Team-BHP (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/)

-   Superbikes & Imports (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/superbikes-imports/)

-   -   Harley-Davidson Street 750 for India: Unveiled @ Goa (https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/superbikes-imports/146755-harley-davidson-street-750-india-unveiled-goa-4.html)

You answered your question yourself. Both brands are compared especially because both choose to reside in the same space, low powered, high cc thumpers/cruisers, offering rudimentary 1900 technology, offering the customer to live life in a simpler age, at a much slower speed. Its a perfect apple/apple comparison.
Quality maybe, I don't defend RE quality in anyway, but charging double for a leather patch brand is too much IMO. Just wait for a Kawasaki/Yamaha/Suzuki to launch a 600cc cruiser and you can see what real 'quality' is. All over the world, Harley's are bought just like how the bullets are bought, people have regularly called them old junk, but it doesn't affect the people who worship the brand.

And if you choose to be the one who buys an iPhone because Steve Jobs cobbled up a cool brand, no matter say Samsung is far better, so be it.

I would agree on this even though I am a die hard RE fan, but there's always this eerie feeling of getting stranded in the middle of nowhere. Not to mention that I am mechanically challenged !

First you quote me saying I cannot compare two brands just because they have engines generating a similar power figure, now this?

Where a particular product resides in, is the perception of the brand for a potential customer.
I don't think Harleys marketing team would be pitching their bikes as a direct rival to the RE, but as an upgrade, may be yes.

If I was going to pay for it, and I would ask you which bike would you want me to buy for you; a Harley or a Royal Enfield, what would your answer be?

Hope it happens soon, and then we have a even clearer perspective of quality being offered on both, Harleys and REs. And I'm sure you know who would fare well. And more options, the better. :D

May be. But still, why compare a product which is far more superior to touch and feel. I've ridden the REs and it doesn't impress me. I know there are people who would buy a RE and then switch to another RE and so on, but it's their way of motorcycling. If it is just about cruisers, would you compare a Bajaj Avenger to a Royal Enfield? No right, feels a superior vs. inferior comparison even when Bajaj actually has better quality than REs. Likewise.

From the discussions, I have started to feel that the RE brand has much more of a halo effect than the Harleys. clap:

There you go.

For me, expensive is not the best.
But just because there is a cheaper alternative available, it doesn't make sense bashing the expensive one.
It is a choice, you buy what you want. And you love / like what you want to.

You like REs, great. I don't love either of them, neither REs nor Harleys.

Why? Both are bikes, with similar displacement, specs, target buyer profiles, both available in India, to Indian bikers. What is so surprising about wanting to compare them or to pit them against one another? I'm actually surprised that someone would not see the obvious similarities.

All of that does not cost 3 lacs. The differential one would nee to pay to buy into the Harley brand.

Better tyres? They are MRF nylogrips for crying out loud bro. Indian 150 cc commuters have similar tyres (in the relevant sizes).

I don't know what other buying people may feel when they buy RE or any other bike, but for me, the only reason I like a RE is because the bike has a 'soul' Riding a bike like an Avenger, is like operating a mixer/grinder, it is an appliance, and I am only into recreational biking, for travel and longer distances I always prefer 4 wheels.

You can imagine my kind of riding because a year post my purchase of the TBTS500, I have only put 3500kms into her. I had a choice of buying a Harley, it fit well within my budget, but then I felt I am wasting 6-7 lacs when it wouldn't do even 5000kms per year.
For my kind of riding, I prefer watching the scenery at 70kmph, on a nice winding country road, with a group of like minded friends. So the RE fits nicely into my scheme of things. For any errands, even to the nearest grocery store, the first keys i remove are of my truck. I don't believe in riding 400kms a day, for me it is on borderline crazy to undergo such torture on two wheels open to the elements.

The reason for this slightly longer post is that, the kind of riding I do even an Activa/splendor would be a satisfactory machine, however the kind of bliss I get hearing the slow revving thumps of an RE, I couldn't get with any other bike today.

Quality wise my bike has not left me stranded anywhere, there are no breakages, no oil leaks, everything works, she has enough power to be on the wrong side of 120kmph, takes me everywhere I need to ride, what more do I want?

I'm actually surprised that someone would not see the obvious differences & benefits.


It's a choice. Even on four wheels, there are so many cars which offer the same equipment at different price points. Doesn't make the expensive one unworthy, does it?

Yeah, sorry about the MRF thing. My bad. :D
Wanted to point out to the Harley-Davidson Michelins.

May be a daily riding experience of over 40-50 kms can change the perception?
I repeat, I do not say that REs are bad, but the quality is.
I am of the types who doesn't mind his hands getting greased. But getting them greased in the morning and in the evening is not something that I can live with.

During IBW, a few members of the media rode down on a Conti GT.
At night I saw them fidgeting with the Conti, went close to notice that the gear lever had come off. Not cool right? Or is it?

Correct. And a biker would look at two bikes, and what he was getting versus what he was paying. For brand aspirers the decision is already made one way or the other. Royal Enfield has a fan base, so does Harley Davidson. But for the bikers between the two, there would be and could be cross polination. As for bikers outside both these cohorts as well. The similarities of type of bike, lifestyle, cubic capacity, specs, and performance lends itself to that. For some 2-3 lacs may be a huge deal, for some not so huge, for others inconsequential. The market is made up of all types, and a market the size of India, each type will typically be more than the size of the entire biking population of a Western country or countries combined. Hence its not a small deal fro either Royal Enfield or Harley Davidson. Especially Harley Davidson. Because regardless of the hoopla surrounding their advent into India, bottom line is that they are here because they see it in their interest to be here, are here to do business, and are not here on a goodwill tour.

It really does not matter where the two marketing departments pitch their bikes. It is the public which will decide. And will decide between what they are getting versus what they need to pay to get it. Rest assured, there is more than enough public in Indian who can afford a 5 lac bike. Add on to that those who can stretch to 5 lacs, if they see a perceivable and credible advantage.

If you gave me the same offer as you gave Apache, I would request that you wait awhile, put the money in an FD earning at least 10% p.a. and give me the principle when the Duke 690 is launched. Everone's a winner! :D

Wouldn't want to speak for anyone else here. My only grouse is the technical, and that's how I entered the discussion. A liquid cooled V Twin 500 cc producing a measly 4 bhp more than an air cooled single cylinder 500 cc. Period. Price and brand and value perceptions and everything else are surrounding points that developed from there.

So we are both surprised then.

Worthy or unworthy is in the mind of the person paying the money. Does not stop us from commenting on our perceptions were we to pay the same money. I've paid money for a Bullet thrice. I knew what I was paying and what I was getting. I'm going to be in the market soon for a new bike. In the same price range as this baby Harley. So I already have in my mind what I want from a bike for what I am now willing to pay. The Harley is better than the Bullet. Period. Is it 3 lacs better than the Bullet. Not on this planet, in this lifetime.

Agreed.

Its not that bad. I'm assuming you're leveraging journalistic "creative" license here.

Agreed. Not cool. Most Bulleteers keep an adjustable "universal" spanner for the same reason. It makes for a great hand operated gear lever. Suicide shift Bullet style. :thumbs up

Now we're talking. :D

But not everyone cares so much about how much it churns out right?
And I am fairly sure there is a very very very small number of Harley owners who would account for how much more power their metal churns out as compared to a Royal Enfield.


If there was anything available from the RE stable at ~5 lakhs, would you buy it?

I gave an example for that, not leveraging from anything.

I've used vibrating monkeys like the Apache first gen and the RTR 180. An Avenger 200 oil cooled and this Yamaha R15.
My uncle has a bullet which would be as old as my Avenger would have been, one look at it, and you feel sorry for the purchase.

Yes, the REs survive extreme conditions, can do leh etc. etc.. I have no problem anyone praising it left, right and centre. The problem is with REs being compared to anything else which for a fact are far more superior in terms of quality. Come on, a brand new bike coming out of the showroom with misaligned turn indicators? No sir. I would continue to more 1000 posts if the discussion is about REs being superior to the others. Yes, they prove their point when required, but then there are much more reliable motorcycles available in the market.

Not everyone, but many do. Any biker worth his salt want a faster, more powerful bike. Even Harley guys. Why do you think Harley guys buy as big a displacement as they can afford?

Not in this lifetime. I am very happy keeping and maintaining and riding my std 500 which I bought in 2004.

The example is flawed and a gross exagerration, and hence my comment about leveraging creative license.

You are debating with two RE owners here who do not agree with you based on their real life ownership experience. And as far as I can tell, you've never owned or ridden or lived with an RE for any length of time.

Whose word are we gonna take here? :)

Firstly bro, nowhere in the world where Harleys have been ridden this past century or more are Harleys considere to be reliable. They have pretty much the same reputation for reliability worldwide as Bullets have in India. Ditto for being heavy and slow, as do Bullets in India. The Harley is the twin separated from the Bullet in the early 1900s and which grew up on another continent. I welcome you to a debate on the same. You will be surprised at how similar the Harleys are to Bullets, and how similar the Harley scene is to the Bullet scene. The Bullets and the Bullet scene in India is a lot like the developing country scene of the Harley in the US. And just like in the US, in India too there are good hardcore Bullet riders who push their bikes to the limit and do things with them most would not. Lets not get Avengers and Apaches and other "normal" bikes into the discussion. :D

But do you think they consider this: Hey, the Classic 500 churns out xx.xx, I want a Harley which tops that.

May be you could elaborate in length on that. :)

And I do not regret that either.
But just because someone else has, I wouldn't let people have an opinion about another brand (or RE) for what they are not.
Call me a revolutionary.

I would start with looking at the bike. Parts even or uneven.
I would touch & feel the bike.
I would bend down and try and point out an many faults as I can.
I would look closely at the paint quality.
I would never forget the brand it is, and what has been its history so far.
I would look at what people have to say.

All these questions if answered honestly will never point out to an RE as a potential product to be purchased. At least for me. I repeat, I don't even want to buy the Harley. I don't even want to keep bashing the RE brand. But what is a fact, is a FACT.

That's a leading question if I know one. A biker in the market for a bike, and not overly enamored by either brand, or appreciative of both equally, is definitely going to consider how his purchase would move for the amount he's going to have to shell out for that.

I have. At length. Elsewhere on this very forum.

You just made a pretty sweeping statement about a bike you've never owned, and hardly ridden. How different is that from what you're accusing us of doing with regard to the Harley? Its not being revolutionary. Its called having an opinion on heresay, and going with the flow.

Hmmmm. Very different philosophies to how we approach a bike.

I would request the keys to the bike.
I would ask about the gear shift pattern, and how much fuel is there in the bike.
I would sit on the bike and start it, quickly finding out the handle controls and the fuel supply.
I would engage first gear, and head for my favorite proving ground and see what the bike can do.
I would call up a couple of close biker friends, ask them to saddle up different equivalent bikes, and head for a 300-500 km ride (at the minimum) where we put each through their paces, in turns if permitted.
I would at one of the breaks during the ride, then look at the bike closely and observe details and quirks, also comparing to the others.
I would listen to what people have to say, but make up my own mind based on personal experience and feel on the road.

What is a fact that there are two very similar bikes in the Indian market now. One costs 2 lacs, the other costs 5 lacs. Both respected marques with a ton of history, and equally old, being among the first. Both bikes (and ridrs) with attitude. Both having borderline fanatical cult-like fan following. Both not known for either reliability or performance, and thus understandably highlighting other less tangible virtues like character, soul, feel, looks, attitude, laid back, lifestyle, style statement, brand image, brotherhood, merchandising, etc etc etc. I know the drill. I'm a Bulleteer, and the Harley scene in India is following the Bullet blue print to the T, right down to its annual festival in Goa (original!). :)

I am talking about a Harley owner in specific. Does he claim / quote this as a immediate buying decision factor?
(Since we have RE specific opinions from your end, can you provide something concrete where a Harley owner compares his bike to an RE?)

Will read through, when we make peace here.

But I would give Harley a breather since they are fairly new in the market.
How old is RE in India? What have been the significant points of progress?
Like a few of you RE fanboys have commented, they are going down the QC if I remember correctly.

It's not heresay, we have that bike. I use it.
I sincerely love the thump and enjoy revving it to the limits. But then, the quality just shows my friend, undeniably.

It is not about me talking ill about something just because I don't have it.
It is this way because I choose not to have it.

I would do that when I approach a bike which is not known for leaking engine oil, gear levers falling off etc.

Again, both are touring bikes / cruisers agreed. But, I will still stay away from pointing out things to Harley which they should learn from RE. May be this kind of cult following (like the replies on this very thread) they should, but the rest, I think they are far better off even without any observation.

Mango is a fruit, so is a Sugar-apple (sitaphal). Both are sweet, but we know which one looks good.
Not to forget, the mango doesn't have seeds in every bite.

A Harley guy has already spent his money, as has a Bullet guy. They come into a segment of repeat business or brand switch, as the case may be.

You said Harley guys are not bothered by how much power their bikes make. I am pointing out to you how and why that cannot be correct. Not only for a Harley boy, but any biker boy.

Otherwise we would all be riding the very excellent, reliable, and high quality Splendor today.

I am absolutely at peace with you. I hope you are not aggravated. We are bikers. We ride and we argue. Otherwise we might as well drive cars. :D

Firstly, let me repeat what I said quite some time ago to you (as I recall) on this very thread. I am not a RE fan boy. Much the opposite really. But I am a Bulleteer and a biker. There is a difference, if you take the time to appreciate it.

Secondly, why should we give Harley the space and not RE? Harley being new in India does not mean Harley was born yesterday. They have been making bikes for as long as RE has been making bikes (3 years less - but over more than a century we can be charitable and grant them that).

Track record of reliability is not great for either one. Please read up and you will realise that Harley is the American biker equivalent of the Bullet for Indian bikers. In almost every way.

And what great progress have you seen from Harley over the past 110 years? Their Night Rod is probably the first and only different and reasonably modern bike they have made. Everything else is more of the same.

The current 750 and 500 though are unchartered territories for Harley, and credit where credit is due. Lets hope they succeed.

Which then makes you a biker with either an agenda or one who has a closed mind based on heresay.

Give me a bike, and I will ride it first. Not look at the paint and weld marks and panel gaps.

Priorities. Philosophy.

That is your opinion. But the facts on the ground do not support that. Harkey are actually following the RE blueprint in India. That should tell you a lot.

I would rather eat both first than admiring how they look. :)

If you buy a Harley Street 750 tomorrow, won't you agree to owning something which is significantly better than a RE?
Once you know that, would you bother about a poorer quality machine producing as many horses as much as your HD does?

Again, I love examples you see:
I have the R15, my friends ride the Duke 200. I know they accelerate fast, but it doesn't bother me. If I had to chose that way, I would have bought the KTM instead.
But then I know the Yamaha is superior in terms of quality. And not to forget outruns the Duke on long straights. Just saying.
Likewise for HD & RE. We both know who is superior here.

I appreciate it, but not the fact which claims superiority (or being equivalent). Because what doesn't feel good, doesn't stay good, is not good.

May be I don't know the exact day when bikes were first manufactured by both.
But I still feel the target audience is a bit different, cross shopping is inevitable, but the target is different 100%.

If it goes above the number of RE complaints in India, I would stop replying.

For a company which entered India a couple of years back, the number of bikes is a fair enough example.
How many bikes does RE have for sale?

Yes, I am the one waiting for a report much more than anyone else. So that a few myths are busted; for all.

It makes me a biker who is aware of what can get me home in the middle of the night, and what can leave me stranded.
Closed mind or not, even you agree why one would stay off the brand you opted for thrice.

Give me a bike, I would do the same.
Ask me to buy the bike, I would rip it apart with my observations, and it if doesn't stand the test, it just doesn't.

Priorities - when I know what I want, and how.
Philosophy - when I know I have it and I have to prove a point.

Then I suggest you wait to eat the other one, and then give us a one on one comparison.

"Significantly better" is very subjective. And very related to "significantly costlier."

You are again talking about an already Harley customer (me, conjecturally). I am talking about one, with 5 lacs in his pocket, and looking for a bike. Not the big fat Indian/Greek wedding that comes with it.

Lets not take this there. We need to ride together some time first. On a lot else than really long straights. You know what they say about really long straights and biker attributes in biker talk right? :D

On the HD and RE, the HD is better. I have said so already. Is it 3 lac better? Not on this planet, in this lifetime its not.

Doesn't feel good to you. Not good for you. Feels great to me. Is good for me, and love it to bits. And for a 12 year old bike, has aged a lot better than most bikes out there (short of most Yams and some of the early TVS-Suzukis). A bike is a lot what its rider makes of it. There are no really bad tools. Just bad carpenters.

Some sources say 1893 for RE and 1903 for HD, some say RE is 116 years old while HD is 110 years old. Either way, both are legendary marques. The record for the bike with the longest uninterrupted roduction run in the world is safely in RE's grasp - for its CI Bullet 350.

Not different by a whole lot. Just a richer version of the same. Nothing to do with biking or bikes per se.

Please don't do that. We need you here for opposing perspective. However, just for laughs, why not go on to forums dedicated to Hondas, BMWs, Yamahas, Sports Bikes, Adventure Bikes, and read what they have to say about Harley reliability? Internationally, not just in the US.

They did not make the bikes here. They just got them here. Bikes which have already been developed and sod elsewhere. That's a business decision. Not a technical or R&D one. And before you point out to me about why RE could not do it, I am sure you appreciate that RE after the British motorcycle industry collapsed, came to India. A poor developing country, with poor people, and very limited resources, and a growing technical workforce. All advantages there to be leveraged by HD from the 1960s to today (the length of time RE has been in India). What earth shattering thing have HD achieved with all of that in all this time? Could one say with conviction that had RE not remained in Britain, had their industry not collapsed, that they would not today have as many if not more models and variants, and of superior technology, performance, and quality? Hypothetical but relevant would you not agree?

Lets see. On the quality, ageing, and reliability part, one would need to see these bikes after 10 years at the very least in India. Indian service, Indians mechanics, Indian roads, Indian riders, Indian fuel, Indian weather. Till then one needs to be very careful in saying one bike is unreliable while the other is not.

On the perormance and stret cred, a couple of years if not less should be enough. As with the sales.

Based on heresay. Without having actually owned or ridden one. It makes you a biker who has made up his mind and will not change it or attempt to see for himself if it can be changed. In other words, a biker with a closed mind.

Would I have bought a Bullet thrice if I agreed with you? Do I come across as a biker who is a juvenile fanboy who does not know anything about his machines besides how to start them and get them moving? No machine is perfect. Credit where credit is due. Brickbats where brickbats are deserved.

It depends on what you want from your bike. For you its the R15 and the Apache before it - both bikes I would never have even in my inital consideration set. For me its the Duke and before that the Bullet. I rode the bikes and bought them with my eyes open. Have not been disappointed with either. A bike is very different from the company that supports it. Much of the griping you hear from old time Bulleteers like me is not against the Bullet, but against RE's changing attitudes and support and parts and non existent service and dealer networks and pricing. Not the bikes per se. Our bikes are not perfect, but they are much more than any other bike can give, if at all, and that is why we buy them. In spite of RE.

Equally, I suggest you own and live with a Bullet first too before making sweeping generalizations on them. Would make what you say much more credible then. Right now most Bulleteers have probably consigned you to the legion of armchair Bullet bashers. Nothing new for us. We thrive on such. :uncontrol