The 2021 and up Sportster thread

Discussion in 'Road Warriors' started by Ginger Beard, Jul 13, 2021.

  1. markk53

    markk53 jack of all trades... Super Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2007
    Oddometer:
    22,988
    Location:
    Delaware Ohio
    @pjensen641 I'm prototyping some foot pegs/controls mounted on the lower triple clamp to suit the feet forward for cornering on the MX bike. The ape hangers will allow more pull back to suit the forward controls.

    I am looking forward to a really functional competitive naked bike too. My present bike has a shade over 5" suspension front and rear, maybe something Harley could shoot for. Really, a legit naked version of the Sporty could be a heck of a ride, but not without adequate suspension and ride position to suit. Still looking to the future.
  2. VicRattlehead

    VicRattlehead Been here awhile

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2014
    Oddometer:
    729
    Location:
    Indiana
    This!
    'Ride modes', in particular, strike me as especially stupid. If I want less than full power there's a twisty-grip on the right side that has been capable of performing that function for over 100 years. I mean really, if you need 'rain mode' on a 120hp bike with a (reportedly) very linear, tractable powerband and more tire contact than a small sedan than, I'm sorry, but you're far to inept to be riding a motorcycle.
    Webman, Oilhed, Rich B and 1 other person like this.
  3. soloyosh

    soloyosh Dad and husband Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2004
    Oddometer:
    5,566
    Location:
    LHC, AZ
    Ducati had a similar (maybe inferior) design back in the day. The press gave them endless shit for it. Ducati changed the design (maybe with a little pressure from the dealers experiencing so many dropped bikes in the showrooms).

    If that's the only thing to hate on, it's fine.
    quint7 likes this.
  4. markk53

    markk53 jack of all trades... Super Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2007
    Oddometer:
    22,988
    Location:
    Delaware Ohio
    I remember the side stand on my Moto Guzzi would quite literally snap up the instant you raise the bike up to vertical. Really sucked when the bike would fall over because of the poor design/application. I guess BMW may have had their version too, because when I was working at the bike shop the one parts guy lifted my bike up from the off (right) side, the shop owner instantly told him to hold the bike there, the stand had snapped up. He told me he heard the clack and knew immediately what had happened. Otherwise the parts guy would have been picking it up shortly.

    I think the best design was Honda's little rubber tab that would hit first and usually knock the stand up with a clunk as the stand would still hit the ground fairly firmly under braking or starting to turn... but it worked.
  5. south

    south Long timer

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2011
    Oddometer:
    1,243
    Location:
    Florida
    I confess I marvel at the amount of time/effort spent deriding this motorcycle for what it isn't, rather than evaluating it for what it is (intended to be). It's truly an infinite--and infinitely fruitless/valueless--undertaking. The easiest, yet least compelling, criticism of any argument/position is to wholesale reject its basic tenets and attack it from the outside, rather than point out its own internal inconsistencies/weaknesses/shortcomings/contradictions/etc.

    Which is all to say, in common parlance: if my grandmother had wheels, she'd be a bicycle; and if the new Sportster S had all the shit some folks are complaining it doesn't have, it'd be a (f'ing) Bronx and not--*like the thread title specifies*--a Sportster S.

    I mean, (despite owning a(n Evo Sportster powered) tuber Buell and a late-model Shovelhead (project,) I'm not a "Harley guy", yet I can't help but notice that no other brand/model -specific thread attracts so much of this kind of static--none of the BMW GS threads are clogged with critiques/complaints that the bike isn't a Supersport, nor are the Duc Monster threads jammed with accusations that the bike isn't a proper cruiser, etc.

    For my part, given that this thread is about the Harley Davidson Sportster S, my interest here lies overwhelmingly in understanding Harley's concept/vision for the bike and subsequently evaluating the execution of that concept/vision as a functional production motorcycle, and not with lodging an endless barrage of criticisms/complaints that have absolutely no application with/to the actual motorcycle as conceived/built.
    Webman, Traxx, Richy and 6 others like this.
  6. soloyosh

    soloyosh Dad and husband Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2004
    Oddometer:
    5,566
    Location:
    LHC, AZ
    To be fair, the CEO said that this is "putting 'sport' back in Sportster." Acknowledged, he may have just meant improving on the current XL (power, weight, cornering clearance, etc.), but that isn't crystal clear. It could easily mean "we built a sportbike!" which is what the Sportster was originally.
    PeterTrocewicz likes this.
  7. south

    south Long timer

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2011
    Oddometer:
    1,243
    Location:
    Florida
    No, actually, it isn't being "fair". At best, it's being disingenuous; in reality, it's being argumentative--albeit, granted, what seems to pass for "ADVrider normal" in my recent experiences. Despite every indication that English is not his first language, Zeitz--and all of the marketing people who contribute to the formulation of his message--clearly has sufficient command of the English language to state "We built a sportbike!" if what he means is "We built a sportbike!". And Harley built the VR1000, so they do know what an actual sportbike is. He said they put "sport" back into Sportster (doubtless hence the Sportster "S"), which only requires that this new Sportster has more "sport" than last year's Sportster models--which it has, in all the parameters you yourself listed. But, hey, don't let common sense, a (truly) fair and reasonable approach, and/or a faithful/objective understanding of what is actually said undermine whatever personal biases/agenda--even if it's only a determination to be argumentative--you and others here obviously have, and continue to draw on the inexhaustable supply of "what this bike *isn't*" to spatter throughout this thread. I've said my piece and am quite content to leave you all to it.
    Tnbrit, Webman, Traxx and 1 other person like this.
  8. Matt-J2

    Matt-J2 Been here awhile

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2018
    Oddometer:
    901
    Location:
    Appleton, WI
    I dunno, the marketing/sales blurbs on the HD website certainly look like they're trying to say "We built a sportbike!". To quote the "This is the right bike for:" list bullet points:

    "Riders who desire top-of-the-line performance and stunning style."

    "Aggressive riding with sport bike agility and handling."

    See also: "A legacy born in 1957 that outperformed the competition is now rebuilt to blow away the standards of today."


    If it was advertised as a sporty cruiser that'd be one thing, it seems like that shoe fits nicely. But they're clearly advertising it as more than that (see above) and that's what we poke at. HD gets more flack than they should IMO, but their ad copy certainly rings like they're still out of touch with the market.
    pjensen641 likes this.
  9. anotherguy

    anotherguy Long timer

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2009
    Oddometer:
    16,864
    Location:
    the hills
    Are you a writer? English teacher? A well written post. In addition I agree.
  10. pjensen641

    pjensen641 Long timer Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2006
    Oddometer:
    2,486
    Location:
    Boone, IA
    Exactly!

    They are marketing it like they built a new platform Roadster or Sport variant and describing it as aggressive with sportbike agility and is superior to the standards of today. If that is what they say they built, they failed.

    I'll help them out....

    "Low slung, mean, and uncompromising. The Sporster S is the new standard in powerful factory custom cruisers."
  11. ARiderX

    ARiderX Long timer

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2014
    Oddometer:
    1,511
    Location:
    Western Europe
    Agreed. But I quoted your post for the next bit :D

    Glad you brought that up.

    Exactly, Harley's interpretation... There's some **** on here who keeps insisting that 'harley' mids (or whatever harley claims are mids) are somehow standard bikes. Better yet, apparently a Harley "mid" set-up magically transforms the bike from a ponderous barge to something that can compete in moto GP and instantly makes you the cool 'sporty' hero in the twisties. Up there with all the sport standards such as a CB1000! No kidding!

    Still better, a CB1000 is somehow be a rear-set bike!

    Harley 'mids', while still sitting 25" from the ground, still forces your feet IN FRONT OF THE RIDER if you're taller than 5'8". Slightly less forward than stretched out forwards, sure, but still halfway between those, and you centre of gravity.

    Imagine me at 6'4" sitting on this sportster S, with those 'mids' (or even the forwards). The only difference is that now it looks even more as if you're sh*tting in the woods with those knees high up. I saw the pictures at motorcycleonline of John Burns (best journo in the bizz). John is tiny, and the bike looked only just right for someone like him. Very tight ergo's, a real shame.

    Anyway, in normal parlance (over here, Europe), there are three types of bikes:
    - Cruisers: feet forward, including harley 'mids' (still forward)
    - standard: feet under your center of gravity (ass/torso), seat higher up, think off a normal bicycle (where the crank would be in relation to your body)
    - sport: rear set (bmw 1000RR, speed triple, ...)

    Worst part is, I have nothing against cruisers at all. They have a time and a place. For some more so than for others. But imo you need to own it. Sit at 22-25" from the ground, have those boots in the breeze, and CRUISE. It's when they start making these weird hybrids to turn cruisers into something they're not, and will never be.

    Hell, my dream bike to add to the garage (completely useless and would only see a few thousand km a year and because of that it's not a near future purchase, but I still want it) is a nice Harley V-Rod of any type. Except the V-Rod that got 'mids' around 2005-2006, whatever that one was, to make it 'sporty' :lol3 Makes no sense. The real V-Rods... Exceptional machines.

    Which is why they should
    1. resurrect a V-Rod type machine with this engine. A no holds barred powercruiser that doesn't look like it comes from the 70's, and proud of it.
    2. leave the slamming and 'cruiser-ifying' out of the sportster line-up, where it never should have been a thing. Make the sportster into a decent 900cc standards line-up with this engine.
    3. Also make a 1250cc hot rod (please Harley with the BRONX, make it happen!!!)
    Chaplain likes this.
  12. south

    south Long timer

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2011
    Oddometer:
    1,243
    Location:
    Florida
    I appreciate what you're saying, and also the way you say it. But I think your argument only works if the ad copy is (disingenuously) viewed by itself/in a vacuum. But it isn't--it's presented within the context of an actual, tangible motorcycle, which, without getting caught up in Platonic "forms" and Aristotealian "essential qualities" seems to be generally agreed to NOT be a sportbike. :-)

    Setting aside that the bullet points are typical, nonreferential, hyperbolic ad-speak (which I hold in the same degree of contempt as you appear to)--e.g., "now 78% brighter/bigger/better!" [than what? compared to what?, etc.]--that exact same copy could be used--merely transposing the "5" and "7" in "1957" to instead read "1975"--by Honda to advertise/promote their latest Goldwing:

    "Riders who desire top-of-the-line performance and stunning style."

    "Aggressive riding with sport bike agility and handling."

    "A legacy born in 1975 that outperformed the competition is now rebuilt to blow away the standards of today."

    ...and nobody would raise anything like the sort of hue and cry seen in this thread *because reasonable people utilizing common sense and without bias/a personal agenda/an axe to grind grasp and accept that the statements are all made within the overarching context that the bike in question is a Goldwing* and not a CBR.

    I understand that many people--myself included--would like to have seen Harley come out with a production version of the Bronx. But they didn't. And this ain't the "Why didn't/I wish Harley [would] come out with the Bronx" thread; it's the "2021 Sportster" thread, which, for the forseeable (near) future = the "Sportster S" thread. So, to repeat myself, I'm struck by the amount of commentary with regard to all the things the bike *isn't* rather than what it is.
    Webman, Traxx, Ginger Beard and 2 others like this.
  13. south

    south Long timer

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2011
    Oddometer:
    1,243
    Location:
    Florida
    Thanks.

    Just someone who spent (arguably too much :-)) time attempting to analyze and explain a bunch of long-winded and convoluted writing from guys who died hundreds, if not thousands, of years ago that hardly anybody gives a shit about anymore. So, now that I think about it, I guess, in my own (infinitesimally) small way, I'm just trying to keep up the tradition of long-winded, convoluted writing that hardly anybody gives a shit about :-). Based on my form to date, I think I'm doing pretty good. :lol3
    Webman, Traxx, Richy and 2 others like this.
  14. HuntWhenever

    HuntWhenever Motorcicle Commuter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2017
    Oddometer:
    2,229
    Location:
    SW Ohio
    Breaking News: Marketing folks don't always paint the most accurate picture of their products. :fpalm
    Kentuckian, Chillis, Webman and 4 others like this.
  15. anotherguy

    anotherguy Long timer

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2009
    Oddometer:
    16,864
    Location:
    the hills
    Say it ain't so!
    Chillis, Webman, Traxx and 1 other person like this.
  16. Cogswell

    Cogswell Road General

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2005
    Oddometer:
    11,757
    Location:
    Riding with my pal Richard Cranium
    True but, it is a sport bike compared to the rest of the line up from HD. Maybe that's their angle. :dunno
    Chillis and Richy like this.
  17. HuntWhenever

    HuntWhenever Motorcicle Commuter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2017
    Oddometer:
    2,229
    Location:
    SW Ohio
    Just look at the things BMW says I can do on an R1250GS. You just have to believe! (Anyone remember that sketch on Mad TV with Will Sasso doing Stephen Seagal?)
    Traxx likes this.
  18. fldfcnscsnss

    fldfcnscsnss Been here awhile

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2017
    Oddometer:
    474
    I hear you. I get that a lot of guys like fwds. I am sure taller handlebars and seats will reveal themselves...maybe even a roadster version. But the electronics turn me off. Still intrigued to test ride it, but just like a modern performance cars, I think I would rather build up an evo roadster just as I would rather have own an older gen 3 corvette. A well setup 327 is enough. Not to be a pessimist. It looks like they did a nice job. Just not for me.
  19. VicRattlehead

    VicRattlehead Been here awhile

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2014
    Oddometer:
    729
    Location:
    Indiana
    I'm afraid for us vehicular Luddites the future is pretty bleak. :trp
    fldfcnscsnss likes this.
  20. Oilhed

    Oilhed MarkF Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2003
    Oddometer:
    17,122
    Location:
    Connecticut
    Chillis, Traxx, Richy and 2 others like this.