HD Nightster

[manofthefield]

Stupid name, but I like it...  lack of chrome, striped down look, matte paint, slash cut pipes, fork gaiters, side mount license, tailight integrated in rear turn signals.  Basically a bobber look in stock form.  But those turn signals hanging from the bars have to go and IMO it needs a tach

HD Nightster



discuss

[manofthefield]

I'd say the price is too high at close to 10 grand, but being a harley, it probably wont depreciate

[SmartDrug]

Not bad, but doesn't hold a candle to this bad boy:

[makenzie71]

Actually yamaha had to stab a 540cc larger engine into the Warrior to get it to perform on par with the V-Rod, and, despite it being 30hp shy of the Warrior, it sure isn't going to hang with the Nightster which is being built to be even more like the REAL sportsters of the older HD.  We're talking 80hp/80ft/lbs and over 100lbs lighter.

No matter how cool I think the Warrior looks, when it comes that time of my life I'll be looking for a Sportster.  Yamaha, Honda, Kawasaki, and Suzuki are all completely clueless when comes to real standards.

Which brings me to something I'll never understand...the big four want to make fluffy cruisers to compete with Harley but they always have to put these gargantuan heavy ass lumps of iron in the frames to keep the power-differences somewhat even.  All that rotating, flopping mass in the middle of the frame destroys any resemblance of handling the bike ever could have had.  The big four needs to stick to fours or stop trying to compete.

[SmartDrug]

Actually yamaha had to stab a 540cc larger engine into the Warrior to get it to perform on par with the V-Rod, and, despite it being 30hp shy of the Warrior, it sure isn't going to hang with the Nightster which is being built to be even more like the REAL sportsters of the older HD.  We're talking 80hp/80ft/lbs and over 100lbs lighter.

No matter how cool I think the Warrior looks, when it comes that time of my life I'll be looking for a Sportster.  Yamaha, Honda, Kawasaki, and Suzuki are all completely clueless when comes to real standards.

Which brings me to something I'll never understand...the big four want to make fluffy cruisers to compete with Harley but they always have to put these gargantuan heavy ass lumps of iron in the frames to keep the power-differences somewhat even.  All that rotating, flopping mass in the middle of the frame destroys any resemblance of handling the bike ever could have had.  The big four needs to stick to fours or stop trying to compete.

You are kidding, right?
Sportster stock: 65hp/70 lb/ft. torque

Warrior: 96hp/77 lb/ft torque

I'll give you the fact that a bored out Sportster 1200 with hotter cams can be a properly sorted engine and is a fine bike, but stock that thing isn't putting out much to speak of, hell, a GS500 will give it a run for it's money in terms of performance.  If you're comparing the V-Rod to the Warrior you won't hear me argue, that Evolution engine is incredible and the Street Rod is a wicked machine, but for the money, the Midnight Warrior is an amazing bike.

[makenzie71]

If you think the dyno is the only thing that matters then my 540ci irrigation motor has all of them beat...despite being tied to a 5 ton concrete pallet.

Put them both on a track and see who's dyno makes a shaZam!.  And the warrior was made to compete with the VRSC, anyway (which is doesn't do that, either).  HAving big balls doesn't mean you can do anything with them.

[SmartDrug]

If you think the dyno is the only thing that matters then my 540ci irrigation motor has all of them beat...despite being tied to a 5 ton concrete pallet.

Put them both on a track and see who's dyno makes a shaZam!.  And the warrior was made to compete with the VRSC, anyway (which is doesn't do that, either).  HAving big balls doesn't mean you can do anything with them.

Good point, and I forgot to consider the fact that the Warrior has 500 more cubic centimeters than the sportster, all a matter of taste I guess.  If they threw the evolution motor into the Nightster, I'd be all about it.  I didn't realize how light the Sportsters were either, an '03 XL1200 is only 530lbs dry, that's only 100lbs more than my Daytona, whereas the Warrior tips in at 615 dry.  I haven't ridden a 1200 yet, but I hated the 883, underpowered as hell and just a pain in the ass to ride.

Why would you take either to a track though?

[Onlypastrana199]

My uncle outran a speed triple on a track with his 883...both pro class....out ran him on the road the following weekend too they're good friends....thats an old school sportster though...my dads got the old school 1200....both kick new sporties asses...

[SmartDrug]

My uncle outran a speed triple on a track with his 883...both pro class....out ran him on the road the following weekend too they're good friends....thats an old school sportster though...my dads got the old school 1200....both kick new sporties asses...

Yeah except the S3 was running year old gas with one cylinder firing and a throttle that only opened half way... c'mon.   

[makenzie71]

Do some research.  Old school flat-tracker 883's weigh 400lbs and put down 80whp...and they were designed around the track.  the very heritage of the sportster, though diluted with sub-par motors for the last decade (I don't even count AMF bullshit), is racing.  The S3 is a "people" bike...it couldn't hang even with a 30 year old real race bike.

[SmartDrug]

Do some research.  Old school flat-tracker 883's weigh 400lbs and put down 80whp...and they were designed around the track.  the very heritage of the sportster, though diluted with sub-par motors for the last decade (I don't even count AMF bullshit), is racing.  The S3 is a "people" bike...it couldn't hang even with a 30 year old real race bike.

I don't know where you're getting these stats, but even the XLCR was only putting out 68 horsepower stock and weighed in at 485lbs dry.  I also don't know where you get the "people" bike idea either, the S3 has always had Triumph's best factory suspension, fully adjustable front and rear, despite superbike bars, it's certainly no Ducati Monster.  Even the 1995 (first generation S3) put out 98 hp and 61 lb/ft of torque weighing in at 460lbs dry, with comparable riders in stock form, there's just no comparison between the two.

[makenzie71]

the XLCR was no more a race bike than the S3.

[SmartDrug]

Ok, I don't know HD's product line, post a link to the bikes you're talking about.

Check this out, pretty cool kit:
http://www.mecatwin.com/en/motos/hd/xlcr/neuf.htm

[yamahonkawazuki]

ehhh some ppl cant stand it when others talk favorably about hd , what helps the hd line is the fact that it makes most of its hp and torque down low in the rev range

[SmartDrug]

I'm really not a Harley hater, just think there's more bang for your buck going overseas.  Ever ridden a Buell?  Same deal with the power down low but they're awesome streetbikes, power all the time, regardless of gear or RPMs.  Now this is a bike:  103 horse and 84 lb/ft of torque... WHEEEEE!!!

http://www.bikez.com/motorcycles/buell_firebolt_xb12r_2005.php

[Jughead]

A quote from a Friend of Mine
"Harley Davidson: Worlds' most efficient process for converting gasoline into noise without the harmful side effects of horsepower." 

[SmartDrug]

A quote from a Friend of Mine
"Harley Davidson: Worlds' most efficient process for converting gasoline into noise without the harmful side effects of horsepower." 

f%$king awesome!!
Cheers!