Never said that FI was outdated. What I said was that the number guys on this forum saying that a FI system that runs rough, dies and refires on it's own was "normal" shows that Harley has issues with it that need to be fixed. That stuff isn't "normal" on FI systems on cars.

And by the way, Honda had the first fuel injected streetbike back in '82. BMW had the first ABS motorcycle in '89. Yamaha had the first "fly by wire" throttle system on the R6 in '06, and Bridgestone has been making dual compound tires for street sportbikes since '88. Also, dual compound road-racing tires have been common place since '84. Just because Harley finally joined the band-wagon doesn't mean they "helped develop" those technologies.

 

As much as I agree with you archangel I think you may be wasting your time. This guy is clearly one of the brainwashed HD loyalists and all of the facts, logic, and truths in the world aint going to convince him that HD motorcycles have flaws or that they are one of the least innovative mfg. out there.
Some of those flaws are endearing while others range from annoying to completely unacceptable.

 

Of course not, and I never accused you of calling FI outdated. What you did say was: Of course, if that were true, they wouldn't have bothered with fuel injection. Nor belt drive. Nor ABS. Nor fly-by-wire. Nor the VRSC. But they did all those things, so from your very first post in this thread, there are plenty of counterexamples to prove you're talking out your ***.

But then you went on to write:

As we discussed: yep, wrong.

Yep, wrong.

Yep, still wrong.

Look, it's not that we don't understand your point. We can comprehend these words you're typing. The problem is, you're wrong so fecking often, nobody cares what you think: your credibility is shot, your complaints are overstated, you're ignoring the solutions (or were, in the case of Buell)... and the only thing you can do in your own defense is to keep rehashing the old stereotypes that ceased to be true back in the 1980s. That's ridiculous whining. It doesn't deserve more than a picture of a sad cat. So you get a picture of a sad cat.

Where are these massive numbers of people who zip-tie their side covers onto their brand-new motorcycles and insist we just have to put up with it because they're American? If it's as often as you say, you should be able to point me to five of them, right off the top of your head. Turns out, Harley has MTBF data. They tell us how much money they make off their extended warranty programs right there in their financial statements. If Harleys were as unreliable as you say, would their warranty program be profitable? Would they even bother to offer one?

Go look at the forum subject listings again. I do see some mechanical help questions, addressing parts that wear out or age. I see some requests for help with those old-fashioned carbs you love so much. And those are to be expected. But for every post like that, there are tons of picture posts and customization posts--people working on their Harleys because they want to, not because they have to.

But what fun would that be? If you're an emo kid, wrenching on your bike for fun isn't entertaining... only sitting here on the internet crying on your keyboard is entertaining. Well, good to see you can entertain yourself.

 

.357 Magnum,

Your quotes from a couple of posters on this thread really clarified my objections to the arguments presented by these two gentlemen.

The first involves the opinion that Harley is stuck in the previous century technology wise, yet clearly the Fuel Injection is a quantum leap ahead of any carbureted system. I have no earthly idea what they're talking about concerning it's just a known fact that Harley's FI shuts down and restarts all by itself, being ascribed to normal functionality that all of us with modern bikes must live with. WTF? They both agreed that, despite badmouthing Harley about being so technologically challenged, they actually prefer carburetors because it's "better" than FI. WTF?

I believe one of these gentlemen is from Washington State, the world headquarters of the greenie weenies. I sure hope word doesn't get out that one of their very own dingleberries actually states on a public forum he's in favor of internal compustion engines burning hydrocarbons with 100 year old technology and spewing the atmosphere with all those noxious greenhouse gasses.

And in my opinion, anyone with half a brain and any mechanical experience at all can see that Harley's belt drive system is lightyears ahead of anything else ever marketed. Chains are noisy, a cleaning nightmare (greenie weenie wax or not), require constant adjustment and, surprise, can leave you swinging in the breeze. Just ask anyone who's ever lost a master link while on a road trip (happened to me back in 1977 on a trip from Birmingham. Al. to Jacksonville, Fl. on a Kawasaki KZ400). We used to carry a spare master link in our tool kits for this exact reason. Shaft drives are relatively maintenance free but are costly to manufacture, very costly to service (bearings, u-joints and spline failures) and suffer from incurable torque loading for the more performance minded boneheads out there.

My complaint all along with this whole thread is that Captain Chaos is trying to have things both ways (i.e. Cruiser ergonomics with Rice Burning Crotch Rocket performance for free or close to it). And Veritas.Archangel can't figure out whether all the technological inovations Harley has built ito it's bikes are good or bad, but since Harley is an American company, they MUST be bad. Because that's just the way greenie weenie liberals think.

 

David, just for the record, I'm a pretty big fan of shaft drives, too. Both shafts and belts are a good way to get a near-zero-maintenance final drive, either one being an enormous improvement over chains for anyone off the track.

And "the track" is an important consideration here: chains still rule the track because they can be easily reconfigured on race day, with different-sized sprockets and pulleys, and chains can be shortened and lengthened to fine-tune performance at the last second. So chains have their place, and I'm not anti-performance or anti-racing. It's just that Harley builds bikes for real-world riding, not track performing, and what's good for the latter is often horrible for the former. Hence, belts and shafts are superior for Harley's intended use.

Frankly, I'm happy that Harley, Victory, and Yamaha have standardized on belts, and that even Suzuki is starting to come around with its lower-end Boulevards. While I like shafts, belts give you better flexibility in customizing: it's far easier to bolt up a different pulley to a custom wheel than it is to find a custom wheel with exactly the right gear pattern to match your shaft drive. One of the things I value about Harleys is ease of customization, so that makes the belt the best choice for me. I'm certainly glad for Harley's early adaptation of new materials like Kevlar and carbon fiber in making our lives just that little bit easier.

 

HD went to FI to meet current EPA standards,, which is interesting seeing as Yamaha Royal Stars are still carbed and meet current EPA standards.

A properly tuned carb, can make as much power and run as well as FI. I just is not as fuel efficient or as clean emissions wise.

 

Gents, great idea, I'm sure someone has considered this at HD but HD is not a FAST bike period.

This bike, this manufacturer this type of bike is for cruising, mine is and I knew it when I bought it.

Admit it
You want it
Harley
Enjoy it