开云体育

I doubt I would ride one in UK either! "larry.botheras@..." <larry.botheras@...> wrote: I'm one who buys into the character thing... I ride a Guzzi for that reason, own a KH400 and

Well, as a Starfire owner myself, I think that bike looks great. A clever idea producing a nice looking bike that is, I suspect, much more useable on modern roads than the original. As Tim Britton

I've heard some horror stories on Sportsters made prior to 04, i.e, the Sportster Sport. In 04 the Sportster got rubber engine mounts so the vibration didnt shake mirrors and parts off. The Sportster

I rode an 05 1200r which in 04 and 05 the 1200r had more compresion than the standard 1200. The 1200r also has dual discs up front, a tach, and a wider bar for better handling. My impressions of the

The list of bikes that will roll away from a Harley without downshifting or over revving, is too long to list here. The Harley is closer compared to a John Deer than a big block Chevy..you want the

Some time ago on this group a member mentioned a comment Jay Leno had made about seeing a dubya at the Rockstore once.....I don't recall the exact statement supposedly made but it was kinda slightly

The Royal Star was a big disappointment for me when I rode one..the old 1983 Venture made 100 HP (almost same engine except 100cc less), the Royal Star made 65 HP and is geared so that 4th and 5th

No one that I know of just enlarged the 883 to 1200cc without pipes and usually an after market carb, but even at your $300 guesstimate..it costs $600 bucks more (higher initial cost plus

I'm one who buys into the character thing... I ride a Guzzi for that reason, own a KH400 and a Ural... The 883 and 1200 were ponderous in my view. I never could find a sweet spot for either for UK

The Harley guys as a whole, that I rode with..few exceptions, never downshift, thinking that their immence torque will pull them through. Each time they tried the roll on game with the Venture, the

Ooops, I take that back. Memory failed me this time. The absolute worst bike I ever owned was a Matchless 750. The Royal Star Palomino was a disappointment in performance, had horrible vibration due

Unfortunately, you encountered a typical uninformed Harley rider. These jokers take off the stocknpipes and put on a pair of loud shotgun pipes, and lose about five to seven horsepower in the process!

maybe that guy was trying but the majority of Sportster riders are happy to cruise around which is why they buy this type of bike in the first place. Unlike you I no longer feel that I have to compete

For ME, the worst was a Royal Star Palomino - simply a gorgeous pig. Dick Tym <rocker66@...> wrote: ??? So Pray tell us What was the worse? Dick

I'm speaking as a prior owner. In regard to smooth shifting, vibration and top-heaviness, I agree. In terms of riding balance and handling, both my 883 and my1200 were good bikes. In terms of

No, this guy came gunning past on a bend while I was accelerating out of a thirty limit. I was two up and was taking it easy accordingly. His exhausts were loud enough to startle me. I knew he and his

The 1200 engine weighs less than the 883 engine. More aluminum and less iron. James Franklin <jimw650@...> wrote: Triumph Bonneville..477 lbs dry Harley Davidson Sportster 883...502 lbs dry

...883 sporty....

I've had five Harleys. They were the most dependable motorcycles I ever owned. The post-AMF Harleys are extremely well-built. But since almost every Harley has had its fuel and exhaust systems

According to all the specs I've read the W650 weighs 450 wet which means that 1200 weighs 130 lbs more...Which is the equivalent of a 9st pillion extra. That gives the 1200 a power to weight ratio of