Yes thats right, the Valk vs 1997, well not the entire year but the 1997 iteration of the Valkyrie, the one that kicked it all off and admittedly the jumping off point for many of the dissenters!
The F6C is certainly stylistically controversial, in a sense, it certainly looks like a modern bike, its sleek bodywork helps hide the mass and its "sportyness" is certainly a departure from the retro original. A massive point of contention seems to be the side pod mounted rads, for some reason the diehards claim these are an antithesis of what the original valk was meant to stand for. Help me out here, how does the radiator location have anything to do with the ethos of the F6C? I can understood if they turned it into a trike or a V-Twin, but radiators?
Its obvious Honda is moving in a new aesthetic direction, they are no longer attempting to fight Harley on their terms but have decided to evolve their styling into something much more progressive. Even their other Japanese rivals have been unable to answer as of yet.
Sure Honda could of built this F6C marginally different to the original F6C but at that point what IS the point? I mean why is it that the cruiser market has to look backwards in time in order to gain acceptance? Well I suppose it doesn't if you don't want their dollars, and I don't think Honda does. They are on record that the new Valk was designed with a younger more performance oriented rider in minds. Honda says the designers went after a raging bull effect, did it work? >