Originally Posted by OldRoadToad
Sheesh...HD can and will continue to do what they know to be best for them. As I delete all my words you have nothing to fear. The point merited the analogy, that you care not for it matters little if at all.
It was and remains praise for Honda in paying homage to their own history. Your pull quote removes that part to make your point.
Fair enough, and I take your point as stated in your reply. I guess we can split hairs whether what they do is best for them, but is also maybe all they can do in any case. I guess my point was that it's easy to clone something like a Harley because there's really nothing cutting edge about it. I get it that the traditional tech is attractive to some people. Nothing wrong with that. Different strokes for different folks. I'm just more attracted to companies like Honda or Yamaha that can innovate to produce whatever they put their minds to no matter the obstacles. That can draw on their own history, or as you say, someone else's history. That can build something like the CB1100 (or the Bolt) just because they feel like it. Sure it offends some of the purists out there, but bikes should be judged on their merits as motorcycles, not on whether they pass some sort of historical purity test. I understand it's just my own point of view, but my eyeballs start glazing over when people start droning on about 'heritage' and 'history' etc. Honda has as much heritage as anyone as far as I'm concerned, if not chronologically, then definitely in the realm of innovation. If they (or Star) decide to spit out some cruisers to cover that part of the market, who gives a shit? On the other hand, I wouldn't give a damn if the only cruisers out there were Harleys. But it's not up to me. Or you.
Of course, Honda is building the CB1100 to mine their own history, but do they need to? Absolutely not. Am I glad they are? Hell yes. Rambling reply over...