New HD Sportster Forty Eight

[YamaMana]

U could build a real neat scoot using the standard Sporty as a starting point.
For starters, I'd get longer shocks and get the rear end up like the XR1200. Then a beefy sport bike front end with dbl. discs etc. Replace the 120 tire with a 130/70 for the Fat Boy look.
The main thing for me would be the seat/peg/handlebar layout. Rearset controls a la Buell Tuber. I'd walk over to my Buell M2 Cyclone and measure the relationship between its foot controls and the seat, then I would replicate that on the Sporty. That would almost certainly mean moving the seat up and forward. To finish it off I'd modify a high capacity fatbob tank to fit between the seat and steering stem (dimpled for triple tree clearance, of course) Maybe a forged aluminum 17" PM back wheel to replace that 60 pounder.

Isn't that what the XR1200 is ...

[img]http://z.about.com/d/motorcycles/1/0...1200Action.jpg[/img]

(hmm, i seem to have forgotten how to insert pics)

[inreb]

Isn't that what the XR1200 is ...

[img]http://z.about.com/d/motorcycles/1/0...1200Action.jpg[/img]

(hmm, i seem to have forgotten how to insert pics)

Well, sort of. Have you priced one?

If you shop lucky you can get a used one (I prefer the carbed version 2004-06) 33% cost of XR1200. Recoup some money from selling the complete front end assembly and replace with fully adjusable Gixxer forks. XR1200 has no adjusability and lesser brakes. Also putting a large capacity tank on the XR1200 is not do-able at this time. Also the lower state of tune of the XL1200 appeals to me. I've spent enough time @ xlforum to build one in my brain. To much on the go to pull the trigger.

[TwistedKestrel]

Well, sort of. Have you priced one?

If you shop lucky you can get a used one (I prefer the carbed version 2004-06) 33% cost of XR1200. Recoup some money from selling the complete front end assembly and replace with fully adjusable Gixxer forks. XR1200 has no adjusability and lesser brakes. Also putting a large capacity tank on the XR1200 is not do-able at this time. Also the lower state of tune of the XL1200 appeals to me. I've spent enough time @ xlforum to build one in my brain. To much on the go to pull the trigger.

Plus the XR1200 has an 18 inch front wheel, so kiss tire selection goodbye. And since the XL1200 motor is in said low state of tune, supposedly there's some low-effort horsepower to be freed up.

(Have built it up in my mind as well, don't think I would ever do it though)

[inreb]

Plus the XR1200 has an 18 inch front wheel, so kiss tire selection goodbye. And since the XL1200 motor is in said low state of tune, supposedly there's some low-effort horsepower to be freed up.

(Have built it up in my mind as well, don't think I would ever do it though)

In the end it's just to many compromizes. Plus I'm mad at the Motor Company for not engineering the vibrations out of it. They've had 50 years to do it. I love the simplicity of that motor and they get great mileage to boot. It was easier to buy an old Buell tuber instead so I did that.

[nakkers]

All 2005 and up are rubber mount so, there isn't much for vibration.

JMO.

[inreb]

All 2005 and up are rubber mount so, there isn't much for vibration.

JMO.

2004 up is rubber mounted.

I should have been a little more clear on the vibrations. The motor is rubber mounted and swings through its' travel from tie rods and rubber donuts. Needing a very heavy frame because the engine can't act as a stressed member like the previous generation. If the frame was triangulated like Buell tubers it would be both stronger and lighter. But that wouldn't provide the right "look" for the Sportster. I would have prefered counter balancer(s) and an undersquare motor. That was vetoed by HD brass as not being authentic to the brand. So as it stands, the new generation Sportster weighs significantly more than it should. And the swingarm pivots off the back of the motor making it a rubber mounted swingarm. Yippee.
Above a certain rpm rubber Sportys are indeed very smooth.

[7073]

http://www.flickr.com/photos/agave1969/4535418770/

That was awesome!! LOL

[nakkers]

Inreb,

Thanks for setting me straight on the effective year of rubber mount and clarifying your thoughts.

Riding a rigid, I don't seem to notice much for vibration. But, I do know the metric cruisers do run a lot smoother.

Most that I know riding a rubber mount don't seem to have an issue with vibration.

But, then again, they might ride a John Deer for their day job.......

[short stop]

With my limited amount of seat time on sportys, I only noticed the vibration while idling. The engine felt smooth as butter once rolling, but when I first started 'er up I thought my fillings were going to rattle out.

[AGAVE]

With my limited amount of seat time on sportys, I only noticed the vibration while idling. The engine felt smooth as butter once rolling, but when I first started 'er up I thought my fillings were going to rattle out.

Now that's more accurate.

My bike is smooth as glass once moving, if it wasn't for the wind at 150+, i'd ride with no hands.
I lock the throttle riding to Montreal, lean on the tank and only use the handlebars to pass.
I do have progressive suspension installed front and rear and a fork brace, which helps a ton.
It would definitely help to install a fat inverted front end from a sportbike.

[inreb]

Inreb,

Thanks for setting me straight on the effective year of rubber mount and clarifying your thoughts.

Riding a rigid, I don't seem to notice much for vibration. But, I do know the metric cruisers do run a lot smoother.

Most that I know riding a rubber mount don't seem to have an issue with vibration.

But, then again, they might ride a John Deer for their day job.......

I've never ridden a Sportster, rigid or rubber. I have a Sportster powered Buell tuber. It smooths right out once I'm rolling. I would expect the same on a rubber Sporty.

When pestering rigid owners for the inside scoop I get various answers from "vibration is a non-issue" to "it's brutal" to a weird look. Having read everything I could find on the rigid to help the decision process I've concluded that they have a certain sweet spot and you can gear your final drive ratio to suit the hiway cruising speed you're most likely to travel at.

Vibration never used to bother me (2 Triumphs, Yam XS650) but I'm older now and probably spoiled so I don't know what the dealio is.

[inreb]

It would definitely help to install a fat inverted front end from a sportbike.

The former editor of Cycle Canada (Costa Msumthing) built one of the most kick*** cafe Sportys ever. Because it was a rigid he could put much longer shocks on it than the rubber version allows. That really helped derake the fork angle and with the ZX7 forks (less offset) and low profile 17" tire she turned into a bonafide ride. Major engine massage too. I'm not sure but I think he gripped the handle bars with both hands but I'm not 100% on that.

[nebulabob]

[QUOTE=Voodoovaj;1240672]I wish they'd put the v-rod motor into more bikes (heck, the entire v-rod power train). It's sooooooooo nice and smooth. So under rated.

I always thought a Buell XB12 with the V-Rod motor would be awesome. I always loved the look of the XB but didnt want an aircooled motor.

[Bumbobee]

Riding the classic Harley is pretty fun. People exaggerate the shaking way too much, it actually doesn't shake much at all, the only time you feel it is maybe at idle, once you get going it goes away.

I test drove a Road Glide and it was like piloting a steamship, including the smoothness.

Fun bike, and I'd probably get one if I didn't live in Canada, the land of insurance rape.

[jolomatic]

I test rode the ultra glide, and agree with Bumbobee - personally I quite liked the rumble at idle.

What I didn't like was the positioning of the controls (foot and hand, both).

[elHOMBRE]

I have always loved the look of the Nightster 1200, but the small fuel tank kills it for me. The forty-eight takes it a bit too far, and I personally find the fuel tank is so small as to look ridiculous. As well, you'd pretty much be driving from gas station to gas station - so much for cruising.

[roadhamr]

The former editor of Cycle Canada (Costa Msumthing) built one of the most kick*** cafe Sportys ever. Because it was a rigid he could put much longer shocks on it than the rubber version allows. That really helped derake the fork angle and with the ZX7 forks (less offset) and low profile 17" tire she turned into a bonafide ride. Major engine massage too. I'm not sure but I think he gripped the handle bars with both hands but I'm not 100% on that.

i have not read all of the posts but this does not make sense at all.

[inreb]

i have not read all of the posts but this does not make sense at all.

I'd be happy to clarify all or parts. Just ask me.

[adri]

I have always loved the look of the Nightster 1200, but the small fuel tank kills it for me. The forty-eight takes it a bit too far, and I personally find the fuel tank is so small as to look ridiculous. As well, you'd pretty much be driving from gas station to gas station - so much for cruising.

Just spend a couple hundred on a bigger gas tank and a wrench?

[elHOMBRE]

Just spend a couple hundred on a bigger gas tank and a wrench?

Fair enough....I never had any mechanical experience growing up so I'm not one to think those kind of thoughts right off the bat - also I think a bigger tank just wouldn't look right on a nightster.