Posted on 05/12/2009 11:01:39 AM PDT by brwnsuga
Yeah they had a high center of gravity and shallow fork/neck angle...unlike my Softail Standard which has a steep rake in the front end. I loved to whip my Sporty around on mountainous roads while the Softail likes to go straight only. I think because of the geometry the Softail is easier to ride that the Sporty. If one were to lower the rear with shorter shocks that would probably slow the steering down to make a real difference....a degree more rake would have been nice.
I couldn't think of what they called the Sporty that was lowered....that was it....
I let people use the arguments on me of Harleys are too high, they don't perform well, they aren't reliable, etc., but the simple fact is buying a motorcycle is not a rational act, it's an act of passion. If you want a Harley, get what you want as long as you can afford it. Oh, and take the riding class.
Man I love my Anniversary Edition Softail Standard (below)...I put the FL style drving light kit on it for that imposing freight train look for oncoming traffic. Always concerned about someone turning in front of me with that stock peanut headlight. Those are available for the Sportster too...a good-looking safety item for sure.
I bought a Harley simply because of the sound. They have a patent on it and I can tell a rice cruiser a mile away. About the only motor that sounds similar is an S and S V-twin. I also have a Cessna 195 with a radial engine that is often said to sound "like a pack of Harleys"....something about that "potato patato potato" produced by that master/articulating rod layout that I never tire of hearing....
I double-dog dare anyone to tell Sonny Barger (Hells Angels) that only girls ride Sportys...:o)
If I had to guess I’d say that Mr. Barger has upgraded since then. His bike, as I recall from something I saw on the History channel, is a frame up custom package. But since I’m NOT talking to SB I will continue to make skirt jokes about guys who ride little bikes. OK, maybe not, my wife is calling me for dinner.
Amen to practicing the panic stops.
15 minutes spend practicing stopping as fast as you can without losing control of the bike can make all the difference between “whew, that was close” and “I might walk again”. Seems a good investment of my time. Yes, I did have a sheriff roll up one time and ask what I was doing. I told him, he just said
“smart, don’t get too crazy” and drove away.
OK I'll connect you with my buddy Moose...you can tell him that...:o)
Sorry, but no. Many people do start on them, but there are much better bikes to start on. Remember that you are buying your first bike, not your only bike. Given the complex controls and all the extra information that must be processed to ride a motorcycle, it is less like driving a car and comparable to flying a plane. A lighter, less powerful bike gives you much more room for error. Come on over to www.beginnerbikers.org . I am Bad Company over there too. Lots of good info available there.
So?
Is that supposed to “prove” something?
She asked for opinions.
I gave mine.
You’re welcome to yours but even I, a chick, wouldn’t be caught on a so-called “chick bike” again, even though hubby changed the triple trees, raked the front end to safer degree and put on a wide glide front end before I was even allowed near it.
[he builds motorcycles professionally, obviously, and
is well aware of the shortcomings of the Sportster]
The short, squirrely front end, above average seat height and high center of gravity are, IMO, a recipe for disaster for a beginning rider, *especially* a woman.
I knew several women whose first Harleys were Sportys.
[may they rest in peace]
I knew one woman whose second Harley was an 883 Hugger because the Sporty was too tall and ‘erratic’ for her to handle.
In less than 6 months, she’d sold it and bought a Heritage.
She sold the Sporty to her friend who then lost control of it in a fairly gentle curve and literally exploded herself on the side of an oncoming van.
I had the agony of watching it all happening from behind.
If the front end had more rake and was less “quick” handling, she’d probably still be alive...as would our dear friend riding behind her since he couldn’t avoid her wild careening motorcycle and ended up *under* the van with a broken neck.
I do NOT recommend it for a beginning rider.
You can ride Sportys til the end of time, if you so choose.
I’m concerned about the lady asking about a good starter bike.
I’ve got the Night Train Centennial.
[it was my “dream bike”]...;-D
Totally stripped all the stock stuff off of it though and sold all the tin, forks, wheels, etc. on eBay.
[and hubby bored it to 95 inches because my Dyna was 97 and there was *no* way I was going *backwards* to 88...and converted it to fuel injection and added racing cams]
It will be 12 years ago this August 10.
Those who were not there to see it happening are doing pretty well, considering.
Those of us who were, not so much.
Thank you for your kindness.
That’s awful.
And that’s good advice for the original poster.
Top poster:
Motorcycles are dangerous as can be. I say this as a civilian motorcycle rider (part time). There’s a lot of hard core combat veterans on this board riding, who have certainly been in a lot more danger and really don’t even consider it. But motorcycles can kill people.
And those they don’t, end up in pretty miserable shape.
Start small. Ride like you’re invisible and every driver is a raving idiot. Some are.
And be careful until you figure out how to handle things out of the ordinary. Like that friend of hers, and that van. Even a small bike can be surprisingly heavy once it tips unexpectedly beyond a certain point - and very unexpected things can happen very quickly.
IMHO it’s better as a beginner to have less bike than you really want, than more bike than you can control.
Sorry about your friend Salamander. That’s awful.
Powerful post.
Just so you know, the whole chick bike thing was started by RUB's. No real biker is going to call the Sporty a chic bike. Hell, Sonny Barger rode a Sportster and you just can't get any more biker than Sonny.
Yeah,I take great umbrage at the notion that the Sportster is chic bike, or in some way inferior. It's not. IMHO it's a far superior ride.
As far as the rake being too severe on the Sportster, you're mad. It's not as relaxed as the big twins, but it's still solidly in cruiserville where everything is relaxed. You make it sound dangerously steep, yet it's much more relaxed than any Sport bike, a Goldwing, or any BMW, and somehow folks manage to ride those scoots safely every day.
I knew one woman whose second Harley was an 883 Hugger because the Sporty was too tall and ‘erratic’ for her to handle.
Ummm....Your ignorance is showing. The 883 Hugger is a Sportster, it was just a model in the Sportster line. You slap in a lowering kit on the forks of any Sportster, takes 20 minutes, replace the 13.5" shocks with the 11.75" shocks that came stock on the Hugger, and any Sportster is suddenly geometrically identical to the Sportster Hugger and it took half an hour tops.
You can go lower btw, I'm a fan of the low and lean look so I run the ever popular Progressive 10.5" shoscks in the rear.
And finally, I don't recommend the Sportster (or any 900cc or 1200cc bike) as a beginner bike either. Which I plainly told Suga in post #34.
Hah,my beard is twice as long as Mooses.
Seriously, that’s a biker.
You know, I’ve never gotten around to that. I’ve thought about it, but never done it. I did install the rear light kit where the turn signals are red, and everything lights up when the brakes are applied. It’s a visibility upgrade that I highly recommend.
I had to check. It’s the 883 Low.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.