I really needed to share this with someone, and thought the folks on this site might understand it best...
As one of the RT5 "test pilots," I've gotten a lot of questions about whether or not the RT has adequate horsepower. I have tried to answer those questions as honestly as possible, re: "I believe it has sufficient power, but have to admit I wish it had more, only because it would be even more fun then."
This is my opinion, having ridden my RT 8,000 miles, two-up, pulling a fully-loaded RT622 trailer, across the length of the country, three mountain ranges and the Mojave Desert.
However, a couple of other journalists, who each rode an RT for a day-and-a-half and less than 200 miles, have written in their magazines about the engine being "weak," or feeling "taxed," and quite frankly, not quite up to the task.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but I just want to point something out:
Just this past year, Harley-Davidson introduced the Tri-Glide, which is a Lehman trike conversion of an Electra Glide. The Tri-Glide weighs 300 pounds MORE than the RT, with an engine that produces 30 horsepower LESS than the RT, and yet the same publications that chastised the Spyder for a lack of power, lauded the Tri-Glide for having "..all the juice anybody would need.."
Add to that a price tag that starts $10,000 higher than the Spyder, considerably less packing space, and fuel mileage that is not one bit better, and you've got to wonder ... could the amount of advertising dollars spent in these magazines possibly be influencing their evaluations? Or perhaps it is just that old "Harley Mystique" that says, "If I have to explain it, you wouldn't understand."
They are correct -- I don't understand.
Fred
As one of the RT5 "test pilots," I've gotten a lot of questions about whether or not the RT has adequate horsepower. I have tried to answer those questions as honestly as possible, re: "I believe it has sufficient power, but have to admit I wish it had more, only because it would be even more fun then."
This is my opinion, having ridden my RT 8,000 miles, two-up, pulling a fully-loaded RT622 trailer, across the length of the country, three mountain ranges and the Mojave Desert.
However, a couple of other journalists, who each rode an RT for a day-and-a-half and less than 200 miles, have written in their magazines about the engine being "weak," or feeling "taxed," and quite frankly, not quite up to the task.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but I just want to point something out:
Just this past year, Harley-Davidson introduced the Tri-Glide, which is a Lehman trike conversion of an Electra Glide. The Tri-Glide weighs 300 pounds MORE than the RT, with an engine that produces 30 horsepower LESS than the RT, and yet the same publications that chastised the Spyder for a lack of power, lauded the Tri-Glide for having "..all the juice anybody would need.."
Add to that a price tag that starts $10,000 higher than the Spyder, considerably less packing space, and fuel mileage that is not one bit better, and you've got to wonder ... could the amount of advertising dollars spent in these magazines possibly be influencing their evaluations? Or perhaps it is just that old "Harley Mystique" that says, "If I have to explain it, you wouldn't understand."
They are correct -- I don't understand.
Fred
The Spyder is a whole different animal. I've done a few little things to make it run better but this is not a power cruiser or a sportbike. For what it is it has plenty of power. I would like to see a true performance Spyder down the road, I would be all over that but having put 43,000+ miles in less than two years of riding the Spyder I can honestly say that comfort was more of an issue on my RS than power. The RT has addressed all those concerns about comfort and then some. It's a great package as it is and like you I think it will soon change the way people look at open air touring. :doorag:
