2015 Ultra Classic Low Question...
Seasoned HDF Member
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 6,080
Likes: 1,957
From: Somewhere on the Bourbon trail
Originally Posted by WildX
Look on the HD site. Trail and Rake differ from the regular model.
Trail - 6.7 in.
Rake(steering head)(deg) - 26
However, the SG, SGS, RG and RGS have a 6.8 in. trail. Funny, as the CVO versions are 6.7 in. trail.
Originally Posted by UltraClassicElectraGlide
No way would I spend the $8k, $9k or $10+ difference, plus the California tax and license fees, just to get the features of the Low when it's just parts that Harley has changed-out from the original configuration.
I somewhat agree, though. I lowered my RK when I bought it with Profile-Lows front and rear, mod the seat and got fat Heritage-Style bars. I would have changed the passenger footboards, but the wife likes the larger style. The shocks were a dealer trade, so just those mods cost about $400 for me.
Last edited by RKZen; Aug 27, 2014 at 05:24 PM.
Road Master
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 910
Likes: 7
From: Shaconage
Does anyone make an aftermarket lower profile primary cover? This is the first time I've heard of this. It would solve a major irritation for me. I'm average height (5,10), but the cover sticking out that far has always bothered me.
Outstanding HDF Member
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,878
Likes: 164
From: Northern California
It's just another way for the moco to keep the sheep coming in the door year after year. Most will trade their bikes every few years or so for the latest greatest and actually believe that they are getting a better product. There is nothing done to the 2014 or 2015 that can't be accomplished cheaper and better on the aftermarket. I just keep on laughing everytime I see something "new" from the moco. All they do is copy the aftermarket....usually its the other way around. Prices go up year after year for minimal improvements and the sheep keep following. Best bet is to get a 2012 or 2013 and ride it until the new frame comes out. And im not talking about some "stiffer" frame sections or inverted forks. Im talking about a radical change like what was done on the 2009 bikes. As long as people keep sucking up these "new" bikes (actually a better term is "re-marketed"), the moco will keep putting out the same ol crap.
I totally disagree with this post: I went from a 07 CVO Ultra to a 14 Limited resulting in a much better motorcycle. The Motor company has figured out that they must move the product line forward to keep sales rolling. IMHO, wet heads and linked brakes are considerable steps forward. The new front end is also a sizeable step forward. The new Low models will also fill a void. Would I trade a 09 - 13? Probably not, they are darn good bikes, I was happy trading a 07, it was a major leap.
The motor company is going to keep moving forward, each and every year. I know some would like them to stop, around the model year they own. Like it was back in the 90's. Harley competes with some great motorcycle brands, moving forward like they are doing is the only way to stay in business. Old times like myself are near the end. I think they are doing it right other than prices. Gone are the days of painless trades. My motto is; be happy for anyone that buys a new bike, just as I'm happy for anyone that still loves and rides a older bike. To each their own!
Thread Starter
|
Road Warrior
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,384
Likes: 3
From: California
Not sure which models you are comparing... looking at the Ultra Classic and Ultra Classic Low, both state rake 26 degrees and steering 6.7 inches. There is a difference in ground clearance, 5.3 in. vs. 4.6 in which is probably explained by the front and rear Profile Low shocks, I would guess.
Otherwise, same length, wheelbase, weight, tires, etc.
Otherwise, same length, wheelbase, weight, tires, etc.
Last edited by UltraClassicElectraGlide; Aug 27, 2014 at 06:39 PM.
Not sure which models you are comparing... looking at the Ultra Classic and Ultra Classic Low, both state rake 26 degrees and steering 6.7 inches. There is a difference in ground clearance, 5.3 in. vs. 4.6 in which is probably explained by the front and rear Profile Low shocks, I would guess.
Otherwise, same length, wheelbase, weight, tires, etc.
Otherwise, same length, wheelbase, weight, tires, etc.
Same bike, with lowering cartridge in forks, and SG shocks.
Thread Starter
|
Road Warrior
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,384
Likes: 3
From: California
As of this post from the HD site for all the touring family, including CVO:
Trail - 6.7 in.
Rake(steering head)(deg) - 26
However, the SG, SGS, RG and RGS have a 6.8 in. trail. Funny, as the CVO versions are 6.7 in. trail.
If you're comparing same year models, the difference is about $900 - $1150. If you're comparing your 2010 vs. 2015, you'll have to consider the Rushmore Project differences, including ABS/Linked brakes, new forks, Infotainment, HO motor, etc. vs. your 2010 UC in todays dollars.
I somewhat agree, though. I lowered my RK when I bought it with Profile-Lows front and rear, mod the seat and got fat Heritage-Style bars. I would have changed the passenger footboards, but the wife likes the larger style. The shocks were a dealer trade, so just those mods cost about $400 for me.
Trail - 6.7 in.
Rake(steering head)(deg) - 26
However, the SG, SGS, RG and RGS have a 6.8 in. trail. Funny, as the CVO versions are 6.7 in. trail.
If you're comparing same year models, the difference is about $900 - $1150. If you're comparing your 2010 vs. 2015, you'll have to consider the Rushmore Project differences, including ABS/Linked brakes, new forks, Infotainment, HO motor, etc. vs. your 2010 UC in todays dollars.
I somewhat agree, though. I lowered my RK when I bought it with Profile-Lows front and rear, mod the seat and got fat Heritage-Style bars. I would have changed the passenger footboards, but the wife likes the larger style. The shocks were a dealer trade, so just those mods cost about $400 for me.
Throw in another $1,805 plus the tax and license on that number gets you a Rushmore model... $15k and the title to my bike just doesn't work for me, as cool and as nice as those bikes are. I'm glad for everyone that sees it differently and bought a 2014 or has already ordered a 2015.
Speaking of 2015 models, I called my local dealer yesterday to see how soon they are bringing out the new ones from the back... was told they have four Road Glides in stock and three were already sold.
Last edited by UltraClassicElectraGlide; Aug 27, 2014 at 07:04 PM.
Seasoned HDF Member
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 6,336
Likes: 67
From: SW Minnesota
Not sure which models you are comparing... looking at the Ultra Classic and Ultra Classic Low, both state rake 26 degrees and steering 6.7 inches. There is a difference in ground clearance, 5.3 in. vs. 4.6 in which is probably explained by the front and rear Profile Low shocks, I would guess.
Otherwise, same length, wheelbase, weight, tires, etc.
Otherwise, same length, wheelbase, weight, tires, etc.
HD Forum Stories
The Best of Harley-Davidson for Lifelong Riders
7 Surprising Harley-Davidson Products that Are Not Motorcycles
Verdad Gallardo
8 Best Harley-Davidson Motorcycles Ever
Pouria Savadkouei
10 Worst Harley-Davidson Motorcycles Ever
Pouria Savadkouei
Killer Custom's Jail Break Is The Breakout That Refused to Blend In
Verdad Gallardo
Crazy Bunderbike Build Looks Amazing, But Is It Impossible to Ride?
Verdad Gallardo
Harley-Davidson Reveals Super Cool Cafe Racer Concept
Verdad Gallardo
Engraved Rebellion: Inside Bundnerbike's Glam Rock II
Verdad Gallardo
10 Motorcycles You Should Never Buy
Joe Kucinski
10 Things Harley-Davidson Needs to Fix in 2026
Verdad Gallardo
Stellar HDF Member
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,674
Likes: 84
From: New Jersey
What is the deal with the "reduced diameter grips"? From the photos, they look like they aren't heated. Anyone confirm??
Road Master
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 803
Likes: 3
From: In the wind.....
I sat on one inside a dealer today and embarrassingly I have no idea if they are heated or not. I was not pleased with the smaller diameter. My wife with her small hands liked it. I felt they were too small and the bars were too close to me. At 6'2" I did like the seat height.