It's no secret that things have been a little tense here at Chez Turista. The biggest problem is that one of our dogs is sick. My wife made an appointment to go see the vet. She was very worried.

I made her a deal. I'd go riding on a brief jaunt on Spinner, then come home to dog-sit the other mutt while she kept the appointment. No problem, I'm not a complete idiot.

Well, as you know I often report that I have heard every bizarre urban legend and shaggie-dog story about Sportsters and their performance. The mythical 175 MPH Sportster. The skunk-works Sportie built out of secret parts on the Hollywood set during "Easy Rider." And these bikes alway belong to a "former BIL," or a "close friend" and the braggart has always seen the actual bike with his own eyes.

BS. I love Sportsters. I'm a Sportster guy. I consider the unit construction engine a superior MoCo design. I love them--did I say that? And I make them go fast. But I have always stated that even with modern engines and tuned to the peak of engine management, numerically a Sportster transmission just won't spin faster than 95 MPH--on a good day. I might have to revise that opinion.

After hitting the bike shop, I checked the time, and I was running late. To make matters worse, as I accelerated up the on-ramp to 39/90/94 I witnessed five semi-trucks try to fit into the same space on two lanes of this ramp. One truck had his right back two wheels off of the road. When these nincompoops finally quit trying to kill each other, three of them blocked the entire flow of traffic for several miles. Finally an opening presented itself, a very narrow space between the two of the outside trucks. I cracked Spinner open and just shot the gap.

The engine never slowed, flattened out or hit the rev-limiter.

As I slowed down the engine (and my heart) I glanced down at the speedometer to the sound of the engine already dropping revs and speed. It was still over 90 MPH. Spinner had cracked 95 MPH without straining. Now, that's not possible, or so I thought. You don't think that skunk-works bike really exists, do you?

I have another question here. Just how accurate are these new speedometers? Obviously our older 'cable driven' variety registered more and more inaccurate info the tighter the cable wound.

I admit that I use speedometers for "trend data" and also modulate my speed to the flow of traffice. For example, I like to ride in the open area between wolf-packs when on the slab. If I can stay behind the log-jam of cars a mile ahead of me, yet ahead of the group behind me, I adjust my speed to stay in the open space and note the indicated speed for future reference.

Spinner seems the most happy at about an indicated speed of 72 MPH. People pass me, but then, we have lots of dopey drivers with some very heavy feet. At an indicated 65 MPH everyone passes me.

At 80 MPH the music begins. You can feel Spinner winding and the bike feels like it's pulling. At perhaps 85 MPH or more the engine rattles despite the rubber mounting. Beyond that, my eyes are pretty much glued to the road. In many cases the sound of the engine and this feeling of 'pull' suggests this Sportster could actually use a 6th gear.

Do any of your guys with late model 1200cc engines have some insight here on speedometer error?

Hey Tourist,
I have had some expierience with the buell bikes. A very good friend of mine had a 2000 x1 lightning. It has an old school sporty engine and the same tranny. The only difference is that some of the parts are stronger and lighter, comes this way from MoCo. The advertised hp is at 103! The RPM go up to 7,000. I found that it pulls hard to 5,500 and then starts to fall off but will go to the limit. You do not want to push it up there too many times. I have personally ridden this bike up to 135 mph that's about all it had. And yes the bike needs a sixth gear. But since the sporty's are not the MoCo's big sellers I am afraid that it will never see an additional gear.

Lets get back to you question and that is that I have never ridden you bike but I will say that the new bikes will do over 100mph and do it with ease. The same with the buell it started to vibrate at about 85 but it will dissapear as you get the rpm's higher. The sporty engines on the new bikes have some upgrades to them and are better then what was out few years back. When you are at the dealer take a look at some of the other sporty models the engines look a little different, especially on their new model with the high mufflers I don't remember what it is called.

I am very close to the racing scene and have friends that race harley's at he salt flats and yes there are bikes that can go 175 mph but they are very highly modded. There are bikes that are turboed and supercharged that put out a lot of power for a harley.

Next time you are out on the slab hit and run it up to the rev limiter and see how fast you go!

Lenny, I am a great fan of the Buell, myself, and I regret never having bought one. In fact, my parts guy says he can still get the upper end and pistons for a Buell that fit a Sportster. I'm thinking...

The problem from my perspective is that a 48 is a very primitive, basic Sportster. As you know, I try to balance the engine to the suspension on my customs. Not always an option with a 48. In fact, I don't even think MoCo makes a rear mag wheel for the thing. Clearly, the 48 is not a Buell, or even a tuned up Sportster or flat-tracker. It has the finesse of a wet brick.

Doing the ton on a 48 is tantamount to a slow motion crash. The 48s have a fork brace, but the rest of the suspension refinements are my doing. The stock shocks literally wore out.

You are probably right about the engine and gear ratios. The problem is the overall bike and the suspension. If it is indeed 'theoretically' capable of 110 MPH, I doubt the present frame, wheels, front fork and dampening units will provide adequate control. I've been upwards of the realistic top speed, and shimmy is a very real problem.

That shouldn't surprise any of us. MoCo meant the bike to be a bar-hopper. I doubt they actually expected anyone to really ride the thing. If Spinner could approach 110 and a Buell can go 135, that means a good, streetable custom Sportster can do 120 under control. Better than I figured, but nowhere near the urban legends.

My fav was...
I had a speedometer like that... good one.
Top speed on my RK. 103 with the windshield 108 with out it.
no prizes there.

I always liked that one, myself. I cannot take credit it for it. That line came from a first chair bass in our choir named "Tiny." I still see him, he owns a tavern that serves food, and he went to culinary school to become a pastry chef. I sharpen his kitchen's knives. He sits and enjoys a few beakers of Patron and I sharpen. Great to go over old sheet music.



To be fair I think the top speed of all Harleys is about 110. Like I said, it ain't always the motor, but the gears. If you're in top gear spinning the motor fast enough to hit the rev-limiter, it's over. And if your motor won't spin the top gear you're done, too. Now, a V-Rod can spin to 7K. Is that enough to pull the top gear in their transmission to speeds upward of 120 MPH? I've never heard of it being done. Even the peak torque figures for the Muscle are 85 while Betty's are 100.

My guess is that MoCo decided 110 for their bikes was fast enough.

Well I have never heard that a sporty had frame problems like the bigger bikes. In 2009 MoCo did a frame upgrade that made the new baggers handle very well. These new bikes will run high speeds and handle too. As for the sporty I think that they are good to go, if you are getting a vibration at speed then you could have a wheel balance problem. I would tell that to your wrench and see what they say. I have sport bikes in my stable and often ride fast and very fast. Depending on the people that I ride with we can average over 100 mph on the slab for 50+ miles. You should not get any vibs at all!

That 48 is my fav for the sporty line. If I were to get one it would be that one. As for buell you can get a nice old tuber buell cheap they are very cantankerous and will have lots of mechanical problems. They weren't designed for all the HP.

There are great upgrade that you can do to your sporty like the buell vented rocker box covers that will fit a sporty. They have a PCV valve in them and route them to a spooge can.

Lenny, I'm not doing tank-slappers, but the suspension was pretty much pushed to the edge. The shocks had to come off, the bike tracks and there is a fork brace, so I think the work is pretty much done.

However, I think all bikes have "a final point." Spinner can run all day and half the night at 85. Push her harder and the bike is obviously running full out. You know the old saying about a horse that poops fast--they don't poop long.

That's not to denigrate the engine. Yes, in the old days people toured quite often on Sportsters. There was even a factory built Sportster with a larger gas tank and saddlebags. But the bike has roots in flat-tracking, not the old EL series. It was a compromise.

If I had to pick one bike from the Harley line-up that could do it all with 'average' Joe Lunchbox type modifications I'm pick the new 103 Fat Boy (not the Lo). You could do all of the standard hop-up tricks, carry five gallons of fuel, tour the country, smoke the competition and even lean over pretty far.

Additionally, you'd have that sixth gear, both the benefits of the Dyna and not the weight penalties of the dressers--while those could be added. My guess is that a bike like that could cruise at 90 and break 120 with a little wrenching. And by wrenching I don't mean nitrous or blowers or cam profiles that won't idle at stoplights.

It can be done, but that 48 is the wrong bike.