lbs less weight claimed. That 150lbs is about 3/4 the weight of a 250f dirt bike (without giving you the extra 30hp that that 250f weight needs to haul it around fast). The Monster retails for $500 more and judging from previous experience and current specs will wals all over the XR1200X which needs a severe Revolution rather than a 20 year old evolution.

The Harley belief is that it's a real "hot-rod". It's not, but it's *alright* engine wise, just not anything really great. If you are a normal Harley owner, you might believe that after riding there cruisers or touring bikes. If you are something else and like sport bikes, every other manufacturer out there has something better (some of them 10 or 20 years ago). And even in Harley terms the XR is a little weaker in the low-end than others.. a bit of a trade-off for the added top-end. Probably has some Screamin' Eagle kit that you could install in any other Sportster engine. I guess if you want a Harley standard then you want a Harley, otherwise, meh.

For a value comparison:

For the money, compare it to say a Yamaha FZ8 (or some other Japanese bike) that will eat it for lunch. In Canada it's $10.500. So go buy a set of slip-on mufflers, new riding gear, and some other goodies if you like.

Nothing fancy but it is cool!

I voted fail.

Not sure who HD is marketing this bike to, but it is too radical for HD's traditional market demographic and not radical enough for the younger crowd. Plus when I first looked at the pictures, the first thing that popped in my mind was, oh look, a late 70's early 80's Honda 750 CBF or the like.