I agree the rider can make up for a bike's shortcomings.

I'm simply saying all else being equal, the front end geometry puts the Wide Glide at a disadvantage.....

I own a Wide Glide in case it's not clear. I simply know what I own and don't get offended when someone makes a valid point. If you were building a canyon carving machine, you wouldn't use the Wide Glide front end as a model. There's a reason for that.

 

I've got an 02 wide glide with 95k miles on it. I put a mustang vintage wide seat/12" pillionand 1/2" longer-than-stock Progressive rear shocks, a 90x90 front tire and I can ride further than alot of my ultra-riding friends. My only drawback is that I wish I had a bit more front brake, I can hog it down but not without effort. Other than that, I'm a 100k happy camper

 

I assumed from the screen name.

True enough....but if I was building a canyon carver, I probably wouldn't use a Fatbob either! But if you take a look at the majority of rear tires on HD's, the tread in the center is a lot more worn than the outsides.

And for what its worth, I like my 06 (looks wise) better than the FB and the "new" WG. And if I had to choose betweeen the two 2010's I would probably take the FB. But I'll be holding my old 06WG for a while!

 

LOL ......Hey man I got some sissy strips myself, but that's due to the fact that I do not ride my bike to it's mathematical limits as you pointed out. After I put the touring shocks on it, the rear end feels like mashed potatoes with a passenger. I designed my bike for comfort, looks, performance..... in that order. The bike performs well with in my riding style. I've scraped my primary, my pegs, my pipes... so don't get me wrong I push it once in awhile... but for the most part, to me my bike is a recliner with an engine..... I just cruise.

 

Good pads on those brakes in the front can make a huge diff. I installed some Lyndall Z pads and holyshit did that make a very obvious diff over the stock pads. I put em on the back too and the braking overall is markedly better.