1987 FLHTC seat options???

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

Dec 4, 2009 | 03:31 PM

#11

oppirs

Road Warrior

Joined: Mar 2009

Posts: 1,885

Likes: 0

From: Chicago area

Quote:

Originally Posted by beardo

Do I have other options? What makes an 89-96 seat not work on the older touring bikes. I bring home an 87 FLHTC this weekend and want something else.

Ohhh that easy talk to Allen or any of his staff.

www.meancitycycles.com

A sponser and got my seat fixed so fast and back, JEEZZSZ

never has a co. been ready to deal with ??? and deliver so fast!

Opp

Dec 5, 2009 | 01:20 PM

#12

beardo

Thread Starter

Tourer

Joined: Aug 2008

Posts: 343

Likes: 21

I have a dealer discount (I still work there from time to time) so money isnt really the issue. I just need to know a year range for these bikes. Nothing seems concrete from what I have seen in the catalogs, so I figured I would ask and get feedback from people who have been there, done that.

For the record, I love Corbin seats. By far the best seats available. BUT they take a really long time for them to break in and mold to your backside and that seems to be the big reason why people dont really like them. They want their comfort now. Which is fine. Different strokes........

Dec 5, 2009 | 02:04 PM

#13

NorthGeorgiaHawg

Club Member

Joined: Jun 2007

Posts: 3,193

Likes: 7

From: North Atlanta Area, GA

Quote:

Originally Posted by beardo

Yep! People seem to have widely differing and strong opinions about seats. Alot of people love Corbins. I gave the Corbin that came with my bike quite awhile to conform to my backside like it's apparently designed to, but it never really seemed to change any. It always felt very hard and uncomfortable to me - but maybe it was just that particular Corbin style. My wife says that I don't *have* very much padding of my own back there, which is probably why I think the Mustang is so comfortable - it's got a lot of padding and feels very squishy. I apparently need that!

One major thing I like about the Mustang is that the throat is much narrower than the Corbin's throat was - nearly 2" narrower. The Corbin's throat seemed to put a lot of pressure on my thighs and push my legs out, and my legs would start feeling quite numb in less than an hour in the saddle. It got pretty scary because I would lose begin to lose feeling in my lower legs, too. Not good. If I were taller, maybe that wouldn't have been an issue - but it sure was with me. I don't have any pressure issues with the Mustang at all. I can ride all day in it and never feel any numbness in my legs or backside. I also have the rider backrest, which to me is absolutely necessary for long rides or my lower back starts killing me.

I'm 5'9" and I also lowered the rear end 1 1/2", which made the bike feel much more comfortable to me... I can put both my feet flat on the ground easily now. With the Corbin and before the lowering, I could only put my boot tips on the ground. I have read that in '97 Harley lowered the seat height with the new, wider frame... but since my bike is a '95, I had to lower it in the rear to make it feel right for me.

I guess that's why there are so many different seat types out there... to fit all the different backside types!

Dec 6, 2009 | 09:40 AM

#14

beardo

Thread Starter

Tourer

Joined: Aug 2008

Posts: 343

Likes: 21

Yeah, I had a Mustang seat before on an ironhead. It was a nice enough seat, but I didnt care for the narrowness. Excellent build quality.

Im getting a couple extra seats with it so I might just send out the stock seat and have it redone to my liking.

Thanks for all the info...