www.CVOHARLEY.com

Custom Vehicle Discussions => CVO™ Limited => Topic started by: 89Speedy on September 18, 2013, 04:09:51 AM

Title: Is there a wider engine guard available that would protect the fairing?
Post by: 89Speedy on September 18, 2013, 04:09:51 AM
Just wondering . . .
Title: Re: Is there a wider engine guard available that would protect the fairing?
Post by: Ironhorse on September 18, 2013, 08:32:00 AM
No,...and that's for a reason.

Any wider and it becomes a liability. Too wide and it might start snagging on things,...like the bike next to you, car bumpers and so on. What you are probably concerned about is not just a tip over,...but a tip ALL THE WAY over. Those are what scuff up the edges of the Bat Wing. I have, sad to say, experienced an all the way over tip over, and that usually happens on uneven ground where gravity pulls the bike all the way over.

What you may want to do is consider installing Highway Foot Pegs, and place them up a bit higher. These might act as a higher "stop" to keep the bike from going all the way over. But remember to fold them up when manuvering in tight quarters as they too might snag.

But I could be wrong.
Title: Re: Is there a wider engine guard available that would protect the fairing?
Post by: 89Speedy on September 19, 2013, 07:28:30 AM
No,...and that's for a reason.

Any wider and it becomes a liability. Too wide and it might start snagging on things,...like the bike next to you, car bumpers and so on. What you are probably concerned about is not just a tip over,...but a tip ALL THE WAY over. Those are what scuff up the edges of the Bat Wing. I have, sad to say, experienced an all the way over tip over, and that usually happens on uneven ground where gravity pulls the bike all the way over.

What you may want to do is consider installing Highway Foot Pegs, and place them up a bit higher. These might act as a higher "stop" to keep the bike from going all the way over. But remember to fold them up when manuvering in tight quarters as they too might snag.

But I could be wrong.
Good thinking, thank you!