Hi Red,
I do not know about Sympathy for the MOCO. [highlight]And regarding the adaptations that Harley has had to make to conform to the EPA, it can be done correctly[/highlight]. Look at the Suzuki M109R (109ci V-twin), the Yamaha Royal Star (113ci V-twin), and the Kawasaki Vulcan VN 2000 (125ci V-twin), and the big Honda, etc. These bikes all run great, and do not have built-in time-bomb issues that we Harley owners seem so willingly to accept. [smiley=soapbox.gif] [smiley=soapbox.gif]
RK,
I don't disagree with you, I had a 99 RK and a 2000 UC and road every mile wondering if I was going to grenade (never did) but I also bought warranties on those in case I kept them more than a couple years.
However, with regard to the emission minutia there is one glaring difference in the examples you use for it being done correctly; by personal experience with another
"icon" we all will someday face a change in our beloved MoCo product in the same way that traditionalist Porsche owners did in the late 90's when they had to start packing anti-freeze.
Royal Star 79-cubic-inch (1294cc)
liquid-cooled, DOHC, 70-degree V-4
Kawasaki Four-stroke,
liquid-cooled, DOHC, four valve per cylinder, 1,352 cc
Honda
Liquid-cooled, 52° V-twin, SOHC, 3-valves per cylinder 1,312 cc
Since the EPA drives emissions and they aren't getting any less strict, we may well face h20 in our future in order to meet stricter guidelines. The other large bore mfr's didn't and don't have the heritage we do and therefore don't have to face the loyal owners that the MoCo does when they make a change.
While the V-Rod was developed to expand the offerings of HD, they went to the number one automotive design/research facility in the world to build it; Porsche's Weissach facility in the hills outside of Zuffenhausen. Porsche had already bitten this bullet and watercooled its "boxer" style engine which was air cooled since the 40's. Everyone howled it would be the end of Porsche as we know it. Some feel it was, Porsche was selling roughly 15,000 units a year in the US, including Boxster which was already water cooled in 1997. But today, Porsche sells 40,000 plus units a year in the US, approximately 50% of the world wide production, granted some of these are not the traditional boxer engine equipped sport cars, but clearly the transition to water cooled engines without giving up any of the efficiency of the air cooled engine worked.
Somewhere in Milwaukie (or Weissach) you can imagine there are engineers tooling around on a Hog that has green slime running through its veins.
I might also point out that with the water came performance:
993 Engine: 3.4 litre normally aspirated
air cooled VarioRam engine producing 285 hp
996 Engine: 3.4 litre normally aspirated
liquid cooled producing 300 hp
Once they had the emissions/cooling figured out they not only had gained the 15 hp they went bigger since the engine cooling and emissions were no longer an issue:
997 Engine: 3.6 litre normally aspirated 325 hp
997 S Eng: 3.8 litre normally aspirated 355 hp
All of this by way of explanation that like it or not, we either live with the MoCo struggle to get a handle on the air cooled cooling/emission issue to maintain the heritage or fold our cards and deal with the slime. However, if
slime equals hp and cooling (and reliability) I am not so sure it would ultimately be a bad thing once we all got over it.
Some of us never would (get over it) and our air cooled bikes would instantly be classics and worth more money. Many would make the change and be happy for it.
If the solution to many of the emission related issues is to get wet and the result is reliability and increased horsepower...............I for one, may just have to get wet. [smiley=soapbox.gif]