From: lotto@lamia.harvard.edu (Jerry Lotto)
Newsgroups: rec.motorcycles.harley
Subject: Re: MSF:Erc review, HD FXRS vs 907
Date: 1 Oct 92 12:38:31 GMT
Organization: Chemistry Dept., Harvard University
In-reply-to: patlo@microsoft.com's message of 30 Sep 92 21:21:38 GMT

>>>>> On 30 Sep 92 21:21:38 GMT, patlo@microsoft.com (Pat Loughery) said:
Pat> The morning classroom session was pretty boring, except for one part.

Sorry to hear that, the ERC classroom can be very enjoyable - even if
some of the information is a little basic.  You have to start with the
lowest common denominator and build, after all.  It is a fairly recent
curriculum and this is a double-edged sword.  Instructors teaching the
ERC have only had the curriculum for two training seasons.  The latest
revision came out this year!  Give them some time to get their
"classroom legs".

Just out of curiosity, how do people rate their ERC (or MRC:RSS)
classroom experience overall?  Can you come up with specific things
(material, presentation, facilities) which made it particularly
enjoyable or tedious?  The student evaluation forms we get back rarely
have the detail that most netters are willing to go into and I can
really use the information.  If you feel funny about posting it,
please respond via e-mail or even phone if you are so inclined.

Pat> but it was very helpful and I don't have any misgivings about
Pat> spending my Sunday that way.

Many people find that they get more out of the course the second or
third time through.  There really is a lot of information to digest.
You may not learn something new every time, but the review of various
techniques can be vary useful at the start of the riding season (if
you ever have a riding season end :-)

Pat> Short review (of Low-Rider)

Pat> This bike is equivalent to today's FXRS-Sp (or closer to -Con, since
Pat> it had fairing and bags), with respect to seat height and ground

You might be surprised at some of the differences too.  I ride an '89
convertible.  One big difference is that the newer models (SP and
CONV) have a 2" longer fork than the motorcycle you rode.

Pat> I didn't have any problems with lean angles, but didn't push it
Pat> all that much.  About the only handling problem I experienced was
Pat> radical front fork dive under any kind of braking. Doubtless a fork
Pat> oil change would fix that.  Also, I had problems remembering to

The -SP and -CONV have an adjustable air anti-dive system that the
other Low Riders do not.  Combine this with (aftermarket) progressive
springs (short money) and the front end dive problem will be history.
You also get more ground clearance and better lean angles.

Pat> - encourages you to ride at relatively legal speeds

I guess mine isn't as persuasive as the one you rode :-)

Pat> Right now, I'm leaning toward looking for a clean used FXRS-Sp next
Pat> spring.  A large majority of that decision is based on the fact that

The '89 went to a 32 amp charging system.  For that reason alone, I
would recommend avoiding the older ones.  If you go with a pre-90, you
will probably want to put in a SE clutch, the stock clutch plates in
early '89 were pretty slippery.  The entire clutch design changed
after that.

Pat> Either way, I'll get one of each - I'm looking at a combo of either a
Pat> 907 and a shovel sporty project, or an FXRS and a Duc 750 or 860 project.

The first option will give you more 'class', the second (a LOT) more
riding time!
--
Jerry Lotto <lotto@lhasa.harvard.edu>         MSFCI, HOGSSC, BCSO, AMA, DoD #18
Chemistry Dept., Harvard Univ.  "It's my Harley, and I'll ride if I want to..."
Newsgroups: rec.motorcycles.harley