Yes it is.
2006-09-02 03:58:28
·
answer #1
·
answered by Capt 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
The biggest problem with the ironhead sporty motor is the use of high-dome pistons, which "squished" the fuel to the sides of the piston, and therefor they didn't combust, so it spit a lot of unburned fuel. They are still an OK engine, for the era. Of course, HD's engines now are so much better.
2006-09-02 08:18:56
·
answer #2
·
answered by yazukka 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
One of my scoots is an '81 1000 & so far, in over 125,000 mi. no real problems. Wish it had a kicker, though. This engine with an S&S Super E & some cam & exhaust work is a real strong runner. It's surpised a whole bunch of rice rockets.
2006-09-05 12:48:02
·
answer #3
·
answered by preacher55 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
I am guessing you mean the 1000cc sporty motor. No they suck they are not designed for the low octane fuels availible today. An alternator equiped iron sportster motor is even worse. Harley had many casting problems with these engines. try to get 86 or newer evo motor.The evo motor solved many of the iron sporty problems.Aluminum sheds heat much faster than iron;)
2006-09-02 07:55:37
·
answer #4
·
answered by mikebrennan_us 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
i agree with mike for the most part. if you just want to ride without tinkering with it all the time, get a newer model. if you like to work on bikes and like a challenge, by all means it's ok. there are thousands of old (pre evo) harleys still on the road today. the riders just have to mess with them more.
2006-09-02 08:09:38
·
answer #5
·
answered by mott the hoople 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Why dontcha just mold a big pile of **** into an engine and itll be just as good
2006-09-03 02:10:02
·
answer #6
·
answered by Lunchmeat 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
It's ok, their are better ones out now, like the new 96cu. 2007.
2006-09-02 06:02:15
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
they can be ok. you have to take care of them a little more than the newer ones. i have over 100,000 miles on mine.
2006-09-04 00:40:29
·
answer #8
·
answered by mycle1000 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
http://magegame.ru/?rf=c1e0ebe0eaeee2f1eae8e9
2006-09-02 03:59:50
·
answer #9
·
answered by ʨ𠠊 1
·
0⤊
1⤋