Why are Harleys disliked?

[RazerSauber]

black-k1 said:

The key question is; if a new American company formed, building motorcycles powered by 45degree pushrod V twin engines, where the bikes just happened to look exactly like, sound exactly like, feel exactly like HDs, yet were 10% cheaper, would the bikes sell? I strongly suspect, even with a huge marketing budget, the company would be bust within a very short period of time, having sold very few bikes because HD owners want a Harley and, more importantly, their perception of the image that goes with that.

The MBP C1002V looks exactly like what I'd imagine a modern HD to look like. Whack some HD badges on it and I bet people would go nuts for it. As it stands though, is anyone going to buy a bike that's probably just as good, or better, than a HD but from a company called MBP? It's unlikely. Lovely looking thing, though.

[black-k1]

Hungrymc said:

black-k1 said:

I won't be using my money to buy an HD as I want to buy a bike, not an image.

It’s fair that you would only buy a HD for image. But I think it would be rash to project that onto everyone else.

I sometimes buy stuff despite it having an image that I don’t like.

I don't know if the "projection' comment was aimed at me but the rest of the paragraph you selectively quoted said ...

black-k1 said:

As said, if someone wants a Harley, they should buy a Harley as nothing else is a Harley. I would wish them many happy miles together and would see them as another fellow biker ...

[Mr Dendrite]

Another no from me, like others I have looked at HD over the years, but if I did want that sort of bike I’d go Indian, they seem far better put together. One thing I noticed, totally anecdotal, if someone turns up at any bike dealer whatever brand on something interesting, quirky, old, or just out and out bling , the dealer and other riders will engage in conversation ask about the bike etc etc. Turn up at a Harley dealer on anything other than a HD and it will be ignored completely, very strange culture around HD

However, if I ever get out to the USA to do one of the tours then I’m booking an HD and will revel in it.

[Hungrymc]

black-k1 said:

Hungrymc said:

black-k1 said:

I won't be using my money to buy an HD as I want to buy a bike, not an image.

It’s fair that you would only buy a HD for image. But I think it would be rash to project that onto everyone else.

I sometimes buy stuff despite it having an image that I don’t like.

I don't know if the "projection' comment was aimed at me but the rest of the paragraph you selectively quoted said ...

black-k1 said:

As said, if someone wants a Harley, they should buy a Harley as nothing else is a Harley. I would wish them many happy miles together and would see them as another fellow biker ...

Yep. I thought your post very balanced to that point. But I did think in that sentence you were implying that image is the reason someone would buy one (instead of a bike). Maybe I misunderstood. Apologies if so.

[black-k1]

Hungrymc said:

Yep. I thought your post very balanced to that point. But I did think in that sentence you were implying that image is the reason someone would buy one (instead of a bike). Maybe I misunderstood. Apologies if so.

Image is my perception of why someone buys a Harley, but only they know why they buy what they buy. I'm sure they have their resaons.

[KTMsm]

black-k1 said:

If you look at handling, braking, performance, build quality, comfort, weight, reliability etc. there are, in every class, bikes that “score higher” for less money than an HD

^^^ This

Although I admit I like the look of some of them, I dislike how they ride

[Speed addicted]

They’ve always struck me as being very expensive for a poor quality and slow bike essentially being sold on image rather than ability. They seem to need for large amounts of aftermarket parts to bring them up to just being slow rather than glacial.

The owners often seem to be combative rather than accepting that others may prefer bikes from different manufacturers. As an example a Harley owning friend of my father in law referred to my Triumph as plastic jap crap suggesting he hadn’t a clue about bikes in general.

[MagnaJeep]

The whole Harley culture is really bizarre, but I may be wrong about the UK. I visited the European Bike Week several times, am very open minded when it comes to bikes, but the average owner is rather special. My (tongue in cheek) observations:

Your life should be modelled around the Harley lifestyle
Even when not riding everyone must know that you are a Harley owner (car window sticker, Harley jacket)
You have to dress like Rob Halford in the 80ies; also tattoos, rings, wallet chains etc.
Helmets must be as useless and exhausts as loud as possible
You should always look tough when cosplaying the MC 1% look
All other bikes are inferior as they are made from lightweight materials
Sportsters and water cooled Harleys are not 'real' Harleys

But I do get the appeal as a relaxing, old looking but kind of modern bike.

Coming out of the closet:


Mine is a 96 Heritage. It's shiny, slow, stupid and i love it.

[ThreadKiller]

I think they’re alright. My brother has had a few and likes them, and he’s a relatively normal guy. I almost bought a 1200cx as I thought it looked quite cool… and sporty with the flat bars. But got a guzzi instead.

[black-k1]

tvrolet said:

Lots of important stuff

And, I'd suggest, Indian motorcycles prove my point. If you want an "all American" heavyweight cruiser/bagger/tourer with tassels a big V-twin, extra chrome etc. then an Indian is a much better bike than a Harley, but it's not a Harley, despite the extra 2 years of heritage, hence it's still a comparatively low volume brand.

tvrolet said:

...

In terms of performance I know you weren't pressing on, but on that day's ride from Fondo, Italy to Gomaringen, Germany across the alps the old Indian has happy enough to keep up, and had enough in reserve to catch back up when it got held up. Sure you were maybe only using 30% of your performance and I was maybe using 80%...but not a bad pace to keep cross country for long distances. I'm not sure too many would want to 'tour' much faster than that over long distances, and so for me at least the big old v-twin was comfy and went well enough.

...

I've always been surprised and impressed with your Indian. You and it have done a lot better on the trips than many others, often on what would be viewed as "better" touring bikes (don't say GS ) although, in all circumstances, the rider is way more important than the bike. I have no doubt that, apart from the tight hairpins of the mountain passes, we'd not leave you and your Indian behind on any road for very long, including autobahns.

At our "get there/get back" pace, a good rider on pretty much anything of 500cc and above (except, of course, a Harley! ) would be able to keep up, but your Indian has done it in style and comfort.

Contrary to many on here, if/when I go to do a road trip in the US, I'd much rather do it on an Indian! or a Goldwing, or a K1600, or even a GS ... just not a Hardly!

[carinaman]

RazerSauber said:

The MBP C1002V looks exactly like what I'd imagine a modern HD to look like. Whack some HD badges on it and I bet people would go nuts for it. As it stands though, is anyone going to buy a bike that's probably just as good, or better, than a HD but from a company called MBP? It's unlikely. Lovely looking thing, though.

Thanks. I wasn't aware of those. It's just the finning on the side of the engine that's making me think V-Max?

I like a proper front mudguard that may actually function as a mudguard.


The Harley rider I know has several bikes. Their other bikes are British and Japanese. They're a really nice, pleasant person.

I've seen at a couple of low, uncluttered Harleys that have looked good, one was an 883.

[Hungrymc]

black-k1 said:

Hungrymc said:

Yep. I thought your post very balanced to that point. But I did think in that sentence you were implying that image is the reason someone would buy one (instead of a bike). Maybe I misunderstood. Apologies if so.

Image is my perception of why someone buys a Harley, but only they know why they buy what they buy. I'm sure they have their reasons.

I guess recognising people will have there own reasons. And that these may not align with what your personal reasoning is the point I was discussing.

[andburg]

Its not so much the bikes alone, i think most of what annoys people are the HOG rides.

I get it noisy bikes, chugging through with outriders closing roads and blocking traffic but having been out on a HD Demo day its great at keeping the large group together. You aren't stopping every 5 minutes becasue somebody has lost sight of the guy at the back.

I have a Harley, its loud, its slow compared to anything modern and water cooled but its not SLOW, nor does it handle badly at the speeds i ride. Its not even covered in chrome.



being a Harley makes no difference to me but the brand and image is appealing to my wife.

[gareth_r]

black-k1 said:

And, I'd suggest, Indian motorcycles prove my point. If you want an "all American" heavyweight cruiser/bagger/tourer with tassels wink a big V-twin, extra chrome etc. then an Indian is a much better bike than a Harley, but it's not a Harley, despite the extra 2 years of heritage, hence it's still a comparatively low volume brand. frown

Indian's heritage goes back all the way to 2011 (or, possibly, 2006 or 2002, depending on how you look at it), just as Triumph's starts in c.1991.

H-D is the only motorcycle company with an uninterrupted history from the early years of the last century (although you could make a case for Royal Enfield).

[kurokawa]

Sycamore said:

Howdy

I only got my licence earlier this year and have a Kawasaki ER6-F that I really like. I've always preferred sportier style bikes.

I do however like the look of various Harleys (and similar style bikes from other brands).

Looking online and on PH there is often a negative opinion on the brand - Is there a general reason why?

I'm probably 1/2 of the age of the typical Harley rider, and not into the Sons Of Anarchy/Tassles/Revving the tits off it that you might stereotype to Harleys, but something like a Street Rod 750 on the face of it seems like a nice thing to pootle around on.

had a 883 once, but like Black K1 said if you want a Harley get a Harley

before the 883 i had a few cruiser, Suzuki Intruder m800, GV650, VN900 custom
yes the 883 build quality isnt as good as those japanese or korean rival but eventually I get myself a Harley 883 (because I could not afford a V-rod/Night-rod), it is the brand image/heritage that finally draw me to my 883

yes there are groups of HD riders with stupidly loud pipe and riding like a maniac, but this go for any type of bike. You dont have to join a group ride, I never like the idea of more than few riders anyway.

If you like american cruiser other than HD have a look at Victory and Indian Scout I found their design more attractive than HD

go for what your heart want

[Speed addicted]

Heritage has been mentioned a few times, apart from having an idea (based on past bikes) whether or not a potential purchase will hold its money or be reliable I don’t really care how long a company has been going.

The people in charge of the company are different, manufacturing processes are different, often the country they’re built in is different.

Does heritage matter to most people?

[srob]

Speed addicted said:

Heritage has been mentioned a few times, apart from having an idea (based on past bikes) whether or not a potential purchase will hold its money or be reliable I don’t really care how long a company has been going.

The people in charge of the company are different, manufacturing processes are different, often the country they’re built in is different.

Does heritage matter to most people?

Judging by how much companies spend pushing/buying it, I suspect it must be important to some...

[LewG]

I'm 30 and have an old 1200S Sportster, no interest in the 'lifestyle' or the look, I just think it's a nice old bike to knock about on. In my view it makes a decent noise whilst not being too loud and generally puts a smile on my face. Always wave at other bikes including mopeds on L plates. It doesn't ride particularly nicely nor is it very light but it's just a bit different, I sort of see it as like having a 60s muscle car but on 2 wheels, yes a lot of stuff will do it faster and more efficiently but that's not the point. I don't get the Harley only til I die sort of mindset either, in fact pretty much every other model they do holds no interest for me whatsoever, I'd quite happily move on to any other type of bike right from superbike to a retro etc. Sadly my bank account doesn't allow that at present

[gareth_r]

Speed addicted said:

Heritage has been mentioned a few times, apart from having an idea (based on past bikes) whether or not a potential purchase will hold its money or be reliable I don’t really care how long a company has been going.

The people in charge of the company are different, manufacturing processes are different, often the country they’re built in is different.

Does heritage matter to most people?

It's the reason that H-D has trouble changing. To its customers, a Harley is a large capacity air-cooled 45° OHV V-twin with separate pushrod tubes and a single intake. It's a basic design that dates back to 1937, and anything else is just unAmerican. H-D is hamstrung by heritage.

Indian (and Triumph) had a clean (re)start so they didn't have to be concerned with the history of the original company. The Indian Motocycle Company had been defunct for almost 60 years when Polaris revived it, so there was no existing customer base demanding a sidevalve engine and leaf spring suspension.

[Pebbles167]

andburg said:

I have a Harley,

That's not a real Harley