I really hope the OP does not think that Triumph heads look like the Classic Triumphs. If so look again.

 

Yes, I guess I am confused. Does he want factory standard Iron head looking rocker arm covers akin to the fake fins on the Indians? I think the sporty evo covers are not bad looking. My '96 XL883 is not all that different "retro" wise from my '72 XLCH or my first bike, 61 XLH. I do appreciate the newer use of electric start, 5 gears and left hand shift. My '96 has the same (with mids) riding position (standard). I also appreciate the belt drive, while I love chain, I just don't ride gravel roads like I used to, so the belt is a benefit for me.

I guess to be a true retro, you need to stop making it, then years later rediscover your roots. Motorcyclesmodels like the Bonneville and Indian and cars like the T-bird and Camero. Harley's can't be retro cause they never left the best parts of their lineage, they just kept tweaking it to make it better and better. The Milwaukee 8 is as important as the Evolution engine. I for one am happy they did not put fake flathead fins on the rocker arm covers or Ironhead red eyed bolts on the evo covers. I think drum brakes or reduced area cover dics to mimic drums is foolish. And I like retro. I think the Triumph nailed it with the T100 and 900 Thruxton, but they walked away from retro with the 1200. So how important is retro as compared to performance and handling?
I do not think a non motorcycle rider could tell the difference between a '69 XLH and a 2010 XL883 and that most riders would immediately identify it as a Harley Sportster and not have a clue what year. Only true XL aficionados instantly recognize the difference in the motors. Fewer instantly recognize frame changes and ever fewer other differences. It takes inspection.

 

Most changes away from current to "retro" would either not be readily noticed, or would reduce functionality that we currently have.

 

I had the XLCR in mind when writing that blurb. I was reaching for examples.

 

Dealer explained the 48s tank, bars and beefy front end was a nod to bikes of thar era.

 

Looked drop-dead gorgeous, but was an awful thing to ride. Pal of mine had a near new one as his first and only Harley - he was hoping to get a cheaper version of my shovel-head! A rubber mount one should be much better.....

 

Rubber mounts are for sissies. 😉

 

To make mine "retro" I just changed to buckhorn handle bars. Mission accomplished.

 

I bought a new shovel, naturally a solid mount - as God intended! And kick-start only. Thing vibrated quite a bit when new, but steadily smoothed out and was a dream to ride by the time it cleared 10k miles. Those ironheads just never did cut it for me, indeed I couldn't bring myself to buy a Sporty until testing a rubber-mount. At last, 40 years later, I have one in my stable! It's great.....

 

I think a 48 is fairly retro as is.

Change the paint job and change to a solo seat.

IMO the dependability, starting ease, better suspension (yes, haha) and brakes are all improvements over year 1957. Yet that '57 is a nice bike; I'd ride it.