Glad you like it. Get highway pegs and rest your heels on the outside of them with your feet pointing out. You take up about as much of the lane as a car does. Very satisfying
The term used over here is power cruiser but yeah, you're pretty much right. It was aimed at the aging sportbike crowd. Those people ready to transition from a sportbike to a cruiser that was still fast and agile enough not to bore them. It's a tough market and a small enough niche that I'm not sure success was ever going to be feasible. They were competing against the diavel, the vmax and the m109 which all already had a market presence. Plus the fact that it's big and heavy will intimidate a lot of potential riders. Late to the market and a small potential audience is generally a guarantee to fail. It's much easier to see in hindsight though.Sports cruiser?
Very impressive information, it is very helpful in decision-making for the future. Thank you for sharingI managed a second ride one evening last week after work, 150km. Again, mixed freeway and winding roads. It took 7.7 litres to refill the tank, so 19.5km/litre or 46mpg (US). Damm good! Means over 400km fuel range.
Today I did a 350km run. This time the fuel gauge went down almost as I watched.
16.25km/l or 38.5mpg. Average for Valkyrie 1800 in Fuelly is 41.7mpg. I guess I was riding more enthusiastically this time. The 2nd last segment of the 8 bar fuel gauge went off at about 275km, 17 litres, with 6 litres to go, in theory. I'll be sure when I run the bike until it stops. There is a lot of space above the fuel when it reaches the bottom of the filler tube and surges up. You could trickle a fair bit more in there if you were patient enough. At least I can assume 350km on a tankful.
From the service manual:
Primary reduction 78/49
Top gear 24/35
Secondary reduction 36/35
Final reduction 33/12
Revs/km for 180/55-17 tyre 505
Result 38.4 km/h, 24mph per 1000 engine rpm in top gear, or 2600rpm at 100km/h, 2900rpm at 112km/h, 70mph
My dash appeared to confirm this. The last 200rpm bar below 3000rpm on the tach turned on at about 115km/h (indicated) while accelerating very gently, turned off at about 107 while decelerating.
Differences between Valkyrie and F6B/Goldwing:
No fairing, radio, panniers (obviously!)
No centre stand
All LED lights
Same frame, except less rigid engine support beam to improve feel (really?)
Lighter rear subframe
1" larger wheels at each end
Lower load rating tyres (only 1.2% increase in rear tyre diameter, 0% at front),
Longer forks? (same rake, 5mm longer trail)
No anti dive on the front forks?
Bigger front disks
Four opposed piston calipers instead of 3 piston single acting calipers in front (no linked brakes)
Three piston single acting caliper in back (same), but with all 3 working off the rear brake lever
Fuel tank (2 litres smaller) in conventional location instead of under seat
Different air box to accommodate the fuel tank
Same drive train, possibly different fuel map in the ECU
3kW, 4hp less power
Did I miss anything?
The bike is unconditionally stable. I tried waggling the bars, but they were completely "dead" at any speed I tried, just like with my Daytona 955i. I think this is the result of a very stiff frame and front end. It won't weave or wobble at any speed, even hitting mid-corner bumps.
The Valk has joined two other obsolete bikes in my garage; Daytona 955i and Husqvarna TR650 Strada. I wonder why this bike failed to succeed. It has performance-biased suspension, impeccable handling, good ground clearance, fantastic brakes and turbine smooth power. It's comfortable and sounds good, great fun to ride anywhere. Much more than a cruiser. Sports cruiser?
I’m interested in your post, are you saying that you put a FB spring on a Honda Valkyrie? If so can you explain in detail how it rides?Thank you in advance.I put in the F6B spring from progressive. Not expensive and not that hard to change. Made a noticeable difference, but not a monumental one.