Road King.. a misnamed tourer
#101
10-21-2011, 06:41 AM
Road Captain
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: under the bridge on the sunrise side
Posts: 570
Received 106 Likes
on
57 Posts
I myself am not much into labels. Heck when I was a younger man I used to think nothing of jumping on my bowling ball Superglide and riding from my home in So Cal up to your beautiful island for a couple day stay. I think you can use just about any bike for long distance touring, I used to know a fella that rode a 250 Yamaha all over the country. I gues it really doesn't matter what you call it as long as you get out and ride it, after all thats what they were all designed for was'nt it?
#103
10-21-2011, 06:51 PM
They do ride like a dream, are very nice looking, I'm happy with mine and have ridden the heck out of it since making the right decision to buy it. I like the color of yours by the way.Dene
#104
10-22-2011, 09:53 AM
3rd Gear
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Denver
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ultimate touring machine!
First of all, I own one and love it but here are my thoughts. Last June I traded in my little '08 Dyna WG on a new '11 RK Standard. I liked the Dyna but for my age, (51), the WG was too much of a shakey hay wagon and I opted to go for a King. It is such a huge step upwards in the suspension department I can't believe the ride now.Now Harley classes this as a touring bike. Do you think that it should be in that class? To me, a hard core touring labelled bike should offer more protection. I put on a set of Harley vented lowers to keep my feet reasonably dry in rain storms but to me, a touring bike should be like a big Beamer or an Ultra or my other bike which is a Goldwing, they all offer cargo carrying capabilities, (somewhat more than the King), but also offer protection from the elements, hence the batwing etc. I appreciate and understand it has air suspension and somewhat of a windshield but a "Touring" bike, I'm not sure.
I am sold on the Road King, hook line and sinker! Harley has something for anybody and everybody, you just have to land on the bike that best suits your wants, needs and personal preferrence, that's all. Now shut up and ride!
Gonzo
#105
10-22-2011, 08:25 PM
Intermediate
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with that. The OP had nothing bad to say about his RK. There is no argument that it's the KING. I'm happy knowing my classic isn't a "hard-core" touring bike, but can be if I fork out some extra $$$.
#106
10-22-2011, 10:04 PM
#107
10-23-2011, 12:43 AM
Elite HDF Member
RKs are great bikes. 3 friends have/had them. Even Sonny Barger wrote it was the best overall bike.
I get the versatility, but putting on a fairing - how long does that take and does it have tunes? Quick electrical connects?
It's not a bike for a music lover. A friend of mine just bought a Dyna T-Sport and loves the lighter weight and actually softer ride vs. the 100k he put on his '99 RK.
I find it funny people comparing a softail to a touring bike. No comparison to the rubber mount engine, suspension travel and iso-drive.
To me, a windshield vs. a fairing is the same thing, but the fairing offers the music, gauges, etc. which is great.
And some don't want white walls, chrome bumpers, auxillary lights and leather bags either.
I definitely respect the choice of any Harley Touring bike. Looks have a lot to do with choices.
Says the guy with a massive windshield on his bike. Hilarious. 
Provided you have lowers and never stop moving. Even then it's not 100%.
That is a total bullshit statement.
I get the versatility, but putting on a fairing - how long does that take and does it have tunes? Quick electrical connects?
It's not a bike for a music lover. A friend of mine just bought a Dyna T-Sport and loves the lighter weight and actually softer ride vs. the 100k he put on his '99 RK.
I find it funny people comparing a softail to a touring bike. No comparison to the rubber mount engine, suspension travel and iso-drive.
To me, a windshield vs. a fairing is the same thing, but the fairing offers the music, gauges, etc. which is great.
And some don't want white walls, chrome bumpers, auxillary lights and leather bags either.
I definitely respect the choice of any Harley Touring bike. Looks have a lot to do with choices.
That is a total bullshit statement.
#108
10-23-2011, 01:42 AM
Provided you have lowers and never stop moving. Even then it's not 100%.
You're correct, it's not 100% but darn near as long as you're moving anyway. I put some lowers on my RK in hopes of staying reasonablly dry but my knees took a hit. My friends with the Ultra's don't seem to get wet as much due to the batwing I would think.
You're correct, it's not 100% but darn near as long as you're moving anyway. I put some lowers on my RK in hopes of staying reasonablly dry but my knees took a hit. My friends with the Ultra's don't seem to get wet as much due to the batwing I would think.
#109
10-23-2011, 02:56 AM
First of all, I own one and love it but here are my thoughts. Last June I traded in my little '08 Dyna WG on a new '11 RK Standard. I liked the Dyna but for my age, (51), the WG was too much of a shakey hay wagon and I opted to go for a King. It is such a huge step upwards in the suspension department I can't believe the ride now.Now Harley classes this as a touring bike. Do you think that it should be in that class? To me, a hard core touring labelled bike should offer more protection. I put on a set of Harley vented lowers to keep my feet reasonably dry in rain storms but to me, a touring bike should be like a big Beamer or an Ultra or my other bike which is a Goldwing, they all offer cargo carrying capabilities, (somewhat more than the King), but also offer protection from the elements, hence the batwing etc. I appreciate and understand it has air suspension and somewhat of a windshield but a "Touring" bike, I'm not sure.
Here's mine,
touring mode:
Cruising mode:
