HD XR1200 (HD lovers you may want to skip this)

derf · 06-26-2010, 10:11 AM

Here is a good review from someones blog, it pretty much sums up everything that has been said here

http://dryohe.wordpress.com/2010/01/...vidson-xr1200/

Quote:

I think I can sum up my review of this bike as follows. The XR is a simple, basic, industrial motorcycle. It turns, it stops and it rides well. The fit and finish is awful. The tach and speedo look like they were found in the discount parts bin in the performance parts aisle of your local Auto Zone. The suspension? Forgettable. If you want to buy a bike that can give you the same experience as the XR1200 but with more performance and a better ride perhaps you should consider firing up your computer and searching Craigslist or E-Bay for a sweet 1985 Honda Nighthawk S. I find it to be amazing that a motorcycle designed and built in 2009/2010 can easily be blown off the road by a mid-level affordable rice burner circa 1985. You think that’s a load of hype? Let’s go to the numbers:

No Worries · 06-26-2010, 01:47 PM

To be fair, Cycle World's 1/4 mile time was 12.13, a full second quicker than Bike Magazine. And their 0-60 time was 3.9 seconds, compared to Bike's 4.34 sec. The weird thing is Bike's 90.1 HP compared to Cycle World's 79.2.

In Cycle World's report, they compared the XR1200 to Ducati's Sport Classic Sport 1000. Surprisingly, both bike were comparable. The Ducati's stiff suspension made it a killer in corners, but the highway ride was too stiff. They gave the nod to the Harley.

The short-travel (3 1/2 inch) rear shock was a problem on the XR. But that can be fixed. The high, wide handlebar on the XR made it easier to handle than the narrow, clubman-style clip-ons of the Ducati. Although the XR has more HP and Torque, the 130 pound weight difference made the Harley slower in the quarter.

But here's the clincher: "The Sportster's big-time midrange torque helps it to be an amazingly easy bike to hustle along a twisty road." That would be a selling point to me.

06-26-2010, 01:47 PM	#2
No Worries Keyboard Racer Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Mile High City Moto: Old Superbikes Posts: 1,016	To be fair, Cycle World's 1/4 mile time was 12.13, a full second quicker than Bike Magazine. And their 0-60 time was 3.9 seconds, compared to Bike's 4.34 sec. The weird thing is Bike's 90.1 HP compared to Cycle World's 79.2. In Cycle World's report, they compared the XR1200 to Ducati's Sport Classic Sport 1000. Surprisingly, both bike were comparable. The Ducati's stiff suspension made it a killer in corners, but the highway ride was too stiff. They gave the nod to the Harley. The short-travel (3 1/2 inch) rear shock was a problem on the XR. But that can be fixed. The high, wide handlebar on the XR made it easier to handle than the narrow, clubman-style clip-ons of the Ducati. Although the XR has more HP and Torque, the 130 pound weight difference made the Harley slower in the quarter. But here's the clincher: "The Sportster's big-time midrange torque helps it to be an amazingly easy bike to hustle along a twisty road." That would be a selling point to me.