2015 Indian Scout merged threadfest

[Kev m]

No I'm arguing over about 10 hp from your claims, which is approaching 20% but more importantly represents the primary difference between a rubbermount generation motor and the previous solidmounts.

And honestly, I'm talking about a tend I've noticed in dynos from multiple sources, magazine and owners.

As for Buell, mine makes nearly 100 rwhp, has no problems with heat, and I doubt the original owner would have kept it so long if there were mechanical issues.

The problems came with strangling emissions and HP races, as well as pressures from Harley to rapidly up production and cut costs. What's really sad is they were through the tunnel by the end.

YouCan ..thinking about this, I think my reaction is about more than just 20%...it's about passing over the must significant redesign the Sportster ever had.

Though the looks are incredibly similar, the chassis and motor are about as changed as possible while still having a few swappable parts between the 03 solidmount and 04 rubbermounts.

The biggest change was that it became a potentially comfortable, all-around bike, while also improving nearly every other aspect from ignition to fuel, engine cooling capacity to chassis stiffness etc.

The cams, heads, and many other engine components were improved.

The result may be only 8-10 hp, but the result is more than the parts or specs.

I'm optimistic about this Scout, but it's a different animal. And it promises some performance advantages, but not double, and not even 1.5x....that's all I'm saying.

But I like it and I'm looking forward to a ride, even if I don't plan in getting rid of the sporty.

[Shorty]

I'm wondering if the 1200c and the 1200r have identical engines. I' m pretty content with the acceleration of my bone stock 1200 Roadster, except for that flippin rev limiter ;)

[Kev m]

I'm wondering if the 1200c and the 1200r have identical engines. I' m pretty content with the acceleration of my bone stock 1200 Roadster, except for that flippin rev limiter ;)

If both are rubbermounted, then yes, identical spec, cams, heads, etc., just cosmetic differences and chassis differences.

You can increase the rev limiter a bit with a reflash, but only a few hundred rpm without a flywheel modification.

[oldbike54]

Kev m , Certainly the rubber mount Sportsters are a great improvement over the older bikes , but aren't they about 50 lbs heavier ? Yeah , I kid you HD guys a bit , but the basic Sportster platform , and for that matter the Dyna series models , are to me , much more attractive than the new Indians . Something basic and elemental about those platforms , and I do have some experience with them , fun bikes . If it just weren't for the "attitude" thing  ;D

   Dusty

[Kev m]

Kev m , Certainly the rubber mount Sportsters are a great improvement over the older bikes , but aren't they about 50 lbs heavier ? Yeah , I kid you HD guys a bit , but the basic Sportster platform , and for that matter the Dyna series models , are to me , much more attractive than the new Indians . Something basic and elemental about those platforms , and I do have some experience with them , fun bikes . If it just weren't for the "attitude" thing  ;D

   Dusty

Yup, they are...or about 10%, which takes away a little of the power improvement.

BUT the Buell Thunderstorm Spec heads and W-cams means they also respond better to Stage I improvements.

And, to put it in perspective, let's keep in mind that weight wise it only means they about equal a Tonti Cali.

[oldbike54]

Yup, they are...or about 10%, which takes away a little of the power improvement.

BUT the Buell Thunderstorm Spec heads and W-cams means they also respond better to Stage I improvements.

And, to put it in perspective, let's keep in mind that weight wise it only means they about equal a Tonti Cali.

Something I have pondered for years , since HD knows how to build a counterbalanced motor , why have they continued rubber mounting ? The could engineer balance shafts that would allow a bit of throb , and make the life of components attached to the motor much more pleasant . Seems to me it would also increase chassis stiffness .

  Dusty

[Kev m]

Something I have pondered for years , since HD knows how to build a counterbalanced motor , why have they continued rubber mounting ? The could engineer balance shafts that would allow a bit of throb , and make the life of components attached to the motor much more pleasant . Seems to me it would also increase chassis stiffness .

  Dusty

They do, it's called the TCB, and has been installed in Softails since the demise of the EVO.

Don't know why they chose rubbermounting over balancing for the Sportster (perhaps size or narrowness), but the former IS the method they chose with most of their air-cooled bikes, specifically the Dynas and sales leading FLH's.

[rocker59]

I figured when the Balanced Twin-Cam-B was introduced that the engine would find its way into every other model.

I was surprised in '09 when the new touring chassis was rubber mounted.  They could've had a really stiff, good handling chassis with solid mounting and counter balancing.

I was also surprised/disappointed back in '04 when the new Sportster frame showed up as rubber mounted, and with a 50  lbs weight gain!  Adding counter balancers would've been expensive, but much better for weight and chassis stiffness...

Oh well.  They sell like hotcakes.  It will be years before Indian's total production nears HD's Sportster production...

[Chuck in Indiana]

Oh well.  They sell like hotcakes.

There's your answer. Harley won't fix something that ain't broke. ;D The faithful either don't know or don't care..

[oldbike54]

They d o, it's called the TCB, and has been installed in Softails since the demise of the EVO.

Don't know why they chose rubbermounting over balancing for the Sportster (perhaps size or narrowness), but the former IS the method they chose with most of their air-cooled bikes, specifically the Dynas and sales leading FLH's.

Well, the Beta motor was the reference . All of this rubber mounting smacks of the British engineering in the 60 and
70s . If Norton had gone the counter balancer route instead of that crazy isolastic Rube Goldberg device , or BSA/Triumph had done some reeingineering of the Bandit/Fury model , they might have survived . Not foretelling the demise of the MoCo , obviously they are successful , but so was Studebaker .

  Dusty

[Crusty]

I figured when the Balanced Twin-Cam-B was introduced that the engine would find its way into every other model.

I was surprised in '09 when the new touring chassis was rubber mounted.  They could've had a really stiff, good handling chassis with solid mounting and counter balancing.

I was also surprised/disappointed back in '04 when the new Sportster frame showed up as rubber mounted, and with a 50  lbs weight gain!  Adding counter balancers would've been expensive, but much better for weight and chassis stiffness...

Oh well.  They sell like hotcakes.  It will be years before Indian's total production nears HD's Sportster production...

Every year, a local BMW dealer would have a self guided ride over very twisty roads through western Massachusetts and southern Vermont. I used to take great delight in passing a lot of K and R bikes through the tighter portions of the ride on my FLHS. The chassis rigidity was just fine. Erik Buell built the best handling bikes I've ever ridden, and all of them had rubber mounted engines. Why add heavy moving parts to an engine when it's not necessary?

[rocker59]

Every year, a local BMW dealer would have a self guided ride over very twisty roads through western Massachusetts and southern Vermont. I used to take great delight in passing a lot of K and R bikes through the tighter portions of the ride on my FLHS. The chassis rigidity was just fine. Erik Buell built the best handling bikes I've ever ridden, and all of them had rubber mounted engines. Why add heavy moving parts to an engine when it's not necessary?

Your anecdotal story speaks more to your riding than to your old FLHS.  Don't get me wrong, I loved the FLHS.  You were passing riders who were not willing to ride as fast as you were willing to ride on that stretch of road.  

Anyway, We're talking Sportster mainly here, and it's true that the Sportster gained 50 lbs when it got the rubber mounted frame in 2004.  Fifty pounds the wrong way, if you ask this Sportster fan.  I've owned two Sportsters and really enjoyed them.  A 1974 XLCH and a 1994 XLH883.  

Being on the sportier end of the rider spectrum, I'd have much rather seen counter balancers in the engine and a lighter overall bike, rather than the resulting 550+ lbs Sportster...

But, I'm obviously not the target customer.  The bikes I've loved over the years have been deemed flops by the MoCo and discontinued:  XLCR, XR1000, XL1200S, XL1200R, XR1200.

Slammed suspension, forward controls, and ape hangars are what the current crop of Sportster buyers want.  And, that's what the MoCo provides them.   And for those customers, they'd probably rather have the "road-hugging weight" of the current Sportster vs. a good handling 450 lbs Sportster...

[steven c]

 They kind of made it into a Porkster. ;D

[Kev m]

Your anecdotal story speaks more to your riding than to your old FLHS.  Don't get me wrong, I loved the FLHS.  You were passing riders who were not willing to ride as fast as you were willing to ride on that stretch of road. 

Anyway, We're talking Sportster mainly here, and it's true that the Sportster gained 50 lbs when it got the rubber mounted frame in 2004.  Fifty pounds the wrong way, if you ask this Sportster fan.  I've owned two Sportsters and really enjoyed them.  A 1974 XLCH and a 1994 XLH883. 

Being on the sportier end of the rider spectrum, I'd have much rather seen counter balancers in the engine and a lighter overall bike, rather than the resulting 550+ lbs Sportster...

Well the anecdotal story ALSO addresses the elephant in the room... the truth of the matter is that Harleys, even some of the lowered poserific models, handle just fine for 99% of real world riders and riding conditions. Yeah, you're dramatically closer to the limits than you ever will be on a sportbike, and if those limits aren't enough for you, then you buy something else.

But truthfully, I suspect those limits are part of the fun and appeal of a Harley.

The whole ride a slow bike fast being more fun than a fast bike slow.

My last BMW (R1100RS) was not nearly as fun going 50, 60, or even 70 mph as my Sportster is.

The RS always wanted to be going faster, 80 or 90 on the highway, which may be fine in the Midwest, but isn't generally a good idea in the crowded corridors of the Northeast. If you constantly do that you're asking for a ticket or an accident, neither of which I'm looking for thanks.

I notice even on some of the slower straight roads around my new home that I'm watching speed limits on closely because it's a new environment and a lot of speed limits change suddenly dropping to 40, or even 25 or 35, as you come in or through towns or residential areas, that I feel like I'm idling in my cars and if not actively braking I'm at least covering it, BUT on the Sporty or V7 I'm just riding, glancing down and realizing I'm already at the speed limit (or close enough that I'm not worried about it).

So I think the Sporty and the V7 are just plain more fun at a lower speed because I'm just using a higher percentage of their abilities in the first place... they still feel visceral at that point, they are still interesting, they're not tempting or pushing me to go faster.

Anyway, so back to counter-balancing and weight...

...I DO lament the size of the current road barges, both engine size and weight. Even the Cali 1400 (which deals with the weight wonderfully, just like the FLH or the Indian Chief line) is still excessive by a hundred (or even a couple hundred) pounds.

So I get your objection.

But honestly, having owned 4 Sportsters (only one being a solidmount, but one was enough). I think the 50# trade-off was nothing to me.

The bike still handles and performs as I'd want it to (ok, maybe I could use a HAIR more lean angle, but it keeps me in check) and it is more comfortable than they ever were before.

So for me, 550ish#'s is acceptable... where 750-800# is just plain too much.

For me 1100-1200cc is just fine... where 1.5L, 1.6L, 1.7L is just plain too much.

And maybe THAT's what has me looking at this Indian in such a generally positive light.


558#'s, around 1100cc .... plenty of power... maybe the only thing I really WANT to see added is a little more suspension and BRAKES... but I'll have to test ride one to know for sure.

[Kev m]

I should add that the RS, also felt less confidence inspiring in bad weather... despite the ABS, the taller center of gravity (even at lower weight) and half-fairing caught cross-winds and made it feel less planted/steady than a heavier, lower, Harley.

Some years back when Jenn and I got caught in western PA and Ohio in the middle of a huge windstorm (that knocked out power to Pittsburgh through half of Ohio) she was a LOT more comfortable and steady in the storm on the Sporty than I was on the Breva.

The Sporty was probably only about 20-30# heavier than the Breva (and lighter with Jenn on it than the Breva with me on it, by a lot lol), but some of those same design traits that people lament about "cruisers" also help them to be comfortable in those sorts of adverse conditions. Whereas some wind gusts were taking me and the Breva CLEAR across more than one lane...

[rocker59]

I spent some time on a friend's R11RS back in the '90s.  I agree, the damned thing wanted to be going 90mph on the freeway.  Comfortable there, if a little buzzy, and thankfully the road I'm thinking of was posted 75mph.  You're right, though.  Bikes like the V7 and Bonneville and Sportster are much more enjoyable in tighter conditions.  That's one of the reasons I loved my V7 Classic so much.  Riding my Sport 1100 around town is not best use of the bike.  As far as wind goes, aerodynamics are strange.  My Sport 1100 has suffered the least from crosswinds of any bike I've ever ridden.  Someone did their homework on that one.

[jas67]

Whereas some wind gusts were taking me and the Breva CLEAR across more than one lane...

I have had the same experience with cross winds on that Breval.   :o

[Kev m]

2013 V7 Racer
2006 Breva 1100
2013 Ducati Monster 796
2007 Vespa GTS250ie (wife's)
1980/78 BMW R100S
1973 BMW R75/5
2003 BMW F650GS Dakar
2001 Honda VFR800
1993 Honda VFR400R NC30
Classic Hondas: 1976 CB400F, 1973 CB350F, 1970 CL175, 1968 CL175, 1967 CB160 (x2), 1967 CL160

So what, do you only list the ones that are currently running and/or that you're keeping in the fleet?  :D  :BEER:

[Thunderbox]

It's not incorrect (and look at my signature, I have ridden and appreciate it lol), but you're taking it out of context.

Those Buell's wouldn't make today's emissions standards.

Come clean Kev m, because they wouldn't meet 2014 emissions they don't have those torque and HP figures?  That's simply a denial that you may have overstated your facts.  Nothing more nothing less.

[Kev m]

Come clean Kev m, because they wouldn't meet 2014 emissions they don't have those torque and HP figures?  That's simply a denial that you may have overstated your facts.  Nothing more nothing less.

If you choke a motor with a cat-con, all other things equal, you're not going to make as much power.

Same goes for otherwise lean tuning to make standards, and/or you run into other problems like increased heat and need for better cooling.

The XR1200 is a great example, a few years newer, tuned for a little less HP than a Buell from which it was largely derived, but more HP than the current sporty, and required a new oiling system with dedicated passages to cool the head.

[sliphorn]

Howdy,

I test rode the new Scout today at an Indian dealer in South Elgin, IL. I'm not a foot forward, low seat kind of guy, and after the test ride I'm still not. They had 4 Scouts, 2 red, 1 grey, and 1 gloss black. They were all set up the same with the foot controls in the furthest forward position. The small of my back is still aching hours after the test ride, and the ride was only 30 minutes long at most.
 
The motor makes good power and pulls strongly, but the vibes are intrusive when you get near 6000 rpm. That's fine, because you won't be there for long after you upshift. I encountered two false neutrals between 5th and 6th, and the throttle was slow to respond when blipping on a downshift to match engine speed. I ride a Triumph Sprint ST 1050 triple so I suspect my approach to riding this new Scout was considerably more aggressive than the other riders that were out for the ride.

Once I adjusted my attitude and took it easy, there were no further protests from the tranny.

What is interesting to me is that every time I would mention that I'd love to see a more "standard" Scout like a Bonneville, V7, CB1100, etcetera, I would get looks and comments like I must be the biggest dummy on the planet. Those comments came from both potential customers and the dealer employees.

Such is life, eh? It's really a shame, because in my view, they are alienating thousands of potential customers that would like to buy an American made motorcycle. So I'll stay with my Triumph and will look to Guzzi for my next machine. Probably a V7 Stone in white.

[Lannis]

Howdy,

......What is interesting to me is that every time I would mention that I'd love to see a more "standard" Scout like a Bonneville, V7, CB1100, etcetera, I would get looks and comments like I must be the biggest dummy on the planet. Those comments came from both potential customers and the dealer employees.

Well, your observation squares with what we've said before.   American motorcycling is 80% about trying to be a tough-boy Harley Davidson Hells Angel rider from Hollister with your bootsoles forward and arms up in the air and a bad, unshaven look on your face, with drag pipes rapping hard so the four-year-old girls cry and put their hands over their ears .....

.... and 19% about frame-sliders and Gixxers and wheelies and biker boyz videoz ...

and you and I and most of this board are the real 1%'ers.

So from a money-making standpoint, they're selling the right thing.

Lannis

[Kev m]

Thanks for the report!  ;-T

[rocker59]

What is interesting to me is that every time I would mention that I'd love to see a more "standard" Scout like a Bonneville, V7, CB1100, etcetera, I would get looks and comments like I must be the biggest dummy on the planet. Those comments came from both potential customers and the dealer employees.

Such is life, eh? It's really a shame, because in my view, they are alienating thousands of potential customers that would like to buy an American made motorcycle. So I'll stay with my Triumph and will look to Guzzi for my next machine. Probably a V7 Stone in white.

Things to remember:

Despite the hopes of classic, standard, and sport-touring riders, the New Indian has been placed up against HD in the marketplace.  That means they're targeting existing HD customers and dealerships will be staffed by people with Victory and HD experience.

They may be alienating thousands of potential classic/standard customers with the FF thing, but the bikes will appeal to the tens of thousands.  Some existing HD customers, sure, but many metric cruiser buyers who do not want an HD for whatever reason. 

Chances are, the people you mentioned "Bonneville, V7, and CB1100" to didn't even know what you were talking about.  If they're from the cruiser world, those bikes are not on their radars...

[Kev m]

Chances are, the people you mentioned "Bonneville, V7, and CB1100" to didn't even know what you were talking about.  If they're from the cruiser world, those bikes are not on their radars...

FWIW, the last time I pulled up to the demos at the Harley factory I was on the Stone.

You pulled past the demo truck on the way into the parking lot, but I parked, out of sight of the demo truck because it was a big crowed lot.

As I walked up to the demo truck to register one of the Harley employees grabbed me and said "Did you just come in on that Guzzi?"

Yeah, plenty in the cruiser world wouldn't know a Bonnie and a V7, but there SHOULD BE SOMEONE especially working an event like demos who should...

SECOND STORY

When Jay and I went to the Indian demos last year, the guy giving the pre-ride briefing bit his tongue and did a little dance not using the term "metric" when he was describing how the turn signals worked. It was funny as he was obviously used to using the term and wanted to, but had obviously been coached not to...

[rocker59]

Summer 2006 I rode my Nero Corsa to work every day during the short time I worked at an HD dealer.  The only person in the dealership who had any idea what it was, or expressed any interest in the bike was the owner.  And he'd spent a lot of time on BMWs in Europe.  No one else, employee or customer acknowledged the bike's existence.  Even after they asked me, "so, what do you ride?".

I've lost count of the times I've been in an HD dealer over the years and asked what I ride.  When I respond "Guzzi", the few people that know what it is only know loops from 40-years ago.  They don't even know Guzzi are still in production.

Yes, some of the more knowledgeable corporate sales staff or demo staff may know a little.  Many of those guys churn through the few positions available at that level in the USA motorcycle industry, so do have some knowledge of other motorcycles.  Example:  Our local Victory Rep left Victory for Piaggio Group Americas.  When I talked to him at an open house at a local dealer, he seemed to have a good knowledge of the industry.  It's rare to meet those types in Victory or HD dealers.

Hey, I'm not making a judgment.  Just stating facts, as I've seen them over the years.  There was a time when I wore the HD blinders, so I understand the phenomenon.  It's just the way it is.  

[sliphorn]

I hear ya rocker59, but the one Polaris/Indian rep that was there was familiar with the bikes I mentioned and was still blinded by the Kool Aid. I tried to make the point that Triumph has all the bases covered from retro standard to cruiser to touring to super sport. And I suggested that if Triumph can cover that many bases then why the heck couldn't Polaris!? Hell, Polaris is way bigger than Triumph.

I don't get it. They're as seriously a stubborn lot as I've ever encountered. Shame, really.

[cruzziguzzi]

Hey, I'm not making a judgment.  Just stating facts, as I've seen them over the years.  There was a time when I wore the HD blinders, so I understand the phenomenon.  It's just the way it is.  

It's like a frikken' stealth company - and bike for that matter - amongst folk often otherwise behaving as aficionados or motorcycle enthusiasts. It doesn't take much to miss Guzzi but it doesn't take much to acknowledge the company either.

I get a lot of entertainment out of watching people in general and certain scenarios in particular. One that provided endless enjoyment would be to sit at the "Rock Store" of a Saturday/Sunday afternoon and watch the HD owners go out of their way to neither look upon nor acknowledge the bikes they necessarily passed to get to the far end of the lot where the HDers parked.

I get it here too, one diner I like has a regular crew of hot rod and HD types and watching them nearly sprain their necks in deliberately looking away when they note that my Calvin and not an HD has caught their eye is truly humorous.

Now before one cries to a self-perceived omniscient nature of my observations, I'll offer in my defense that not one person to whom I've pointed this out has seen it different. G-Damn funny, it is!

[LowRyter]

There's your answer. Harley won't fix something that ain't broke. ;D The faithful either don't know or don't care..

and keep the service bays busy fixing primary drives too  :D

[Kev m]

It's just funny how I rarely (if ever) run into that around here...

...well, the purposeful aversion. I get plenty who don't KNOW of Guzzi, but few if any who are off-putting.

Maybe it's a local thing...<shrugs>