Electra Glide - ride and handling comparison
Thread Starter
|
Cruiser
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
From:
Electra Glide - ride and handling comparison
Wondering if any here have had a 1997-1998 Electra glide and could compare the ride/handling to the newer 2008-2009 (new frames) ?
To date I've heard nothing but good about the new frames, but most are comparing them to newer versions like the 2005 or 2006's.
So I'm wondering how they compare to even older yrs, like the Evo's last yr being 1998.
I would assume that there is a big difference but maybe not ?
Or just how much of a difference is there and are there any trade offs.
How about it, anyone out there driven both of these vintages ?
To date I've heard nothing but good about the new frames, but most are comparing them to newer versions like the 2005 or 2006's.
So I'm wondering how they compare to even older yrs, like the Evo's last yr being 1998.
I would assume that there is a big difference but maybe not ?
Or just how much of a difference is there and are there any trade offs.
How about it, anyone out there driven both of these vintages ?
Extreme HDF Member
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 14,744
Likes: 402
From: Phoenix '53, '88, '09 Big Twins
the new frame was introduced 2009
the up to 2008 frame is much the same as the 1985 frame, only minor changes to the frame were made through those years- so the difference from 85~2008 is maybe 10%.
the twincam ( 99+) is a rigid drivetrain with the motor and transmission bolted together into one big tough rigid/stiff slab-
the evo ( 84.5~98) drive train is 2 piece - the evo motor and transmission are 2 big pieces connected by the primary case- which can flex and even crack- ( the carlini torque arm/ s/e race brace corrected this by putting a slab of billet between the timing cover and the tranny on the right side ( I have one for sale).
this lack of rigidity does show in handling and vibration.
I had a '95, it was awesome- I rode it to 80K miles.
I waited until 2010 to get a newer model as i didn't think the incremental improvements over the years were sufficient to justify the expense
I bought an 09 an it is super-awesome, the handling is much improved, suspension, 96", improved drivetrain mounting system, 6 speed, the efi, the abs and brembos.
the all new frame is not only design, but material, welds and assembly- it really is different- the entire rear section is a bolt on subframe- this allows easier repair in an accident or the substitution of an aftermarket rear section such as the FBI drop seat
so my experience is that the 09+ really is worth having-- the earlier bikes, less so. and on a budget i would likely go to an evo rather than the twin cam teething pains --- which is exactly what the buyer of my '95 was after a great evo, rather than a so-so twin cam
here is a good read:
https://www.hdforums.com/forum/evo-c...eet-years.html
mike
the up to 2008 frame is much the same as the 1985 frame, only minor changes to the frame were made through those years- so the difference from 85~2008 is maybe 10%.
the twincam ( 99+) is a rigid drivetrain with the motor and transmission bolted together into one big tough rigid/stiff slab-
the evo ( 84.5~98) drive train is 2 piece - the evo motor and transmission are 2 big pieces connected by the primary case- which can flex and even crack- ( the carlini torque arm/ s/e race brace corrected this by putting a slab of billet between the timing cover and the tranny on the right side ( I have one for sale).
this lack of rigidity does show in handling and vibration.
I had a '95, it was awesome- I rode it to 80K miles.
I waited until 2010 to get a newer model as i didn't think the incremental improvements over the years were sufficient to justify the expense
I bought an 09 an it is super-awesome, the handling is much improved, suspension, 96", improved drivetrain mounting system, 6 speed, the efi, the abs and brembos.
the all new frame is not only design, but material, welds and assembly- it really is different- the entire rear section is a bolt on subframe- this allows easier repair in an accident or the substitution of an aftermarket rear section such as the FBI drop seat
so my experience is that the 09+ really is worth having-- the earlier bikes, less so. and on a budget i would likely go to an evo rather than the twin cam teething pains --- which is exactly what the buyer of my '95 was after a great evo, rather than a so-so twin cam
here is a good read:
https://www.hdforums.com/forum/evo-c...eet-years.html
mike
Last edited by mkguitar; Feb 28, 2012 at 12:41 PM.
Stellar HDF Member
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,561
Likes: 280
From: North Cental Iowa
The frames from 97-08 are basically the same, the swingarm was upgraded in 02 & has better bushings & larger axle & can be updated to the older frame. The front forks & brakes were updated in 00 & those also will swap back to earlier years. With some kind of stabilizer system the older frame is quite acceptable, so it just depends on what your budget will allow. I always recommend going as new as you can afford, sometimes it isn't any more in the long run considering maintenance costs, especially if you don't do your own work.
Stellar HDF Member
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 2,379
Likes: 226
Rode an 89 Electra Glide for many years. Evo, 5 speed, same brakes, wheels and forks as the 97/98. The frame was slightly different , but not much, and the dash was the older design. The swingarm and frame by the swing arm along with the stock shocks was the same as the 97/ 98 years.
Now ride a '11 Street Glide with ABS, 103" , 6 speed and electronic cruise control for the past 2 years or so..
The handeling of the '11 in the turns and straight aways, regardless of a smooth or bumpy road is much crisper, tighter and better than the older frame. The rear sway is all but eliminated in the new frame / swing arm design. The bike sits a tad higher than the older frame at the seat and the bike is a little longer than the older frame, but it feels "right".
The Brakes - it's not even close in performance, the lever feel, feedback and stopping power of the Brembos is light years ahead of what they had bolted on to the Evo's.
The 103 with a 6 speed (stock) vs the 80" 5 speed (stock) is a very noticable improvement in acceleration and cruising power in roll ons. 2 up - there is an even bigger difference. With the old evo - you knew when you were doing 80, you could feel it and hear it. With the 103, I'm just 'gliding along at that speed and the overall ride takes less effort from both me and the bike.
Now ride a '11 Street Glide with ABS, 103" , 6 speed and electronic cruise control for the past 2 years or so..
The handeling of the '11 in the turns and straight aways, regardless of a smooth or bumpy road is much crisper, tighter and better than the older frame. The rear sway is all but eliminated in the new frame / swing arm design. The bike sits a tad higher than the older frame at the seat and the bike is a little longer than the older frame, but it feels "right".
The Brakes - it's not even close in performance, the lever feel, feedback and stopping power of the Brembos is light years ahead of what they had bolted on to the Evo's.
The 103 with a 6 speed (stock) vs the 80" 5 speed (stock) is a very noticable improvement in acceleration and cruising power in roll ons. 2 up - there is an even bigger difference. With the old evo - you knew when you were doing 80, you could feel it and hear it. With the 103, I'm just 'gliding along at that speed and the overall ride takes less effort from both me and the bike.
Last edited by 89FLHT; Feb 28, 2012 at 02:39 PM.
Stellar HDF Member
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 2,379
Likes: 226
Just had to add this. I wanted ABS bad, so I was willing to finally give up my carbed EVO to get it, but loved that motor and the simplicity of the bike.
If I did not get the '11 SG, I had planned to sell the 89 and get a beat up 97 or 98 Evo glide, and go with a 96" S&S motor with a 6 speed, upgrade the swing arm and forks from an 07 and run newer wheels with updated brakes, slap in a decent stereo, shoot some paint and call it a day. Except for not having ABS, it would have fulfilled all my needs.
Just saw that damn '11 sitting on the showroom floor and couldn't resist...
If I did not get the '11 SG, I had planned to sell the 89 and get a beat up 97 or 98 Evo glide, and go with a 96" S&S motor with a 6 speed, upgrade the swing arm and forks from an 07 and run newer wheels with updated brakes, slap in a decent stereo, shoot some paint and call it a day. Except for not having ABS, it would have fulfilled all my needs.
Just saw that damn '11 sitting on the showroom floor and couldn't resist...
Cruiser
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
I kinda hate to resurrect an old thread (well....not really) but I have to add that the 85 - 96 e-glides handled much better for me than the 97 - 06.
I have owned a 1988, then later on a 1997, sold it and now ride a 1989. That 1997 had WAY less miles on it and was real squirrelly and wobbly feeling to me on the highway. I truly believe that the seat height played a large part in the handling, perhaps this is why the 2009 + bikes have a higher seat than the previous 1997 - 2006. From what I know, the seat height was the only major change from 1996 - 1997.
When I first rode my 1989, I had recently saved it from a barn ($2500!) and gone through the simple stuff to get her road worthy. It took me back to the early '90's when I would ride that 88 through the mountain twisties......sooooooo much tighter and predictable than the 1997. In my younger days (and dumber) I would ride for miles no-handed with that 1988, corners and all. Maybe someday I will get away from the Evo's and buy a 2009 + e-glide, but just to get the awesome brakes as my current bike just feels right to me.
Anyway, just my 2 cents worth.
I have owned a 1988, then later on a 1997, sold it and now ride a 1989. That 1997 had WAY less miles on it and was real squirrelly and wobbly feeling to me on the highway. I truly believe that the seat height played a large part in the handling, perhaps this is why the 2009 + bikes have a higher seat than the previous 1997 - 2006. From what I know, the seat height was the only major change from 1996 - 1997.
When I first rode my 1989, I had recently saved it from a barn ($2500!) and gone through the simple stuff to get her road worthy. It took me back to the early '90's when I would ride that 88 through the mountain twisties......sooooooo much tighter and predictable than the 1997. In my younger days (and dumber) I would ride for miles no-handed with that 1988, corners and all. Maybe someday I will get away from the Evo's and buy a 2009 + e-glide, but just to get the awesome brakes as my current bike just feels right to me.
Anyway, just my 2 cents worth.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
2008, 89, 97, 9798, comparison, comparisons, decent, electra, electraglide, glide, hd, motor, ride, speed, street
