Harley Davidson’s EV debut could electrify the motorcycle industry
techcrunch.com
techcrunch.com
This will fail.
1. Harley demographic is entrenched, hard to pivot. Most associate with wealthy boomers and 'lowlifes', or working class murica. Not things as popular today. Other, better, performance ebikes exist, and outside this restrictive submarket, but are not thriving. And I will casually remind readers of Southparks opinion. That said, they do have diehard fans that would buy anything they made.
2. Motorcycles are all about freedom. Range issues, or even the idea of them, robs confidence. This will change, but gas is way more energy dense and on a bike it matters even more than cars. Going into the mountains is not when you want to wonder if your range will halve going up hills with gusto, or screwing it on for the corners.
3. Price perception. The electric will be awesome. Torque is so fun on bikes. But to harley riders, I think it will fell like a 'toy'. And for the price point, its gonna be a tough sell.
4. Tinkering. You do not buy a harley as an intelligent person without ever expecting to work on it. Hell, that is part of the classical appeal of them. There are more than a few explorations of life and motorcycle maintance in print. Maybe this is just my bias, but the connection with the machine is part of what makes motorcycling so intimate.
I very much welcome being incorrect. I shopped for an ebike and bought another used sportbike instead.
Departure from their typically... lacking bikes(liquid cooling, engine designed in joint with Porsche). With drastically different styling. They had a niche but never really caught on.
Harley also briefly had a Performance Bike company, Buell that they shuttered.[2]
I'll disagree with your point 4. Even though they're still behind, modern Harleys aren't the stereotypical leaking/broken down rattling apart of the past.
American sportbikes have always had problems, even without harleys heavy hand. The Buell story really is a sad and facinating one for anyone interested in business.
Look at the electric bicycle crowd. Mods, mods, mods. Yes, you can get an electric bicycle to go above 50MPH, but you don't have the tires and brakes to stop the thing.
Buell did release the 1125r near the end, which was finally a bike that could truly compete with other sport bikes, and used an engine made by Rotax. Sadly it was too little, too late, and the 1125r had reliability problems to boot.
In short, Buell never stood a chance of being anything beyond a very small, niche brand.
In addition to carbon emissions reduction, the most immediate benefit is a godly reduction in noise pollution. In SF we have these bastards who love nothing more than to rev up their engines and make noise, on residential streets, at night. I so loathe that aspect of bikers.
I would love it if police would pull people over for their loud motorcycles, check that the system hadn't been tampered with, and if not seize them and revoke the rider's motorcycle license... probably not going to happen though.
As a rider, I can't want until Harley crashes and burns. Ungodly loud and ungodly TERRIBLE sounding machines. I only wish I could afford a Ducati but at least a Duc with Termis sounds GOOD in addition to pissing everyone off. I don't know why anybody would want to ride what sounds like a flatulent cow.
And their riders' need to go wide open throttle at low revs any time they see someone within earshot they think they might be able to 'impress' just murders any desire I have to ever ride one.
I can't say for sure I won't find myself being drawn to a 'cruiser' style motorcycle at some point in life. But I can say for sure that I will never, ever want to associate myself with that particular brand.
Harley has made racebikes in the past, both flat track as well as track bikes. Although yes, they are known for their cruisers.
Agreed, though, of course many people find any loud vehicle annoying. I've seen the occasional ricer banging their R6 off the rev limiter at the gas station. The difference is, the loud sportbike is gone in the blink of an eye. The loud Harley rider feels the need to 'show off' in every 30mph pedestrian zone they can find.
The 90 degree difference between firing pulses is what makes the engine shake and sound the way it does.
This is pretty much everywhere in the US. Aside from local ordinances, there is nothing you can do about. To call people bastards for a loud bike is one thing, but have you ever heard 'loud pipes save lives'?
The sequence is, slow for a stop sign or intersection, full throttle, then heavy breaking for the next block, full throttle, mind you, modified, again. It's infuriatingly annoying.
“Loud pipes save lives” is ridiculous. If you need to be irritatingly loud to be safe then your hobby is too dangerous.
I wish soundproofing standards for buildings were much higher.
Apartment listings only ever focus on just one of the major senses, vision. They make sure the photos look good with prop furniture and just the right lighting. But the experience of actually living in a place involves all of the senses.
I would love to see an apartment listing saying "60dBA soundproofing", "99.9% odor isolation", etc. All of the senses matter.
I'm in Japan and have the same problem with kids with modified exhausts being loud in quiet neighborhoods. This is Japan, where people are NOT loud, and it's even forbidden to talk on the phone on a train or bus.
Assholes are assholes around the world.
Yes I have, and it's complete and total nonsense.
Here are a few good articles on the subject: https://www.revzilla.com/common-tread/stop-saying-loud-pipes... https://canadamotoguide.com/2016/07/29/the-truth-about-loud-...
tl;dr version is that basic physics says most of that noise goes backwards, so while a driver may be more likely to notice a louder bike the majority of the increased noise is going in exactly the wrong direction to be useful.
It's a bogus claim made by people trying to justify their annoying exhaust choices.
You'll note that the people who tend to be most vocal about "loud pipes save lives" also tend to be the ones wearing little to no gear and/or riding like jerks. We're not talking about the most safety conscious people out there.
Though, I am a very considerate and conservative rider, whose default is to putter along and disturb as little as possible, especially around humans but I try to respect nature as well. Harleys... yeah, I mostly agree with you.
Then by doing it to show off at red lights etc. they are taking lives by putting loud pipes in constant legal jeopardy.
When the riders who use that phrase don’t wear helmets (and they usually don’t), it seems more than a little insincere.
Longtime Harley rider here, what I love on my Harley, the vibration, the sound, the smell, this Harley as nothing of it, I would never buy it and probably the average Harley rider shares my opinion.
Electric scooters are near-ubiquitous in South-East Asia, particularly China. 30-50 miles of range is plenty for a little urban runabout. You don't need a lot of power to replace a 50cc or 125cc engine, so the battery is small enough to carry up to your apartment and it can charge reasonably quickly from a normal 13A outlet. Electric scooters are often replacing absolutely filthy two-stroke scooters, so they have a disproportionately positive impact on local air quality.
Electric scooters have the potential to be the new Honda Cub - simple, economical transport for the masses.
Unfortunately as I'd need a car anyway, I'm guessing this is going to be well outside my price range. Is there any info on pricing yet? I couldn't see it in TFA.
Though for the points you listed and others, I expect the run of the mill that they're none for to continue for a while as well. But they have the possibility of owning two markets, so why not?
They're not targeting existing customers, this is a growth story about attracting new, younger, urban/suburban customers.
To make matters worse, things like electric motorcycles, discontinuing the Dyna / FXR line, and changing from an air cooled engine to a liquid cooled engine is also annoying their diehard demographic.
The only demographic which seems to be growing (though, I'm extremely biased on this) is younger kids who are getting into customizing motorcycles. Not "Orange County Chopper" bikes, but buying old Harleys (or Triumphs or BSAs or Hondas for that matter) and making them into cool choppers or cafe racers or whatever. The problem is, this demographic doesn't give Harley any money. They don't want the Harley branded everything. They want old bikes that they can get cheap aftermarket or NOS parts for and they want to ride those.
Even if millennials suddenly thought Harley was cool, they wouldn't have the money to afford one.
Which is? I'm out of the loop.
So, they are looking for riders that don't care that their machines will (ostensibly) be more reliable (less vibration), saves money on fuel, and is quiet and efficient. I care about none of those things, BUT I want Harley to stay in business, and if they can do that while attracting new riders, I fully support them.
A side note, gas sport-bikes accelerate insanely fast now ... imagine how fast they will with an electric engine ... scary!
Any time you ride that thing past someones home you wake everyone up if they're sleeping and completely ruin any sense of quiet that may have existed.
If your neighbor fired up a chainsaw (or six) 20 feet from your house at all hours of the day, I imagine you'd consider that neighbor similarly.
So if they loud bikes go away, I'm all in favor. I think you're all acting like jerks for riding them.
The problem is that they are so fast. So if you call in a seriously scary and illegal noise at night the culprit could be a state over before anyone arrives. So it's obviously a non starter and nobody calls the police. But then there is a cultural of it being normal and so the problem never goes away and only gets worse.
Motorcycles are your right to ride if you have a license. Scaring the living daylights out of people every day is not.
I wouldn't be opposed to a noise restriction, provided it was implemented reasonably.
Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
The fact is, motorcycles are unsafe mostly because of drivers who just don’t give a shit and feel entitled to the whole road.
Motorcycles are unsafe by design. You want high acceleration, great gas mileage, and awesome maneuverability? Well then, you don't get the same protection that a car gets. It's basic physics.
The fact is, the vast majority of people choose to drive 2+ ton metal enclosures (with much larger total cost of ownership, mind you) and you choose to drive something that actively puts you in danger. That choice is entirely on you as are all of the consequences because, let's face it: no one but a few psychopaths want to be responsible for someone's death. Your argument that drivers don't give a shit rings absolutely hollow.
As for entitlement, if a horse buggy or low speed moped gets on the freeway and gets obliterated because they can't function like the cars that the roads were designed for, do you blame the cars or the person who decided to get on the freeway in an entirely inadequate vehicle?
I'm all for motorcycles on the road and I'm all for designing safety systems (that don't make life worse for everyone else) into them and other cars on the road to reduce accidents and fatalities. You, a minuscule minority, however, do NOT get to noise pollute our environments far beyond what is reasonable in a dense urban/suburban society just for your own enjoyment. The vast majority of drivers have long ago voted with their wallets and ballot boxes that the quiet, safety, and size of cars is what we want.
As a car driver, I don't feel entitled to the whole road, but I also don't shed too many tears for the idiots who lane split and ride like maniacs - ironically, maniacs who appear to feel entitled to the whole road.
I'm a cyclist most days, so I'm acutely aware of how oblivious and dangerous car drivers can be... so it seems crazy to me that most motorcyclists would choose to buzz between them unpredictably at high speed, instead of riding in a safer fashion.
Motorcycles are comparatively loud, especially big V twins, because a) a surprising percentage is intake noise - there's a huge intake pulse from a 1200cc V b) the engine is open rather than behind a closed bonnet with noise absorption c) they tend to rev much higher than equivalent car engines (not Harleys)
Passing the legislated noise tests (specified engine revs etc), bikes are often quieter than a car. With some bikes now too quiet for comfort around pedestrians in town. Harleys somehow are always obnoxiously loud - My guess is probably mostly from intake pulses given current EU noise regs.
They don't come from the factory that way (regulation), but people add aftermarket parts to make them that way. It costs a good amount too; $2500 installed depending on what you get.
They effectively did for a very long time. Harley has a performance parts division, complete with a thick catalog of custom exhausts, cams, intakes, and most importantly an EFI "tuner" box. Harley dealers were more than happy to install whatever you wanted, and even kept a stock of already modified bikes ready for sale.
They were fined $12 million for this awhile back. 2012, I think.
Source: have lived near a road.
without any context I could imagine you were talking about a Lamborghini.
And thankfully soundproofing of cars makes those loud pipes irrelevant. They are kind of like car alarms, if I happen to even hear them, obnoxious, I ignore it
Id rather pay attention visually to the vehicle's on the road including motorcycles, not be distracted by one asshole on the road
Granted there are assholes that like to knock out your side mirrors but loud bikes definitely make themselves aware of other drivers when their cross section visibility is much less than a car.
I would think that the more scorn you show for these bikers, you are just upping their own sense of glee.
I don't doubt it, but it does make my point.
Loud pipes == jerks.
[1] https://www.theonion.com/wow-check-out-that-motorcycle-revvi...
A Hybrid scooter in the classic Italian style or the Honda c90 style might make sense for delivery riders deliverooo etc
Porsche enthusiasts also show similar preference for air cooled 70~80s models which appreciates in value....but they kept almost all parts of the formula (the car look, clock, engine in the rear) the same because when they went with a bold new look (like the tear drop of early 2000s) they were facing an uphill battle.
It's sort of like the HN comment I see calling for petrol cars to be banned because electric vehicles are going to render the old ones extinct.
There is a true lack of understanding the market and the buyers in a space that most HN'ers are not the target demographic.
Note I'm not advocating a ban as such. I think it would be a shame if all petrol powered vehicles were banned, if only for historical appreciation. They might be banned from or face restrictions on their use on public highways though. However it does seem likely there will be a push back from petrol heads on that.
The air cooled leap in value didn't happen until more than a decade after porsche switched to water cooling when people realized vintage 911s had been undervalued for decades (they are excellent cars, especially with modern tires). There is likely now a bubble, especially with 912s, but there are tons of porsche guys buying both old and new stuff.
I don't see current Harley guys taking to electric very well, but this is about getting a whole new generation of buyers, not about keeping their aging boomers happy.
Trouble with motorcycles is, at least in the EU, too many years of governments putting the fix for bad car drivers onto the motorcycle license. The capacity limits and multi-part test etc are quite off-putting for new riders. Unsurprisingly, it's still car drivers causing most rider deaths. On the plus side you develop a definite 6th sense for those that will pull out - whilst looking straight through you. You also end up a much better car driver.
Lifestyle ranges are part of the problem of decline. The manufacturers, Harley included - perhaps especially, have catered more and more for the born again bikers spending a lot of $$$ in their 40s+. The cost has got rather silly and many models, even Jap middleweights, have reached the cost to buy of a cheaper car. When I started only the Goldwing and rarer Italian managed that.
So whilst I'd love for an EV bike to revitalise things, I suspect they'll be more of the same for the 40+ born again biker.
Source: Almost 35 years of motorcycling and trying to encourage the kids to take up biking.
Edit: This has been gaining plenty of up and downvotes. I'm intrigued - what's controversial here?
I know in my home state (NJ) I took a 2.5 day class over a weekend and got my motorcycle endorsement from passing a basic skills test at the end of that. No capacity limits or anything else, I could have gone out and picked up a liter bike with my couple hours of riding experience (and probably gotten myself killed quickly) if I wanted.
Yes, but as you know, even if the motorcycle is in the right, physics doesn't care. I quit riding recently after 8 years of serious riding, 18 of casual, because our sales guy, who has years of riding experience got T-Boned on a legal left turn with his wife on the back. They were "ok," meaning not dead and no brain damage, but they were pretty beat up. The moral of the story for me was, no matter how good and experienced a rider you are, you can still get clobbered.
>The cost has got rather silly and many models, even Jap middleweights, have reached the cost to buy of a cheaper car.
Between you and me and all the blind drivers, I'd rather buy a used sport convertible with a manual transmission. Just about the same experience for the same money, minus most of the risk of death.
As for the sports car, I totally understand the choice. Unfortunately, for under a couple of million dollars a car will never have the same potential for acceleration as even a relatively modest motorcycle. And you... loose something visceral when you can't lean into turns.
If a person is OK with that, however, a used sport car is definitely a reasonable investment for some wheeled fun.
For people to downvote you because they don't like noise is violating HN's downvote guidelines, and contributes to making HN an echo chamber.
> "I'm all for outlawing motorcycles if noise is necessary for safety."
Being a noisy arse encourages sensible thinking people to start calling for outright bans. The lead footed in hot hatch or Subaru with Cherry Bomb are just as annoying as the noisy arse on a bike. Especially if late or around town.
On the flip side, noise regs have got so tight that some factory standard bikes are barely audible around town - presuming sensible revs, almost dangerously so. I think it was Toyota was trialling playing engine noises on EVs because of this. I don't want obnoxious straight pipes - just "enough" legal noise to be comparably audible as cars round town (as factory standard).
What you say is false. Here is data to the contrary: https://www.swov.nl/en/facts-figures/factsheet/motorcyclists
There is a clear relation between engine size and fatalities. There is also a clear relation between stringent license tests and safety.
What you have to accept is that you might ride safely, but for every person like you there are a couple of young squids out there who are going to buy the largest capacity motorcycle they can, ride it dangerously and without any gear and any caution thrown to the wind. I am a rider too, and often encounter these idiots. At least in the Netherlands gear is very ubiquitous (except for the nostalgia grandpas on their 1940s antique) but I still see dangerous riding all the time.
And in terms of economic incentives, at least in the Netherlands it is insanely attractive. The license is the only obstacle, but you save a lot on fuel and road tax.
"Approximately 40% of all serious and fatal motorcycle crashes in the Netherlands are single vehicle crashes (a crash in which no other road user is involved). In the other motorcycle crashes the crash opponent is mainly a passenger car"
Now I'm sure some of the other 60% are caused by the biker, but the vast majority of two vehicle accidents involving a bike come down to driver pulling out of side road, overtaking into blind spot etc. Your guess is as good as mine how they broke down further.
The only UK figures, with enough breakdown, I can find are 2004[0], which gave rider at fault 42%, other driver 44% with 33% single vehicle. They removed single vehicle to get 22% rider, 57% driver as cause when more than one vehicle.
But yes the idiots taking racing line at 100mph in weekend traffic are an accident waiting to happen and have a good chance of ending buried in a wall. I'm happy to let them pass me.
I grew up with people like my dad (born in the 30s) saying they'd "never buy a Jap car". He never did but we did have Honda and Suzuki dirt bikes because of the quality and price.
The environmental performance of electric motorcycles is different than cars:
- Cars need ancillary services like heating, increasing battery size
- Motorcycles have no real chance at regenerative braking
- Motorcycles are driven fewer kilometers than cars, making the impact of the vehicle more important (as opposed to the fuel).
Currently, we estimate that battery motorcycles are preferable across a variety of environmental indicators, though results differ for small and large motorcycles, which have very different usage patterns.
Feel free to contact me directly if interested in discussing or collaborating on open source life cycle assessment code or data (https://brightwaylca.org/, https://chris.mutel.org/).
They do, but it has to come from the front wheel. An electric generator would be heavy and add significant unsprung weight.
KTM experimented with a 2wd dirt bike. It used hydraulic lines to transfer energy to the front wheel. A similar system could be used for regenerative braking.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/motocrossactionmag.com/amp/all-...
Harley is dying and needs to do something to attract younger buyers into the fold. Hopefully this will do that.
As someone not really in the biker scene, I find the whole image people try to project with loud bikes etc. a bit ridiculous. It's not about the bike and enjoying riding it or just using it to get to places, it's all about what others think of you while you're doing it. It's a fashion/lifestyle statement, and it's not something I personally care about so much.
Riding a motorcycle without a horn is as irresponsible and dangerous as riding one with bald tires or poorly maintained brakes.
Take responsibility for your own safety. Ride defensively. Don't be a jerk.
[1]: Who haven't been on their bikes in years.
I do not ride a quiet motorcycle on the street. My pipes are louder than stock (no baffles) but I still have mufflers. This bike is louder than stock because I like how it sounds. I admit that makes me a bit of a jerk. I don't hide behind dubious claims of safety.
I think as it goes, the 'jerk'-ness of riding a loud motorbike is a small subset of the greater jerkness of petrol-based vehicles in general. As a value proposition, widespread car ownership is about the most horrible idea for public transportation imaginable, in most places.
I'm really looking forward to the end of it, to be honest. Public transport has lots of nice side-effects - like increasing general health (through reducing polution, for instance), or making the elderly more able to get around. Cars just have negatives - and most of the time, they're just a really uncomfortable way to sit still in traffic.
It's not good for the environment/traffic, but I'd like to think I'm helping a little on both pollution and noise.
I don't disagree on public transit, but IMO on an individual level it's not practical until group buyin.
It would also be quite ironic, in an enjoyable sort of way, to see Harley-Davidson at the top of the pack in terms of innovation. Just hope it's got as much go as it does show, unlike most of their other offerings: Rod series aside[1], their bikes are absolutely worse than other major manufacturers' by almost any measure you care to name (performance, handling, reliability, fuel efficiency, weight, features, price, and TCO). I think the only attributes they've been winning on recently are swagger and decibels which, in fairness, are probably the two main reasons to buy a Harley... so I suppose they at least know their market.
[1] And lots of people complained about the Nightrod because it wasn't a "real" Harley: it had a Porsche designed engine that incorporated modern features such as water-cooling (I'm being totally serious).
Unless there are availability or technical problems with all the currently marketed electric bikes.
Serious? As if such attitude was unknown to the hacker community...
One of the reasons people are drawn to HD is they are highly customizable, with a huge aftermarket of parts that are mostly "bolt on," meaning a knucklehead like me can do it.
A silent motorcycle while cool would be a huge risk for people changing lanes on top of it, pulling out in front of it.
Edit: Speelling
That said, it is well known that the power-sound connection is a very satisfying one to the rider.
The drop in sales you point out is the recession and crash of the housing market in 2008.
My R6 weighed 359lbs and had a 123hp. It was hilariously fun to ride.
A loud pipe will make bugger all difference when you're doing 50+ down a major road and that idiot in the 4x4 on the side road junction looks right at you, then pulls out anyway. He probably has music on so gets little input, and no direction, from your nice open pipe.
What saves lives there is the biker actively moving across driver field of vision - eg weave in lane or more dramatic if you think he's going anyway. More motorcycle awareness on the car test might help, but that's not politically popular.
People usually get clobbered by cars pulling out in front of them, or getting swerved into from the side.
Signed: Disgruntled electric owner
Bring on the understated. The quiet and classy. The silent but deadly farting sounds.
100 mile range rather than 300, but interesting concept nonetheless.
50 miles?!? Is that it??
"Those hogs are too loud!" "My delicate hearing!"
I can agree though that the "loud pipes save lives" argument is silly.
The truth behind the loud Harley mystique though, is much simpler and obvious to those who have ever ridden one: crack that throttle and a smile is inevitable. It just feels good to ride a big, rumbling, thundering internal combustion engine. Yes, you might channel your inner knuckle dragging primate, but it doesn't mean you are one, or need to be one to understand it.
That being said, it is rude to use excessive throttle in residential areas after hours.
Everyone who doesn't own a Harley thinks it sounds terrible and hates it. The only reason you don't hear more about it is because people are too polite to speak up. You are the yappy-dog-in-a-grocery-store-dressed-up-as-a-service-dog of the vehicular world. 100% self centered entitlement, relying on the courtesy of others to tolerate your atrocious behavior.