|
I wanted a Blast but they never sold it here, that's why I got my SRX instead. Half a Sportster engine would probably have been more durable at least.
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2011 20:27
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 15:13 |
|
|
The first bike I rode substantially after getting my license was a Sportster 1200. I really enjoyed it, and it wasn't one bit scary or unpredictable. It is really, really heavy though (but stopping was alright enough on the dual disc one I rode), and the gearing is such that you have to ride around slipping the (extremely heavy) clutch at low speeds, which is surprising given how torquey the engine is. I really hate the Harley indicator system too, both the hard to reach buttons and the auto-canceling. Quite comfortable to actually just ride though, nice seat and arm position. I'm sounding negative here but I'd love to actually own one. If you do get one, I'd get one of the rubber mount ones (05+?), and I'd advise against lowering it. The ground clearance already is pretty slim, and I keep reading that the newer models are so low you keep dragging exhaust in roundabouts.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 4, 2012 18:59
|
|
|
Gay Nudist Dad posted:As for lowering it that depends a lot on the model of Sportster. There are so many varieties with different suspension setups, control mounts, and exhausts (and brakes, and seats, and...) that it's hard to make overarching statements about them. True, the one I rode was a 'sportier' one, with mid controls as well, aforementioned dual discs, and a relatively large tank, though I believe the Custom ones of the time had an even larger one. Doesn't look nearly as cool as a 48, but at least it's actually ridable. It had aftermarket shocks as well, the standard ones tended to bottom out riding two-up, don't know if they still have that issue.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 4, 2012 22:33
|
|
|
angryhampster posted:I wish I could convince MY WIFE to get an 883 Sportster. She is completely opposed to piloting a motorcycle. Riding 2-up on a Sportster tends to suck. Some kind of a back rest/sissy bar really makes all the difference on those. Without it you keep sliding back, it's horrible. Edit: And without after-market shocks they keep bottoming out 2-up too. High Protein fucked around with this message at 18:20 on Apr 3, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2012 18:17
|
|
|
An XB will probably be my next bike, hopefully next year; there's plenty of low mileage 2008 and 2009 models out there. In fact had the Blast been available here I'd probably have picked one up over my SRX600. I've always loved the look, I'll enjoy the low maintenance and I know that at least in the Sportster the engine is pretty much bullet proof, though the Sporter engine has a lower state of tune of course. I haven't been able to find anything indicating real weaknesses of the XBs other than maybe the need to reset the TPS every now and then but if yall have more information on peculiarities I'd be grateful.
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2012 20:39
|
|
|
clutchpuck posted:Buell stuff Thanks, not the first time I hear about Harleys being leaned out stock. As for the oil level, my SRX does pretty much the same thing, especially so when I didn't yet know to check the oil level with the engine warmed up (manual doesn't mention this).
|
|
#
¿
May 24, 2012 19:20
|
|
|
VikingSkull posted:So what's the overall opinion of the Fourty-Eight and Seventy-Two Sportsters? I've been looking for a first bike for a year or two, and now that my truck is paid off I think I'm ready to get one by next spring. My sister can get me a smokin' hot deal at the dealership near here, and I've more or less settled on one of those two. I know, I know, Sportster and all, but goddamn are those some sexy bikes. The 48 is beautiful but these bikes are meant for looking at, not riding. Extremely low fuel capacity, very little ground clearance (keep hearing this complaint over and over), supposedly the 48's seat gets uncomfortable after an hour and I doubt the 72 is any better. The Iron 883 has a larger tank and the Custom 1200 larger again, but I don't know about their respective ground clearances. Apparently they ditched the 883 Roadster for this year, which was the last sportster with dual front discs (the XR1200 notwithstanding). I think 2008 was the last year for the 1200 Roadster, which IMO is the best non-XR1200 sportster.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2012 16:21
|
|
|
VikingSkull posted:e- I don't like the fork style on the Iron 883, though, goddamn that just throws off the whole style of it. Those are easy enough to remove though.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2012 17:42
|
|
|
XR1200's got the oil cooled heads yeah (and an oil cooler), and I think it uses a hotter cam. Biggest performance increase probably comes from the intake and exhaust though.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2012 17:14
|
|
|
clutchpuck posted:The nice thing about motorcycling is it isn't always about lap times. I think 550lbs is fine for a street bike with a buttload of midrange like the XR has. The XR is not super flickable but it will lean over and hold a line well enough. The oil cooled heads are XR1200 only, weirdly, since the heads are actually exposed to the air on that.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2012 21:02
|
|
|
Trying to work on my Buell always makes me want an XR1200 real bad too.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2012 09:41
|
|
|
Strife posted:^^ That's what I intend to do. I've got to take everything off to ensure that it's all sufficiently loctite-ed anyway, and I mean to replace the aluminum exhaust gaskets, so if something's loose I'll surely uncover that along the way. Maybe it's somewhere between the engine and oil filter?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2013 20:55
|
|
|
Talking about Harley FI, I saw an ad for a screw you replace your idle air control valve with, so you can turn down the idle again for that lopey, oil-pressure destroying idle.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2013 19:32
|
|
|
On the other hand, they're ridiculously easy to work on... Anyway, if you do go for a Sportster, if possible go for a 2004 or later one as they've got a rubber mount engine. Also, the 1200 is fine for a first bike.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2013 17:11
|
|
|
I've done a lot of two up miles on the back of my dad's sportster and yeah, better shocks and a back rest made all the difference.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 4, 2013 17:14
|
|
|
I hope this doesn't mean the end of the line for the evo engine, I know they had to switch to water cooling eventually but this has a 60 degree v angle, overhead cams, balance shafts and no hydraulic lifters. I know it's a minority opinion around here but I actually like that Harleys (and Buells) use 50s engine tech. My dad got a little excited about there finally being a 750cc Harley again though.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 5, 2013 23:41
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:Why? Why, well that's a bit difficult to answer. I like bikes to feel mechanical and unrefined, but on the other hand I think it'd be weird to design a new engine to be gimped by a 45 degree V angle and pushrods on purpose. Does that mean I've succumbed to Heritage-based marketing by proxy? Maybe, but I think it's just plain cool they managed to squeeze 100HP out of something like this, just like I think it's cool how pushrod V8 engines are still competitive. I also enjoy the juxtaposition of a futuristic looking bike (with good brakes and suspension) that sounds and shakes like a tractor. Disregarding Harley/Buell there's also people that choose to buy and MT-01 over a B-king, or anything else than one of the Honda 700CC bikes which are probably, purely objectively viewed, the best bike one can get.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2013 20:37
|
|
|
Giblet Plus! posted:Technically, it was Buell, not harley, who squeezed 100 hp out of the Evo. I wasn't trying to imply otherwise 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2013 18:30
|
|
|
OMGVBFLOL posted:It's not just price, but that's good to know. I'm still a ways off, so I'm sure I'll be doing more research between now and the summer, but if there's known problem areas to keep an eye out for, I'd appreciate any input. I'm assuming taking a careful look for rust, chain wear, and obviously making sure it starts/runs. I'm not looking for a project, but I'm fine with some scrapes and wear. Ironhead known problems: the engine is poo poo and breaks all the time every time.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2014 18:46
|
|
|
Outside Dawg posted:Looks like this thread could use a bump. I've thought about getting one of those timing covers for my Buell.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2014 13:23
|
|
|
Scrapez posted:
What does it take to get 90hp out of a sportster?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2015 20:11
|
|
|
Scrapez posted:Not a lot actually other than some cash. Interesting, thanks. Buell XBs had the same heads as the 2004+ Sportsters and made 100HP stock, but they had hotter cams, injection, 2-1 exhausts and a much better intake tract that seems like it would be hard to replicate on a Sportster. It's too bad we probably won't see a successor to the Evo.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2015 22:47
|
|
|
OMGVBFLOL posted:does Harley own a patent on the concept of auto-cancelling signals or is every other manufacturer just not dumb enough to think they're a good idea My 1986 Yamaha SRX600 had them, thankfully the system could be disabled easily by removing some small electronics box. It was a both time and distance based system. I would signal ahead of merging onto/leaving the highway and by the time I would actually do so the blinkers would shut off.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2017 12:47
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 15:13 |
|
|
Riding Harleys for years means my dad rides around with this turn signal on 50% on the time now that he's got a Japanese bike. Lack of proper riding training back in the day also means the rides around with both his feet hovering along at low speeds, god that's awful to watch.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 18, 2017 17:20
|
|