Was that before or after the Mustache rides?Na, na... Longride enjoyed it you know.. the whole FireFighter/Brokeback Mountain thing...it's cool.....
Was that before or after the Mustache rides?Na, na... Longride enjoyed it you know.. the whole FireFighter/Brokeback Mountain thing...it's cool.....
He's certainly light on his feet for such a big felleh'Yeah. Longride's pole dance was memorable, wasn't it?
Yes, it probably depends on what you're used to riding. When I switched from my Yamaha to my Indian in 2003, it took me a while to get used to the feet forward seating position. But when I started looking around for the Indian replacement, I realized that I had gotten used to that position, and the feet below position felt cramped and limited my leg movement. On the Vision, the floorboards are so long, you can really vary you foot position a lot. I like that.I sat on one, the low seat height combined with the floor boards doesnt work for me either. Just creates a new rider triangle problem, knee's to the sky.
Objection, your Honor!! Asked and answered.Nice effort here, but Y in the world would U folks chose to compare a $35K+ bike to 2 bikes in the low/mid $20K range? Couldn't U get a standard Ultra from HD?
At least twice!Objection, your Honor!! Asked and answered.
I blame the public school system.Objection, your Honor!! Asked and answered.
I blame ourselves..their failure is our failure..we have been tested and found wanting....I blame the public school system.
Seems I remembered them being lower than that. I suppose coupled with the very low seat height they do seem high. I'm used to sport bikes where the seat is level with the bars so anything below the triple clamps seems low to me.Guess we have a different opinion on the location of, and what those two large aluminum pods at the top of the frame just below the handlebars are in the attached pics.
This isn't some inherently flawed design; Victory's designers and engineers are highly skilled and experienced. But our impression of the Vision, primarily during slow speed maneuvers, was that of a top-heavy feel. The most obvious contributor to that seems to be the location of the fuel.
Nah, I'm 6'6. Foot forward means my knees are steering locks. Low seat height just doesnt work no matter the foot peg config. I can see where average humans would enjoy the 12" or longer floor boards, but with my 15's their still small. Its really a small world in my case.Yes, it probably depends on what you're used to riding. When I switched from my Yamaha to my Indian in 2003, it took me a while to get used to the feet forward seating position. But when I started looking around for the Indian replacement, I realized that I had gotten used to that position, and the feet below position felt cramped and limited my leg movement. On the Vision, the floorboards are so long, you can really vary you foot position a lot. I like that.
Klazy Ken blame pubic system.I blame the public school system.
I guess if you're confused then I didn't do as good a job with that sentence as I could have. I was attempting to point out that at a premium of $11K more than the next most expensive bike, the GW, it doesn't offer more engine or overall performance than what the other two offer for that extra cost.In the article, regarding the Harley, you say "However, at over 35 grand this bike blows the other two out of the water, but for the wrong reason. The Ultra is over $11,000 more than the second next expensive Gold Wing. Yet clearly it doesn't offer that much more in terms of engine, handling or anything else for that matter."
What do you mean when you say that it doesn't offer "that much more..."? This implies that it does offer more than the GW, but yet, the evaluation doesn't seem to indicate that it offers anything more, unless you happen to just like Harley's...which I can certainly understand. But your evaluation of the various aspects of the bikes, doesn't seem to indicate any real advantages at all, other than styling which is a matter of taste.
The art of the comma is lost on most people. It freaks people out. We need user giganto to translate.I guess if you're confused then I didn't do as good a job with that sentence as I could have. I was attempting to point out that at a premium of $11K more than the next most expensive bike, the GW, it doesn't offer more engine or overall performance than what the other two offer for that extra cost.
Make sense now?![]()
Did anyone question the low HP/torque numbers for the HD 110? Harley quotes torque of 113 ft-lbs stock for their CVO and while they may put optimistic numbers up, 88ft-lbs seems outrageously low. I have an 03 with only minor upgrades and I think I did better than that on the dyno...I guess if you're confused then I didn't do as good a job with that sentence as I could have. I was attempting to point out that at a premium of $11K more than the next most expensive bike, the GW, it doesn't offer more engine or overall performance than what the other two offer for that extra cost.
Make sense now?![]()