Motorcycle Forums banner
41 - 60 of 63 Posts

·
Super Duper Mod Man
Joined
·
10,479 Posts
Bollocks. Claimed dry weight is 308 kg (678 lbs). My Fat Boy has claimed 307 kg dry but then I have 88 ci engine compared to 98 ci here. They could have named this Nippy.

- cruiz-euro
Here is a quiz. If you have 62 horsepower and added two more to it, how many horsepower would your imaginary FatBoy have?
 

·
The Toad
Joined
·
17,458 Posts
Bollocks. Claimed dry weight is 308 kg (678 lbs). My Fat Boy has claimed 307 kg dry but then I have 88 ci engine compared to 98 ci here. They could have named this Nippy.

- cruiz-euro
1980 Shovelhead 603lb wet weight. Bollocks to you sweetcheeks.
 

·
Aging Cafe` Racer
Joined
·
8,715 Posts
I'm not saying they should be heavier but like LR said, these bikes are built to look a certain way. To keep the look and still get anywhere near the standards of a modern bike with a mild steel frame you need to go thicker and add gussets, electronic ignitions weigh more than points and coils, cast alloy wheels or steel rims and spokes weigh more than alloy rims and spokes, disc, calipers and master cylinders weigh more than skinny drums and cables, tubeless tires weight more than skinny tube tires, electric starters weigh more than kick starters and require bigger batteries, ignition modules and regulator rectifiers add weight, the copper wiring and switch gear that ties all that stuff together adds weight

Modern standards and nekkids are built for performance, the frames are designed to be light and stiff not to look a certain way, the bikes use mostly plastic and alloy instead of steel, it's a totally different set of manufacturing requirements. so no, these bikes shouldn't weigh more but if they were built using chrome molly and alloy like the originals they'd exceed the price point, cheaper materials and modern conveniences equal more weight.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,087 Posts
I'm not saying they should be heavier but like LR said, these bikes are built to look a certain way. To keep the look and still get anywhere near the standards of a modern bike with a mild steel frame you need to go thicker and add gussets, electronic ignitions weigh more than points and coils, cast alloy wheels or steel rims and spokes weigh more than alloy rims and spokes, disc, calipers and master cylinders weigh more than skinny drums and cables, tubeless tires weight more than skinny tube tires, electric starters weigh more than kick starters and require bigger batteries, ignition modules and regulator rectifiers add weight, the copper wiring and switch gear that ties all that stuff together adds weight

Modern standards and nekkids are built for performance, the frames are designed to be light and stiff not to look a certain way, the bikes use mostly plastic and alloy instead of steel, it's a totally different set of manufacturing requirements. so no, these bikes shouldn't weigh more but if they were built using chrome molly and alloy like the originals they'd exceed the price point, cheaper materials and modern conveniences equal more weight.
Wow, a calm voice of reason! What are you doing on this board?!!
 

·
The Toad
Joined
·
17,458 Posts
I'm not saying they should be heavier but like LR said, these bikes are built to look a certain way. To keep the look and still get anywhere near the standards of a modern bike with a mild steel frame you need to go thicker and add gussets, electronic ignitions weigh more than points and coils, cast alloy wheels or steel rims and spokes weigh more than alloy rims and spokes, disc, calipers and master cylinders weigh more than skinny drums and cables, tubeless tires weight more than skinny tube tires, electric starters weigh more than kick starters and require bigger batteries, ignition modules and regulator rectifiers add weight, the copper wiring and switch gear that ties all that stuff together adds weight

Modern standards and nekkids are built for performance, the frames are designed to be light and stiff not to look a certain way, the bikes use mostly plastic and alloy instead of steel, it's a totally different set of manufacturing requirements. so no, these bikes shouldn't weigh more but if they were built using chrome molly and alloy like the originals they'd exceed the price point, cheaper materials and modern conveniences equal more weight.
Yeah. And don't forget the part about filling the frame tubes with lead.

They've also replaced a lot of the metal parts with plastic which saves weight. I just think that they don't care about weight reduction. The idea never entered the design concept. Can't blame them really. The buyers don't seem to give a shyt. Worse. They seem to clamor for heavier and heavier bikes. Sportsters gain weight. Boulevards gain weight. They still fly out the door. Amazing.
 

·
Super Duper Mod Man
Joined
·
10,479 Posts
" I just think that they don't care about weight reduction. The idea never entered the design concept."

Yup. They are designed to look a certain way first and foremost. Then they are engineered and manufactured as cheaply as possible. They are NOT engineered to be light, easy to repair, or easy to service for the most part. All the excuses for heavy weight are pretty much are just that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,521 Posts
Win a free T-shirt

"I hear it could....."

That's about the best you got. If you depended on knowledge I'd say you lamer than an imginary FatBoy that has 64 horsepower.
Oh yeah. Didn't we have this same discussion years ago? If I recall correctly you were getting so paranoid during some extended glue sniffing that you were doubting whether I actually existed at all.

But talking about my HD, here's a riddle for you: my 2002 HD owners manual says the 7th last digit in VIN is a letter for manufacturing town either Y= York, PA or K= Kansas City, MO. What letter do I have?

Get this right and I will send you a t-shirt with my picture on it, you can wear it on all the important occasions.

- cruiz-euro
 

·
Super Duper Mod Man
Joined
·
10,479 Posts
"Oh yeah. Didn't we have this same discussion years ago? "

Yes we did. I'm still waiting for the picture of the French engine that Harley copied. You know, when you were going to prove me wrong AGAIN. Send along a picture of that and of you with your 64 HP FatHead. I guess I have to wait for that one eh? You don't have a manual for a bike you don't own, but Sportsters are made in KC, so I'd guess you have a K, becuase you love Sportsters so much? Do I win a prize now? Did I get the horsepower right at least?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
722 Posts
Looks like a nice enough bike, competitive price too.

I have to wonder though, why not simply sell it with the 104 kit covered in your sidebar? Slightly bigger pistons and different cams would not cost much extra if they simply came with the bike to begin with.

With the kitted engine, power is very good for the class. Seems like a missed opportunity.

As it is, the new Thunderbird is heavy and underpowered as delivered. Pity. The power part of it apparently is easily rectified.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,087 Posts
Looks like a nice enough bike, competitive price too.

I have to wonder though, why not simply sell it with the 104 kit covered in your sidebar? Slightly bigger pistons and different cams would not cost much extra if they simply came with the bike to begin with.

With the kitted engine, power is very good for the class. Seems like a missed opportunity.

As it is, the new Thunderbird is heavy and underpowered as delivered. Pity. The power part of it apparently is easily rectified.
I wouldn't say the T-Bird is underpowered - unless you think a Harley is underpowered, even tho the Triumph has more power.

The 104 kit isn't standard for the same reason Harley's 103ci motor isn't standard. It allows for an aspirational purchase that can also be lucrative for dealers. It also allows Triumph a simple upgrade in a couple of years once the bike isn't as fresh anymore.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,521 Posts
Sorry no T-shirt this time

"Oh yeah. Didn't we have this same discussion years ago? "

Yes we did. I'm still waiting for the picture of the French engine that Harley copied. You know, when you were going to prove me wrong AGAIN. Send along a picture of that and of you with your 64 HP FatHead. I guess I have to wait for that one eh? You don't have a manual for a bike you don't own, but Sportsters are made in KC, so I'd guess you have a K, becuase you love Sportsters so much? Do I win a prize now? Did I get the horsepower right at least?
Lemme get this straight. If I post a picture of a Harley you are convinced I own one. Because, er, it must then be mine. I give you free advice: never answer any mails from Nigeria. Never open one.

I would never ever buy a worster. Everything that is wrong with American auto industry is crystallized in that bike. Even the name is a pisstake.

Oh yes the French bike that the original Harley copied, got to find a picture, thanks for reminding. K is the wrong answer. But as it happens Y is wrong also. Think about it.

- cruiz-euro
 

·
Super Duper Mod Man
Joined
·
10,479 Posts
"I would never ever buy a worster. "

That is the reason I just got one. A stripped down 72. Right side shift. You would hate it. I'd say there is no better reason for me to love it.
 

·
The Toad
Joined
·
17,458 Posts
"I would never ever buy a worster. "

That is the reason I just got one. A stripped down 72. Right side shift. You would hate it. I'd say there is no better reason for me to love it.
So, the Sportster is indicative of everything that's wrong with the US auto industry. Cool. I wonder what he would use as a representative of the US farm equipment industry? Raytheon amplifiers?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,488 Posts
So, the Sportster is indicative of everything that's wrong with the US auto industry. Cool. I wonder what he would use as a representative of the US farm equipment industry? Raytheon amplifiers?
Soviet-era Minsk Traktors............
 
41 - 60 of 63 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top