Harley Davidson XLS 1000 Roadster

For years I've thought that Harley-Davidson just had to be joking, and the XLS Roadster merely reinforces such a horribly biased opinion. How anyone could even consider paying £100 more than BMW's top of the range R100RS for a one-litre machine which has the acceleration of a 250 and top end performance of a 500, vibrates like an earthquake and is not provided with so much as a plug spanner, is difficult to understand.

No doubt Harley riders will rush to put pen to paper, using words like macho, image and torque to justify their purchasing of what can charitably be described as one of motor cycling's greatest anachronisms. But before the hot-headed criticism self-ignites, permit me to rationalise.

There is only one way to seriously appraise any Harley. You can look at the machine, its performance, comfort, handling and braking capabilities and study its value for money. Then, since Harley-Davidson motor cycles are responsible for boosting more flagging egos than any other machine, you must consider its unique esoteric appeal as an entirely separate issue.

Having approached such an emotive machine in such a level headed fashion you will probably arrive at the conclusion shared by many of my colleagues. It is that the Harley is a craggy and uncouth contraption as it stands in the parking bay but its aura and image is such a powerful force that even the most stoic opponent would enjoy, even admire, these hulking American motor cycles - once they're in the saddle.

As remarked in previous Harley tests, one of the Milwaukee giants has about as much to do with normal motor cycling attributes as Khomeini has to do with genuine religious morals. While the Roadster is an undeniably awful motor cycle per se, it is easy to understand why a comparatively small and partisan group of bikers find them so appealing.

You sit low in the bucket-type seat, feet on the additional forward-mounted highway rests, arms stretched to meet the horizontally-bowed handlebars, and let the distinctive motor haul you along at 60 mph in fourth gear with barely 3,500 rpm on the tacho. You keep the speed down so that wide-eyed pedestrian admirers can confirm that they have indeed seen a real- live Harley-Davidson that day. There's no need to rush, even though the Roadster will run a healthy 112 mph; as the rider of a Harley you have nothing to prove. Whether it's curiosity, disbelief, admiration or disgust which brings comments from onlookers, you'll never be ignored.

With nonchalant modesty, you'll tell allcomers what it's like to ride a Harley-Davidson. And you will probably find yourself leaving out all references to the shocking vibration and dreadful brakes, or glossing over its many bad faults in a few words.

The Roadster is a descendant of the Harley Sportster which partially lived up to its name with a one-way speed of 123 mph when tested by Motor Cycle Weekly in 1978. Both bikes share a virtually identical 45-degree, 997 cc V-twin with a 38 mm Keihin carb, although the Roadster has a slightly lower first gear ratio.

The important differences between the two engines has been forced by paranoid emission rulings in the States. Valves close 30 degrees earlier and duration is shorter to meet noise regulations, whilst the exhaust system on the Roadster is heavily baffled, which alone slices 3 bhp off the power output.

The latest machine has a raked steering head angle increasing the wheelbase by an inch to 5 ft. Handlebars, seating arrangement and a long overdue Bosch halogen headlight are further differences, along with a 16-in rear wheel for the Roadster. These are changes which make the Roadster look more like a Low Rider or Super Glide than a Sportster.

It is difficult to be complimentary about the way the Roadster feels on the road. Vibration is present; little vibration is hardly worth a comment, yet the shattering violence of the Roadster's vibration would register on the Richter scale! Even allowing for the fact that the bike's footrests are mounted on the engine side casings, it still shudders to excess.

Now while it is possible to concede that a certain level of vibration is often synonymous with low speed torque and an endemic part of Harleys, the Roadster's motor feels agricultural and simply underdeveloped. At standstill it rumbles, shakes and clatters so much that you expect a mechanical catastrophe any second. As revs increase the pounding becomes more violent and between 3,500 and 4,000 rpm when the Harley is punching out its maximum 52 lb-ft of torque, it becomes almost unbearable. A sensitive man would find it painful to spin the motor to its 6,000 rpm red line.

Gear changing, too, is a noisy process which again has you wondering whether H-D measure tolerances in thousandths of an inch or feet and inches. Top gear is too high for townwork, bottom a little too low, and the Roadster plainly is not made to cope with congestion.

The raked forks and longish wheelbase make it feel heavy and awkWard at low speeds and it needs careful riding through town. Throttle response, however, is good, the throttle itself being light and sensitive while low speed torque is tremendously punchy. But the pulling power tails off noticeably after 3,800 rpm and you become more aware that the motor is working harder.

On the open road the Roadster emerges as a mixed package. The long wheelbase is great for in-line stability and the weight of 520 lb is about average by today's standards.

The bike cruises at 70 mph with 4,000 rpm on the tacho and easily slides up to 100 mph and 5,500 rpm. The handlebars are narrow at 28 in and the bucket seat is too far back for a shorter rider even when the conventional footrests are in use. So less than 100 miles will be covered before a pain-relieving walkabout is welcomed.

And surely H-D do not expect any serious passenger to contend with the agonies of riding on that matchbox-sized hump atop of the mudguard?

Braking has never been a Harley strong point and as far as the Roadster is concerned things haven't changed. In the 1980s there can be no excuses for producing motor cycles with below average braking. Obviously the Harley's amazing flywheel effect, which fails to provide immediate engine braking once the throttle is shut, may be a factor, but the triple disc set-up lacks any feel. The initial bite which is so reassuring on most other bikes is also missing. For comparison we stopped the heavier Suzuki GS1000G in 24 ft from 30 mph while the Harley stopped in 36 ft.

The Roadster handling is far from bad but those Goodyear Eagle tyres are not entirely trustworthy.

In a straight line, the suspension is fine too, but in a hurrying ride over uneven surfaces in the wet, both tyres and suspension serve up a cocktail which induces a queasy stomach. In good weather you can indulge in a little scratching but that is rather inappropriate with the Roadster.

Considering our test machine had completed about 7,000 miles in the hands of the Press, the Roadster was remarkably well preserved. No doubt a doting Harley owner would have stemmed the slight rusting which appeared on cylinder head fins, exhaust system and brake pipes. Some chrome had also chipped off the foot of the spidery side stand and the steering head is still left in a rough cast finish. But the new glossy black engine casings and paintwork had held up remarkably well - so well that the bike would have benefited from a brighter paint job.

The tinted rectangular mirror was liked (although I wish it had a partner) and the small Bosch headlight was another good point. Engine restrictions introduced to beat emission laws seem to have had at least one beneficial side effect in improved fuel economy. An overall figure of 46-2 and a best of 61-6 mpg is quite acceptable.

The indicator system also leaves much to be desired. The indicators only operate while the thumb buttons on each side of the handlebar are depressed, so anyone with small hands will have great difficulty in indicating and changing down through the gearbox simultaneously.

The chances are, of course, that anyone considering buying a Harley is already well acquainted with such numerous shortcomings and has decided that the Harley image, brash, rugged, raw and mean as it is, far outweighs the disadvantages. Those who do not already know about Harleys are not likely to buy one anyway. In fact it is unlikely that anything written in this test will affect H-Ds sales figures by a single unit.