Replies

My Ultra Classic is lighter, handles better, is more comfortable, has a better stereo, carries more, and gets better mileage than a comparable Gold Wing despite the number of times that behemoth has been reinvented over the years.

Define better. If I give the Japanese credit it's for the Wing. It has a lean angle significantly deeper than your Ultra so I'd give it the edge in Handling. The real advantage the Wing has is the engine. It's not only much, much faster than your twin-cam, but it's an engine with a duty cycle of 300,000 expected miles between rebuilds. Your Ultra only has a duty cycle of 100,000 miles. Granted that's amazing for an air-cooled engine, but that's exactly the downfall: The limitations of an air-cooled engine.

OK, I'll admit my criteria is subjective.

Yes, the 'Wing has better ground clearance and subsequent lean angle. But how much do you really need? By the time I'm grinding hardware on the left side I'm going much faster than is reasonably prudent. I have yet to find the limit of the right side; don't want to ball up my brand new bagger just yet. Bottom line, the vaunted lack of lean angle is not really an issue in the Real World as it seems to be in the minds of magazine testers. I'm not going to be turning laps at Elkhart Lake on the bike anytime soon.

However, the Gold Wing has a higher center of gravity which can make the bike genuinely spooky in slow speed maneuvers; parking lots, driveways, etc. And there is a certain feeling of "disconnectedness" with the road I just couldn't get used to. I never knew what the tires were doing. I felt like I had to just plant it in the corner and hope it would stick. To it's credit, for the short times I had it, it always stuck. Maybe that feeling of uncertainty diminishes with time & familiarity. For Gold Wing owners, I hope so.

I can't argue your points about duty cycle. I'll let you know when I get 100,000 miles on the clock. The electric smoothness of the 'Wing's powerplant is impressive, but it's hampered by a significant amount of driveline lash as well as a tendency to squat under deceleration and stiffen under acceleration. And the 'Wing's motor can be genuinely wimpy when you're caught in the wrong gear and the revs are low.

There's a ton of other little things that turned me off about the Gold Wing. The cruise is quirky and inaccurate, the radio controls are still sprawled all over the place, the "saddlebags" are small and the seating position is surprisingly confining.

Then there is the aesthetics. I suppose it's much easier to keep looking clean, but . . .

Admittedly, subjective.