Fort Nine video How Indian makes 43% more power than Harley.

[bigbikerrick]

Fort Nine does it again...I like this gent's videos.
Rick

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ooue7i73zo&feature=emb_logo

[GeorgiaGuzzi]

I agree. This is one of my main beefs with retro cruisers. Great power, brakes, handling. But you’ll be dragging hard parts in a hot second once you get to fun roads. At least I have on every cruiser I’ve had.

I really like his videos, reminds of Alton Brown with motorcycles!

[bigbikerrick]

I agree. This is one of my main beefs with retro cruisers. Great power, brakes, handling. But you’ll be dragging hard parts in a hot second once you get to fun roads. At least I have on every cruiser I’ve had.

I really like his videos, reminds of Alton Brown with motorcycles!
[/quote

I agree GG. Thats one of the Many reasons I like the Tonti  Guzzi Californias. They have decent cornering clearance.
Rick.

[Tom]

Richard in Phoenix, picked up a FTR1200 Flat track replica.  He says it's a really fun bike to ride.   

[Guzzistajohn]

Interesting video, those poor Harley riding flat trackers, they don't have a CHANCE!

[oldbike54]

 He is leaving out a whole slew of details . Like small bore engines are forced to use small valves meaning gas flow is faster at low engine speeds giving better low speed torque . Then a lot of the advantage gained by a longer connecting rod is lost on the compression stroke .

 Dusty

[kingoffleece]

Yep.  He is, however, focused on large displacement motors in this vid.  I think he does a fine job distilling a really complex issue down to a reasonable level.  We all know that it's ALWAYS a compromise as to what you want vs what you get vs what you'll compromise on.

[kingoffleece]

Oh, and cruisers cornering?  My Triumph America would go over more than any cruiser I've been on.  The Jackal I have has more in the chassis than it has available lean angle.

[Canuck750]

Another great FortNine video!

I like this one for explaining hp and torque

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tv97i_-V7hA

[pehayes]

I just spent the weekend at the Moto America races at Laguna Seca.  The most fun class was "King of the Baggers".  Indian took 1st and 3rd.  Great to see these huge bikes in full plastic gear.  Tyler O'Hara was fantastic!  I always sit at the big sweeper turn #5.  Incredible to see him sliding and "backing it in" to this corner with both tires on a drift.  He was clearly head and shoulders above the field.  Got into turn #2 a bit too aggressively during the race and went off into the gravel and lost his huge lead.  Kept it up.  Limped it back onto the track in 5th place or so and then just climbed over the field to finish well out in front once again.  Really was fun racing to watch.  There are numerous YouTubes to watch.

Patrick Hayes
Fremont CA

PS:  No spectators allowed unless you had an RV reserved campsite.  I've had the same site for 15 years.

[Murray]

Oh, and cruisers cornering?  My Triumph America would go over more than any cruiser I've been on.

This is a bit like saying this is the best shit sandwich I've ever tasted IMO, its still a shit sandwich though.

[Kev m]

This is a bit like saying this is the best shit sandwich I've ever tasted IMO, its still a shit sandwich though.

Here's the thing.

Though I know it's easier to find the limits on "cruisers" those limits are hardly limiting to most riders.

I mean shit I've scraped pegs/boards on both my V7s, some Sportsters I've owned (mostly when lowered), my RK, and actually probably more times than any of them on other demo bikes that I just wasn't yet used to or on which I was not paying as much attention to body English.

But here's the thing. 99% of the time on my own stuff I'm already far above the speed limit and double the little yellow recommended cornering sign and I manage to hustle those things through without a touch.

WTF should it matter to me that when I hit the big sweeper it was at 75 mph on the Monster and only 70 mph in the giant Road King? Or that following a couple friends over mountain switchbacks I'm a few seconds behind them on the King? Honestly most of those times I really wouldn't be any faster on the Monster in the corner anyway What's a few MPH on the street?

I guess there are those who are so comfortable at cornering speeds that you're willing to throw away the margins of error in the street. But that's not me and I'm glad.

So I think most people just don't need a few more RCHs at the apex.

[Kev m]

Ok, now for the video itself.

Another really high quality production and well done on the technical points.

But like so many things today it editorializes because it's entertainment. Ok I can accept that.

I simply draw a different conclusion.

I love the new indians and glad they are around, but I still prioritize the experience of ownership that includes simplicity (hydraulic valves and air cooling because I don't need the extra hp in trade for extra maintenance).

I've ridden and really enjoyed the Scout, but I wouldn't be interested in the FTR AT ALL and it's not because of the "iconic heritage" crap FN was spewing but primarily because of ergonomics and riding position. Though ironically it's also that which helps keep me off a Scout.

Ergo I've long understood his points, but don't care. I'd still buy the Sporty.

[Aaron D.]

The Bobber in the video has lower pegs than the standard Scout. If you must, there are ways to get them higher.

But seriously, you want lots of clearance, buy something else,right?

[Kev m]

The Bobber in the video has lower pegs than the standard Scout. If you must, there are ways to get them higher.

But seriously, you want lots of clearance, buy something else,right?

It's weird, I could have sworn the original Scout listed lean angles of 31 or 32 degrees each side, but when I went to check just now I saw:

Scout: 29
Scout Bobber: 29
Scout Bobber Twenty: 29
Scout Bobber Sixty: 31
Scout Sixty: 31

https://www.indianmotorcycle.com/en-us/scout/compare/

I should note all the big bikes I checked (Roadmaster, Challenger, Springfield etc.) were listed as 31 degrees.


Typically speaking Harley Sportsters in the last decade or two ranged from 25ish (versions of the SuperLow) to 32ish (versions of the 1200R). Most were probably in the 28-30 range, and the current CX Roadster was 31 last I checked.

The big Harleys also ranged a low of 24ish (certain Softails before the redesign) to a high of 34 (CVO). Most of the touring models, if not lowered, were 31/32, but a lowered one might be in the 28 range.

[kingoffleece]

Acually, Murray, you couldn't be more wrong, or rude.  But don't let your opinion get in the way of a useless comment.

[LowRyter]

I didn't get past the first part, Sportster vs Scout?  Air vs Liquid Cooled. 

One thing we've learned about motorcycles for the last 20 years is that a water pump is worth all the turbochargers in the world.

[Kev m]

I didn't get past the first part, Sportster vs Scout?  Air vs Liquid Cooled. 

One thing we've learned about motorcycles for the last 20 years is that a water pump is worth all the turbochargers in the world.

His basic unstated hypothesis or underlying theme is that a Harley (any Harley but the 1200 Sporty hp is used an example) is somehow wrong because it uses a long-stroke, air-cooled motor which was once mechanically necessary but is faulty today simply because time has passed and a shorter stroke, OHC, water-cooled motor can therefore make more power because it can spin faster.

Like you're saying the basic mechanical premise is "well DUH"

The conclusion - well "that depends" on your point of view.

He goes on to make the argument that Harley is stuck being that way because of their customers (and stuck is wrong to him).

He also goes on to criticize the basic chassis of the Scout for similar reasons - that is is stuck low and long because of heritage/looks.

He finally silently concludes that all bikes from Harley or Indian should be the FTR because it doesn't have THOSE fatal flaws.

He does at one small point or so in the video admit that the north American market is fickle and these things are largely this way because it is what sells. So in theory his whole point could be that the consumers are wrong for the same reasons.

Basically it's well made piece that will get people talking about it, bringing more views, and more advertising dollars, because THAT is what HE does. What better way to do that but to stir the pot and say something he knows will be thumbs up to half the market and thumbs down to the other half.

[cloudbase]

The formula for horsepower hasn't changed.  Increase the MEP, increase the length of stroke, increase the piston area, or increase the RPMs.
Add cubic inches, which requires rectangular dollars.

[Aaron D.]

It's weird, I could have sworn the original Scout listed lean angles of 31 or 32 degrees each side, but when I went to check just now I saw:

Scout: 29
Scout Bobber: 29
Scout Bobber Twenty: 29
Scout Bobber Sixty: 31
Scout Sixty: 31

https://www.indianmotorcycle.com/en-us/scout/compare/

I should note all the big bikes I checked (Roadmaster, Challenger, Springfield etc.) were listed as 31 degrees.


Typically speaking Harley Sportsters in the last decade or two ranged from 25ish (versions of the SuperLow) to 32ish (versions of the 1200R). Most were probably in the 28-30 range, and the current CX Roadster was 31 last I checked.

The big Harleys also ranged a low of 24ish (certain Softails before the redesign) to a high of 34 (CVO). Most of the touring models, if not lowered, were 31/32, but a lowered one might be in the 28 range.

They were quoted at 31 I think. Using the reduced reach pegs raises them and moves them back. Adding boards reduces clearance, and I suspect the extended reach pegs may as well.

I looked at mid mount kits, but it isn't necessary if yo lean in a bit.

[LowRyter]

His basic unstated hypothesis or underlying theme is that a Harley (any Harley but the 1200 Sporty hp is used an example) is somehow wrong because it uses a long-stroke, air-cooled motor which was once mechanically necessary but is faulty today simply because time has passed and a shorter stroke, OHC, water-cooled motor can therefore make more power because it can spin faster.

Like you're saying the basic mechanical premise is "well DUH"

The conclusion - well "that depends" on your point of view.

He goes on to make the argument that Harley is stuck being that way because of their customers (and stuck is wrong to him).

He also goes on to criticize the basic chassis of the Scout for similar reasons - that is is stuck low and long because of heritage/looks.

He finally silently concludes that all bikes from Harley or Indian should be the FTR because it doesn't have THOSE fatal flaws.

He does at one small point or so in the video admit that the north American market is fickle and these things are largely this way because it is what sells. So in theory his whole point could be that the consumers are wrong for the same reasons.

Basically it's well made piece that will get people talking about it, bringing more views, and more advertising dollars, because THAT is what HE does. What better way to do that but to stir the pot and say something he knows will be thumbs up to half the market and thumbs down to the other half.

I guess you didn't read when I said that I didn't bother to watch it after seeing the two bikes.  One water cooled and the other air cooled.  That's as far as I took it.  But yeah, I know the Harley doesn't rev past 5k.  And that the Indian is a much newer design.  Didn't see a reason to mention more obvious stuff.

It you want to see a good Fort9, watch the one on chain lube.  I did learn that gear oil is better than all the special chain lube and waxes.  The kid is right about that.  Maybe you won't agree???  ? 

[Kev m]

I guess you didn't read when I said that I didn't bother to watch it after seeing the two bikes.  One water cooled and the other air cooled.  That's as far as I took it. 

I absolutely DID read that, which is why I SUMMARIZED the rest for you (or anyone else) who decided the video was "duh" content.

[LowRyter]

I absolutely DID read that, which is why I SUMMARIZED the rest for you (or anyone else) who decided the video was "duh" content.

So WHY did you quote me when all you wanted to do was to summarize the article for everyone else?

[Kev m]

So WHY did you quote me when all you wanted to do was to summarize the article for everyone else?

This is just you being obtuse right?

I mean I literally said FOR YOU (or anyone...

Literally.

Like literally.

Sorry thought you MIGHT care about where he was going if you didn't need to sit through it.

[LowRyter]

This is just you being obtuse right?

I mean I literally said FOR YOU (or anyone...

Literally.

Like literally.

Sorry thought you MIGHT care about where he was going if you didn't need to sit through it.

Nope, I didn't.  I saw he was comparing the Scout to a Sportster.   End of comparison. for me.

If you wanted to explain the nuances to the board, you didn't have to drag me into it. 

My point was that water cooled bikes have proven effectiveness for more power.  More than a turbo charger by comparison.  I could add multi cylinders, multi valves, etc., but I didn't.  You can.  But I'm not interested. 

[Kev m]

Nope, I didn't.  I saw he was comparing the Scout to a Sportster.   End of comparison. for me.

If you wanted to explain the nuances to the board, you didn't have to drag me into it. 

My point was that water cooled bikes have proven effectiveness for more power.  More than a turbo charger by comparison.  I could add multi cylinders, multi valves, etc., but I didn't.  You can.  But I'm not interested.

What a drag...I must be.

Ha ha well sorry man. But at the end of the day I find it funny to take offense to an offer of help.

I realize now it wasn't wanted, but the funny thing is the offer carried with it an explanation that the astute might have realized clarified or changed the light which was shone by the initial terse observation.

Again that the point of the video was NOT the "duh" moment you assumed from the mere introduction. But that he at least intended to draw some lines of thinking where the watcher would conclude, like him, that Harley is a unfortunate victim of their customers, and that most of North America places an unfair burden on their motorcycle manufacturers and that the world would be better with more FTRs and fewer Sportsters (or equivalents at both ends).

As such, the result may be equally dull and obvious to you, but let's be honest, you had no idea that was the message without the editorial.

So even if ungrateful, your response was ungracious.

Which is fine, I'm not complaining, simply pointing out the further irony.

Ride safe!

[LowRyter]

Kev, you've succeeded at wasting my time to the point that I could've watched the video in the first place and actually learned something of importance but of little value to me.  But certainly better than this.

[kingoffleece]

All over a video.............. ................... .for cripes sake.  The kid's entertaining.  Enjoy the ride.

[Canuck750]

All over a video.............. ................... .for cripes sake.  The kid's entertaining.  Enjoy the ride.

What he said, just enjoy the video

[Kiwi_Roy]

What he said, just enjoy the video

And the scenery, Vancouver British Columbia, my backyard.