Is Harley-Davidson the Worst Motorcycle Money Can Buy?

[ksquared]

(Thanks (and credit) to Marky Mark for providing the link to this story.)

Is Harley-Davidson the Worst Motorcycle Money Can Buy?
by Rich Smith, The Motley Fool Feb 17th 2014 12:30PM
Updated Feb 17th 2014 3:42PM
Is Harley-Davidson the worst motorcycle money can buy? Let's get this out of the way right now. No.

It's actually the second worst.

At least, according to Consumer Reports.

Harley-Davidson Forty-Eight Sportster. Photo: Harley-Davidson.

Long a recognized authority on automotive quality and value for your money in cars, Consumer Reportsbegan branching out to reviewing motorcycles last year, publishing its first-ever report on the most reliable motorcycles from five of the biggest brands -- Harley, BMW , Honda , Kawasaki, and Yamaha. (Polaris' Victory and Indian brands had apparently not made enough of a dent in the market to attract CR's attention by the time of the survey.) What CR discovered from its research is that quality varies "significantly" among brands -- and the best brand, Yamaha, is about six times more reliable than the worst, BMW.

Only about one Yamaha bike in 10 has experienced a major problem or required a serious repair over the past four years, according to the 4,424 motorcycle owners surveyed by CR. In contrast, about one BMW motorcycle in three has suffered from such a complaint -- and one Harley in four. Here's how the numbers break down:

Subtler variations in vehicle reliability were found within brands as well. CRcategorized them according to "class" of motorcycle, noting that touring motorcycles were most problematic, and cruisers the least. This may have something to do with the fact that, according to CR, "accessories" were the most common problems encountered with bikes. Touring bikes, being designed for comfort in long-distance travel, are likely to be outfitted with more bells and whistles than a standard motorcycle -- and therefore have more accessories on them that can break.

Again, the numbers:

The good news here is that Consumer Reports says major, big-ticket repairs were few and far between in its research. Regardless of bike and regardless of brand, only about 3% of all problems reported to CR involved a motorcycle's engine, only 3% a transmission, and only 7% a clutch. More common were issues with a vehicle's brakes or electrical or fuel system, and, as already mentioned, with the accessories. Overall, CR noted that about 75% of the repairs reported to it were performed for $200 or less.

What it means to youThat last fact, the low cost of repairing most motorcycle fix-its, may be the really important news for Harley-Davidson shareholders.

It may help to explain why -- Harley's weak performance on the surveynotwithstanding -- CR says Harley owners remain the most brand-loyal of all motorcycle owners, with an astounding 75% saying yes, they'd buy a Harley again. The occasional small repair bill may simply be a price they're willing to pay for owning the most famous name in motorcycles. (And it probably doesn't hurt thatHarley goes the extra mile to take care of its customers when an issue with one of its bikes does arise.)

In turn, the remarkable brand loyalty of Harley-Davidson customers may help to explain why, of the publicly traded motorcycle makers on the survey, Harley carries the highest price-to-earnings ratio, selling for nearly 20 times trailing earnings. Whether that P/E ratio can bear the scrutiny now that Consumer Reports has put a bull's-eye on Harley-Davidson, though, remains to be seen.

Learn the secrets to successful car (or bike) buying
You don't know it yet, but you probably spent thousands more than you should have on your last ride. The auto industry is a dangerous place for uneducated consumers -- for now. But our top auto experts are determined to even the playing field. That's why they created a a brand-new free report on The Car Buying Secrets You Must Know. The advice inside could save you thousands of dollars on your next vehicle, so be sure to read this report while it lasts. Your conscience, and your wallet, will thank you. Click here now for instant access.



The article Is Harley-Davidson the Worst Motorcycle Money Can Buy? originally appeared on Fool.com.

KSquared Comment:

Frankly, I can't think of a magazine less suited to rate motorcycles than Consumer Reports. Consumer Reports rates all products as they would appliances; how efficiently do they transport the owner from here to there - everything objective; everything by the numbers and by the book. But motorcycles are not appliances - motorcycles are subjective devices with character and soul. To rate them ". . . by the numbers . . ." underrates their visceral appeal. Does this author think that 75% of Harley owners (and I'd wager it's WELL higher than that - more like 85 - 90%) would buy another because their efficient people movers? Because they don't have mechanical problems? Because of their performance? Don't make me laugh! Nope - they'd be repeat customers because they like Harley-Davidsons - and for no other reason. Because Harleys, for whatever reason, SPEAK to their owners - and the owners like what they hear in that small, still voice in their heads.

 

[1olbull]

K^2,
Wow! Your comments read like a description of an Obozo voter! A subjective vote for free stuff with no regard of the details, history or experience of the man!

I believe using your brains to choose a motor vehicle based upon its performance and repair record is paramount. I further believe and agree, that style of motor is indeed subjective; however, to entirely rely on your emotions or visceral appeal is reckless.

My answer to: "would buy another because their efficient people movers? Because they don't have mechanical problems? Because of their performance? Don't make me laugh!" is a resounding YES to each of your criteria! I don't have unlimited funds. I want the biggest bang for my buck and I want NOT to be stranded with a broken down motor.
The best part of the article you cited, in my opinion, is this:
Antilock brakes: A real lifesaver
A welcome trend in motorcycle technology is the growing availability of antilock brakes. Bikes equipped with ABS are 37 percent less likely to be involved in a fatal crash, according to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.

The reason is simple: Locking up the brakes in a panic stop robs the rider of any steering control. That can easily lead to a skid and crash, which can result in serious injury. ABS can help prevent skids and crashes by allowing the rider to retain steering control during an emergency stop, and it can be especially valuable in slippery conditions.

This critical feature is now standard on many high-end models and adds only a few hundred dollars to the price of more basic bikes—a worthwhile investment in your safety.
Thanks for initiating this thread. It is an important one.
Respectfully submitted,
1olbull
PS: Nothing wrong with that Harley 48 Sportster, for what it is. My two young nephews each have one and are having a blast on them. I note that the graph relates cruisers have less issues than the other styles.

 

[R3R Torque]

Totally agree that consumer reports is not suited to rate motorcycles.

My last two e-glides were efficient people movers, trouble free - believe it or not, and were enjoyable relaxing rides. I would definitely buy another...

Don't get me wrong. I really like my R3R, but would love to have my 2011 e-glide back. It would've looked good sitting next to the rocket.

Wonder how the bmw riders feel about the article.

 

[Ogremeister]

From my limited (and muchly 2nd hand) experience with BMW...not only do they break, they cost more to fix. And the factory support, often places the blame for breakage on the owner/rider.

Which is why I have a Yamaha Super Tenere & not a BMW GS for my more dirty adventures.

 

[Boog]

For my own two cents, I take CR as far as reporting mechanical issues at face value. The rest of their ‘style’ does not reflect how I evaluate a vehicle. Case in point, in 2012 they rated the Toyota 4Runner as one of the worst vehicles on the road. Why, because it lets you know it is a truck and not a car. They said it was rougher than the Ford Explorer which is built on a car chassis. Well duh CR, it is a truck and if Ford chooses to downgrade their SUV to car status, let them. (I apologize as I see I’m getting up on the soap box).
As for HD, my 1982 XLH 1000 was one of the most fun bikes I had in my early years. Yes it was towards the end of the AMF years and yes it was an Iron head with a four speed, but dang it could run hard and fast (in a straight line), and, I’ll check with Guinness later, might have been the only Harley not to leak oil of that period. Almost all of my riding buddies at the moment own at least one Harley if not 2-3, so I guess the CR folks need to look at more than what they do when they make a call like that. Why am i defending HD so hard? Beats me! I haven't had one since that Sportster and I got rid of it before a deployment back in 1986.
Oh, and my boss rides a BMW 1100GS that he bought new when stationed in Germany and has ridden it everywhere according to the darn stickers on the panniers. He only complaint is that now it is burning some oil after 200K miles. I think I would rather have a Tiger though or maybe a Super like Ogre’s…

 

[mexican]

I love my harley!!! (Which reminds me, i have to find a battery charger since the harley likes to hibernate a lot the battery is death!!)

 

[ksquared]

K^2,
Wow! Your comments read like a description of an Obozo voter! A subjective vote for free stuff with no regard of the details, history or experience of the man! Wow! One of the few things I've never been called is a supporter of, let alone a voter for, the President, being just slightly to the right of Attilla the Hun! I don't know where you got the notion that I was advocating for "free stuff".

I believe using your brains to choose a motor vehicle based upon its performance and repair record is paramount. I further believe and agree, that style of motor is indeed subjective; however, to entirely rely on your emotions or visceral appeal is reckless.

My answer to: "would buy another because their efficient people movers? Because they don't have mechanical problems? Because of their performance? Don't make me laugh!" is a resounding YES to each of your criteria! But you need to understand, I wasn't talking about you, nor anyone else who considers performance metrics as part of their purchase decision, I was chastising those riders (mostly Harley guys) who NEVER consider metrics. I don't have unlimited funds. I want the biggest bang for my buck and I want NOT to be stranded with a broken down motor. You've slightly misunderstood my meaning. I, too, use metrics of performance and handling to purchase my bikes. Frankly, performance and handling come first with me. BUT (and it's a substantial but), I could never choose a bike that didn't appeal to the visceral side of my nature, no matter show strong a performer it was. What I was suggesting is that many of the Harley riders I know care nothing whatever for the performance metrics of their bikes - they buy them solely and exclusively because they're Harleys! I once had an interesting discussion with a self-identified "Harley Guy". I asked him if it wasn't frustrating for him to be left for dead by motorcycles with better engineering and performance at a fraction of what he paid. He said, quite honestly, if you ask me, that he couldn't have cared less about the bike's performance - it was a Harley and that was enough for him. When I told him that I needed a high performance envelope in any bike I'd buy so I'd probably never consider a Harley - he accused me of having a severe case of Harley envy and if I'd just admit to myself that I'd really wanted a Harley all along and made a terrible mistake buying my Rocket, then I'd feel better and maybe get a Harley next time around. This is EXACTLY what he told me!

But I stick with my criticism of Consumer Reports' vehicle tests. They have no understanding about what it is to be moved by a motorcycle. They judge them as they judge washing machines - and for the same reason - they look at the purchase decision as a rational one - not an emotional one. Do you think that CR would rate our Rockets well? If you do, you must be delusional! Too heavy, too much power, poor low speed handling characteristics, crappy gas mileage, too big a carbon footprint - not green enough - these are the things that are important to CR. Questionable reliability in some model years. Never once would they discuss the thrill of hustling a Rocket down a challenging road. They just don't care about that.

 

[IMFASTTOO]

For my own two cents, I take CR as far as reporting mechanical issues at face value. The rest of their ‘style’ does not reflect how I evaluate a vehicle. Case in point, in 2012 they rated the Toyota 4Runner as one of the worst vehicles on the road. Why, because it lets you know it is a truck and not a car. They said it was rougher than the Ford Explorer which is built on a car chassis. Well duh CR, it is a truck and if Ford chooses to downgrade their SUV to car status, let them. (I apologize as I see I’m getting up on the soap box).
As for HD, my 1982 XLH 1000 was one of the most fun bikes I had in my early years. Yes it was towards the end of the AMF years and yes it was an Iron head with a four speed, but dang it could run hard and fast (in a straight line), and, I’ll check with Guinness later, might have been the only Harley not to leak oil of that period. Almost all of my riding buddies at the moment own at least one Harley if not 2-3, so I guess the CR folks need to look at more than what they do when they make a call like that. Why am i defending HD so hard? Beats me! I haven't had one since that Sportster and I got rid of it before a deployment back in 1986.
Oh, and my boss rides a BMW 1100GS that he bought new when stationed in Germany and has ridden it everywhere according to the darn stickers on the panniers. He only complaint is that now it is burning some oil after 200K miles. I think I would rather have a Tiger though or maybe a Super like Ogre’s…

For my own two cents, I take CR as far as reporting mechanical issues at face value. The rest of their ‘style’ does not reflect how I evaluate a vehicle. Case in point, in 2012 they rated the Toyota 4Runner as one of the worst vehicles on the road. Why, because it lets you know it is a truck and not a car. They said it was rougher than the Ford Explorer which is built on a car chassis. Well duh CR, it is a truck and if Ford chooses to downgrade their SUV to car status, let them. (I apologize as I see I’m getting up on the soap box).
As for HD, my 1982 XLH 1000 was one of the most fun bikes I had in my early years. Yes it was towards the end of the AMF years and yes it was an Iron head with a four speed, but dang it could run hard and fast (in a straight line), and, I’ll check with Guinness later, might have been the only Harley not to leak oil of that period. Almost all of my riding buddies at the moment own at least one Harley if not 2-3, so I guess the CR folks need to look at more than what they do when they make a call like that. Why am i defending HD so hard? Beats me! I haven't had one since that Sportster and I got rid of it before a deployment back in 1986.
Oh, and my boss rides a BMW 1100GS that he bought new when stationed in Germany and has ridden it everywhere according to the darn stickers on the panniers. He only complaint is that now it is burning some oil after 200K miles. I think I would rather have a Tiger though or maybe a Super like Ogre’s…

THATS a good fairy tale you tell about sportsters I worked at HD dealer and they always had problems and CR is correct in exposing HD and BMW

 

[1olbull]

The rider comments and statistics provided by the mags are great. I subscribe to a half dozen and save many for recall of the statistical information and rider perspective.
CR evaluations are made by engineers of the type that design motor vehicles. Their comments are indeed dry, boring and statistically based; but, they are way more informative and helpful in making a purchase choice than the subjective analysis of an individual. IMHO - both are necessary tools for the smart buyer.

 

[1olbull]

K^2,
Wow! Your comments read like a description of an Obozo voter! A subjective vote for free stuff with no regard of the details, history or experience of the man! Wow! One of the few things I've never been called is a supporter of, let alone a voter for, the President, being just slightly to the right of Attilla the Hun! I don't know where you got the notion that I was advocating for "free stuff".

heh heh heh - This was my weak attempt to use Obozo for an analogous joke!

I believe using your brains to choose a motor vehicle based upon its performance and repair record is paramount. I further believe and agree, that style of motor is indeed subjective; however, to entirely rely on your emotions or visceral appeal is reckless.

My answer to: "would buy another because their efficient people movers? Because they don't have mechanical problems? Because of their performance? Don't make me laugh!" is a resounding YES to each of your criteria! But you need to understand, I wasn't talking about you, nor anyone else who considers performance metrics as part of their purchase decision, I was chastising those riders (mostly Harley guys) who NEVER consider metrics. I don't have unlimited funds. I want the biggest bang for my buck and I want NOT to be stranded with a broken down motor. You've slightly misunderstood my meaning. I, too, use metrics of performance and handling to purchase my bikes. Frankly, performance and handling come first with me. BUT (and it's a substantial but), I could never choose a bike that didn't appeal to the visceral side of my nature, no matter show strong a performer it was. What I was suggesting is that many of the Harley riders I know care nothing whatever for the performance metrics of their bikes - they buy them solely and exclusively because they're Harleys! I once had an interesting discussion with a self-identified "Harley Guy". I asked him if it wasn't frustrating for him to be left for dead by motorcycles with better engineering and performance at a fraction of what he paid. He said, quite honestly, if you ask me, that he couldn't have cared less about the bike's performance - it was a Harley and that was enough for him. When I told him that I needed a high performance envelope in any bike I'd buy so I'd probably never consider a Harley - he accused me of having a severe case of Harley envy and if I'd just admit to myself that I'd really wanted a Harley all along and made a terrible mistake buying my Rocket, then I'd feel better and maybe get a Harley next time around. This is EXACTLY what he told me!

I thought as much; but, since you did not specify your own beliefs, I just wailed away

But I stick with my criticism of Consumer Reports' vehicle tests. They have no understanding about what it is to be moved by a motorcycle. They judge them as they judge washing machines - and for the same reason - they look at the purchase decision as a rational one - not an emotional one. Do you think that CR would rate our Rockets well? If you do, you must be delusional! Too heavy, too much power, poor low speed handling characteristics, crappy gas mileage, too big a carbon footprint - not green enough - these are the things that are important to CR. Questionable reliability in some model years. Never once would they discuss the thrill of hustling a Rocket down a challenging road. They just don't care about that.

The boys are engineers! Their total approach is scientific and not unsubstantiated subjective opinion. Perhaps they should add a owner comment section like Amazon?

Thanks for your response, K^2. I enjoyed it.
1olbull