'89' vs '95 Electra Glide
#1
#2
#3
#5
The following users liked this post:
Uncle Larry (11-17-2018)
#7
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Southeast Michigan 15 Minutes East Of Hell
Posts: 147,603
Received 47,791 Likes
on
18,561 Posts
I agree with Dan ... The more current your purchase, the more available parts are ... FWIW trying to find bag parts for the pre 1993 bags can be hard and very expensive ... Good luck on your hunt
Trending Topics
#9
With the early bags the r/h one was cut to fit around the battery, which was installed on the outside of the frame. From around '94 the oil bag was removed from the frame and integrated under the transmission casing. While the later bags look the same shape as the early ones they are actually bigger all round, in addition to no longer having the battery cutout.
The following users liked this post:
Kingglide549 (11-17-2018)
#10
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Grew up in Texas, moved to AZ
Posts: 915
Received 293 Likes
on
199 Posts
Lots of differences already mentioned. I would recommend getting the newer model bike, given mileage and cost into consideration. More parts availability.
Here a few more differences to consider: splined (95) vs. keyway transmission shaft; possible case weakness in '89; '89 did not come with CV carb, it came with Keihin butterfly; '89 came with Torrington cam bearings (don't know if 95 was stock); '89 had a better stock cam (L-cam?).
Both will be great bikes. I have an 89 and like it very much.
Here a few more differences to consider: splined (95) vs. keyway transmission shaft; possible case weakness in '89; '89 did not come with CV carb, it came with Keihin butterfly; '89 came with Torrington cam bearings (don't know if 95 was stock); '89 had a better stock cam (L-cam?).
Both will be great bikes. I have an 89 and like it very much.