Son of a whore!!! I got a speeding ticket!!!

[lagerdrinker]

Originally Posted by PiZdETS

I'll take you up on that bet... I'll even give you a headstart.

I have no respect for Harley's design, 50 or so horsepower from damn near 2 liters is pathetic and the torque does not make up for it when you compare it to the metric cruisers/tourers.

Its all gearing. my sportster does about 45mph in first gear at 6000rpm. When you consider most sportbikes do about 60-80mph in first at 14,000rpms you notice theres a huge gear reduction that gives them that acceleration. In effect the harley if it could rev to 14000 rpms it would do about 110mph in first gear. Thats all good and well, you have no respect and obviously it wont change your mind but ide love to race you on any metric cruiser comparable to my sportster since you stated yourself that compairing YOUR bike to a harley is like compairing apples to oranges or sportscars to minivans. lets race minivans, ill give you a headstart.

[Mr Lefty]

Originally Posted by lagerdrinker

Its all gearing. my sportster does about 45mph in first gear at 6000rpm. When you consider most sportbikes do about 60-80mph in first at 14,000rpms you notice theres a huge gear reduction that gives them that acceleration. In effect the harley if it could rev to 14000 rpms it would do about 110mph in first gear. Thats all good and well, you have no respect and obviously it wont change your mind but ide love to race you on any metric cruiser comparable to my sportster since you stated yourself that compairing YOUR bike to a harley is like compairing apples to oranges or sportscars to minivans. lets race minivans, ill give you a headstart.

1. I think the R6 does about 100 in first (or was that shit4life saying that)

2. a Harley reving to 14000? shit... I wouldn't put my balls anywhere near that motor...

[lagerdrinker]

Originally Posted by Ebbs15

1. I think the R6 does about 100 in first (or was that shit4life saying that)

2. a Harley reving to 14000? shit... I wouldn't put my balls anywhere near that motor...

I was taking what i know, my 2002 gsxr 750 does around 80(indicated) in first.
And yeah, a 3.5" piston on a 3" stroke at 14000rpms would be slightly risky as well as those 10" lawndarts called pushrods set to the right of them.

[OneSickPsycho]

Apples to oranges comparison. Harleys do what they are designed to do very well... fit and finish is unsurpased... reliability is dialed in, but people don't want to let the old AMF days die...

[lagerdrinker]

Originally Posted by OneSickPsycho

but people don't want to let the old AMF days die...

Yeah, i like how i get asked how much oil my harley leaks.

[OneSickPsycho]

Originally Posted by lagerdrinker

Yeah, i like how i get asked how much oil my harley leaks.

Mine leaks.

I shouldn't say that... It oozes... not even... the fucking front rocker panel wets the outside of the jug... fuck, I have no idea how to describe it... It's never wet, but the matte silver finish is blackened slightly from oil residue...

[Mr Lefty]

before or after your slide?

oh... and when you gonna update your bike thread?

[PiZdETS]

Originally Posted by lagerdrinker

Its all gearing. my sportster does about 45mph in first gear at 6000rpm. When you consider most sportbikes do about 60-80mph in first at 14,000rpms you notice theres a huge gear reduction that gives them that acceleration. In effect the harley if it could rev to 14000 rpms it would do about 110mph in first gear.

Ummm...just no. It's not the gearing that makes my bike go fast in all gears and yours go slow in all gears. It's about my bike having a modern, well made, cutting edge engine (in 2003) which makes 160 hp with 990 cc's, and your bike with it's antiquated engine making something way under 100 hp with almost double my displacement.
I'll give you 7 gears and I'll just take 2...and I'll still destroy you. Getting hypothetical with "if harleys could rev past..." is just silly.

Originally Posted by lagerdrinker

Thats all good and well, you have no respect and obviously it wont change your mind but ide love to race you on any metric cruiser comparable to my sportster since you stated yourself that compairing YOUR bike to a harley is like compairing apples to oranges or sportscars to minivans. lets race minivans, ill give you a headstart.

Now see your changing the race, you told phenix that he couldn't shake you on his 650, which I'm calling bullshit on for his bike and for my bike and just about any other sportbike on here. YOU brought up keeping up with sportbikes, I didn't.
I'll let you put nitrous on a vrod and I'll still rape you any ol day of the week. Power to weight my friend.

And if you wanna race cruisers, I'll take a Triumph Rocket III.

[lagerdrinker]

Originally Posted by PiZdETS

Now see your changing the race, you told phenix that he couldn't shake you on his 650, which I'm calling bullshit on for his bike and for my bike and just about any other sportbike on here. YOU brought up keeping up with sportbikes, I didn't.
I'll let you put nitrous on a vrod and I'll still rape you any ol day of the week. Power to weight my friend.

And if you wanna race cruisers, I'll take a Triumph Rocket III.

Phoenix is in PA and that offer is still open. me meeting you realistically is probably not gonna happen. you brought up metric cruisers knowing that your bike is a modern bike and comparison between the both is apples to oranges thats why i offered a real comparison between my cruiser and your choice of metric crusier of equal displacement.

Originally Posted by PiZdETS

I have no respect for Harley's design, 50 or so horsepower from damn near 2 liters is pathetic and the torque does not make up for it when you compare it to the metric cruisers/tourers.

This is the statement im refering to.

[lagerdrinker]

Originally Posted by PiZdETS

and I'll still destroy you.

and I'll still rape you any ol day of the week. Power to weight my friend.

Friend??? LOL, i need more friends like you