You could go back to the method used on TransAm race cars by the likes of Roger Penske in the mid to late 70s. acid dip the frame ! Timing is everything ! However very effective.

 

opcorn

 

The two biggest places to save weight are the exhaust and wheels. You can lose close to 60 pounds with the right combination. I believe you want to keep it a ride friendly bike, but if you're looking to make a 1/4 mile bike out of it then you could also remove the "R" frontend and install an "A" model frontend which is good for another 15 pounds I believe.

 

Its a Harley, the engine might be New and advanced but everything else will remain Harlified. The Germans didn't hold their hands during the Whole thing.

 

There is a reason it is called American Iron!

 

I'm no engineer but my 2 cents worth, is maybe Harley designs and manufactures bikes to be around for the long haul, so they put more beef into the package.

I see a lot more "older" Harleys on the road than "older" Japanese bikes....so could it be said the Japanese bikes are more of a "throw-away" mentality?

 

Uh, join a gym maybe. lol Never considered the bike heavy at all imho. Gotta bulk up Buzzy. lol

 

i think the frame wieghts about 75 pounds. eagle made a partial frame of chromoly which save i think 25 pounds, maybe paul o elvis will chime in

 

Wheels and exhaust are the biggest offenders and the easiest to make lighter.
IMHO the frame is WAAAAAY heavy. It's made out of thick tube steel and I don't see a way to make that lighter. A crotch rocket it ain't.

 

Buzz your right they are fat. I think the frame itself is a huge chunk of the weight. The engine also isn't lite, I think it weighs in just under 200 pounds by itself. Real world is the key word in your question, I know of one racer that made a chrome moly frame and lightened his up a great deal but the cost wasn't cheap. Just the crankshaft in the engine is much heavier then most any engine this displacement so I can see why the engine weighs so much.

 

Just wait until the chrome bug bites you! Bike will look great but the ET’s will slow down. Next step Trask Turbo!

 

If I had a huge international magazine, I'd contract out someone to recreate the frame in titanium myself. :hidesbeh: You're right though, the weight is BS.

 

BUT...put the V-Rod against other bikes that compete (or are perceived by some to compete) against it....and these numbers are from their websites:

Harley VRSCAW - 637 lbs.
Suzuki M109R - 703 lbs.
Suzuki C90 Boulevard - 665 lbs
Honda VTX1300C - 678 lbs
Honda VTX1800C - 734 lbs
Kawasaki 1600 Mean Streak - 640 lbs
Kawasaki 1500 Vulcan Classic - 659 lbs

It's hard to put the V-Rod into a segment, i.e. it's not really a low-rev heavy cruiser (not with the Revo engine), not really a sport-tourer, definitely not a crotch rocket.

But ok...

So compared to a typical crotch rocket or sport tourer, yeah, the V-Rod is heavier....but compared to other cruisers....maybe not so much.

 

You could remove the rear subframe like LAUNIRep did:

I'd leave the skins on though.

 

You take one of these apart, look at the components, and you realize this is a 100,000 mile, rebuildable power plant, installed in a frame meant to take those kind of miles. Its not a 20,000 mile throwaway.

Example. A Horizontaly split crankcase with all major load bearing shafts located on the same plane, thus allowing all to be carried in high pressure plain split bearings, easily replaced at rebuild intervals. THis is opposed the the latest practice of stacking the transmission shafts verticaly, saving weight and length true, but requiring at least one shaft to run in pressed in bearings.

High pressure plain bearings work better when wider than current standards, to better distribute the load thru the oil film and wedge. This requires thicker cases, thus more weight. The Revo has surprisingly wide bearings. Again, rugged longevity at the expense of weight. Roher has commented on this in his sportbike, that the cases are very meaty where it counts.

Unfortunatly, this type of engineering is largely unappreciated outside of the touring market. But ask the high milage guys here if its worth it.

Frankly, if your are not racing, a lot of this weight saving is simply add copy.

 

The frame is made out of steel....show me a bike similar to the Vrod that is lighter

 

You take one of these apart, look at the components, and you realize this is a 100,000 mile, rebuildable power plant, installed in a frame meant to take those kind of miles. Its not a 20,000 mile throwaway.

Well said..... Yesterday I was riding with an airhead, and he asked me about my "new" bike... I smiled and told him it has almost 20K on it... He asid "wow I'm suprised it runs so fast being so close to re-built time" I laughed when I saw his face after telling him I had at least 80K to go before even looking inside this engine!

he really marveled at my 6K oil change intervals

 

Well, the vrod is not really a fast bike. Its fast compared to most cruisers, and I agree, it's a bike for the long haul. I have said this many times, but it's worth reiterating. I ride with some freinds who have rockets, and they are always impressed by the power of my bike. It's not like I can run with the big boys.(the newer 750s and bigger) I can still run with most stock 600s. But when we switch bikes, they are all impressed with how solid the vrod feels. When I ride those rockets they feel like they are falling apart. And I know they are not. They just don't have the solid, well built feeling. It's not like I am riding crapped out rockets either. Most of the guys I ride with are in their 30s, bought their bikes new and dont race or trick them. And they are under 4000 miles on the bikes.
To me its just that the vrod is a well built machine that will last a long time. Its fast enough, rideable enough, and well built enough to give me years and years of great service. Most will agree its no crotch rocket, and thats a good thing if you want to ride some distance and get a little silly now and then.
That is why I think that the street rod was a slow seller. It was focused on the sport crowd, but didn't perform at that level. And please dont think that I am a R hater, I would ride one, but I see why it wasnt the best selling V.
I guess this is kinda off topic, but its my opionion of why the V is heavy, it's built to last.

 

hey another "Happy ?" R owner?.:hidesbeh:

 

You could go back to the method used on TransAm race cars by the likes of Roger Penske in the mid to late 70s. acid dip the frame ! Timing is everything ! However very effective.

Pontiac acid dipped fenders on the 62 Catalinas that dominated stock car and drag racing........Super Duty Lightweight factory works. 421 Six Pack.........

 

Well, the vrod is not really a fast bike. Its fast compared to most cruisers, and I agree, it's a bike for the long haul. I have said this many times, but it's worth reiterating. I ride with some freinds who have rockets, and they are always impressed by the power of my bike. It's not like I can run with the big boys.(the newer 750s and bigger) I can still run with most stock 600s. But when we switch bikes, they are all impressed with how solid the vrod feels. When I ride those rockets they feel like they are falling apart. And I know they are not. They just don't have the solid, well built feeling. It's not like I am riding crapped out rockets either. Most of the guys I ride with are in their 30s, bought their bikes new and dont race or trick them. And they are under 4000 miles on the bikes.
To me its just that the vrod is a well built machine that will last a long time. Its fast enough, rideable enough, and well built enough to give me years and years of great service. Most will agree its no crotch rocket, and thats a good thing if you want to ride some distance and get a little silly now and then.
That is why I think that the street rod was a slow seller. It was focused on the sport crowd, but didn't perform at that level. And please dont think that I am a R hater, I would ride one, but I see why it wasnt the best selling V.
I guess this is kinda off topic, but its my opionion of why the V is heavy, it's built to last.

Excellent perspective, good read. IMO the Street Rod was a slow seller because the people who can actually fit on them is limited. If you are short or even average height (which covers a lot of people) you are not going to buy a Street Rod because you cannot get your feet on the ground or feel comfortable tippy toeing. It is a nice looking bike for sure but targeted to a very limited crowd.

 

If you had seen how little wear there was in my 60K motor when we pulled it apart in September, you'd appreciate the strength of those cases. The mains were hardly worn at all.

 

BUT...put the V-Rod against other bikes that compete (or are perceived by some to compete) against it....and these numbers are from their websites:

Harley VRSCAW - 637 lbs.
Suzuki M109R - 703 lbs.
Suzuki C90 Boulevard - 665 lbs
Honda VTX1300C - 678 lbs
Honda VTX1800C - 734 lbs
Kawasaki 1600 Mean Streak - 640 lbs
Kawasaki 1500 Vulcan Classic - 659 lbs

It's hard to put the V-Rod into a segment, i.e. it's not really a low-rev heavy cruiser (not with the Revo engine), not really a sport-tourer, definitely not a crotch rocket.

But ok...

So compared to a typical crotch rocket or sport tourer, yeah, the V-Rod is heavier....but compared to other cruisers....maybe not so much.

Good post. Was going to note the same. Compared to other power cruisers, the category it was designed to compete in, the V-Rod is svelte.

 

My buddy has a Victory Hammer that is somewhere north of 700 pounds as well. The V-Rod is heavy, but it hides it's weight well :hidesbeh: :hidesbeh:

 

I know why mine is so heavy... Cuz my fat ass is always on it.