How to save Harley Davidison
in [Motorcycles]
|
Prev: Proper oil for cruisers
Next: 9-11 was an inside job.
From: Mark Olson on 15 Jul 2010 12:46 Mark Olson wrote: > TOG(a)Toil wrote: >> You see very few 1800s here. Looks like the dedicated Wing Nuts prefer >> the older bikes. > > Well, one factor might be that they're expensive here, and I can't imagine > how much more they sell for in the UK. Doesn't seem to stop the generally > affluent middle-aged crowd from buying them here in great numbers, and also > getting them "triked", which is /really/ eye-wateringly expensive. My GWRRA buddy reckons 80% of the Wings he sees are 1800s. And according to him, that's not other GWRRA members, that's just bikes he sees while he's commuting. I think his estimate is high but I would say that at least 50% of the Wings I see on the road are 1800s.
From: J. Clarke on 15 Jul 2010 12:59 On 7/15/2010 10:43 AM, tomorrow(a)erols.com wrote: > On Jul 15, 2:20 am, totallydeadmail...(a)yahoo.co.uk (The Older > Gentleman) wrote: >> don (Calgary)<hd.f...(a)telus.net> wrote: >>> On Wed, 14 Jul 2010 07:13:40 +0100, totallydeadmail...(a)yahoo.co.uk >>> (The Older Gentleman) wrote: >> >>>> High Plains Thumper<h...(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: >> >>>>> Actually, I'd like to see Harley put the water cooled V-Rod engine into >>>>> a cruiser. I know it would break the mould of oil cooled offerings at >>>>> the loss of the potato - potato - potato sound. But I feel that it is >>>>> inevitable that such should happen. >> >>>> Agree 100%. >> >>>> I'd also like to see it in a more coherent touring bike than what they >>>> make at the moment. Something with a decent chassis, more power >>>> (obviously!), more ground clearance and the sort of sophistication that >>>> would give BMW a few worries. >> >>>> They could do it - they just *choose* not to. Which is a bit odd. >> >>> They could choose build a better mouse trap too, but that is not in >>> their business plan. >> >> Ah, if you know their business plan, you're doing better than I am. >> >>> They know what they do well and they understand >>> what their customers are looking for. To date they are doing a damn >>> good job of keeping their customers happy. I doubt they care very much >>> you find it "odd". >> >> Really. I find it odd that, for example, they've not made a flat twin >> for the thick end of 40-50 years. >> >> (Actually, nor has anyone else I can think of except for the Russians - >> and Chinese). > > Damn it, why isn't Honda responding to the OBVIOUS threat of the new > Triumph and coming out with a line of their own three-cylinder > motorcycles? They're losing sales and missing a GREAT marketing > opportunity! > > For that matter, where is Honda's response to the Chevy Silverado > HD2500 and HD3500? Just because GM does heavy duty pick-up trucks > well, Honda is CONTENT to not challenge them and take over THAT > market? Gee, I guess Honda just isn't INTERESTED in being *ALL* they > could be! Give 'em time. Right now they're setting up to take over the jet engine market.
From: S'mee on 15 Jul 2010 13:07 On Jul 15, 12:20 am, totallydeadmail...(a)yahoo.co.uk (The Older Gentleman) wrote: > S'mee <stevenkei...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > On Jul 14, 12:25 pm, totallydeadmail...(a)yahoo.co.uk (The Older > > Gentleman) wrote: > > > > I wonder if they'll ever dust off the old Porsche designed lump? I've > > > got an article about that in my magazine archive, dating from about > > > 1982. Very interesting. > > > The Nova? I dunno, might need to be seriously reworked imo. But that's > > just my take on it. > > Oh, I'm sure it would have to be, after 30 years. Just a thought. > Biggest change isn't architectur<sic> but rather making it water cooled without changing the exterior dimensions of the engine then fitting it with a modern FI system. Not much to change frame wise...dimensionally anyway. Maybe minor changes due to materials. Modern suspension wouldn't be a major change just common sense. The hard part would be holding to the principle of K.I.S.S. when making the changes.
From: Bob Myers on 15 Jul 2010 13:29 J. Clarke wrote: > Of course if someone wants a standard and Harley doesn't make one, > that's Harley's error. You can't win unless you play the game. But it's not quite that simple. In many cases, what's in the buyer's mind isn't something specific like "I want a standard," but rather "I want a motorcycle." And in that case, you look at all of the available options and go with the one that appeals to you most. When that happens, any and all considered under that broader expression of interest are your competition, whether or not their products are aimed exactly where yours are. Bob M.
From: Bob Myers on 15 Jul 2010 13:33
J. Clarke wrote: > On 7/14/2010 7:19 PM, don (Calgary) wrote: >> On Wed, 14 Jul 2010 07:13:40 +0100, totallydeadmailbox(a)yahoo.co.uk >> (The Older Gentleman) wrote: >> >>> High Plains Thumper<hpt(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: >>> >>>> Actually, I'd like to see Harley put the water cooled V-Rod engine >>>> into a cruiser. I know it would break the mould of oil cooled >>>> offerings at the loss of the potato - potato - potato sound. But >>>> I feel that it is inevitable that such should happen. >>> >>> Agree 100%. >>> >>> I'd also like to see it in a more coherent touring bike than what >>> they make at the moment. Something with a decent chassis, more power >>> (obviously!), more ground clearance and the sort of sophistication >>> that would give BMW a few worries. >>> >>> They could do it - they just *choose* not to. Which is a bit odd. >> >> They could choose build a better mouse trap too, but that is not in >> their business plan. They know what they do well and they understand >> what their customers are looking for. To date they are doing a damn >> good job of keeping their customers happy. I doubt they care very >> much you find it "odd". > > But what is their objection to getting more customers of a different > kind from the ones that they have? None at all, if that were the only concern. It never is. If you're a manufacturer, you are going to have a certain finite amount of money/resources to put toward new product development, including development for markets you're not currently playing in at the moment. You're going to want to put that into those efforts which you believe will give you the greatest return, and that may or may not mean that you should be getting into something new at any given point in time. The trick with different markets and product offerings, of course, is just what Kenny Rogers said - you've got to know when to hold 'em, and know when to fold 'em (and start doing something different). Countless companies have gone under by missing that sort of call, in either direction. Bob M. |