Harley Dyna Switchback

Kev

I'm curious how the Switchback feels compared to the other Touring family H-Ds such as the Road King. At some £4k cheaper there has to be some reason why Harley can still sell the Switchback alongside the RK.

A;lso what are their plans with the XR1200? I see it's in the range for 2012 but it appears as though nothing's been done to it. Is it intended for them to keep this model going? I do hope so.

Nice review Kevin.

Wish this model was available several years ago, when I pulled the trigger on an Ultra.

This model should feel much sportier vs the Road King. It weighs about 100lbs less!!!

However, not sure why HD would limit its ground clearance and reduce the tank size to 4.7US gallons vs 6.0 for the RK? Big mistake IMHO.

If you are touring one-up, this model looks to be better than a RK IMO.

And you save lots of money as well - about $2,500US, comparably equipped.

Cheers and thanks again.

I got to ride the Switchback, on Sunday, with it's panniers removed but screen still in situ. My thoughts:

It's seat is noticeable tapered at the front to help the short of leg and the rear of the seat isn't as wide as the Glide's say, although the pillion seat is easily as good. But the lower weight and extra agility are noticeable, making it easier to turn quickly.

I prefer its lower mid-height screen to that of the Road King Classic say, and most people will be looking over it, rather than through it. The model I rode was a 103 and yet it wasn't as smooth as the 96 Street Glide I rode immediately before it, which genuinely surprised me as the 103 in the Wide Glide that I also rode on Sunday and other Harley's that I tried last month fitted with the 103 were all buttery smooth. Hhhmmm?

As the Wide Glide and Switchback are both Dyna's you would assume that they both use the exact same generic Dyna frame and would both feel the same vibration-wise on the move, but maybe not so? It could be put down to it having a brand new motor, but then again the Wide Glide had only done 69 miles from new itself, so hardly glazed its bores yet. But that's still not to say that it wasn't smooth 'enough' and never felt particularly wanting for power at the legal speeds that we travelled at.

Overall I'd say it's achieved it's objective really. To be a better choice for those that hanker after a Road King but know it's weight and dimensions are just that little bit too much for their own frame. Probably a better choice than a Road King for the averaged size woman or man who is short in leg length or perhaps strength even; let be honest these things aren't exactly Street Triples are they? For giraffe's like me I prefer to stretch out a little more which is why forward controls on Harley's or the long travel suspension on adventure/dual-sports bikes seem to suit me better.

Generally all the bikes still have harsh gearboxes really, requiring a firm prod IMHO. And the low mileage bikes were particularly hard to find neutral on. Of course you soon get used to living with this and the required foot effort involved until you get it seamlessly right; but it's something you really shouldn't have to.

Triumph used to have similarly bad boxes but have moved towards one's that seem to have neutral-assist (like Victory's do), very light shift-effort and short throws. The very latest one's, like the Tiger 800 particularly, are really effortless to use and its only when you try something like that does your eyebrow raise a great deal and mouth take on a distinct Cherie Blair look, when the Harley's cog slots home with all the subtly of a lump hammer on an anvil.

I believe Triumph claimed the biggest improvement came from just a tiny adjustment to the selector mechanism. If a small company on a trading estate in the middle of England can get it right, Harley who are ten times larger and then some really ought to redesign their gearbox to make it easier for all to use. But this aside, they are of course a joy to ride.

I've read some of the UK press reviews of it and other recent Harley tests and they do seem to miss a lot of key details that might matter to an owner. They'll say thing things like they haven't made much of an effort with design, whilst missing the fact that the tanks don't have a mass produced pressed seam for instance. Or they'll say the spec is poor, whilst missing the Kardon Harman stereo, cruise control, air suspension and keyless ignition. They'll say the quality is poor, whilst ignoring the hand finished and nearly four times thicker than any other manufacturers paint. Or they'll say there's not much tech going on, whilst ignoring the completely hidden CAN wiring loom, invisible cabling inside the handlebars, RBW throttle systems, rear cylinder shut-down at idle and accelerometers embedded in the self-cancelling indicators which work perfectly every single time (btw no need to cancel them though Kev, that's like buying a dog and barking yourself! ;-D). Sometimes they mention they're expensive (even if it was the cheapest bike 'as tested' in the last test I read), rather than costing a lot, but forget to mention the biggest running costs are residual losses which HD fair better than most or arguably all. Or they compare them to a bike with 100 hp and four cylinders more and say it lacks go at illegal speeds - doh, well go figure! :-D

Anyway, back to the Switchback. A fairly nice steed to ride for anyone that wants a mid sized heavyweight cruiser, with the ability to convert from boulevard poser to practical weekend long distance trip warrior in a faster time than it takes your local starbucks to brew up your favourite tipple.

Thanks Shuggs. I've been to a few factory's (Triumph, HD and so forth) as I know you have too. I was pretty impressed at the tech in the Harley factory, watching fenders (mudguards!) being cut by lasers, computers measuring pressure points in saddles (seats!), sophisticated audio juggling trademark sound (king-edwards, king-edwards!) versus noise control.

I can only say that the Harley's I have bought have been extremely well made. They've not corroded like a couple of my Triumph's did. They've not had failed switchgear or cut out like my S1000R did. And they've also had strong easy starting at total odds with my boxers and Ducati's. The only weakness I've seen is about ten years ago when they used Michael Mouse banjo clips on the exhaust systems which tarnished nearly as quickly as a BMW boxers header pipes.

I agree with you that the idiots lights and tidy icons/numerics are a myopic's nonsense. If it doesn't come out of the 40/50's its as though they don't want you to see it. I was kinda surprised to see a selected gear indicator on the Switchback and digital revs indication too; two things again omitted from most hacks scribbling on this particular model.

I'm far from a Harley lover more an admirer. I guess its lazy journalism an unrealistic outlooks that mildly annoy me more than anything. It's kinda like putting an R1200GS up against a KTM250 dirt bike on a motor-cross track and then slagging the GS off for being heavy and not all that. Or reporting on the release of the (then) new R1 and omitting to mention it's been fitted with a cross-plane crank.

I just kinda think, if you're not interested in the provision of a detailed product evaluation based on its genre and target audience then don't bother in the first place - a Harley orientated magazine hack could just as easily slag off an R6 for having no torque, comfort, panniers or big screen to sit behind, but it would be futile to evaluate it like that so they either don't bother or don the leathers and ride it on track; obvious!

Of course this is no reflection on Kev or his article (as I said above "Good review Kev"), else I wouldn't of hung around here for hhhmm a very long time now! I know that lazy journalism annoys him too, as he's said how some have been lazy enough to practically repeat the press releases in print verbatim! And the scribes this side of the pond, are even worse on that front, truth be known. I feel like saying to them that if I wanted to know the spec of the bike and see some studio shots I could have surfed the manufactures web site in five minutes flat at no cost for the same information provided!

What we want to hear is (one man's) opinions! That's why the journo is on the launch. I really wanted to hear that the Tiger 800 was a Fazer 600 Mk I re-incarnate with modern clothes and grunty thrusting midrange powerplant. When Kev was the only journo saying (in different words) it's perfectly fine but it's no Diavel in the midrange and a little revy without zinging top end of a STR kind thing , my heart kinda sank, because as we all know he's pretty immune to all the press release PR BS and provides his conclusions based on being his own man. I.e. I knew he'd be on the money, supported by my own test rides of the stock/XC models - not that I didn't love the Tiger and think it's engine is fine within its scope of use!

So not so much Harley lover as simply wanting to see them fairly evaluated and regularly disappointed when they get judged on limited (lazy) journalism research and incorrect appropriation. I.e. Evaluate them against other (preferably closely matched) cruisers and then don't slag them off as not being as good at the Nurburgring as your long-term ZX10RR - its just patronising at best to the reader!

If you try the Switchback Shuggs, I hope you enjoy it. It doesn't tick enough boxes for me personally (I prefer the more comfortable Street Glide - which only needs a taller screen), and I had a few issues with the seat and vibes, but as mentioned above I think its basically achieved their objective of a more agile Road King, for those looking for that.

Cheers, as always, Shuggs. The Diavel vs V-Rod is a good test. They're both power cruisers with half decent power. Although the Diavel should handle better and go faster, and is technically therefore better compared with the Vmax, we all know ultimate power isn't everything in these type of tests, else we'd have bought the Yamaha instead of our Carbon Reds. I hope they fit matching new tyres to the HD and Ducati, to better judge the bikes, and you end up with a new set! :-D

All big twins I've owned (Boxers, MTS, twin-cam 88 [1458 cc] Harleys) have all struggled to start on the g-of-go when left for a week or so unridden. But when HD moved to the twin cam 96 (1596 cc), and not unlike Triumph around the same time period, they did something (starter motor, battery, ignition, coil, whatever?) to the bikes that suddenly made them much easier to start. The Beemer K series also got far better from the K13 onwards too. With my last boxer (R1200GS) they actually released a recall (after I'd sold my bike) to improve the starting.

Those big heavy pistons in 1200-1600 cc twins must require a bit of grunt to get them moving after a decent sleep, so a prod or two, followed by a slow turn and eventual start and often grumpiness for a while is still better than no start at all. Annoyingly though its a trait my Diavel also shares, despite dedicated battery charger hardwired in when I want to use it!

Thanks for your postings extolling the virtues of the AirHawk too. I know you have a vested interested, but I used mine for a 800 mile three day trip a couple of weeks ago and I could ride until the fuel run out without discomfort; much better than the touring seat, which is much better than the stock seat. Shame about the looks, but then again not every pretty girl is easy to live with.

If you, or anyone else, rides the Switchback it'd be good to hear the good, bad and indifferent comments...

Fair points made, but some are (totally unintentionally I'm sure) misleading:-

No Harley has a chromed engined as standard. But Dyna's do tend to have polished heads versus the Touring range chromed. I believe this is reflected in the lower asking price.

Their EVO engine was in fact the 1340 cc. Twin cam 88's were 1458 cc and I can find no evidence to support a common cam chain tension failing on the thinterweb. My own 88 and 96 engines ran perfectly and sounded sweet.

Harley's do not "cut out in traffic", rather the 103 models onwards are capable (switchable) of being set to enable the rear cylinder to shutdown whilst idling, to reduce heat (rider comfort, not reliability) and fuel consumption.

I think its a very good observation that you make, that the Diavel is like the VRod of its day, on initial release. I'm kind of surprised that a journalist hasn't concurred in same based on the many reviews that I have read.

There are similarities, like long initial waiting list with some jokers attempting residual values of low milers above list initially. And of course both set new performance and handling standards for the genre.

I guess the real difference was that HD failed to appeal to suffice new market share and the Hognescenti dismissed the 'Japanese-plastic' Harley (ironic seems it was Porsche who primarily designed the engine) as lacking the period looks, style and all important gruff potatoe-potatoe (which hysterically they once tried to trademark, I understand), that enamours the typical owner of the marque.

Diavel owners have felt a mild backlash from the purist Ducatisti, in the same way that 911/Cayman R owners think the Cayenne and Panarama are soft, lack visual appeal and in their (miss-guided IMHO) view dilute the brand. But, and again just like most level-headed Porsche drivers, most purist owners do realise, that those particular models represent the current big sellers and subsequently generate more than enough coffers for the marque to then research and build extreme machines, such as the reputed 195 hp and 175 kg 'wet' (FM!) forthcoming Ducati Paginale, for instance.

Yeah GT a Touring VRod would work well for some. My next door neighbour has a Road King and V-Rod. He's early sixties and so surprised me when he said that he could take or leave the Road King, but would never sell his (CVO) V-Rod!

125 hp seems more than enough for a custom cruiser too; if cruiser owners need more they probably should question why they want a 'cruiser' really.

In the techno-performance cruiser camp, I personally find the 100 hp mode of the Diavel too annoying in it's lack of go, but it doesn't really need it's claimed 162 hp (135 RW?) power; although it does make effortless mid-range punching past cars that begin to sway as their occupants scan their iPhones in an effort to find their next contact that can't wait another five minutes to be spoken to :-D

I don't know if this internet thing is the best thing since sliced bread blessing (prolly) or turns us into the equivalent of a hypochondriac in terms of 'problems' with our own or potential purchase motorcycles?

I've been thinking about what to buy next year. And, as ever, my tastes are quite diverse. I look at a K1600GT forum and everyone (it seems) is complaining that their bikes pull violently to the left requiring constant counter-steering! Bizarre and as yet no known route cause. Or I look at R1200GS forums and they say the drive-shaft could last a day or up to 40k miles, but it's going to fail and it's going to be expensive, along with fuel pumps and all-sorts of other dodgy anomalies. I've had five BMW's from the R and K series that had zero problems, but I 'must have been' lucky I guess?

And I've been thinking about a Street Glide or Road King Classic, but will the rear cylinder keep getting the hump and spitting cams like exhaust fumes? Even the mighty Honda couldn't release the superb yet flawed VFR without a waif of wharf shavings within its cases!

About the only desirable modern motorcycle I can find that seems fault free is the Tiger 800. Early examples of that bike had an engine cut-out / stalling problem. But Triumph seem to have comprehensively solved that with a map update now. Apart from that, the worst it seems to get is "I'm 5ft 1" or 6ft 5" and the stock screen could be better for me personally" in terms of owner gripes on the forums. But is the little Brit firm really that much better than the renowned for quality BMW? Or the ten fold higher selling HD? Anyway it makes me wonder! :-D

"Don't forget the Guzzi range Captain S. None of the above mentioned problems..."
... I was at my local multi-franchise (Jap four, Ducati, Aprilia and Guzzi) dealership on Friday and spoke with the sales manager and chief mechanic. I said to both that whilst not class leaders Guzzi seem to be doing really well in group tests now (proper contenders); the Adventure bike seems to handle better than the GS whilst being better value and offering as much character for instance. Plus, I said, the build quality seems to be there, so why aren't they selling in reasonable numbers? The mechanic said the big money investment in recent years had yielded good results, with great build and reliability, but reputations take a long time to rebuild. The sales manager blamed the parent company for not investing sufficiently in marketing and getting the name out there. They have several Guzzi models from the adventure to roadsters to touring Norge (pronounced 'nor-gay - Italian for Norway!) but they haven't sold a single one this year, which doesn't bode well for residuals. By contrast Diavel sales are into double figures and Ducati stock has been real hard to get hold off, especially Diavel Carbon Reds and Pike's Peak Multistrada's. Begs the question whether they'll reconsider an 848 Multistrada option at some point? Anyway, modern Guzzi - reliable bikes. If only they could make them as light, cheap and fun as Triumph! ;-D

"I've heard Harley service intervals are very short (2500 miles?) and can be pretty costly. That alone (if true) would put me off"
... it's all a bit deceptive really. Generically speaking, I think modern service intervals of Harley's are 5k, Triumph 6k, Ducati 7.5k. But some dealers 'suggest' interim oil changes. And of course many modern riders struggle to touch 5k a year, so are in actual fact looking at a service once a year, if they want to keep their warranty intact. Harley's are generally easy to work on but their workshops usually charge a little more for labour. Ducati's have been simplified in recent years in terms of servicing, reducing costs and increasing intervals. Triumph are middling in terms of intervals and workshop costs, but I understand the 12k service is an expensive one, as the 15k one is on Ducati I believe. I think servicing is a bit like fuel consumption, in that it shouldn't be a key criteria in purchasing a motorcycle unless it's your main form of transport. Assuming it's self indulgent escapism from the monotonous mundane of the typical working week, it's not something I want to consider, else I'd buy a Rocket 3 and relish in its 10k service intervals; but I'd have to put up with it's 1983 Chevette gearbox (with blown synchromesh) Orca dwarfing physique and different time-zones wheelbase

"can you do your own oil change and keep the warranty?"
.. that warrants a lengthy can of worms reply, but as this is the Switchback thread, I'll just say that if you do it yourself and your engine then seizes, your view would be that you changed the oil, filter, kept the receipts and therefore you assume a manufacturing fault. The manufacturers view would be that a factory trained mechanic could have spotted a fault earlier utilising the OBD plug in kit that you don't have access to, and therefore you are liable. After a legal representative discussion you're likely to agree to 50% of the rectification costs, in all probability, a non ideal outcome. Other points: if you got an electrical problem the warranty should still hold good unless they could claim a lack of regular service caused the problem; which would be near impossible IMPO. With modern engineering its unlikely an engine would implode during the warranty period, so self-service could save you a packet on face value - but would you buy a modern vehicle without a dealer service history? And if you would, would it be reflected in the price you'd be willing to offer? I know it would for me. As a young man I couldn't afford dealer servicing and did everything myself. I'm more comfortable financially nowadays and bar fitting accessories/adjusting the chain I leave the rest to the dealer. Its a personal choice, no rights or wrongs I guess.

"It is a real shame Guzzi are not doing as well as they deserve. Triumph and Ducati have cracked the barrier from where they used to be"
... but it took the last twenty five years. The first modern Triumph's (Trophy 1200 and Trident 900) were little more than Kawasaki's, one with a cylinder removed. But they were helped along with a bit of jingoism and when they started to stall a little they fortunately brought in a talented marketing company that basically said stop trying to copy everyone when you've already got a uniqueness in the triple format. Once they started saying no to mainstream ideas like a thousand and six hundred cc sportsbikes and started making Streetfighters and 675 cc supersports, the rest is history. Ducati started to get their act together from the 888 onwards, but if it wasn't for the first Monster they'd have imploded too. In recent years sorting their electronics out and employing a top Audi quality control guru has paid dividends. Guzzi is continuing to focus on what they are known for, the quirky opposed v-twin in a trellis frame and have now sorted the quality and are hitting those markets that they can compete in price, weight and performance wise. They'll get there, but it takes a while. Perhaps the biggest problem they have is that the average rider is now late forties and very few of them have ever ridden one, never mind owned one; so with so much choice they often settle for better the Diavel (oops sorry Devil!) they know :-D

"I think you are right about marketing, as bikes are often grown-ups toys people need to feel good buying one"
... I do personally. I like to buy boring cars that are completely about functional efficiency. Practicality, comfort, economy, reasonable service costs are all key for sitting in a traffic jam on a lengthy straight roads at slow speed on the daily commute. But bikes are escapism/freedom (name your cliche) and I want mine to make me forget work, home, responsibilities and all the stuff that I put up with until I can next have a bike fix outside of rush hour.

standing out from the crowd?
... they've had the chance for this but squandered it IMHO. I.e. Dr.Jon reps, MGS-01 proto and if they really want to play to their heritage, how about some cool ratty cafe racers? I mean, check this picture out, doesn't it make you want to instantly marry her? http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y98/killagram/The%20Davida%20Guzzi/full...